Am I a Democrat?

[Jackpine Radical]

I'm not sure anymore.

I believe, as Hubert Humphrey said, that a society should be judged by how it treats those at the fringes of society--the poor, the elderly, the very young.

Although not a supernaturalist Christian, I find that Christ speaks to me: Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.

I believe in a democracy where an EDUCATED public makes informed political choices. This means that the undue influence of money must be removed from the political playing field.

I believe it is a primary function of the state to provide an environment in which all people can flourish and reach their maximum potential.

These goals can only be attained through a free public education for each citizen, and to the extent that each person's gifts and inclinations lead her to pursue knowledge, she should be free to engage in that pursuit. Not just K-12, but post-secondary and graduate education should be free to those who can benefit from it and choose to do so.

I believe in a government that prevents the rich from impoverishing the masses in the name of their own greed.

I believe in a heterogeneous society in which people are judged by their actions, not by their ethnicity, their wealth, or their beliefs.

I believe that the State has the right and duty to intervene in individual behavior only when that behavior infringes upon the rights of others. For example, I have little interest in protecting people from the evils of marijuana, but I have a strong interest in protecting people from things such as predatory mortgages and monopolistic price-gouging.

Work should be compensated adequately, and each person should have the means of basic sustenance with dignity.

Where practical, systems that promote co-operation over competition should be encouraged. Better a credit union than a bank, better a co-op than a corporation, better a worker-owned factory than a publicly traded one.

Monopolistic industries such as national transportation and energy production ought to be nationalized.

I believe the nation ought to engage in military actions only to protect the integrity and safety of the nation itself. Our military ought to be reduced to a size commensurate with the military forces of the rest of the world, and our current course of imperial adventurism must be stopped.

I don't delude myself that these things can or will happen rapidly or perhaps at all, but these are the values and purposes a political party must hold if it hopes to retain my allegiance.

If these goals sound like the principles of the Democratic Party, then I m still a Democrat.

[msongs]

1. do you believe in

endless spying on all americans?
executing men, women, and children world wide w/out arrest, trial and conviction?
starting negotiations with republicans from the weakest possible opening position?
allowing the minority party to control the majority party in the senate?
chasing medical pot smokers while republicans rewrite voting laws to penalize democratic voters?

yep, you're a 2013 democrat lol

[Jackpine Radical]

4. Oh, yes, yes, those things too, of course.

Just forgot to add them to my list.

<--Somehow I just know I'm gonna need this.

[George II]

118. Look up - is there a cloud perpetually following you above your head?

[pscot]

2. That sounds like the democratic wing

of the Democrat party.

[abelenkpe]

3. That's what I thought a democrat was

Would add in breaking up big media, pharma and finance. Pretty sure we have anti trust laws...but yeah.

[Scuba]

5. Thanks Jackpine. Your heart speaks to mine.

[LuvNewcastle]

6. Paulbot

[zeemike]

7. I am not sure ether.

I hear those that reject all of that and they say they are the democrats...
Perhaps I have went to sleep and woke up in some new kind of world...where we are all republicans now.

[Lifelong Protester]

8. Yep, still and 'old school' Dem.

Anyone who can still remember and quote or paraphrase Hubert Humphrey is OK in my book.

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. 2009 is the year I became an indie

Granted, as a reporter that's best...but it was the singe payor that did it for me.

[heaven05]

107. I

thought so. Wasn't sure, thanks for confirming.geez

[nadinbrzezinski]

108. what...that I am indie

Last edited Sun Jul 28, 2013, 01:32 PM - Edit history (1)

No longer give one bloody red cent to.a campaign...nor could afford to either

As a reporter it's old fashioned...some don't vote even. That's old fashiobed i know city hall is a beat of mine

[Phillyindy]

10. Democrats believe...

...in all those things, so yes you are. Problem is many democrat leaders have been co-opted by big business, and the good ones can't fight against them and the entire Republican Party and the corporate media and the apathetic clueless American public. Bottom line, you probably feel like the only sane person in the country at times, that just means you're a TRUE Democrat.

[George II]

134. WHAT??

"Problem is many democrat leaders"??

Didn't you mean DemocratIC leaders?

Thanks Senator McCarthy!

[liberal_at_heart]

11. I went through a time when I didn't know either. Now I know I'm just not a democrat anymore.

I'm an independent now.

[A Simple Game]

19. I'm unaffiliated also. The Democrats left me about 20 years ago.

It seems most of what the Democrats have over the Republicans is just rhetoric.

I would not give up my liberal principles just to remain in a party.

I haven't voted for a Republican in over 30 years, not even local. I do vote for Democratic candidates but not on the Democratic line, only if they are also on a third party line. The third party Presidential candidate that I voted for in the last two presidential elections won. I am not as happy about that as I once was.

[Pyrzqxgl]

58. I thought the idea of this forum is that we are all DEMOCRATS!!!

I thought we were all to use this forum to help make the DEMOCRATIC Party the kind of liberal progressive party we want it to be.

[HumansAndResources]

77. Folks can continue voting in the primaries for Working-Class options

... but that doesn't mean one has to swallow what the DLC pays to get elected by the sheeple who believe their Tee Vee sets.

[A Simple Game]

89. Please read the About section that is at the bottom of every page.

We are first and foremost a liberal group. Well we used to be, not so much anymore.

[George II]

136. Very true, and those who claim to be independent "Democrats" will never be in a position....

....to change the party from the outside looking in.

It's just a cop out to abandon one's party because they don't agree 110% with one's beliefs.

