We need an OPPOSITION Party.

[elehhhhna]

This Dem/Reep Good-cop/Bad-cop act is screwing us ROYALLY.

They are in cahoots. For all the Dem handwringing they still vote against our interests as a civilization.

Boxer seems like the only one worth a damn anymore.

[G2099]

1. A Real, Grassroots, Populist, Peoples Party

Ah, but what shall be its principles and platform? Let's kick it . . .

[elehhhhna]

2. The Musty Old Constitution lays out some good principles.

[Protagoras]

15. Populism at it's base

1. Strong anti-corporatist agenda.
NOT anti-capitalst. But dedicated to the restoring of individual rights to individuals...and the complete reversal of Corporate insulation and protections...Make Board Members responsible for the pain and suffering their corporations inflict. Moreover, return to strong BALANCED trade with insurances about human rights and environmentalism. Not half measures...real measures that might hurt in the short term. Radical blow to the money raising arm of the party for sure but necessary if governments are to serve the people instead of Mammon.

2. Restoration of the Fairness Doctrine in the MSM. Make journalists earn their rights by serving the good, not the shareholders.

3. Labor, Labor, Labor, Labor. Union is NOT a dirty word...a strong defense of the working person, of a decent wage, decent hours, and decent treatment would have great appeal if someone actually had the balls to defend it.

4. REAL social services/education/healthcare: Stop being scared of the word Socialism...it's a lame joke. Start talking about CORPORATE Socialism instead...then return to the streets and give poor people a reason for hope. Give them healthcare and give their children a safe clean place to learn...guess what...they might just develop a reason to go to the polls on Nov 4.

5. Humanity over War: I'm not saying we should have a pacifist party...I'm still pretty sure we needed to be involved in WW2 for instance. But the US should get the hell out of every 3rd world conflict between Corporations and peasant governments. We should stop selling arms abroad and we should become the INSPIRATION rather than the puppet master of the UN.

6. Admitted Class Warriors: Let the progressive party embrace the conflict between the poor (increasing in size) and the Rich (consolidating)...Don't shy from the term...admit to it and then with all the passion and fervor in the world...point out the abuses of the current system. Eliminate SS taxes on anyone making under 40K and then raise the cap to 100 Million ...let the Rich defend that position.

7. Reverse the Culture of Criminalization: We don't need more prisons. We have more people in prison than any other industrial country? That's obscene. Land of the free my ass. Lets go back and look at why people are in prison. Lets start looking at VIOLENT CRIMES and CRIMES AGAINST VICTIMS as reasons to imprison people...and stop throwing money and people away over crap people do in the privacy of their closet. CEOs need to serve time like Bank Robbers...and in the same places...a hell of a lot more than someone caught with a joint (and I am not a user or supporter of marajuana...just someone who thinks we need responses proportional to the crime).

None of these things would make us weak, or socialist, but they would go a long way toward restoring a sense of fair play and cultural appeal. We don't need to even worry about a lot of issues that people get caught up in. We need to be able to say to most CULTURAL VALUE arguments...Great...HAVE THAT ARGUMENT ONCE THE HOUSE STOPS BURNING!

Till then...get the kids safe before you worry about the damn curtains.

[leyton]

3. I wish they would consider filibustering right-wing judges

and guys like Bolton.

Wait, they are.

They ain't perfect, but you should give our Senators/Congressmen credit for doing the best they can with 44 seats.

[Mythsaje]

14. Best they can?

The problem is they're NOT doing the best they can. They're 'getting by.' Sure, they're doing their best to block these nominations, but the Repugs are getting closer and closer to blowing everything out of the water.

When Delay and his scummy friends were pulling the re-districting thing in Texas, I had to applaud the Democratic legislators who pulled up and fled across the state line. That's saying "Trying getting by WITHOUT us, you creeps!"

The Democrats seem too willing to compromise when compromise, in Repugnican principle, seems a lot like my ex's. "Compromise means, we do it MY way."

Compromising with evil, even on the 'little things' is merely taking baby steps down the road to hell. The fact that even ONE Democrat voted for the Bankruptcy Reform Bill, and the Medicare Bill last year, tells me that a lot of them have given enough ground that they've lost sight of who their true constituents are.

