Are you ready for a fight for the Democratic platform at the Convention?

[IndianaGreen]

The Left should fight for a series of progressive planks for the Democratic platform. A general outline would be:

1. Condemn Congress's vote on the PATRIOT Act and call for its outright repeal.

2. Condemn Congress's vote on IWR and call for a total and unconditional troop withdrawal from Iraq within 90 days of Inauguration Day.

3. Condemn Congress's vote on DOMA and call for ending all discrimination against GLBT people, and endorsing their right to marry the person they love.

4. Condemn Congress's vote on the so-called "partial-birth" abortion ban and call for removing all restrictions on women's reproductive rights.

5. Call for the passage of an Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution that will ban the federal government and the states from denying or abridging equality under the law to people on account of sex or sexual orientation.

6. Call for an end of Israel's Occupation of Palestine.

Those are the top six, and I will be happy to entertain additional progressive planks that we can

[aldian159]

1. #3 = politcal death

sorry, plain and simple. As wrong as it it, #3 is political suicide.

[MercutioATC]

3. Nope, Dean framed it correctly:

I just want President Bush to tell me why EVERY American doesn't deserve the same rights and protections under the law.

It's that simple. We have to stop letting the Repubs define the argument. This isn't about GAY rights, it's about EQUAL rights. It's up to us to make THAT the issue.

[IndianaGreen]

5. Exactly, discrimination against one is discrimination against all

DOMA was bad law!

[Cheswick2.0]

29. Kerry will be saying the same thing if it proves to play well in Peoria

Kerry will embrace #3 once Dean proves it is safe to do so. Will it be a good idea then?

[Jim Sagle]

2. #6 is fascist rubbish.

[IndianaGreen]

4. The Occupation of Palestine is Fascist

Calling for a return to the pre-1967 borders and for two states is progressive.

[SiobhanClancy]

31. I agree....

and how about the six occupied counties of Ireland?

[Mass_Liberal]

39. not facist

imperialistic, yes. Wrong, yes. Facist, huh? Wrong use o' the word, methinks

[Wonk]

7. Fascism definition

a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=fascism

Try again.

[mary_in_ri]

16. fascism defined

fascism

n : a political theory advocating an authoritarian government (as opposed to democracy or liberalism).

I've seen the word reworked depending on the need to exploit it as a political hammer.. ironically enough, those quickest to toss it about have trended towards the fascistic. It sprang from National Socialism, and throughout history, socialistic and communistic forms of government have been fascistic. When there are no individual liberties, there is no freedom for anyone other than the elistist hierarchy. Everything is decided on what the elite believes will benefit "the state", though initially the masses are told that they are the "true state", they only end up as serfs in crushing servitude to it.

[Kanary]

6. Nothing at all on poverty? Yet you want the votes of poor people?

Y'know, this is getting really irritating.

Are there *ANY* Dems left who have any concern for poor folk at all?

Kanary

[IndianaGreen]

8. Add your plank on poverty to the list

Although as a Socialist the only way to get rid of poverty and social injustice is by abolishing capitalism and building a socialist society.

[mary_in_ri]

14. Socialism never got rid of poverty..

it does facilitate an insulated elite that are served by an underclass of peasant type workers. Since 2000 I've read so called leftists espousing viewpoints that one would have assumed were the sole province of right wing nut jobs.. but I think the angry white male syndrome has nested like a viper in some "green" hearts just as easily as in their republican counterparts. Sorry, but a society where there are no individual rights, means that no one other than the ruling elite makes the rules, where "the state" is used as a club to beat the people down is not liberty nor is it any kind of ideal to pretend to.

[IndianaGreen]

24. Strange to find Socialists defending democracy and free speech

Strange to find Socialists defending democracy and free speech while the "defenders" of freedom are calling for a coronation and loyalty oaths for Election 2004.

