We are not cheerleaders for the Democratic Party – we are the Democratic Underground.

[alberg]

We are not cheerleaders for the Democratic Party – we are the Democratic Underground. We share the beliefs expressed by FDR:

• The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
• The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

• The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

• The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

• The right of every family to a decent home;

• The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

• The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

• The right to a good education.

We recognize that opposition to these beliefs exists within the financial elite, the Corporations, the right wing robots and even within some areas of our own party. We understand that it is a struggle and that only through collective action can we hope to manifest enough power to overcome the forces aligned against us. We understand that the 2008 election was a start – but only a start and perhaps more limited in its’ victory than many of us believed at the time. We understand that the future depends on what we do now. We know that persistence is the key ingredient in any plan. We know that we can’t give up.

[asdjrocky]

1. Er, welcome to DU.

You're going to find "we" is a pretty relative term around here.

Thanks for defining the board though.

[alberg]

3. Collective action

Thanks for the response. I'm still amazed by how much FDR was able to capture the core beliefs of what I think most of us stand for. I believe the key now is what it was in the 30's - collective action.

[asdjrocky]

8. If you are serious, you should enable your profile.

Just a suggestion. It's not that I don't agree with most of what FDR did and said, I'd love the second bill of rights to come to a serious discussion.

Don't you think you're coming into the world here in a strange sort of way? Is it typical for someone new to come into a place and deem the way the place should act? Is this usual for you?

[alberg]

11. Thanks for the suggestion.

I've been on the board for a few years but haven't posted much. I only log on occasionally. I'm as frustrated as many of the folks who post here - not trying to "deem" the way the place should act - just putting up a few thoughts for consideration and response. Thanks for the suggestion. I'll look in to my profile enabling my profile - not sure what that means.

[asdjrocky]

13. Fair enough.

Hope I didn't come off too snarky.

[bahrbearian]

27. Ya , you came off pretty Snarky

I was here posting long before my profile shows it. Profiles can be used as a disguise too.

[el_bryanto]

2. And we strongly disagree with each other on the best way to achieve those goals

For example some people are pie in the sky idealists, while others are sellout realists, abandoning principles for power.

Bryant

[alberg]

7. Those forces are always present.

All change is based on 3 dimensions: vision of the desired state, disatisfaction with the status quo and tangible, practical steps. I believe all three elements exist today throughout the general population and that the 2008 election was evidence that collective action can still work. The question is what do we do next?

[roguevalley]

59. good post, alberg. opinions are welcome and yes, I am not a cheerleader

even though I am a radical die-hard born in the cradle dem. Welcome.

[alberg]

60. Thanks for the affirmation! It's essential for us not to lose this struggle.

[roguevalley]

65. agreed

[TexasObserver]

4. And we're not sock puppets, either!!

I'm certainly no cheerleader, but there are legitimate differences of opinion among Democrats regarding the president and his actions.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

5. ...Skinner?

[intheflow]

63. .

:spray:



Hey, Sweet Pea, how ya doing these days? :hi:

[Tailormyst]

6. Unfortunately the party has been boiled down to:

"Vote for us or the Palins and Roves will go after Gays and Abortions." And sadly we will continue voting for these do-nothing greedy bastards because the alternative sucks even worse.

I'd like to have someone to vote FOR instead of just voting against the worse choice. I thought in 2006 and 2008 that's what we all fought for. Sadly, we were mistaken. Same shit, prettier words, lots of promises and very little action.

[alberg]

9. FDR's principles are the key.

We need to focus on re-affirming FDR's principles within the Democratic Party - as the cornerestone of the platform and as the talking points of our candidates and among ourselves. We have strayed too far from it.

[bvar22]

38. Welcome.

I've been posting FDR's Economic Bill of Rights on a regular basis lately.
#1 because they define The Democratic Party I joined 42 years ago.

#2 They are a useful landmark in determining the DIRECTION of what passes for the "Democratic Party" today.



"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone

[alberg]

41. Thanks!

[SammyWinstonJack]

26. Yep.

Same shit, prettier words, lots of promises and very little action AND a complete 360Ί.

[blondeatlast]

10. Noble. "We" also recognize that there are different ideas as to how to

accomplish these worthy goals.

