socialists/greens/fringe Dems gather here and tell us the plan for 2006

[wyldwolf]

(Lovingly inspired by this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2314750&mesg_id=2314750

Because we all know that the anti-DLCers strike first but whine the loudest)

What is the plan for the socialists/ greens/ fringe left Dems to regain control of the House of Representatives in 2006?

Wait! "Regain?" You've never had it so how can you regain it?

What is the plan for the socialists/ greens/ fringe left Dems to regain control of the U.S. Senate in 2006?

Wait! "Regain?" You've never had it so how can you regain it?

What is the plan for the socialists/ greens/ fringe left Dems to regain control of more state Governorships and other statewide and locally elected offices in 2006?

Wait! "Regain?" hmmm... ya' never had any!

Please step up to the plate and hit the ball out of the park!

Go ahead. Make our day!

Show us the way. I eagerly await the facts (you know, "FACTS.")

But I'll make a prediction based on your prior record:

You'll sit on your high horses and do nothing until a moderate Democrat gets the party's nomination, then you'll complain and whine and threaten not to vote. Or you might even work against the party's nominee like you've done before when...

... you abandoned Harry Truman not once but twice because he wouldn't play nice with the Communists.
... you protested the nomination of JFK in 1960, demanding Adlai Stevenson instead.
... you protested the 1968 Democratic convention because you preferred Gene McCarthy over Humphrey and continued to not support the Democratic nominee... Richard Nixon won that year, by the way.
... you abandoned Jimmy Carter in 1980 and hiched your horse to Ted Kennedy - bringing your "fight" to the convention floor that year. Ronald Reagan won that year, by the way.
... you bought into Ralph Nader's BS and voted third party - abandoning Al Gore..

[spaniard]

1. LOL! Amazing that when you compare prior records...

...the DLC shines and the far left is insignificant or, as you said in another thread, little chihuahuas nipping at the heels of the party establishment.

Recommended!

[stickdog]

144. The far left reminds me of the Goldwater zealots who led the GOP to ruin!

Oh, they didn't? Whoops.

[Douglas Carpenter]

149. within the context of the Democratic Party

Who specifically; individuals or groups do you consider "far" left or "fringe" and what policies do they support that makes them "far"left or "fringe"?

And one more question. Do you want progressive/left Democrats to work for and within the Democratic Party?

[Zhade]

152. I'm interested in those answers myself.

Twenty bucks says you won't get any.

Besides, there are no Maoists or Stalinists in the Dem party, so the "far left" label is wrongfully applied by those incognizant of worldwide political reality with regards to the definition of "far left".

People who scream "far left" at those who don't like the idea of corporate rule of America have a lot to learn about what political stances really are far left.

[bushclipper]

2. "anti-DLCers strike first but whine the loudest"

Classic line.

I'd forgotten about the incident you mentioned at the 1960 convention.

But of course the rest is still fresh in my mind.

[pnorman]

3. "...abandoning Al Gore"

Had Gore ran as a fucking DEMOCRAT in 2000, things might have played out a lot differently. To a large degree, Gore had abandoned the Democratic Party.

I voted for Nader in 2000; a "safe" and non-threatening move in WA State. My hope then was that Gore would be elected, but a HIGH Nader vote would give him something to think about. Obviously it's impossible to fine-tune things that well, but I do the best I can do ... and with WHAT I KNOW AT THE TIME. WHO here, KNEW AT THAT TIME, that Florida for example, would be stolen so brazenly?

pnorman

[Kahuna]

5. He did run as a Democrat. Too bad you weren't paying attention.

You would have noticed. And Florida would not been such a surprise had you kept in mind that bush's brother was the govenor.

[pnorman]

6. Yes, thanks for reminding me.

I'm getting quite forgetful at my advanced age. As for Florida ... do you REALLY think his kid brudder was the king-pin of what could be termed "The Theft of a Century"? Judging by what we're only just beginning to learn, we're looking at a degree of cold-blooded organization and at many levels, like NOTHING this Nation has ever seen before.

pnorman

[MrBenchley]

12. Wow...it's nice to see leftist fantasy is as silly as ever....

"Gore had abandoned the Democratic Party"
Says the guy who actually DID abandon the Democratic party and voted for Ralph Fucking Nader. Thanks for nothing.

[pnorman]

25. " abandon the Democratic party "

I didn't abandon anything I wasn't a member of in the first place. I voted almost SOLID Democratic, beginning with Stevenson in 1952, but I NEVER considered myself as a card-carrying member of that Party. I voted for "the better of two evils", until I had my fill with Gore in 2000. Had I the kind of precognition necessary to have known what that gang was capable of, my name would have been in lights a long time earlier --- Master of the Stock Market ---Master of the WORLD!

I trust that YOU are using your Divine Gift of Precognition in the service of mankind.

pnorman

[MrBenchley]

28. And Reagan didn't leave the party, the party left him....

"Had I the kind of precognition necessary to have known what that gang was capable of"
You mean you took it took extraordinary gifts of divination to know stated Republican policies sucked? That IS sad.