[locks]

12. Best kind of Democrat

Hope all Democrats will say Yes, this is what we stand for.

[DevonRex]

13. Mostly we ignore

these threads. Not because of people like you, because you're one of us. It's all the ones who proudly declare they're ex-Dems or that Dems are pretty much evil that we just avoid.

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

14. Looks a lot like these rights, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Check them out.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml

Sounds like you're a world citizen as well, welcome to the human race.

[blackspade]

15. K&R!

Very well said. I'm 100% with you.

[mick063]

16. The current Democratic party

has veered so far from the OP's vision, a former Democratic Party vision, that I have come to conclusion that a "knock down, drag out fight" is required to claim the party back.

Certainly, the folks that consider politics as a "team sport" where lockstep cheerleading is preferable to reclaiming party identity will spread disenchantment here. Winning at all costs is their mantra.

Folks that claim they can "no longer stomach visiting DU anymore" are witnessing the start of the fight. The GOTV chorus is starting to get drowned out with the "we want our party back" chorus.

The folks with time and effort invested in the party are disgruntled because many outside the party infrastructure do not appear "appreciative" of their efforts. Perhaps lost in all that hard work was what they should have been working for as many people are not satisfied with just "winning". Perhaps some of those that have worked so hard have coopted the party toward a different direction because they are not ideologically aligned with Progressive ideals.

Perhaps those that complain we are attempting to change the political landscape from a message board have not seen the images of people assembling in state houses and public parks only to be pepper sprayed and arrested.

Perhaps people that are due for influence on the party structure are not familiar with the inner workings of the structure and choose unorthodox methods because they are not included in the party structure.

Perhaps many people have recently awakened and are still under the learning curve of how to politically resolve this and perhaps those that retain power within the party feel threatened by such renewed interest. The comfort zone within the party machine isn't quite as comfortable as it once was.

Perhaps some people regard "taking the party back" as a higher priority than defeating Republicans.

The strongest message the current Democratic Party has is "We can't let those crazy Republicans win." This is not a message of vision. This is a message of ultimate failure. Further, when the progressive vision is properly spelled out in campaign rhetoric and then not implemented when in power, it goes well beyond vision. It has become a matter of trust. When the Democratic party loses trust, the calls for GOTV ring hollow. People will not show up. 2010 will repeat in 2014.

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

20. And if we "took the party back"

We would defeat the Republicans, we would win the popular vote.

[Mojorabbit]

50. Someone on this board told me these long held ideas were failed 60's ideas.

These are the people who are guiding the party it seems and it scares me to pieces.

[mick063]

51. Don't be sacred

Drop the gloves.

It is time to brawl.

[liberal_at_heart]

52. yeah it is.

[Demeter]

91. I am more inclined to a new party: A Peoples' 99% Occupation Party

Last edited Sun Jul 28, 2013, 01:11 PM - Edit history (1)

for three reasons:

1) It starts fresh without all the crap the GOP has heaped on the Democratic brand (and all the crap so-called Democrats have done to sully the name).

2) It permits people who were never Democrats and would never consider it, based on their prejudice or history, to reconsider their options and go for something other than the right-wing fundie Tea Party or the GOP Corporate brands.

3) A new party can be set up so that the message and the spokespeople are controlled by the grassroots, as opposed to any entrenched Establishment Elite.


On Edit:

The first reply to this post I cannot read, because I have that person on Ignore. If it's worth looking at, please advise...if it isn't, that's why he's on Ignore!

[heaven05]

111. ok

let's go with it. You start. Lead. What next, start a petition? What next?

[MotherPetrie]

18. K&R.

[Martin Eden]

21. "engage in military actions only to protect the integrity and safety of the nation itself"

Great post, and I heartily agree!

With one caveat, though:
I believe military action in concert with other nations under the authority of an organization of international law (like the UN) may under extreme circumstances be the only practical humanitarian means of saving a population that is being victimized by what amounts to genocide.

[midnight]

22. Thanks Jackpine..... I can't help but thinking this should be a given, but considering the fact

that corporations are people with more value than people I'm happy to read this....

[gulliver]

23. You are. You just don't get to dictate.

That's the problem a lot of people have. They think that if something isn't going their way it justifies unreliability on their part, as if they get to dictate the degree of reciprocity in the relationship with the party. "I voted for you so you would eliminate blue food. You didn't, so I won't vote for you."

It's natural to think that way. Ridiculous but natural. If you want something—anything—you pretty much have to be willing to endure a lot of disappointment and resistance. You also have to have focus and unbreakable persistence. Being all over the map on your demands and acting ready to walk all the time is the opposite of that.

I don't fear for the party if you or others depart because you feel you aren't getting your way enough. If that is where you are, then by all means take off and start another party or join the Greens or whatever. It's a good thing for a party if flaky, demanding, noisy people leave it. Those types hold us back.

[liberal_at_heart]

25. Glad to hear you won't miss my vote.

[gulliver]

26. I won't.

For every fair weather, "me first" liberal who departs, we probably gain ten overall.

[liberal_at_heart]

27. have fun insulting people. You're going on ignore. I'm done with you.

[TheKentuckian]

35. Elaborate on this theory, if you would. What is it that can be done to attract a ten fold increase

that becomes workable by subtracting these liberals?

Which issues are "me first" and which ones are for greatest and broadest benefit for the most people which are the purpose of the struggle in the first place? How do you discern between the two?

Is "fair weather" not defined by lack of commitment in the face of shared adversity rather than misplaced loyalty to the source of the adversity? Is the latter not the mental poison that leads to battered spouses "standing by their man" and stockholm syndrome?

