If any evidence was needed that we are moving toward one party rule,

[KlatooBNikto]

it was provided for me in the following;

1. Dean says that now that we are in Iraq, we must stay regardless of the merits of the original case.

2.Hillary says that we need to change our position on abortion.Dean seconds that.

3.To top these, Bush Sr. and Bill are cozying up to each other in many ways stroking each other at each chance.

I don't know what to make of all these but I am very uneasy.

[ananda]

1. This is indeed..

.. most worrisome if true.

Did Dean really say that we need to change our position on abortion? I thought he was just in favor of changing the way we frame the language.

Sue

[Mugweed]

2. There's more than one party????

I thought most people would have seen through that illusion at least after the 2004 "election".

[mike_c]

3. I am very disappointed....

The attempt to move the Democratic Party to the right, in effect chasing perceived voter ideals is a cheap strategy that is likely to not only fail, but backfire badly. The first problem has to do with accepting that the conventional wisdom about what voters want is correct. I think it isn't-- many voters have been tricked into voting against their best interests by political indirection, which the Republican Party excels at. Second, and more important, riding the coattails of the republicans allows them to frame the debate on the on the issues that matter to them and to essentially prevent dabate on topics they're uncomfortable with. Dean and Clinton should know better than this.

Rather than taking the cheap way out, democrats-- or more properly liberals-- need to create a national dialog on the issues that are meaningful to THEM, and force republicans to address them. Living wages, social services, health care reform, economic justice, and so on. Putting people before profits.

[Southpaw Bookworm]

4. Vichy Dems

Is the phrase my intended uses to describe these people. Pretty accurate, no?

[KlatooBNikto]

8. Describes it very well for me.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

5. One big party of fundraisers and yesmen is what we have now.

It's a giant Catch-22. The politicians have to appease the moneybags to get the dough to run a campaign. The politicians willing to do so are the least likely to serve the people over their own interests. They all feed at the same trough.

They're are exceptions who manage to buck the tide. Cynthia McKinney, Maxine Waters, Dennis Kucinich, John Lewis, come to mind. But, I'm damned if I can think of any others.

[Selatius]

6. I think Dean said that we had to reframe the debate on abortion

I don't think I've met anyone who was "pro-abortion" as much as one who realizes that it is an issue of choice and that individuals should be allowed to make that decision on their own without the government making it for them. Abortions should be as rare as possible, and measures should be taken to fulfill that goal such as sex education and programs to fight poverty, but there are cases where it is absolutely necessary.

As far as the war in Iraq goes, who here supports leaving tomorrow if we had the ability to pull out everyone tomorrow?

[mmonk]

7. They're just misreading

the recent success of the republicans. Fear is the only thing keeping this miserable bunch in power right now with a heavy dose of propaganda.

[sweetheart]

9. "bolshevism, fascism and corporatism..."

All lead to a tremendous concentration of power, and are ultimately
extremely alike in this regard. - paraphrase of noam choamsky from
"the corporation bonus content disc"

The irony that they've singled out China as the enemy, as an ironic
reflection in the mirror, of a nation so very like china, in its corrupt
disrespect for individual power, enlightenment and liberty.
The equation is about the elites and their power concentration, end
of story.