They're either spineless or corrupt. Or both.

[leyton]

23. You don't really give any good evidence of the entire caucus being corrupt

Yes, there have been turncoats on important bills like the Medicare bill and such. That's in the House, where that's unfortunately a reality. But I do know that Reid is doing an excellent job holding the caucus together in the Senate - a far better job than Frist. Sure, there is room for improvement - such as on the bankruptcy bill - but saying "all Democrats in Congress have forgotten their progressive roots" is a bit hyperbolic, no?

[Mythsaje]

25. Never said

ALL. A lot, perhaps, but not all.

[sweetheart]

4. Indeed, we need opposition to the 2 party system

The existing system attempts to wedge voters in to 2 sides of
consent where no such thing exists.

I disagree with the democrats on just about everything, but they're
less evil than the more evil party, and i support lesser evil.

To have a party that i could actually vote FOR! wow, like a Dennis
Kucinich party that actually was able to represent the significant
percentage of americans that are of that ilk, would be a godsend.

But nay, i think the democrats should just let the republicans run
amok. To help your enemy make fewer mistakes helps nobody in the
long run. The slave state they propose will be so evil, that real
people would choose armed revolt... so why not let the pukes go at it.

There is no opposition, as the constitution bans it... sort of like
the bolshevik communists... 1 party, join it, or be stepped on.

[AndyTiedye]

10. It May Turn into a 1-Party System Soon

If Frist :nuke:s the Senate, there will be no more place for
opposition parties in Washington.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

5. Forget parties. Vote issues, candidates.

I, for one, will not vote for candidates that support the war or take contributions from corporations.

I've been a Democrat since 1965, and usually vote (D). But, in 2006 I'll be voting Green because my rep(D) and senator(D) have sided with the corporate/militarist/fundamentalist repugs.

Let them earn your vote. They're supposed to work for us, not the moneybags.

[therapist]

6. I concur

Democracy needs 2 parties min to be effective

[Horse with no Name]

7. I think we need a Peace party

These war parties are killing us.:)

[elehhhhna]

8. Bravo!

[K-W]

18. I think we need to convince a majority of americans to support peace

Then if we need a peace party, we will get one.

[Deja Q]

9. Bingo. But not tHe green party;

tHey don't Have clout or respectability.

WHy can't we reclaim the Dem party for ourselves? Of course, will tHe DLC allow tHat to Happen?

[K-W]

19. Who cares what the DLC will allow.

If we can convince people that we, not they are right, we can beat them in primaries and they will become powerless.

We can take back the party, if we have the votes, this whole party debate obscures the simple fact that right now, we dont have the votes.

The DLC didnt sneak into office. They ran candidates who won elections. That is all we need to do to become the ideological core of the party again.

[Cleita]

11. After reading this because it was suggested on another thread,

http://www.relfe.com/media_can_legally_lie.html

It seems we need to get every liberal lawyer on our side to fight the whole system, government, corporations, religion and media. Their side have a bunch of slick lawyers they have bought hook, line and sinker. This is what we are fighting.

I don't think we need a new party, but to reform our party. Howard Dean as chairman of the DNC is a good choice for many reasons, but the main reason is because he can't be bought.

Next, we need to vote out all those Democrats that are part of the problem in the next primaries.

[leftofthedial]

12. We need a Labor Party

[leftofthedial]

13. We need a Labor Party

[K-W]

17. No, we need strong labor unions

who can use the power of numbers to elect pro labor politicians to office thus making at least one of the parties in our two party system pro-labor.

Does nobody remember FDR? It is so simple. If we have unions, if we have people behind us, we can take over whichever party we want without a problem.

We dont need new parties, we need to convince americans to vote for us. Until we do we can have 10 million parties, the conservatives will still run the country.

[Protagoras]

21. The United/AA/Soon Delta

Airlines fiasco could be a great opportunity for labor to unite. But I fear it just won't happen yet. Too many still comfortable and don't see a threat to baggage handlers in Seattle as a threat to their Pilot job in Houston etc.

Ever seen Matewan? Maybe we can send out copies around the country?

