Is the IWR still your litmus test?

[DjTj]

This is my 992nd post. 8 more to 1000...

When I first started posting on DU, a big topic was the "litmus test" of the IWR vote. This was one of the first polls I voted in:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=764392

Now, we are essentially down to two candidates that both voted for the IWR and it seems like many are now lining up behind Kerry or Edwards. Given that many DU'ers previously used the IWR as a litmus test, have people changed their minds?

[judge_smales]

1. I use a slightly different litmus test

It's the Last Name test. If the last name = "Bush" I *DON'T* vote for him.

[IrateCitizen]

2. While I am extremely disappointed for those who voted for it...

... in no way do I consider it to be a "litmus test". Rather, I would view it as a good nugget of information to tell us how much work we have to do depending on what candidate gets into office.

"Litmus tests" are stupid, IMHO.

[Catholic Sensation]

3. Bush's record on the environment and healthcare disgusts me more

than the war in Iraq. But maybe I'm too pragmatic...

[corporatewhore]

4. well imperalism is my litmus test it goes beyond iwr

occupation
FreeTrade
SOA
Human rights disastors like plan colombia

[Dhalgren]

20. I agree. IWR was just the best publicized of the

creeping imperial government, bent on ruling the world. No thanks, the world needs less imperialism, not more. I will never forget, nor forgive the Democrats who voted for Bush's PNAC plan for America and the world. The Republicans were always on the shitty-end of the evil stick, so now they have some more company.

[booksenkatz]

5. I generally have a distaste for litmus tests, BUT

this year you might say that my "litmus test" is the Supreme Court, which supercedes any other issue I have. If Bush wins and appoints even ONE justice in the next 4 years, then every other issue I have is forever doomed.

(A Clarkie for Kerry here.)

[demnan]

6. This is an interesting poll

but I don't have an answer. Yes the Iraq war was my litmus test but I don't know what I'm going to do in November (besides vote and work for my local Democratic Congressman who did vote against the IWR). I don't think it makes any difference since Virginia will go for Bush anyway.

Why am I so adamant about this issue? It's a personal thing. When I was growing up my older brother was drafted and sent to Vietnam. He came back safe, thank goodness, but full of bitterness toward the war and the pointlessness of our being over there. That's what I had to grow up with, so it's personal for me. So if I have to make a protest vote for Nader to demonstrate my feeling about the Iraq war I may have to do that.

It's somebody's family members over there. Next year it could be yours.

[jmoss]

23. what's scary is...

..that the people voting ,"IWR is my litmus test, and I will stick to that in Nov.", they will have to either vote for Nader, or write in Dean, Kucinich, Sharpton, (Clark), or mickey mouse, for that matter. These hard-liners are going to, ironincally, improve GW's chances of re-election.

What's done is done, But PLEASE don't pull away from Kerry/Edwards (and I don't buy theis crap about Kerry being anti-war--he voted that same as Edwards). The Democratic Party needs this issue to be put to rest. If you don't support the War, don't help the Republicans who are benefitting, financially, from it!!

[buckeye1]

7. Our soldiers don't care about this nonsense .

Who can bring them home. That's the Question. Who can fix this mess? Democrats need to look to the future,(bad as it may be)beause when there is trouble Democrats have always saved the nation. Asshats, blue sky blowhards,and Progressives have never done anything useful.

[IrateCitizen]

8. Apparently you never heard of any of the fights for the following:

- Child labor laws
- 10-hour workday
- 8-hour workday
- Freedom to organize in the workplace
- 5-day, 40-hour workweek

Because if I recall correctly, it was PROGRESSIVES who were at the front lines of ALL of these fights. While Democratic administrations can, for the most part, be credited in pushing for the legislation -- that push never would have happened without the blood, sweat and tears of progressives fighting for decades.

IOW, blow your self-righteous mischaracterizations out your ass.

[lastliberalintexas]

9. Thanks IC

I was wondering how to respond to that drivel.

Also, it was progressives who brought us the miniumum wage and overtime, the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, and most environmental legislation.