Where will these ten come from? Is this going to motivate the big pool and draw out non-voters? You think you can move far enough right to nab that many TeaPubliKlans and hold together the vast majority of who we have (and why doing so is desirable if we have goals anything alike)? Independents? What in the world suggests any such number of truly unaligned and obtainable voters? Most of them vote their lean as reliably as declared partisans and the small number that consistently flips back and forth don't seem to be policy or ideologically driven, they are casting a vote for surface reaction-likability, "feel safe", height, attractiveness, "inspiration figure", "experience", "new blood", brand recognition.

Also, if this were really true what has stopped it from already being done when it is so clearly obvious? Sentimental softies like Rahm just couldn't do what is needed for the greater good?

[gulliver]

57. This apparently touches a nerve.

Last edited Sat Jul 27, 2013, 08:52 PM - Edit history (1)

You may not be one of these folks who can't tell the difference between Dems and Republicans, or who think they might not vote against Republicans, or who might join the Greens. I'm talking to those folks, not necessarily you. It's not possible to hold their position and call yourself liberal. It's just not. They need to go to the Greens where they can be ignored as a bloc. They don't deserve to get their grimy fingerprints on the liberal microphone.

Someone whose vote is not reliable is not really a vote that needs to be counted, so a 10x replacement becomes academic. But let's look at the kind of ethically zero-dimensional so-called liberal who wouldn't vote Democratic in the face of the current Republican alternative and think of them as one vote lost for the sake of argument.

That "vote" they think they have liberals over a barrel on isn't worth anything on the net side. It is a net negative, because you have to account for the negative affect of their misguided voices in the public forum. If you are trying to attract everyday people to the liberal cause, you need a clear message and respected leaders. It is not possible to have that when you have a tiny band of self-styled, self-appointed liberal wannabes constantly dragging everyone into the mud.

How many young people hear one of these nitwits comparing Obama to Bush and don't know that it is just meaningless nitwit-ism rather than true liberalism? The same is true of independents and even the Kansas Republicans who really should be Dems. How many need to be turned off by these "Greens in liberal clothing" before we realize that it is real people they are hurting?

[TheKentuckian]

140. So there is no such math just another convoluted way to tell liberals to shut their yaps

and take whatever garbage the Turd Way shits down their maw or else the Boogie man will take over and give them something to cry about.

There is no there there, just more of the same shut up and let us be secular Reaganites horseshit or the Republicans will win/the path to a liberal America is secular corporatism and our silence and complicity in establishing such least the theocratic leaning corporatist take advantage.
If the corporatism is the problem, maybe in a generation or two when the "real" threat is dealt with and eroded by demographics then maybe we can look at beginning to discuss some other "differences".

Right.

[Doctor_J]

39. By kicking liberals out of the party, you're planning to increase the membership?

Assuming this bizarre flight of fancy is true, and you give the boot to, say, 2 million liberals, and the supposed 20 million that you add don't believe in jackpine's principles, is it still the Democratic party? Do you want to be led/ruled by someone who doesn't believe in those principles, regardless of what they call themselves?

[gulliver]

64. Not liberals

I'm talking about a fringe of people, the folks who would consider sitting out an election where a Republican stood to gain power. That's not 2 million. Maybe it's 20,000. A pittance.

In my scenario, they leave and join the Greens. They set up shop on their Green blog site. Some of them even run for office as Greens and join Green protests. Their putdowns of Obama and Dem accomplishments go in the media's Green file. In short, we never hear from them again.

Then without the constant negative howling, the Dems are able to present a unified party, all consistent with the kinds of principles Jackpine Radical called out (and which I agree with). Without the constant undertone of contempt and false equivalence with Republicans, the Dems gain electoral ground dramatically and can finally start doing some of the things the Green defecters wanted them to do in the first place.

[Doctor_J]

116. You think there are only 20,000 who are unhappy with the party's performance over the last 6 years?

I suggest looking at the number of people who voted (D) in 2008, and compare it to the number who voted (D) in 2010. That's a better estimate. Also, if you believe that the party leadership (the reps, Senators, president, and big money types) have beliefs consistent with the OP, you're fooling yourself, Finally, if you believe that 20,000 people can bring down a party of 50 million or so by "constant howling", you're projecting. It's not the real Dems that are the problem - it's the so-called reps who would rather please Republicans than the actual party members.

[Jackpine Radical]

56. This particular fair-weather, Me-First liberal

acquired a few perforations in his hide along with a strong antiwar sentiment in Vietnam, got gassed and clubbed on the streets of Madison in the 1969-71 era, walked the streets for George McGovern in '72, worked for Mo Udall & then Jimmy Carter in '76, and participated actively in every major election since.

But I guess you don't need us fair-weather, Me-First liberals anymore.

[nadinbrzezinski]

61. No they don't...because the 75 year switch is happening

Ten years tops...democrats will officially be the party of big business.

[gulliver]

63. Not sure why you include yourself...

...in the set of false liberals I'm talking about. I read your OP, and I agree with your principles. The lamenting undertone isn't even a problem with me. If you are one of these folks who can't stop scaring away would-be liberals from the Dem Party, then I would hope you would go to something like the Greens.

The Dems need a sense of unity and respect for our leaders if we want to grow. People need to know we have our act together and are definitely, clearly, hands-down, head-and-shoulders better than Republicans. That is an easy sale, because it is simply an obvious fact. Respectful, constructive criticism is good of course. Blackmail threats to walk in the next election and contempt-laden attacks on our elected officials aren't.