[pnorman]

32. Like I said:

"I hope you're using YOUR Divine Gift of Precognition in the service of mankind."

pnorman

[MrBenchley]

36. Yes, when Chimpy announced in 2000 he wanted to privatize Social Security

only Kreskin and me could have guessed that meant he wanted to privatize Social Security....(snicker)

[pnorman]

44. I'm talking Grand Theft --- Election.

Social Security and the entire New Deal has been on their hit list for a long as I can recall. But did you and or your pal "Kreskin" predict Grand Theft? Keep snickering.

pnorman

[MrBenchley]

45. That is pathetic....especially from a Nader VOTER

[pnorman]

46. What's REALLY pathetic,

is how readily Gore threw in the towel in Florida. More than anyone here NOW, he and his lawyers had a very clear idea of what took place there THEN. And it wasn't old Tammanyite "dead men voting" and other stuff. As we're learning well AFTER the event, it was like NOTHING this Nation had ever seen until then. Keep chuckling.

pnorman

[Uncle Joe]

64. It is somewhat amazing that you think Al threw the towel

in what turned out to be the longest post election dispute in history?

[pnorman]

131. "It is somewhat amazing that you think Al threw the towel ....."

I'm not really trying to get in the Last Word here. That's usually an immature and egotistical reaction, and can go on forever. It generally makes both parties appear silly, and turns many people off to what might be a valuable thread. So I'll make no further response to this thread (other than perhaps by private mail).

But that above assertion has been the subject of many serious DU discussions. I invite all others here to revisit it.

pnorman

[AuntPatsy]

140. Thats not how I recall it? Gore did indeed wish to fight and did

for some time, I recall at the time even some hard core Dems wanting him to just throw in the towel so this nation could move on? I never did understand that thinking and was against such from the beginning, but many many people I talked to and those even behind Gore more than likely thought the same.

I still cannot fathom how so many turned against Gore when it was pretty obvious this election was being stolen outright.....

[Kahuna]

41. You couldn't imagine that two oil men in the White House could

possibly lead to oil wars? You couldn't imagine that Dick Cheney picking himself as a running mate could possibly mean that he had an agenda? That floors me.

[MrBenchley]

43. He had NO CLUE a tax cut for the rich was in the offing....

Good thing the psychics at the Onion were on the case for the rest of us....

""Finally, the horrific misrule of the Democrats has been brought to a close," House Majority Leader Dennis Hastert (R-IL) told reporters. "Under Bush, we can all look forward to military aggression, deregulation of dangerous, greedy industries, and the defunding of vital domestic social-service programs upon which millions depend. Mercifully, we can now say goodbye to the awful nightmare that was Clinton's America.""

http://chak.org/pages/onion/bush_nightmare.html

[Inland]

114. Well, back to the plans for 2006 and beyond.....now that you know.....

With the results of 2000 obvious as hell in retrospect, how many nader voters are going to repeat the same mistake?

[katinmn]

117. I think Dems need to think in terms of shifting paradigms

Time to get on board with the left wing if you want to be on the winning team in '06. :hi:

[Inland]

158. Let's not mistake what Nader and Nader voters were doing:

Let's make the distinction between 1) trying to win and making a mistake about how to go about it and 2) not trying to win. Nader and Nader voters weren't trying to win, in the sense that they would rather have a losing candidacy and be for all the right things.

You and I could argue about which positions will be winners as if we were both on the same page as number one, but you've already posted that you consider electability to be a distant third place criterium for candidates. We don't have the same meta-goal.

[Kahuna]

4. I've been waiting three years to hear about that great liberal utopia..

they keep talking about. When was that???!!! Little do they realize that if it had not been for their antics as described in your post, we'd be a lot further along to having the great liberal utopia they dream about. Talk about voting against your own interest... Every time we take one step forwards they force us (by assisting republicans to get into office), to take two steps backward.

[IndianaGreen]

8. The DLC has adopted the language of the rightwing!

They hate the New Deal and have embraced Hooverism!

[Kahuna]

39. Language, smanguage... You have to actually win elections..

before you can actually implement your agenda. ALL politicians run to the middle. Bush did it too. That's how it's done.

[MrBenchley]

10. Meanwhile, look at the open contempt and hatred expressed here

for ordinary Americans and patriotism on a daily basis. That's true not just on DU but throughout leftist rhetoric in the wider world.

I think the "Democrats hate America" meme is a lot more toxic to the party and it's candidates' electoral chances than anything the DLC does or doesn't do...and thanks to our "idealists" it's impossible to throw it off because they insist on reinforcing it.

[katinmn]

19. McB: Is this who you are supporting?

:rofl:

[jonnyblitz]

22. wow...you do a damn good RW rant!!!

sorry if we "evil libruls" aren't jingioist enough for ya!! good Ann Coulter impersonation anyways. :thumbsup:

[MrBenchley]

24. No..I just see left wing loonies plainly and say so

And frigne leftists have been a drag on us liberals as long as I can remember.

[katinmn]

27. You're a liberal? But you hate liberals

:rofl:

[MrBenchley]

29. Yeah, I'm a liberal Democrat

I don't even hate the anti-DLCers--they're too lame to do anything but snicker at.