Perhaps the anti-Socialist propaganda and fear mongering that we have been bombarded with since we were in grade school should be challenged just as vigorously as the claims about WMDs in Iraq were challenged.

[ldoolin]

33. Where to begin with this one?

Socialism never got rid of poverty..it does facilitate an insulated elite that are served by an underclass of peasant type workers.

In looking at history and the present, socialism (that is to say, Democratic Socialism of the type common in western Europe), is the *only* economic system that has proven to lead to a strong middle class and eliminate most poverty. Laissez-faire capitalism, and totalitarian Marxism-Leninism, have both proven to facilitate an insulated elite that are served by an underclass of peasant-type workers. But socialism? That's the only system that has proven *not* to lead to this.

Since 2000 I've read so called leftists espousing viewpoints that one would have assumed were the sole province of right wing nut jobs.. but I think the angry white male syndrome has nested like a viper in some "green" hearts just as easily as in their republican counterparts.

Well, since I consider opinions hostile to socialism to be the province of right-wing nut jobs, I'm not sure how this follows from the first part of your post.

I assume you're talking about other issues here besides socialism? Civil liberties, free speech, gun rights, those issues maybe?

Anyway, it was angry working class people (which includes angry white males, like it or not), who brought us the labor union movement and therefore, the weekend, the minimum wage, and at least a halfway decent standard of living - so I'm not sure what purpose is served by making "angry white males" a focus of hatred?

Sorry, but a society where there are no individual rights, means that no one other than the ruling elite makes the rules, where "the state" is used as a club to beat the people down is not liberty nor is it any kind of ideal to pretend to.

I agree with this statement, but it is a complete non-sequitor to your other two points. Both socialists, and "angry white males" (if you mean what I think you mean by that, i.e. rural working class people), have historically been in the forefront of defending individual rights against the ruling elite.

[Mass_Liberal]

40. socialism definetly did help poverty

socialist societies have had the misfortune of having brutal dictators. But even Stalin and Castro built schools and helped peasants recieve health care (at least castro did) where their predecessors couldn't give a crap.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Old and In the Way]

17. Welcome aboard mary_in_ri!

Obviously, IG will be disappointed when all his expectations are not met.

I don't agree with condemning the IWR vote, but I'd settle for condemning George Bush's use of the IWR to serve his personal political/economic agenda. I'd rather see him impeached on the reckless shedding of American blood, but his Republican majority prefer to use that on Democratic Presidents who lie about sex.

[IndianaGreen]

26. Do you want Iraq to become a Democratic war?

Iraq is on the verge of a civil war! This is why I want US troops to be withdrawn within 90 days after Inauguration Day. If we fail to withdraw quickly and unconditionally, our troops are going to find themselves in the crossfire of a civil war and Iraq will become a Democratic war.

Do you want Iraq to become a Democratic war?

Vietnam was a Democratic war until Nixon failed to pull the troops out within 6 months of taking office. Vietnam then became a Republican war.

[IndianaGreen]

38. Who the hell are you to say I am not a Democrat?

someone who goes by the handle "IndianaGreen" shouldn't be mistaken for a democrat

Unlike your boy Kerry, I did not support Bush on any of his legislation. I am totally opposed to PATRIOT Act, IWR, NCLB, and all of the other crap that Bush has proposed, and many Democrats have supported.

I am a registered Democrat and I have voted and supported Democratic candidates, except for Gore in 2000 (irrelevant in a GOP state like Indiana), and for DINO Bayh in 2004 (I wouldn't give that man a glass of water if he was dying of thirst-to paraphrase Susan Hawk in "Survivor").

Millions of progressive Americans had to swallow hard on far too many elections and vote a candidate that was anathema to their values simply because he/she had a "D" after their name. Now we are being forced to vote for a candidate that embraced a criminal war and a bloody occupation in Iraq, and the infringements of our civil liberties at home, and most of us will probably vote for him simply because another Bush term is too horrible to contemplate.