[leftstreet]

67. The Democratic POLITICIANS are 'scaring away would-be liberals'

The Democratic politicians can't prove to potential voters that they're better than the Republicans

Don't blame the voters

[Bluenorthwest]

69. Not sure? Here is how you responded to the OP.

"I don't fear for the party if you or others depart because you feel you aren't getting your way enough. If that is where you are, then by all means take off and start another party or join the Greens or whatever. It's a good thing for a party if flaky, demanding, noisy people leave it. "
Now you say "Not sure why you include yourself bin the set of false liberals I'm talking about. I read your OP, and I agree with your principles."

Wowser, Penny!

[treestar]

99. So your vote should count for more than the votes of others who did not do all that stuff?

I was too young for all that, and didn't do any of it. You need a major change in law to get my vote to count for less than yours does.

[Vanje]

121. JPL never said his vote should count more than yours , or anyone elses.

It was dishonest to suggest that he did. Shamefully so.

JPL was stating his bonifides as a response to the inevitable avalanche of posts here, that he was never a true liberal DEmocrat.

I'm sorry you have no actual boots-on-the-ground experience as a liberal. Carry on keyboard warrior.

[treestar]

123. Everyone who does that

is saying exactly that. It's an easy logical conclusion.

[Vanje]

128. Nonsense.

[Mnpaul]

119. That plan worked great in 2010

didn't it?

I think you have it backwards though. The liberals are the "we first" group. The DLC/Third way bunch are the "me first" bunch that only care for the needs of the few.

[gulliver]

133. Unfortunately, what I am talking about wasn't tried in 2010

The left side counterpart to the Tea Party did hurt liberals, but not by walking. Had they walked and declared themselves Greens, they would have helped the Dems. It's almost too ironic that the very people who did their best to discourage Dem voters now point to Dem voter discouragement as some sort of vindication of their position.

In 2014, liberals would be blessed if the Green types would just walk and join the Greens offically. They have to have the class to walk though, because their is no "kick out" process. Anyone who isn't fully committed to voting against Republicans is no liberal. We don't need to keep 20,000 or so noisy flakes if the price is ruining Dem Party unity and resolve. We need the Obama=Bush, fight-the-NSA-before-poverty, FTP folks to take a hike.

[Mnpaul]

138. "Anyone who isn't committed to voting against Repiblicans isn't a liberal?"

Where did you come up with that garbage?

I think you have the terms "lockstep party loyalist" and "liberal" confused.

[Egalitarian Thug]

62. They actually believe that they can win by attracting "moderate republicans".

Apparently they still have faith that the last 40 years are simply an aberration and the nation will come to its senses any years now.

That's the problem when faith/wishful thinking supplant reality.

But also know that after they lose again, it will be our fault.

[Cali_Democrat]

66. I won't miss it.

[treestar]

98. Why do you feel entitled to so much more from your vote than I get for mine?

Or anyone else?

In the end, it counts as one vote, equal to the other voters.

[Vanje]

122. Dishonest!

No one.
Is.
suggesting
that
their vote
should count more
than
anyone else's vote.

[treestar]

125. They are when they demand that they get all they want.

that is exactly what they are saying. I did not get what I wanted on one issue, therefore I won't vote for another Democrat. I should have got something I wanted in return for my vote.

When none of us gets that. It is logically impossible.

We're supposed to feel threatened - OMG DU poster will withhold his or her vote! We must make the politicians do what she wants done on this issue or we'll lose!

[Vanje]

129. Nonsense

Did you actually read the OP?

[Caretha]

71. So sorry

I refuse to eat blue food. AND I definitely vote against eating blue food....my very dead (over 50 years) old grandmother would admonish me if I did.

And not to be confrontational or anything, but I'm definitely not all over the map about blue food.

You may be okay with turning yourself into a pretzel trying to justify the BIG FAT LIE ABOUT ....it is okay to eat blue food,

but, I don't have your same disorder, and I'm not confused.

Have a good day!

[mick063]

72. You will become extinct. A dinosaur.

You should not be surprised when "your" party passes you by.

You speak from a perch as if you dictate "the rules". Claiming that people of your mindset are in the driver's seat. Convinced that it is the "others" that are in the minority. Believing that you represent common thinking. A static view. A snapshot in time. A Joe Scarborough sound bite, "America is center right", speaking with authority to reassure yourself and those that might listen.

The dynamics are what you do not see. You don't have enough fingers to plug the inevitable holes. Your frustration will grow, everyday, as the fringe will not go away. Eating away at "your party", claiming it for themselves.

You are the type "that holds us back". Only briefly. We will catch you in the rear view mirror.

We are taking our party back......from you.

[NorthCarolina]

83. Well said!

[treestar]

100. Wow that's pure projection

Who is it that wants to dictate?

You can only change the party by changing the minds of other voters. I'm quitting because you disagree with me is not going to work. How many Democrats become more liberal because you quit because the party is not liberal enough? If that's all it takes the Democrats would be much more liberal right now.

[Vanje]

124. "We are taking our party back......from you."

Right-fucking-on!

[Fearless]

87. You have no idea what you're talking about.

If one doesn't support their own beliefs no one will.

[Demeter]

92. Yours is the kind of party I wouldn't want to belong to

A party without any principles whatsoever beyond winning at all costs.

There's no "winning" without actually making change. If the only change you make is to "win" a beauty contest, that's not winning.

The GOP has goals. They are crazy, stupid, people-destroying goals, but they fervently believe in them.

I want a party that has smart, well-thought out, people-enhancing goals. And believe me when I say: Obamacare isn't cutting it.