[Cuban_Liberal]

10. I'm not a one-issue voter-- too Freeper-like of a mindset. n/t

[The Magistrate]

11. This Vote Is A Mere Distraction

It is used by some who prefer to attack Democrats rather than Republicans. These deny the obvious: the responsibility for the invasion of Iraq lays with the criminals of the '00 Coup who conceived, pressed, and executed that policy, and with no other person or persons. Some persons feel it their duty here, claiming left zeal impels them to it, to indulge in apologias for the criminals of the '00 Coup on this question, and seek to spread the blame around onto others, rather as if they were defense attorneys pleading societal causes for their client's robbing liquor stores and gunning down the clerks. They do this because they are as hostile toward the Democratic Party as the Republicans are, and so cannot stomach the idea of Republicans being to blame for the bad things Republicans do; Democrats must have had a hand in it somehow. They "enabled" those poor Republicans, who would never have done anything wrong on their own, but just fell in with a bad crowd of Democrats, who let them do wrong things....

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[IrateCitizen]

12. Not entirely accurate, sir

This vote was an indication of the character of those who were in the position of casting a ballot for or against it. Both of the people who are lambasted for their YEA votes -- Sens. Kerry and Edwards -- have repeatedly stated that they "supported the war against Iraq" but just "disagreed with how it was carried out."

As I stated above, for me, personally, the IWR is NOT a "litmus test". However, the votes and subsequent statements of Sens. Kerry and Edwards do tell me a lot about their character, and it is brought into question. While I would not hesitate to cast a ballot for either of them come November and encourage others to do the same -- because Bush and his gang of thugs are not people of questionable character, but rather of no character -- I am also not going to delude myself into believing either of these men to be something greater than what they are, which is politicians interested in perpetuating their own power and supporting the establishment status quo.

In the words of William Greider in describing a Kerry Presidency -- (It) will be just like electing the editorial board of the New York Times -- totally establishment, but a huge improvement over the Weekly Standard.

[The Magistrate]

13. Fair Enough, Sir

Those two gentlemen indeed cast votes of expedience; that is not a thing which much bothers me, but there are certainly persons who do mind it, and can give good reason for their bother by it.

As we are united in our determination to what is necessary to evict the criminals of the '00 Coup from office come November, there can be no need for any substantial quarrel here.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[IrateCitizen]

16. Nope. No quarrel. Just a quibble.

Quibbles can wait to be resolved AFTER November. ;-)

[The Magistrate]

17. Indeed, My Friend

And by means well short of pistols at twelve paces, to boot.

"Politics is not the art of the possible. It consists in choosing between the disasterous and the unpalatable."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Skip Intro]

14. Their current stand on whether invading was right/wrong is important to me

First, what was done is too big, too atrocious, to simply set aside, imho. It is the issue for me.

I've read reports that Representatives and Senators were lied to by the bush regime. I believe many were indeed misled. Some voted no on the res. anyway, some didn't. And was a for vote an authorization for war, or for the threat of war? I don't know.

What's important to me is where they stand now. Edwards says he was not misled, and that he would have gone into Iraq himself. That disqualifies him, for me. Kerry seems to be both for and against it, but some of his statements at least allow for the possibility that he would have invaded as a very last resort, giving inspections more time, etc.

Of course, Sharpton's and Kucinich's views then and now are most reflective of the reality of what was done - bush lied us into an unnecessary and illegal invasion. The whole thing was created by the bush regime on lies, and DK and AS are the only Dems left that speak the truth on this.

But of the two - JK and JE - I have to go with Kerry, while wishing like hell my party had nominated someone who could stand on solid principle and tell it like it is on this issue. It is a travesty that we ourselves will assist bush in escaping accountability for his murderous deeds.


*sigh*

It wasn't supposed to be like this.

[IrateCitizen]

15. It most certainly WAS supposed to be like this!

Politicians are elected, by and large, because they support the status quo. While there are discernable differences between the two parties, they are, in essence, just two different sides of the same coin.