I warn those that take the progressive vote for granted that your days are numbered. If Kerry loses to Bush, despite our reluctant votes for this pro-PATRIOT and pro-war candidate, there is going to a reckoning with the DLC for control of the party, or we will walk away from a party that has become a pale version of the Republican.

If Kerry defeats Bush, he better not rest on his laurels! If he doesn't bring the troops home and ends the occupation of Iraq, we will march and demonstrate against President Kerry as we did Bush. How ironic it will be, but not surprising, to see President Kerry use PATRIOT and First Amendment Zones to stifle dissent as Nixon once did to him.

Don't let Iraq become a Democratic war!

[Fovea]

9. Create a national passenger rail system

that includes urban commuter rail. The economy of the US is insecure as long as air travel is the only option for long to mid distance travel.

Re-institute a W.P.A, and create full employment.
Empower the W.P.A act for a 12 year cycle.

Recind the abolishment of overtime for affected employees, prevent abuse of salaried positions to work unreasonable hours per week.

National Healthcare with coverage for all citizens.
And make citizenship more valuble by deporting all non-legal
aliens at once.


US Out of NAFTA and the WTO.

[IndianaGreen]

10. Those are all excellent progressive planks, realpolitik

that should be introduced and fought for at the Convention.

:thumbsup:

[no name no slogan]

41. They will be at my caucus in March

that's what's beautiful about the caucus system: ANYBODY can introduce planks for the platform by just showing up, and putting them up to the vote.

Even if we don't get our first choice in candidates, our issues WILL BE HEARD at the convention.

[Old and In the Way]

18. National rail system for sure!

We need to layout a new vision of the future and start investing in alternative energy strategies that minimize our dependence on foreign oil. We have to start this now, because we are fast approaching the point where supply outstrips demand. This would necessarilly require a re-investment/reinvention of our infrastructure which should drive jobs.

This should contrast nicely to the doom and gloom, no vision scenario of Republicans which envisions more Americans dying as we fight for the last barrel of oil...

[ldoolin]

37. Yes, yes, yes!!!!!

Create a national passenger rail system

Re-institute a W.P.A, and create full employment.

National Healthcare with coverage for all citizens.

US Out of NAFTA and the WTO.

It's not all that common to hear calls for re-instituting the WPA, or for a national passenger rail system, but those should be priorities. Maybe a grassroots push for those things will get the politicians' attention?

I agree with this one too, surprise surprise, and think we are long overdue for a serious debate on immigration policy in the Democratic Party, one that is based on labor, wage, environmental, and overpopulation concerns and doesn't resort to race-baiting or name calling:

And make citizenship more valuble by deporting all non-legal
aliens at once.

[bluestateguy]

11. Ahem

1. Fine.

2. I opposed the war, but this just won't work. I'd say withdrawl within a year, gradually, and with a speedier transfer of power to the iraqis. And fire Paul Bremer.

3. Agreed, though with the stipulation that states and churches should be allowed to recognize or not recognize "marriage" in name. We should only endorse the governmental rights that come with marriage.

4. Fine, but taxpayers have no obligations to pay for someone else's abortion. Pro-choice means no government involvement either way.

5. Yes, and subject women to the draft too.

6. When suicide bombers stop blowing themselves up and killing people, perhaps. I do support a Palestinian state, however.

[IndianaGreen]

12. A marriage license is a civil document

and it should not be denied to anyone on account of sexual orientation.

You will find rabbis in Reform Judaism that want to marry same-sex couples, and they should not prevented from doing so by the federal government (DOMA) or by the Christian pastor down the block.

On #5, the only reason for a draft is to maintain a large imperial army. End imperialism and you will end the need for a large imperial army, and the need for a draft altogether.

I support abolishing the selective service and registration of draft-age youths. We don't need it in peacetime!