And "we" also understand that "Underground" also means "not official," as in not part of the Party itself.

[AllentownJake]

12. The Democratic Party is a coalition

Generally of a bunch of people who aren't republicans for one reason or another.

The Wall Street policies of the administration offend me to my core, however I'm sure there are democrats who have no problem with it and lots of time their belief structure is more focused on their objection to the dominionist Christian aspect of the Republican party in its current form. If we brought up economics they'd be elitist pricks with little concern about how the world was doing outside of Manhattan and their upper middle class gated enclaves.

It is the problem we face since religion was brought front and center into American public policy debates. A "democrat" that I would want to punch in the face on 90% of the issues is better than a Republican that has the goal of setting up "God's" kingdom on earth.

[alberg]

14. OK, but wouldn't most Democrats agree with FDR's principles?

[Romulox]

15. Not required to post on this board, that's for sure. nt

[alberg]

18. Agreed, but the majority of us support these principles.

Agreed, but if the majority of Democrats do not identify with FDR's principles then I'm not sure if what I've been calling the Democratic Party actually exists. I believe that not only do most Democrats support those principles as the basis of their political philosophy, I believe that most Americans share them as well and that is why the type of change a'lot of us would like to see happen is still possible - difficult but possible.

[AllentownJake]

16. No, in fact most democrats in the administration don't nt.

[alberg]

20. See my post #18.

[AllentownJake]

22. You need to do a search on the "third way"

It will become very clear to you, that there are a lot of democrats that do not agree.

[alberg]

24. I know that many Democrats in power have sold out.

What I’ve been struggling with is how to re-affirm our core message – the simple clear, powerful message that states what we as grass roots Democrats stand for and are willing to work to achieve. If we can’t agree on a simple. Clear and powerful message then we are in trouble as a party (I think we are in trouble). For me, that clear, powerful message is summed up by FDR’s principles. I believe if Democrats focused on this message we would start to shift the American conversation in a better direction. I do not believe that folks on this board consider themselves to be rubber stamps for everything the Democratic Party Establishment asserts. This is all I’m trying to say in this post.

[Dragonfli]

61. Certainly, if you mean what lately I have been calling "Classic Democrats".

People that often call themselves "the third way" or "New Democrats" (people likely to belong to the DLC)appear to have a more "corporate vision" than FDR. I have been outspoken in my belief that they are Republicans running a false flag, defeat from within the party strategy. My opinion may be harsh but, these folks would be republicans in my fathers day.

The bad news is that even though the party platform still holds many "classic Democratic principles" and the people voted for a more liberal platform than is being implemented, those darn "New Democrats" appear to have taken control of the party again and are helping to block any FDR type actions or legislation from the party under their new "enlightened" party leadership.

I agree with FDR's Principles! I am an old fashioned Dem, party of the people, blue collar kind of guy just like my dad was.
:hi:

I don't know yet how to get those things for all of us without the help of our one time ally - the official Democratic Party. any suggestions?

[alberg]

66. The question is: How do we mobilize collective action on a large enough scale to create change?

Right now, we don't have enough leverage. How do we get leverage? The Unions were the mechanism in the 30's. The Universities, the Civil Rights Movement, the Women's Movement and the national youth culture ( with the help of independent FM radio) were the mechanisms in the 60's. How do we do it now? We need national leadership to emerge from the existing Progressive Organizations like Move-On etc. in conjunction with a National Political Figure (example: Howard Dean etc.) in a convergence that can give voice to what the majority of Americans are already thinking.
These shared thoughts are: that our Government has been bought off by the rich and powerful and is no longer working for the benefit of most Americans and we, the people, want it back. How do we get this to happen? Organized collective action. The Internet is the new FM radio, but by itself it is not sufficient. We need a reaffirmation of our principles, national leadership and a coherent voice that energizes and unites the majority of Americans that want to see this kind of change.

