HolidayBuyer's Guide

Speakeasy forum

General discussion

Should the DNC admit it and merge with the Communist Party?

by Edward ODaniel / August 4, 2006 3:45 AM PDT


Since the turn of the 20th century, the Democratic Party has worked diligently to rob its membership of the fruits of their labor via all the unconstitutional acts passed under FDR and in subsequent administrations. Back then, before the masters who pull the strings of the White House and Congress bought up all major newspapers in this country in order to control the flow of information, some were sounding the alarm.

Back in 1996, I wrote about the 57 members of Congress who belonged to the "Progressive Caucus." The Democratic Socialists of America highly admire these left-of-the-left members of Congress, i.e., open socialist Bernard Sanders, I-Vt., who should be barred from serving in the U.S. Congress because his goal is the destruction of our constitutional republic (we are not a democracy). Here's just a few current members of the Progressive Caucus ? all Democrats except for Sanders:

Lynn Woolsey, Calif., George Miller, Calif., Nancy Pelosi, Calif., Henry Waxman, Calif., "Mad Max" Maxine Waters, Calif., Bob Filner, Calif., Diane DeGette, Colo., Alcee Hastings, Fla., John Lewis, Ga., Patsy Mink, Hawaii, Jessie Jackson Jr., Ill., Barney Frank, Mass., John Conyers, Mich., Jerrold Nadler, N.Y., Major Owens, N.Y., Charles Rangel, N.Y., Dennis Kucinch, Ohio, Sherrod Brown, Ohio, Peter DeFazio, Ore., Robert C. Scott, Va., Bernard Sanders, Vt., James McDermott, Wash


Personally I think it would be the honest thing to do as suddenly a lot of "Democrats" would quite suddenly re-align as Republicans or Libertarians or Green Party persons.

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Should the DNC admit it and merge with the Communist Party?
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Should the DNC admit it and merge with the Communist Party?
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
(NT) (NT) Huh? I thought the DNC is the communist party.
by C1ay / August 4, 2006 3:54 AM PDT
Collapse -
Sorry, forgot the links ...
Collapse -
Sure, as soon as the RNC.....
by Josh K / August 4, 2006 3:58 AM PDT

.....creates a new party called the Fascists.

And no, I'm not suggesting they do that.

Collapse -
Care to list the RNC platform ...
by Edward ODaniel / August 4, 2006 4:09 AM PDT

items idiologically linked to facisim?

The Socialist idiology is already solidly and indisputably linked to the DNC platform.

A lot of Democrats wouldn't be Democrats if they only let themselves see that simple fact.

A lot wouldn't have voted for Kerry had they but known that the Communist Party endorsed him and worked closely with (and remember what they had to say about "owning" the party).

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) I think you're missing my point.
by Josh K / August 4, 2006 5:09 AM PDT
Collapse -
Nope, I got your "point" but...
by Edward ODaniel / August 4, 2006 6:07 AM PDT

your "point' is blunted by the fact that the RNC does not advocate a facist platform while the DNC most definitely does advocate a socialist platform.

Collapse -
Oh and by the way......
by Josh K / August 4, 2006 11:03 AM PDT

.....David Duke is/was a Republican, and right-wing groups have endorsed Nazis running for office (real Nazis, Ed) so I guess (according to your logic) that Republicans should just "admit it" and ally themselves with the KKK and the Aryan Nations.

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) KKK-Sen Btrd-WVa-Dem
by marinetbryant / August 4, 2006 11:26 AM PDT
Collapse -
EX-Klan, Tom...
by Dave Konkel [Moderator] / August 4, 2006 1:22 PM PDT

and has clearly seen and admitted the error of his ways. And he's a lot more dedicated Black civil rights than the one Black Supreme Court justice is!

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
snt byrds still was and
by Mark5019 / August 4, 2006 1:30 PM PDT
In reply to: EX-Klan, Tom...

beleafs dont die easy

Collapse -
In that case, Bush still hates Social Security and
by Dave Konkel [Moderator] / August 5, 2006 3:09 AM PDT

wants to kill it -- because that's what he wrote in B-school, Mark. Thinking, rational people change their beliefs when they're show to be wrong, immoral, or outdated. Only those who gleefully proclaim "flip-flopping" to be shameful have the foolish notion that beliefs must be etched in stone, or that everything is black and white, rather than colored and shades of grey.

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
by Mark5019 / August 5, 2006 3:14 AM PDT

ss is gonna be deat for all people by 2040?
he wanted to make people be responceable for there retirement seems like it wasnt him that failed

Collapse -
Then there was, Dave...
by J. Vega / August 4, 2006 1:32 PM PDT
In reply to: EX-Klan, Tom...

Dave, then there was his Filibuster of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) Not to mention opposing the Voting Rights Act of 1965
by Edward ODaniel / August 5, 2006 4:55 AM PDT
Collapse -
Black Civil Rights...
by EdH / August 4, 2006 1:38 PM PDT
In reply to: EX-Klan, Tom...

as distinct from regular civil rights how?