[treestar]

96. This ^^^^^^

Excellently well put. Politics involves working with others. Not thinking in terms of what you yourself want.

[Progressive dog]

24. The Democrats have a platform,

the last one would be from 2012 if you'd really like to know what Democrats (well a large majority of Democrats) support. It's east to find.

[Thinkingabout]

28. Agreed, I also don't like to vote for or against a candidate on a single issue. Having

Agreement on ten issues and disagreeing on one issue will not cause me to vote for the other party or third party candidate. I have been a life long Democrat and plan for this to remain. When you vote single issue you will end up voting against yourself. I am not libertarian and do not like their platform

[liberal_at_heart]

29. It was certainly a single issue that drove me to become an indepenedent. Race to the Top.

My son has had a terrible time in school. It's personal for me. I will vote for a democrat again when they repeal Race to the Top and restore funding to our public school system.

[Thinkingabout]

31. It might be your big issue at the moment but what will be your issue when your son

Gets into the job market? Protecting the right to vote, protecting employees on a job site, protecting the food your son eats, protecting the environment so your child can breath, this could go on and on and it should be important for your ad your childs well being. If it was not for the fights put forth by our Democrat Platform your child just might not be having a department of education, both libertarian and Republican parties wants to eliminate this department. Don't vote against yourself.

[liberal_at_heart]

33. like the democrats are going to help my son in the job market? Give me a break. I already

know my kids are in for poverty wages, and the democrats are doing nothing to fix that.

[Thinkingabout]

37. Do you think the GOP or libertarian party is trying to change this?

Has the GOP or libertarian party proposed an increase in minimum wages? Has Obama proposed to get jobs created? This is why you can not use a single issue when voting, perhaps you just don't try to vote, nit voting sure will help your kids. There has been times in the past history where jobs bills was passed and people went to work on wages to support their families. The WPA helped my father and many more since that time, how many jobs programs does the GOP push for.

[liberal_at_heart]

38. I will not vote for any politician who supports Race to the Top, defunding education, low

wages, or any Reagonite trickle down economics whether they be GOP, libertarian, or democrat. Do you think any democrat in office is willing to fight for a living wage, say $18 an hour? If they are willing to fight for that, restore funding for education, and repeal other Reagonite trickle down economic policies then maybe I'll consider voting for a democrat again.

[Thinkingabout]

44. It would be interesting to see what candidate you will find but sometimrs I have beennproven wrong.

You mention Reaganomics and this was the beginning of the decline in wages for lower income, he sought to destroy unions which worked to improve working conditions for all workers and not just their union members.

[liberal_at_heart]

48. and the democratic politicians go right along with it. I will not go along with it anymore.

I may not find a candadite. I may not get to vote, or I may have to find another alternative, but I will not vote to support these kinds of policies anymore.

[Doctor_J]

41. Have you been paying attention?

Protecting the right to vote, protecting employees on a job site, protecting the food your son eats, protecting the environment so your child can breath,

The current DC Dems do almost nothing about any of these issues.

[liberal_at_heart]

43. where is Congress on restoring voting rights? Why aren't we hearing democratic politicians

screaming about this? Why aren't we hearing democratic politicians fighting tooth and nail for this? Where are they? Are they waiting for the election cycle?

[Thinkingabout]

49. And you think another party is going to do a better job.

[Doctor_J]

131. The post to which I responded did not say anything about another party

It said that people should vote (D) to protect their right to vote, protect the environment, etc. The current Dem delegation in DC does not do those things. They've been in charge for years (House & Senate - 2007-2008; House, Senate & WH 2009-2010; Senate & WH 2009). The campaign slogan, "We'll take away your rights more slowly than the Republicans" will not get indies & newbies to the polls.

[Thinkingabout]

132. I was responding to your post "The current DC Dems do almost nothing about any of these issues."

My comment was do you think the other parties would do a better job.

[Vanje]

126. Word! nt

[Progressive dog]

32. Public Education has been broken for a while

and no one seems to have a good idea how to fix it. I didn't know that the Feds cut funding with Race to the top, but I'm not surprised. They've never funded special ed. to the extent they promised.
In NY, most funds for education come from state aid and local property taxes. The state restricts property tax increases to basically CPI. It's tough to figure out who to vote for at the state level if education is your main issue.

[liberal_at_heart]

34. luckily our state had the forsesight to write into our state consitution that k-12 education is to

be our number 1 budget priority. The bad news is is that we have been in violation of our state constitution for a long time. Our state supreme court just ordered our legislators to fund education the way it is suppose to be. Now if we could just get that kind of action out of the federal government.

[treestar]

101. But then you would understand others don't have that exact priority?

Let's say I don't have kids, so that issue doesn't matter to me. Choice is my only issue, so I'll stick with Democrats, and they've been pretty good on that. You're saying I should only vote on what matters to me, right? The only thing that matters to me is pro-choice, and the Democrats are good enough on that, so I vote for them.

[Doctor_J]

40. As we have have seen during the Obama years, platforms expire after the election.

[Jackpine Radical]

53. Platforms seem to be where they stand their principles

the better to lynch them.

[Progressive dog]

97. The complaint was about not agreeing with what the Democrats

stand for, with specific examples. I was just pointing out where to go to find out what Democrats claimed to stand for.
You might want to compare the OP to the platform to see if the Democrats have changed or if the OP's inflating the actual stance of the Democratic party.

[hay rick]

110. ...only to rise from the dead 4 years later.

It's true. It's obscene. It's not democracy.