[Dragonfli]

70. Mobilizing collective action on a large enough scale would require

A mobilizing "figure" that could give a unifying voice to those shared thoughts. A new FDR could rally all of those forces once again and bring them to bare, but does such a figure even exist in this era? Another concern is many that are dissatisfied thought they had found such an individual in Obama and are now becoming disillusioned and cynical, They are no longer in a trusting mood, no matter what principles are voiced. That is a real problem IMHO. Perhaps another way can be found than the "unifying figure". Can the Ideas alone without a visible leader be a focal point of a movement? I honestly don't know, agreement on FDR's principles I believe would be more wide-spread than we are led to believe, the power is there, the focus and utilization are what is lacking, I am struggling with finding a solution as I am sure are most.

Perhaps "a leader will appear when most needed" just as my robustly spiritual friends like to think. Cycles they tell me, "infinite cycles or loss and gain steadily spiraling upward towards growth". My practical side is screaming to DO SOMETHING more direct than await a cycle.

[alberg]

71. I share your thoughts and your questions.

There is no "answer' yet - but the desire for an answer, a way forward, is clearly building. Thanks for the replies. Keep posting FDR's principles. It's amazing how many folks are still not aware of their existance.

[BeFree]

17. Democrats vs republican

It is as simple as night and day. And until a new sun comes along we are stuck with the one we have.

That source of light and heat for us politically is the Democratic party.
Don't like it? Tough shit. Either we work to have the party do our bidding, or we are worthless.

[cali]

19. I don't need some brand spanking new poster to speak for me.

I'm perfectly capable of doing that myself, thank you very much.

[alberg]

21. What does new have to do with it? Do you agree with FDR or not?

[Winterblues]

23. Seems to me the poster was speaking to you and not for you.

It is nice to see some Basic Principles Defined and Written for all to examine and either disagree with or try and follow. There is a reason FDR was, and in many corners still is, considered the best US President. I think those goals are very worthy and should be something Democrats could/should Unite over.

[alberg]

25. Thanks, you got it.

[bahrbearian]

28. Ride rough shod , much?

[tbyg52]

29. Just a small quibble

>>The right of every business*man*

Uh, you do realize we are in the 21st century? :hi:

[alberg]

31. Your right - it should be updated to reflect todays world.

I took the quote directly from the 1930's speech, did not edit.

[tbyg52]

33. That's OK - *I* didn't look at anything except the bullet points, although

I should have recognized FDR's style anyway. :blush:

[Blue Owl]

30. I'm proud to be a Democrat

But there's some shit happening in our party that's gotta get cleaned out.

Harry Reid, for example. He shrugs off FDR's beliefs by caving into the GOP time after time after time after time, and thus making us ineffective.

Nancy Pelosi. At the end of the day, does she represent we the people, or big corporations?

What's it gonna take to elect some party leaders with the spine to uphold these beliefs instead of the corrupt politics?

[alberg]

32. I'm proud too, and want to be prouder.

That's why I want to see Democrats reclaim FDR's simple, clear powerful message. I want those principles to once again be the "what" of our party. If, together, we can affirm this "what", then the job of agreeing on the "how" will become possible (possible, not easy, but possible). As it stands, we're not sure where many of the Party leadership actually stands on many of these issues. They've triangulated so much they've lost their souls.

[Iggo]

34. WE...ARE...MARSHALL !!!

[alberg]

36. I don't know what that means?

[Iggo]

39. Yes.

[alberg]

40. Allright!

[MH1]

35. Link to the FDR attribution?

sorry I am a bit spotty on my American History and I was not fully aware of this list.

[alberg]

37. Here's the link.

http://www.worldpolicy.org/projects/globalrights/econrights/fdr-econbill.html

[bvar22]

42. Simply Google "FRD Economic BIll of Rights.

Thom Hartmann occasionally plays the original FDR Radio Broadcast.

http://www.620kpoj.com/pages/listenlive.html

[bvar22]

43. Absolutely!

THAT is the "Democratic Party" I joined 42 years ago!
THAT is the "Democratic Party" of my parents and grandparents!

Unfortunately, it bears NO resemblance to the Party using that name today.


(How did you encode those Black Dot bullets?
I've been using asterisks.)

[alberg]

45. Black Dot Bullets

I wrote the post in Word and then pasted it in.

I agree. I grew up in a Democratic household, my ancestors were Irish coal miners that fought to create the Unions in the coal fields of North Eastern Pennsylvania. We've lost our way and need to organize and fight to get it back. We need a core set of principles to build around and I haven't found a better list than FDR's.