If you truly want change, REAL change, the question is not what some politician is prepared to do to bring it about. The question is what are YOU prepared to do to bring it about?

Are you prepared to refuse to cooperate with the status quo and suffer the consequences? Are you prepared to deprive yourself of comforts in pursuit of the greater good? Are you prepared to suffer the onslaught of an inevitably violent backlash, only to pick yourself up and stand more defiantly afterwards?

THIS is the only way that real change is brought about. The "rulers" will continue to do whatever they feel the population will let them get away with. Obviously, Kerry and Edwards know that they can get away with taking the path they have chosen. If they knew quite clearly that they could not get away with it, they wouldn't have done it.

[Skip Intro]

18. Good points

And I agree with most of what you say.

As the run-up and the invasion unfolded, it never occurred to me that a pro-invasion candidate would take our nomination. I was certain that my party would put forth a clear anti-bush candidate, especially concerning this issue, making the Nov. election as much a referendum on the invasion as anything else. That that scenario has all but slipped away from us is hard to take. I feel betrayed. This, the pro-invasion Dem vs. the pro-invasion bush is what was not supposed to be, imho. I wish it were not.

In this election, I will vote for the strongest anti-bush candidate. I don't believe that will be Edwards, and I hope I won't have to attempt to force myself to vote for him, because he is as pro-invasion as Lieberman or bush, it seems. I believe our nominee will be John Kerry, and, faced with four more years of the thugs, I will vote for Kerry, and encourage all I can to do so as well.

After November, tho, as I've said many times, I will have to do some serious soul-searching, and reassess whether the party I currently support is really the party that best represents my views. But that's after November.

[IrateCitizen]

19. You're not getting the point behind my post

After November, tho, as I've said many times, I will have to do some serious soul-searching, and reassess whether the party I currently support is really the party that best represents my views.

The question is not which party better represents your views. Unfortunately, the question is which party provides the lesser impediment to getting your views implemented as policy.

And unless things change DRASTICALLY with the rise of a viable progressive party on the national stage, that party will continue to be the Democratic Party.

But it's not the responsibility of the Democratic Party to advance your views for you. It is YOUR responsibility to advance your views. If the system is expressing viewpoints that do not jive with what you believe, then if you want to change it you have to be willing to do one thing: to refuse to cooperate with it. Of course, this kind of action has consequences. As a recent-history example, just look at the bus boycotts and lunch counter sit-ins during the civil rights movement.

Personally, this is an issue that I have begun to really grapple with. What am I going to do to try and advance my beliefs? For starters, I'm working toward getting into a more altruistic profession (teaching) than my current one (consulting engineering). Such a switch will also enable me to move into a lower cost-of-living area. I am also cutting back on many of my previous unnecessary expenditures and saving as much money as I can. Ideally, I am striving to get to the point at which I no longer have to work full time in order to sustain myself and my family, which will enable me to contribute to and work full-time on the causes I believe in and, perhaps even more importantly, starve the government of tax revenues which they often direct toward nefarious ends.

The end analysis isn't about having your views satisfied. Instead, it's about you, personally, doing the most that you can in order to advance the idea of a better world -- even if it is at the expense of your personal satisfaction.

[The Magistrate]

22. Well Said, Mr. Citizen!

Well said indeed, Sir!

[IrateCitizen]

25. Thank you, Sir

My personal disgust for the electoral system in which we are stuck does not preclude the reality that it is the only electoral system through which I can operate. Therefore, it is not up to me to look to the system for purity where there is none, but rather to seek the choice that will provide the lesser conflict with the advancement of society as a whole.

The only space in which we can seek to promote some kind of purity is in our personal sphere. And even that is questionable.

[Crunchy Frog]

21. For the general election, my only litmus test

is that the candidate have a D after his name.:)

As to the candidate that I previously supported, it was a plus that he opposed the war, but that was far from being the only factor in my decision.

[Piperay]

24. The litmus test that I apply

is they must have the D after their name.