[cyclezealot]

13. I can't but imagine real conflict in Boston

Kerry gets the nomination...Polls of Democratic voters in Iowa and New Hampshire..Well over half or more like 3/4 of them strongly oppose the war...Do we forgot so qucik Kerry's recent votes.Will Kerry control the minds of his own delegates.

[copithorne]

19. The platform isn't relevant this year

We're not going to pass any dramatic legislation through a Republican congress.

The next president's agenda will just be to clean up after W.

In previous years, the platform has had some meaning. In this year, it doesn't mean a thing. It hardly seems worth fighting over one way or another.

[IndianaGreen]

25. I guess our votes aren't relevant either!

Gee, I'll try to remember that.

[Old and In the Way]

21. Kerry polled a higher % of anti-war voters than Dean in NH.

So I don't think you'll see anyone except some Republican activists, disguised at radical lefties, who will try to incite trouble for Democrats. In fact, I think you can count on that.

[Dookus]

20. none of that will happen....

there will be no condemnation of previous actions.

There will be no anti-israel plank.

I wish it were possible, but it's not.

[DemBones DemBones]

22. Just vote for Dennis Kucinich and get a progressive platform

without floor fights.

There is NO candidate who actually had to vote on IWR and voted "NO" except Dennis Kucinich.

There is NO candidate who actually had to vote on the PATRIOT Act and voted "NO" except Dennis Kucinich.

Three of Dennis Kucinich's most important goals are to:

1) Get the UN in and the US out of Iraq.
(See his webpage for his 10 point plan to bring our troops home within 90 days of UN approval.))

2) Repeal the PATRIOT Act.
(Kucinich, along with 20 other members of Congress, has introduced the Benjamin Franklin True Patriot Act, which would repeal several major sections of the law. . . As President, he can do more.)

3) Repeal NAFTA and WTO.
(Establish new, bilateral trade agreements that protect workers' rights, civil rights, and the environment. Fair trade will replace "free trade.")

4) Kucinich's Enhanced Medicare for All is a plan to provide universal health care with a single payer plan.

Dennis Kucinich intends to have an administration that is assertive in all issues related to civil rights and/or privacy rights.

GLBT Rights

5) "Kucinich goes further than supporting civil unions for same-sex couples at the state level; he believes that, much like the Civil Rights legislation of the 1960s, federal law should protect civil unions, and that no state has a right to abridge basic rights to privacy. He would support the introduction of federal civil union legislation if the courts do not recognize this intrinsic right." {Ultimately, he believes that gays ahould have the right to marry. Read more about his support for GLBT people at his website.)

6) Kucinich voted against and spoke out on the House floor against the partial-birth abortion bill. He has promised to make support for Roe v. Wade a litmus test for Supreme Court appointees.

You didn't mention disability rights, but Dennis did:

7) "As President, Kucinich will nominate equal rights-oriented judges who interpret the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) broadly, and he'll propose an amendment to the ADA to ensure the coverage that was intended prior to restrictive rulings by Republican-appointed judges. Kucinich will also increase resources to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and to the Departments of Justice, Education, and Health and Human Services civil rights divisions to enforce the rights of people with disabilities."

Dennis also discusses workers' rights, voting rights, immigrants' rights, and the right to water on his web site,

8) As for Israel and Palestine, here is Rep. Kucinich's statement on House Resolution 392, which expressed "solidarity with Israel" as it battles "the terrorist infrastructure in the Palestinian areas." This is from May, 2002.

"I declare my support for the State of Israel and for the security of the Israeli people. I also declare my support for a Palestinian state and for the security of the Palestinian people. So I will vote present today because I believe the security of Israel requires the security of the Palestinians."

"I will vote present because I believe the United States can do better through honest brokering, and a principled commitment to peaceful coexistence."

<snip>

"When this Congress enters into the conflict and takes sides between Israel and Palestine we do not help to achieve peace, but the opposite. Similarly, the Administration should consider that when it conducts a war against terrorism without limits the principle of war is quickened everywhere in the world, including the Middle East. When it talks incessantly about invading Iraq, the tempo of war is picked up everywhere."