The Klan historically was inextricably intertwined with the Democratic Party in the South. I don't think it's fair to paint the Republicans with that brush.

And Clarence Thomas is not in favor of civil rights how?

Collapse -
by Evie / August 4, 2006 10:17 PM PDT
In reply to: EX-Klan, Tom...

Clearly? Yeah, clear as mud!!

Nice slam at Thomas again.

Collapse -
Ex Klan? Are you sure about that?
by Edward ODaniel / August 5, 2006 4:48 AM PDT
In reply to: EX-Klan, Tom...

Sen. Byrd was a "Kleagle" -- an official recruiter who signed up members for $10 a head. He said he joined because it "offered excitement" and because the Klan was an "effective force" in "promoting traditional American values." Mostly unmentioned is the fact that his father, Cornelius Calvin Sale Sr. (Robert was Cornelius Calvin Sale Jr. until renamed by his aunt in 1918) was also a Klan member.

Also not commonly known from his comments on his membership is that shortly after joining he recruited 150 friends and relatives and formed a new chapter in Crab Orchard, W.Va.

"When it came time to choose the Exalted Cyclops, the top officer in the local Klan unit, Byrd won unanimously."[3] Byrd, in his autobiography, attributed the beginnings of his political career to this incident, though he lamented that they involved the Klan. According to Byrd's recollection, Baskin told him, "You have a talent for leadership, Bob... The country needs young men like you in the leadership of the nation." Byrd recalls that "suddenly lights flashed in my mind! Someone important had recognized my abilities. I was only 23 or 24, and the thought of a political career had never struck me. But strike me that night, it did."

"During his campaign for the U.S. Senate in 1958, when Byrd was 41 years old, Byrd defended the Klan. He argued that the KKK had been incorrectly blamed for much of the violence in the South."
(same link as above)

The ex-Klansman allegedly ended his ties with the group in 1943, BUT...

Republicans in West Virginia discovered a letter Sen. Byrd had written to the Imperial Wizard of the KKK three years after he says he abandoned the group. He wrote: "The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia" and "in every state in the Union."

The ex-Klansman later filibustered the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act -- supported by a majority of those "mean-spirited" Republicans -- for more than 14 hours. He also opposed the nominations of the Supreme Court's two black justices, liberal Thurgood Marshall and conservative Clarence Thomas. In fact, the ex-Klansman had the gall to accuse Justice Thomas of "injecting racism" into the Senate hearings. Meanwhile, author Graham Smith recently discovered another letter Sen. Byrd wrote after he quit the KKK, this time attacking desegregation of the armed forces.

The ex-Klansman vowed never to fight "with a Negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds."

That also responds to your inane drivel about his being "more dedicated Black civil rights". His words and deeds clearly say otherwise.

As recently as 2001 (March 4) he was on Fox Network and stated - "There are white *******. I've seen a lot of white ******* in my time. I'm going to use that word. We just need to work together to make our country a better country, and I'd just as soon quit talking about it so much."

Of course that doesn't even register on your scope does it.

He voted for Owens but against Brown when they were nominated for the 5th Circuit. There certainly were not too many differences in the qualifications or the
judicial philosophies of those women. Rogers Brown was a conservative Justice on the California Supreme Court. And Owen was a conservative Justice on the Texas Supreme Court.

He voted against the nomination of Alberto Gonzales to be Attorney General. But he voted in favor of John Ashcroft's nomination, back in January 2001 although the only major difference politically between the two is minumal leaving one wondering how much race affects his votes.

Should I mention his "hold" on Rice's nomination?

Senator Robert Byrd Receives KKK Lifetime Achievement Award

By N. B. Forrest

HANGMAN'S GROVE, WEST VIRGINIA ? Billy Bob Cracker, President and CEO of the Klu Klux Klan (KKK), has chosen Senator Robert Byrd (D-Wva.) as this year?s recipient of the KKK?s Lifetime Achievement Award. The award was presented at the 133rd Annual KKK Transparent Image Awards, taped last night and scheduled to air April 1st (8:00 p.m. ET) on FOX.

?The Lifetime Achievement Award reflects individuals at the pinnacle of their respective fields who?ve made significant contributions to the success of the KKK," Cracker said. "Senator Byrd exemplifies this prestigious award; no living person has worked as hard as he has to keep the black man dependant on, and subservient to, the white man. Not to mention his outstanding work against Jews and Catholics.?

I guess for you that all spells dedication for Black civil rights. Wonderland is said to be a nice place to visit (mostly by recovering addicts and "progressives") but you really ought to stop living there Dave -- it isn't real!.

Collapse -
I know my logic is flawed
by Josh K / August 5, 2006 12:32 AM PDT

So is Ed's which is what I'm getting at.

Collapse -
how is mine flawed? do you deny that...
by Edward ODaniel / August 5, 2006 4:59 AM PDT

both the communist and Democrat parties have the same agendas on their individual platters?

Hard to deny when BOTH parties make a habit of announcing their platforms to the public Josh.