[damnedifIknow]

30. One sure fire way to know for sure

Stand next to a muslim, a gay, a black. Feel comfortable and unafraid? Then you are a Democrat.

[Thinkingabout]

36. Hey, bet you can walk down the street without an AR-15 also, yep you are a Democrat.

[mick063]

42. If fairness is a core conviction

You are certainly a Democrat.

If it is not, you may still consider yourself to be a Democrat, but you deceiving others and yourself.

[Jackpine Radical]

54. No problem with any of that, but

standing next to a Teabagger makes me nervous.

[Demeter]

95. Even when that Teabagger is my Auntie?

She may be deluded and prejudiced, but she's family. With a dialog, we can find common ground, to the benefit of the family.

We have to bring the Teabaggers home, one by one. They are the abused, confused, lost sheep. We have to rescue them, just as we would any other cult victim: with love, support, and education.

[LondonReign2]

45. As the Democratic party rowssteadily to the right it becomes an excellent question

Is "being a Democrat" determined by the set of principles you laid out, or by the changing stance of the party establishment?

I feel a bit like I imagine Lincoln Chafee and other moderate Republicans must have felt as they watched their party lurch rightward and become something unrecognizable.

[LostOne4Ever]

46. Wrong question

What you need to ask yourself is if you:

a) Support the Democratic platform?

Or

b) Oppose the Republican platform?

If the former then you are a democrat, if the latter then you are a member of the democratic party. The former votes for candidates who "D" after their name, and the latter votes for the people who have the best chance to defeat people with a "R" after their name.

This is usually the same person.

[Festivito]

80. +1 For centering hammer over the nail. eom

[mick063]

103. Recent history has shown

Platform = campaign rhetoric

Reality = policy implemented/people appointed

Platform does not resemble reality.

It is all a matter of trust.

I have lost my trust.

[LostOne4Ever]

113. If that is how you feel

Then you should look at what the republican party stands for...in full.

Lost trust or not the dems are MILES better than the repugs. The stupid winner takes all system have left them as the only 2 choices we have.

[mick063]

114. So we strategically make the choice

We force the Democratic party to change or we let Republicans take brief power.

The incompetency of the GOP will swing this country further, quicker to the left than the slow corporate assimilation that the current Democratic Party offers.

[LostOne4Ever]

120. Only a brief time in Power

Could be disastrous for the country as Double Dumb proved. Further, it could have long lasting effects (especially on the SCotUS).

I like to think the people would quickly see the errors of their ways...but I am a pessimist and remember Kerry losing to Bush.

I think a better strat is to stick with the dems and use the demographic coalition Obama has forged to make the republican party irrelevant, and allow us a strangle hold on the SCotUS and then push for change from within the party. If done right we will have all three houses and no resistance.

I am more than willing to have to hold my nose on some candidates if ultimately it leads to the defeat of the fascists in draped in red.

[Octafish]

47. You're a real Democrat.

Some say Repuglian Lite passes for the name, but they are wrong, deluded, or lying.

[KoKo]

55. Have asked myself that many times over the past Decade. I vote Dem...

but "AM I?" I look in the mirror...I wonder... I see what I see my voting has gotten me and I wonder, also.

[Skip Intro]

59. +100. I disagreed slightly in a spot or two, but great post!

I have considered myself a Democrat for decades. Still do, but not as strongly. My principles define me, labels, including Democrat, do not.

I lurked DU shortly after the 2000 election. I jumped in after 9*11. I felt at home. No so much sometimes these days, but there are still tons of awesome people here, and I ain't going nowhere, for what that's worth.

Bottom line is, no one should sacrifice principles to brandish a label.

[Zorra]

60. You sound like the very antithesis of a Republican.

And I personally completely agree with the principles and conditions that you posted.

We are Democrats, the opposite of Republicans, but now there is also a Third Way who have things in common with Democrats, but who also have some of the primary characteristics that define Republicans.

It is a Third Way; not really Democratic, not really Republican.

Yet this Third Way refers to themselves Democrats.

This seems to have created an identity crisis for Democrats.

[Mnemosyne]

65. Hear, hear! nt

[Recursion]

68. Are you registered to vote, and do you vote for Democratic candidates?

That's what makes you a Democrat.

[DCBob]

70. I think virtually all Democrats want all those things..

the problem is how to make them happen. Its not a simple task when about 40% this country is totally resistant to those things and thinks its akin to socialism and communism.

[mick063]

73. We make it happen

We start by taking back the party. The 40% worry? It will always be there. The concept of change is so politically important, that our President used it as his primary theme for 2008 and he rode in on a wave.

People want change. Real change, not campaign rhetoric change.

The GOTV chant? It begins with the primaries.

Incumbents that lose our trust? Kick them out.

We change the party. We will get called Paulbots (which we are not). We will get called fringe. We will get called extreme. We will get called everything in the book, by "Democrats", just from our desire to restore the party to what we remember it to be.

It is time to reintroduce this party to a couple of generations that have yet to see it in it's grandiose form. The Libertarians are stealing our next generation because we have collectively become Republicans and when a young voter is forced to choose from just Republicans, the Libertarians win.

We must be dedicated to changing the party at least on the same level as defeating the opposition party.

As for me, changing the party is more important than defeating Republicans. It is the priority.

This means a "no holds barred" assault on those politicians that misrepresent the historic ideals of this party.

No rationalization. No excuses. No putting lipstick on a pig.

Time to call them out and call them out brutally.

[liberal_at_heart]

74. I'm ready.

[NuclearDem]

75. Exactly. I'm not willing to sell my soul and vote for someone just based on the (D).

The party establishment has to know they can't take true liberals for granted anymore. They can't expect us to support a terrible candidate or incumbent just by saying "But what if the Republicans....."