"If we truly want peace in the Middle East, this resolution is counter-productive. I will vote present because I do not believe that this resolution dignifies the role towards creating peace, which this Congress can and must fulfill."



FEAR ENDS. HOPE BEGINS. KUCINICH PRESIDENT 2004

[bushwakker]

23. #3 and #6 No

Lunacy.

[IndianaGreen]

27. What is "lunacy" about standing for gay rights and Palestinian freedom?

What's the point of replacing Bush with a Democrat if there are no substantive changes to policy? We want to turn this country around, but some people are asking us to settle with a political version of botox treatments.

[Lexingtonian]

28. No

Maybe we should endorse a plank that limits the reading and writing of grandiose political manifestos as a 19th century anachronism on par with the gold standard, and the pretense that great-sounding legal constructs are in fact solutions.

The first five of your proposed planks are utterly unconvincing compared to "We commit ourselves to the installing of judges in all state judiciaries and the federal judiciary whose wisdom is compelling, whose sense of the needs of society to progress- and be maintained- is proven, and who serve the interests of social justice wholeheartedly and without corruption. We commit ourselves to the creation and enforcement of laws that provide justice not in name, but in practice, such as (list)."

I/P is a problem of situational logic and resolved only, imho, with the passage of the oldest generation on both sides in power. I don't see any way of writing terribly concrete pronouncements on the subject, other than a claim of an intense commitment and unwillingness to tolerate certain kinds of engrained or novel abuses perpetrated there.

[MaineDem]

30. Each state is working on Platform now

If you have comment, contact your state party office and get involved in the Platform discussion.

Public hearings will be held shortly.

Don't just talk about it, do something about it.

[ldoolin]

32. Concerning the Patriot Act...

...I just read an account of all the pressure the Democratic Party leadership put on Russ Feingold to try and get a unanamous vote in favor of the Patriot Act. There were undoubtedly other Senators who wanted to vote "no" but caved in to the pressure.

Russ Feingold didn't cave, and he was denounced on the floor of the Senate by Tom Daschle for his vote.

Anyone who thinks Nader voters were the problem in 2000 had better read those above sentences again. Look up the story yourself. Michael Moore even mentions it in Dude, Where's My Country. If this is the kind of stand against the Bush regime gestapo that I can expect from the Democratic Party leadership, who needs enemies with "friends" like this?

Here's another one. Two years ago there was a vote in the Senate on an amendment to the election reform bill which would have required states to automatically restore voting rights to ex-felons in federal elections. It was sponsored by Harry Reid (NV), Russ Feingold (WI), and Arlen Specter (PA). Guess who got up on the floor of the Senate to denounce the amendment and urge Democrats in the Senate to vote against it? DASCHLE! The amendment failed because about half of the Democrats in the Senate, and almost all of the Repukes, voted against it.

You can read similar stories about how the Democratic Party leadership subjected Democratic Congressmen to abusive "meetings" which left them in tears, in order to sway their votes on the Brady Bill a decade ago. With that kind of abusive mindf**k going on, it's a wonder there were any Democrats at all who voted against it.

So I say, BRING IT ON! We not only need a convention floor fight over the platform, we need to rid this party of its corrupt leadership, dump Daschle and make Russ Feingold the Senate Democratic leader. Get rid of Bush yes, but the Democratic Party needs an enema too.

Howard Dean, Dennis Kucinich, and Al Sharpton should stay in the race until the end and then pool their delegates in a unity slate against the DLC-anointed establishment hack, Kerry. This is how we can take back the party platform and wage a struggle for the heart and soul of the party, even if the DLC manages to get the nomination. I'm also sorry I didn't pay as much attention to Carol Moseley-Braun as I should have, because after reading some campaign statements of hers she was hands down, the best candidate in this race, period. She deserves a position like Attorney General in the next Democratic administration.