[bvar22]

47. I agree.

I posted FDR's Economic Bill of Rights without an attribution on DU a few weeks ago, and got attacked for being a "Fringe Leftist" and an "Idealistic Dreamer".

[Dragonfli]

62. .

:rofl: I must have missed that one, why am I not surprised?

[undergroundnomore]

44. I'd say

that this just about covers it.

[Vidar]

46. K&R.

[mopinko]

48. cheerleaders or just supporters, you might want to check the rules.

support of democrats is a pre-req to posting here. i understand that it is hard to tell sometimes, but it is a fact.

[alberg]

51. Support for Democrats who support Democratic ideals, isn't that the point?

We are concerned about trolls on this board, folks who aren't really one of us but pretend to be. My concern is that we have folks in leadership positions labeled as Democrats who in substance ( in the beliefs they actually hold and promote) are not Democrats at all. I believe that FDR's principles are a good placed to start in order to identify specifically what our shared belief structure really is. If we don't have a shared belief structure or can't clearly express it - I'm not sure we can actually consider ourselves a political party. Does that make sense?

[Dragonfli]

64. "Does that make sense?"

It does to me, I am bashing my head on that same wall. Asking the same questions. Arriving at the same conclusions.

[bvar22]

67. "support of democrats is a pre-req to posting here"?...actually, No.

"Democratic Underground is an online community for Democrats and other progressives. Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office. Democratic Underground is not affiliated with the Democratic Party, and comments posted here are not representative of the Democratic Party or its candidates."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html

"Support of Democrats" is different from "support Democratic candidates for political office."

In other words, it is against the rules to support someone running against a Democratic Candidate in an election. I'll take "supportive of progressive ideals" over "must support all Democrats" any time, especially conservative Republican Lite DINOS like Mary Landrieu, Max Bauchus, Blanche Lincoln and ESPECIALLY that corporate scum sucking Corporate fuck face Holy Joe Lieberman. DU had to tombstone some conservative ("Centrist") members when they chose to continue supporting Lieberman when he ran against a REAL Democrat.

[nyc 4 Biden]

49. Right On!

and Welcome.

[Avalux]

50. A question -

why do you feel the need to dictate what we believe?

[alberg]

52. An answer

I'm not "dictating" anything. I'm putting something out there and hoping you'll read it, think about it and respond. I could prefix every sentence I write with the phrase "It is my opinion..." but that would start to be pretty cumbersome. It's my point of view and I hope (and believe) that a large group of folks on this site as well as in the Democratic Party atlarge share this point of view. If not, well then I need to reassess who I'm hangin out with.

[Avalux]

53. Start by removing the word "cheerleader".

Maybe then I'll think about what you have to say.

[alberg]

54. It was intended to be a little controversial in order to get folks to read it.

What I'm trying to get at by the use of the word "cheerleader" is the tendency on the part of some folks to support whatever is done or said by those in power as long as they are labeled "Democrats". We ridicule that behavior when we see it coming from the right wing robots. I think it's no less reprehensible when it comes from our side. The word "underground" communicates to me the idea of independence, of thinking and opinions that don't always follow the party line. That is what I was trying to say with the statement: "We are not cheerleaders - we are the Democratic Underground". Please excuse the word "cheerleader" if it offends you. Please try to focus on FDR's key principles and decide of you agree with them. I do agree which is why I made the post.

[Avalux]

57. Your controversial subject line swallows your points about FDR.

By using that word to get people's attention, it has the opposite effect on those of us who are here for thoughtful discourse.

[alberg]

58. Read through some of the posts, some folks got it - others didn't.

I'm trying to make a couple of points. One, FDR's principles need to be more visible and repeated as our Democratic Party talking points. Two, the mind set of "My party, right or wrong" can get in the way of actually achieving our goals as Democrats.

[carolinayellowdog]

72. "Maybe"? Maybe you're just being obnoxious.

To dictate another's wording as a prerequisite for POSSIBLE reflection on his/her message strikes me as a sign of bad faith.

[Odin2005]

55. WELCOME!!!

:hi:

[alberg]

56. Thanks!

[donheld]

68. K & R & Welcome to DU

:hi:

[alberg]

69. Good on ya, mate!