[mick063]

76. Correct

The Republican fear tactic is growing old.

"When you ain't got nothin', you ain't got nothin' to lose" - Bob Dylan

This is where we are at.

The Democratic Party is not helping us in it's present form. It is slowly killing us.

We have to draw a line in the sand......starting now.

I will be relentless in this endeavor. I expect I will be very ignored and very despised before it is over.

Fine. The ignore bots will become increasingly alarmed at the growing dissent, without really knowing why. They have plugged their collective ears and said, "Lalalalala".

They will also get left behind.

[DCBob]

82. "changing the party is more important than defeating Republicans." -- ABSOLUTELY NO!!

We cannot underestimate what the Republicans are capable of if they ever get full control of this government again. They are already messing with voters rights and redistricting and election laws. Those bastards would love to find a way to win without the actually having the majority agree with them. We need to keep focus on the real enemy and that is the RW part of this country. They are a dangerous bunch and need to be kept out of power as much as possible.. that "is the priority".

[mountain grammy]

86. Hear, hear!

[mick063]

104. Their control would be unteneable

Precisely why it would not stand even the shortest test of time.

Nothing hurts public perception of the modern GOP more than the GOP being in position of power. Their extreme incompetence is their downfall. The strongest argument against Republicans is their track record while holding office.

Nope.....changing the Democratic Party is the priority.

[Vanje]

127. "As for me, changing the party is more important than defeating Republicans."

Republicans are very busy defeating themselves!

The GOP is the party of 'saying real stupid stuff'.

Sadly, the Dems have become Repub-lite, based upon their actions , if not their empty words and platforms

[B Calm]

79. BINGO!

[treestar]

102. Yep

And the percent, that is much lower, that wants, let's say, no NSA, refusing to acknowledge that.

[Enthusiast]

78. Kicked and Recommended. nt

[Rebellious Republican]

81. JR, you have toned down your views. I remember when you were so much more....

Radical. I have been around here for a few days, I remember some of your earlier posts that were very extreme. I think you have realized that everything has shifted right. Your OP has a more politically correct feel to it, less abrasive than your earlier writings.
Thanks for this post. To add to your thought process, I would like to say that we have become a Plutocracy. Most here do not realize it. We are now the Incorporated States of America. You are spot on with your OP. Thank you!

RR

[Mira]

84. Stellar n/t

[TNNurse]

85. That describes

the Democratic Party I joined when I cast my very first vote (by mail as a college student)for Hubert Humphrey in 1968. Yes, it has changed and yes it has not been true to it's origins. I understand when Democrats become Independents. I do not understand when they become Republicans. I have NEVER voted for a Republican for President...so yes my Presidential candidates have only won five times...once for Carter, twice for Clinton and twice for Obama. I have voted for Republicans in local and state elections because I live in East TN and sometimes there are no Democrats running. I try my very best to vote in every election, it is my responsibility as a citizen. It is often very hard to decide between local candidates but I research and do what I can.

Oddly enough as a rarely church attending Christian, I think that the tenets that formed the Democratic Party are far more "Christian" in their values than those of the Tea and Republican parties (and I think you should have to choose and not be a member of both...split them up). I see too many of their actions and words as bigoted, without love for one another, greedy, selfish, even hateful and believe that they are fooling themselves when they believe that they are following God's laws.

This is my rant for the day.....I got stuff that needs to be done.

[mountain grammy]

88. Of course you're a Democrat, this is what we believe in..

But 40 years of constant propaganda from the corporate world has done it's job on American minds. It's hard to resist, and we've lost our way, but reality bites and we're slowly deciding to stop buying what they're selling. Before the "Reagan revolution," the usual method was to just murder popular liberals, but it was soon clear they couldn't murder all of us, hence corporate propaganda and a smiling actor for president. The American people have been sold out, the corps are running the place.

We often have to compromise, and getting back to some kind of liberal sanity won't be easy, but I have hope we can do it. The thing is, we have to do it together. Back in the 80''s the company my husband worked for wanted the union employees to agree to a permanent pay cut during the term of the contract. They were told if they didn't it would be the end. I was shocked at how scared and ready to capitulate these guys were. Courage and solidarity won! They did take a pay cut which was repaid a year later with interest, in accordance with the agreement. It turned into a win/win situation.

Problem is, there's precious little courage and solidarity evident in America today.

[CrispyQ]

90. Not me.

The two party system is a tool of the status quo. As of two weeks ago, I'm no longer a member of the Democratic party. I used to be a straight party voter. What that has gotten me, is a party that takes my vote for granted, a party that plays on my fear of the right getting in office, all the while capitulating to the right! What the fuck?

Personally, I think our voting process is so compromised on so many levels that I don't believe we will regain the People's power through the ballot box. Gerrymandering, voter disenfranchisement, Citizens United, electronic voting, voter apathy.

Our party & the entire political system have been co-opted by big money. Thursday night I watched "The Corporation" for the third time. They are the most powerful entity on the planet. Until we rein the corporate behemoths in, we don't stand a chance. They are a tool for the 1% to behave however they want without consequence.

Supreme Court Rules Drug Companies Exempt from Lawsuits in 5-4 Vote:
Monsanto Strategy?
July 2013

http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_27940.cfm

snip...

In a 5 to 4 vote, the US Supreme Court has absolved pharmaceutical companies, and over 80 percent of all drugs prescribed in the US, of legal liability for a long list of ill deeds including fraud, mislabeling, side effects and accidental death.