[LWolf]

34. Absolutely.

That's why I'm supporting Dennis Kucinich all the way there.

[NashVegas]

35. The Main Problem w/That Platform

Is that in cases 1-3 at least, many of them would be condemning themselves, and the possible nominee, as well.

[JohnLocke]

36. F that.

I'm not going to let someone dictate to me what's progressive and what's not.

1. Condemn Congress's vote on the Patriot Act and call for its outright repeal.

Moronic. There are many provisions that are needed to moderize the law code for the 21st century. Why not repeal the invasive parts of it (such as the "sneak and peak" warrants and the national security letters).

2. Condemn Congress's vote on IWR and call for a total and unconditional troop withdrawal from Iraq within 90 days of Inauguration Day.

That's right. Now that we've made this mess, let's leave the mnation is shambles. That will really anger the Iraqis, and they will act aganist us. We should rebuild Iraq and help them help themselves transiton to democracy though popular-vote elections and a constitution similar to post-WWII Japan.

6. Call for an end of Israel's Occupation of Palestine.

Rubbish.

[flaminbats]

42. I would add something from the Green party platform in addition to that...

"1. The Green Party, proposes a COMPREHENSIVE POLITICAL REFORM AGENDA calling for real reform, accountability, and responsiveness in government.

2. Political debate, public policy, and legislation should be judged on its merits, not on the quid pro quo of political barter and money.

3. We propose comprehensive CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM, including caps on spending and contributions, at the national and state level, and/or full public financing of elections” to remove undue influence in political campaigns.

4. We will work to ban or greatly limit POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEES and restrict SOFT MONEY contributions.

5. We support significant lobbying regulation, strict rules that disclose the extent of political lobbying via “gifts” and contributions. Broad-based reforms of government operations, with congressional reorganization and ETHICS LAWS, must be instituted. At every level of government, we support “Sunshine Laws” that open up the political system to access by ordinary citizens.

6. We recognize individual empowerment, full citizen participation, and PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION as the foundation of an effective and PLURALISTIC democracy."

7. We demand choices in our political system. This can be accomplished by proportional representation voting systems such as: 1) Choice Voting (which is candidate-based) 2) Mixed Member Voting (which combines with district representation) ; and/or 3) Party List (which is party based), and semi-proportional voting systems such as: 1) Limited Voting and 2) Cumulative Voting. All are used throughout the free world and by U.S. businesses, and community and non-profit groups to increase democratic representation. We call on local governments to lead the way toward more electoral choice and broader representation.

8. We believe in MAJORITY RULE. Accordingly, we call for the use of INSTANT RUNOFF VOTING in chief executive races (mayor, governor, president, etc.) where voters can rank their favorite candidates (1,2,3, etc.) to guarantee that the winner has majority support and that voters aren't relegated to choosing between the "lesser of two evils."

9. We believe in MULTI-PARTY DEMOCRACY (for partisan elections) as the best way to guarantee majority rule, since more people will have representation at the table where policy is enacted.

10. The Electoral College is an 18th century anachronism. We call for a constitutional amendment abolishing the Electoral College and providing for the direct election of the president by Instant Runoff Voting. Until that time, we call for a proportional allocation of delegates in state primaries."

11. We encourage building alternative, grassroots institutions that support participatory and direct democracy at the local level. Political reform goes beyond elected politics, ultimately residing in choices each of us makes in our own lives.

12. Using our voice to help others find their voice, a national Green Party should spring from many sources: state and local Green Party electoral efforts, individual efforts, political involvement and direction at every level. As Greens, we look toward forming bioregional confederations to coordinate regional issues based on natural and ecosystem boundaries instead of traditional political ones."

http://www.gp.org/platform/2000/index.html#reform

By making these issues our issues, the Greens will no longer have Ralph Nader or an advantage on political reform which could be used to pull votes away from us.