[leftofthedial]

22. The Democrats used to be a labor party

now they are a corporate party only marginally more benign than the repukes


we are in a class war. ALL our problems are driven by this. both repukes and national dems are on the other side.

[K-W]

24. Right, because labor controlled more votes than corporations.

Now corporations control more votes than labor.

The dems arent on anyones side. The democratic party is a structure, it is a hollow shell, a procedure. It is made up of whatever people get elected to offices in this country as democrats.

The democratic party was a labor party because labor voted candidates into office. The party is not some eternal monolithic entity. It is whatever the people in it make it. The right wing has destroyed the ability of progressives to hold positions in government. Thus they are not elected, thus they are not represented in political parties. All of the purges, all the marginalization, all the propaganda. That is what causes this. The democratic party didnt choose its direction, it is utterly incapable of doing so, and it is designed that way for a reason.

Stop blaming the party structure because the right wing has successfully counterattacked progressivism. This is a democracy, the people lead, not the parties, stop hoping for the party to lead. That isnt how this is supposed to work. Youve got to convince your fellow citizens to support your ideas. When the citizens suppport progressive candidates in elections, there will be progressives in the party.

[K-W]

16. What is the obsession of progressives with parties?

We have broker parties, not ideological parties, unlike in a proportional government, where the compromise happens at the legislative level, the compromise in the US happens on the party level. Rather than a coalition government, we have broker parties.

The Democratic party is NOT an ideological party, it has an ideological tradition, of course. Anyone can register as a democrat, anyone can run in primaries. The party is who is elected.

We need to create progressive organizations that are not political parties, organizations that can advocate, teach, and work to get progressives elected into political offices.

If we can do that, and get progressives elected, our share of power in the broker party will increase proportionately.

Anyway, if we had the ability right now to have a viable party, we would by needs also have the ability to get a swath of progressives elected in the democratic party.

I think it is fairly obvious that we dont have the ability to do either, so it seems to me fairly odd that so many people are worrying about having a party when we havent yet done the grassroots work to deserve one.

IF we create progressive organizations, and strengthen and reform existing organizations, unions, non-profits, etc. If we have the votes around this country to elect people. If we reach that point and if, at that point the Democratic party wont let us through the door, then we take our people power and make a new party.

But right now everyone wants to payoff handed to them. They want the democratic party to bend to us or a new party to magically appear and succeed before we have the votes, before weve beaten back the scourge of reactionary regressives, before weve created an America where progressive candidates win elections. Until then it will just be this stupid game of progressives being fed up with democrats and democrats unable to accomidate them because progressives refuse to aknowledge that our opponants have thier foot on our chests and we are not capable of backing up the democratic party if it were to spontanously decide to shift its positions.

[Javaman]

20. I justed this in the lounge about a new politcal party idea...

New political party?

As I read Studs Terkel's, "Hard Times" about the depression, I'm struck by a few things.

Communism didn't work because of it's ridged structure, it didn't take in the fact that joe blow working his ass off for 40 hours a week gets the same pay as joe blow that doesn't do a thing during the same time period. Then it mutated, because of human nature, that some people just basically want more, own their own businesses, etc...

Democracy, solves that but without proper checks and balances, fat cats and life long politicians control rather than listen to the people. The long term effect is class ware-fare. The few control the many.

Now I'm just spit balling here, speaking off the top of my head, suppose there was a political group that was able to reign in both of these problems.

Have the our basic freedoms as promised by the constitution assured, but at the same time, curb an outrageous wealthy class from controlling everything and keep politicians from being lifers that have nothing but special interests in mind.

I have always argued for term limits on politicians. Reasoning, if the president is only limited to two terms, so should members of the house and senate. When you have senators that have been in office for 30+ years, they control alot of influence thus handy capping any president. With limits, everyone knows they have only a short time to do what they need to do and actually do their job and not be the tool of the lobbyist.

Perhaps stronger monopoly laws, everyone paying their fair share on SS, the repeal of the inheritance tax, etc...but that's where I get lost.

Basically, my concept in the end is a strong middle class, that takes care of the poor but also allows people to become rich but at the same time limiting them to maintain an balance in society.

Please, I would like to open this up for debate.

[Wizard777]

26. We cannot surrender we must unite