This decision happened as a response to a lower court's ruling concerning a victim who took a pharmaceutical drug and had a severely adverse reaction that caused the patient to be completely disfigured when the drug caused a flesh-eating side effect. The side effect was known by the drug maker and yet, was not labeled. The lower court ruled that the drug maker would have to label all future drugs with this side effect but the Supreme Court left the corporations who make these drugs completely exempt from future lawsuits, and said the victim 'had no legal grounds to sue.'

Karen Bartlett tried to sue Mutual Pharmaceutical Company after taking an anti-inflammatory drug called Sulindac due to a sore shoulder. It was this drug that caused 'toxic epidermal necrolysis' just three weeks after taking the pharmaceutical. Her flesh began to peel off so badly it resembled a third degree burn.

How is it that pharmaceutical companies can continue to put people's health in jeopardy in such atrocious ways without being culpable?

Wait until the TPP goes into effect. They won't even need supreme court rulings then.

[cantbeserious]

93. These Are Not The Goals Of The DLC Democrats That Control The Party - Hence You May Not Be A Democrat

eom

[treestar]

94. Only you can decide if you are going to support a party

The Democratic party is not exclusive and there is no loyalty test or test for entry. You simply start campaigning and connecting with other Democrats.

[heaven05]

105. beautiful

in principle. But principle be damned and out the window, off the cliff because of theft 2000 and for the unsure, in Florida. By Rove, Cheney et al.. Oh and by the way, this 'democracy' never was for sizable segments of this country's population, and with the SCOTUS, RW Pigs that call themselves conservatives and zimPIG type verdicts and justice, women's rights stripped from their persons and justice being meted out from the barrels of all types of guns being triggered for all types of SYG excuses, banks that have always ruled and guided the politics and both political parties of this country and just don't care if their naked power is out in the open now it NEVER will be a democracy for ALL the people. Never has been.

[mstinamotorcity2]

106. Great Op!!!!

Sometimes we must ask ourselves why are we engaged in the party? We need to challenge ourselves to work for the real common needs of a democracy. We should see ourselves as we want others to view us. The value of the man who has a 50 foot Yacht should have the ability to comprehend the value of the man in the lawn chair fishing off the local pier. They are the same man. One who has found a way to enjoy one of Nature's most miraculous creations. A comfort level that is acceptable with each man.

[TreasonousBastard]

109. Not really. More like a Green, or Working Family type...

Aside from occasional platforms (which local parties rarely have) where is all this written down as Democratic policy? Granted we often as not hold these ideals or positions, but I've never seen a Democratic loyalty oath.

Bull Conner was the ideal Democrat back in the 60s. So was Jimmy Walker in the 30s. Wanna emulate them? Huey long, Sharpe James? Woodrow Wilson?

I'm a Democrat not because the Democrats are so great, but because they give me the chance to do and be what I want to do and be, unlike the Republicans, even local ones, who do have a script to follow. I agree with all that stuff you write, but nowhere do insist the Party follow it. It would be nice, but the point is to follow your own muse, not a party line.

So, more to the point, aside from such grand eloquence, what are you actually doing to get any of this stuff you want enacted as actual public policy? I'm bedridden at the moment, but was going to drop a grand to meet my Congressman and Nancy Pelosi for breakfast this morning. And I have to raise money and hit the campaign trail for my own run for local office. That's this week. It gets worse.

This is a message board, so messages are what we get here, but the world gives you points for what you do, not what you say.

[hay rick]

112. My plan.

Shhh.

I have infiltrated the Democratic Party. I am working locally with the idea of rebuilding a more populist Party from the ground up. It helps that I am retired and not financially insecure...

Shhh.

[another_liberal]

115. Are you registered to vote as a Democrat?

Otherwise, you sound like a liberal and a progressive. Most Democrats may also be progressives and liberals, though not all are by any means.

[gtar100]

117. If that's a Democrat, I'm a Democrat too.

[get the red out]

130. I believe in all that too

Don't know what label to use for it.

[LWolf]

135. Are you a Democrat?

I don't think so. Of course, my perception is colored by a couple of decades outside the party, as an independent that never registered with a party, before becoming a "Democrat" in 2000 to protest the selection. So I see the Democratic Party from 2 different lenses, inside and out.

To be honest, I liked the party better when I was an outsider.

At this point in time, from my admittedly different perspective, a Democrat is someone who puts party before principle, and whose narrow concept of "winning" is focused on elections, not issues.

You are not that kind of Democrat. Are there enough "old" Democrats left to retake the party and make it stand for the principles in your list? To make the party meaningful and relevant again?

Reading down your thread, I see a Democrat writing off the left, writing off those unhappy with the direction the party is going, and telling us that the party will be better without us. "Us" being those of us with principles. I see a Democrat relating party membership to loyalty to party, not issues.

I'm not that kind of Democrat. I wonder what the response would be if all the "fringe" wrote their candidates in '14 and apologized for not donating, campaigning, or voting for them, because they'd been told that it would be better for the party if they left.

I see the claim of ten new, faithful partisans for every "fringe" voter purged. I don't believe that's true, unless those new partisans are coming from the right. I guess the Democratic Party can build a position of strength by encompassing the right, but then the relevance of the party is over.

At least as far as I'm concerned.

Am I a Democrat? I'm registered that way. I often vote that way. I don't, though, support in any way the direction the party has taken. I'm not taking any right-hand turns with the party.

[ileus]

137. since 1988...

[Mosaic]

139. Bookmarking for future reference

The true values of Democrats always inspire me.