Collapse -
Of course I do
by Josh K / August 5, 2006 5:10 AM PDT

Stop being absurd, Ed. I am a Democrat and am most decidedly not a Communist no matter what you happen to think.

Collapse -
It is not I being absurd Josh...
by Edward ODaniel / August 5, 2006 5:57 AM PDT
In reply to: Of course I do

The Democrat Party supports and promotes: abortion; homosexuality; feminaziism; environmentalism; government control over every aspect of our lives and society; socialized health care; disarmament of the American people; Internationalism - the subjugation of the U.S. to the U.N.; the complete elimination of our national sovereignty; complete destruction of our basic traditional family unit; loss of personal freedoms and individual liberty; favoring government regulation over capitalism. In other words, complete destruction of our Constitution and Bill of Rights and our American way of life. So does the Communist Party.

I didn't mention that both also are in total opposition to school vouchers which would enable a parent to remove his child from unhealthy influences of many marxist oriented educators.

Still don't believe it, take a few minutes and COMPARE the two platforms side by side.

I don't blame you at all for getting upset by being associated with communists, BUT I do blame you for keeping your head in the sand and not recognizing that the old Democratic ideals have been replaced and restructured to those of the Communist Party. Matter of fact if you will but listen you will hear Dean, Kerry, Kennedy, Pelosi uttering arguments directly from the Communist Party Program. Read it as it is informative -

I am not the one putting the words in their mouths Josh.

Collapse -
Your first paragraph says it all, Ed
by Josh K / August 5, 2006 6:22 AM PDT

You have no idea what you're talking about and there's no point continuing this.

Collapse -
Are you claiming that is not true?
by Edward ODaniel / August 5, 2006 6:35 AM PDT

If so it explains your state of denial. It isn't me who doesn't know what he is talking about Josh, that distinction goes to he who can't see the facts of the matter when they are pointed out. I guess that would be YOU.

Whould you care to make a tiny effort to indicate any of the listed items that are not true? You used to read links unlike an unnamed DK who seems to have exerted an unhealthy influence on you by showing that if he can avoid reading them he can keep quoting fiction.

I really think you should take the time to actually compare the platforms. The words are not identical but the agendas pretty much are.

Collapse -
Of course I am
by Josh K / August 5, 2006 9:17 AM PDT

Even a sixth grader knows the difference between a Democrat and a Communist, Ed, and you're smart enough to not need it explained to you.

Collapse -
wow! Don't even know your own party's platform!
by Edward ODaniel / August 5, 2006 10:39 AM PDT
In reply to: Of course I am

Actually the Communist, the Socialist, and the Democrat parties should merge.

Differences? NBC's "Meet the Press" of 14 May 2005 (Howard Dean and Russert) should be real illuminating for you.

Collapse -
The difference ...
by Evie / August 4, 2006 10:16 PM PDT

... is that national, and for the most part even state and local party apparatus have not endorsed or promoted Duke in eons when he has run for office. He's never held a position higher than state legislator in LA.

OTOH, there are many Democrats pouring $$ and support to Ned Lamont in CT, and he will receive the enthusiastic backing of the DNC if he wins the primary.

The "Progressive Caucus" aka DSA, are not side show members of the Democrat party, they are given leadership positions!

You failed to identify the parts of the GOP platform you consider fascist.

Collapse -
You're missing the point too
by Josh K / August 5, 2006 12:32 AM PDT
In reply to: The difference ...

I don't consider the RNC platform fascist. And the DNC platform isn't Communist either, though it may appear so if you're standing so far to the Right you're in danger of falling off the platform entirely.

Get it?

Collapse -
Missing the point
by marinetbryant / August 5, 2006 1:41 AM PDT

Just my own observations. As with any politician there is waffling and 2 stepping. The Dems have swung way left leaving some of the middle of the roaders dismayed. Even some Reps are dismayed over the far right swing the party has taken in some instances. To my eyes, the Dems have swung to a socialist left stance. Don't mind helping those that need it but the Dems are proclaiming everyone needs help and are even inviting the world to get on the wagon. Not all rich folks are Rep, but those who were Dem and made a forune seem to be leaving that party. I got a prescription for new glasses but this is still what I see.


Collapse -
I think there's truth to that
by Josh K / August 5, 2006 2:05 AM PDT
In reply to: Missing the point

There are also a lot of rich Democrats on the far Left who still espouse far Left views even when those views might cost them tax dollars.

But this was about someone equating Democrats with Communists, which is frankly beneath any serious response.

Collapse -
by marinetbryant / August 5, 2006 2:30 AM PDT

It seems as time goes by the line between communism and socialism tends to get fuzzier.


Popular Forums
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
Laptops 21,181 discussions
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
Phones 17,137 discussions
Security 31,287 discussions
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

The Samsung RF23M8090SG

One of the best French door fridges we've tested

A good-looking fridge with useful features like an auto-filling water pitcher and a temperature-adjustable "FlexZone" drawer. It was a near-flawless performer in our cooling tests.