[katinmn]

30. Liberal as in Lieberman, Hillary, and Zell Miller.

Got it.

[MrBenchley]

31. So what's the name of your group?

Oh that's right...you don't know the name of the group representing the "progressive" faction.

[katinmn]

33. I didn't claim to belong to a group, silly. You did. :-)

[MrBenchley]

34. Sure you did...

What's even funnier, when I pointed out that such a group existed and was hardly ever mentioned on DU, you turned out to be unable to identify it.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

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

[MrBenchley]

37. No downside for me

[loudsue]

66. Well, the name of OUR group? Like Kucinich, Dean, Feingold,

Stephanie Tubbs-Jones, Cynthia McKinney, Ted Kennedy.... there ARE some REAL Dems who get elected, in spite of your rightwing money.

:kick:

[MrBenchley]

70. LOL! So I guess you never heard of the PDA either...

Other than both being Democrats, I'd bet Cynthia McKinney and Ted Kennedy have no connection whatsoever.....

[Moochy]

93. Gosh lets take that bet...

Senator Edward M. 'Ted' Kennedy (MA)
http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=S0410103

Cynthia McKinney
http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=H0965103

I see alot of connections, and common ground. Do you?

LOL indeed.

[MrBenchley]

100. LOL...so other than the Democratic party

which organization do they both belong to again?

[Moochy]

103. And you followed those links?

Oh of course not you have your agenda to laugh and laugh and laugh at the lefties who are responsible for all the problems with the democratic party.

[MrBenchley]

110. Like I didn't know where they led before I clicked

but yeah, I did...

So tel us, do both Ted Kennedy and Cynthia McKinney belong to, for example, Planned Parenthood? The Doris Day Animal League?

[AuntPatsy]

141. Your wording leaves much to be desired if you honestly

care to make an attempt to bring more unification, this "leftist" and "looney" wordage sounds awfuly familiar in that it is the way of the Gop in how they like to bring discourse..

[MrBenchley]

154. Funny....

having people call other Democrats "cancer" or compare them to Hitler tends to annoy me....

[Moochy]

99. Right back at ya

Project much on the hatred?

Why do you hate america?

[IndianaGreen]

7. Why are the Democrats not challenging Senator Lugar (R-IND) in '06?

Harry Truman supported a pro-Nazi faction in Greece which led to the so-called "Truman Doctrine" which marked the beginning of the Cold War.

Adlai Stevenson was a better man than JFK, and a very decent man to boot!

Humphrey was as much a war criminal in 1968 as Dick Cheney is today.

Ted Kennedy was a better choice in 1980 than "malaise forever" Jimmy Carter. Despite all of that, we supported Carter in November because we opposed Raygun's policies. The DLC has adopted Reaganism without Reagan as its core values.

Lieberman threw in the towel in 2000 on military ballots being cast after Election Day. Gore's lawyers should have asked for a statewide recount in Florida, instead of selected counties (they were out-lawyered by Jim Baker & Co). Not a single Democratic Senator joined the House Black Caucus in challenging the Electoral College ballots in Congress. The DLC backstabbed and sabotaged Gore in '04. I won't go into what the DLC did to Dean. The Left totally supported Kerry in Presidential Election in '04 despite serious issues with Kerry's positions on Iraq and Venezuela.

The DLC speaks for the same corporate interests that own the Republican Party and it has adopted the religious dogmatism of the Religious Right.

Al From can suck my dildo!

Lugar Could Run Unopposed for 2006

Dec 15, 2005, 06:26 PM EST

Could Indiana Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN) be unopposed in his effort to win a sixth term to the US Senate? Democrats have yet to find a candidate, and it's getting late.

To get on the May primary ballot, a candidate must gather 4,500 petition signatures around the state before Valentine's Day - a requirement that would be difficult to meet even if they started today.

Sen. Richard Lugar's campaign organization is in place and fundraising is underway. All that's missing is an opponent.

<snip>

"You don't recruit a candidate to run for the United States Senate," said Dan Parker, state Democratic chairman.

http://www.wishtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=4251636

Lugar has been a rubber stamp for Bush's criminal and anti-labor policies. If the Democrats don't challenge Lugar, it will be up to those "socialists/ greens/ fringe left Dems" that you view with so much elitist contempt, to challenge Lugar through a third party.

[wyldwolf]

52. I dunno. Since the far left thinks they own the party...

..why don't they run someone?

[MrBenchley]

9. Let's not forget that the left HATED Bobby Kennedy

They derided him for not speaking out against the Viet Nam war, then derided him for doing so, saying he was a "coward" who had only spoken up when Eugene McCarthy made it safe to do so.

[wyldwolf]

54. right. RFK didn't become a liberal hero until he was assasinated...

..before then, he was the equivalent of the hated DLC.

[MrBenchley]

56. Exactly so....

There were even claims in places like Ramparts magazine that he was in collusion with those who had assassinated his brother....

[katinmn]

11. We will win by stubbornly sticking with our convictions THIS TIME

We go to the precinct caucuses as a voting bloc.

We laugh off those who attempt to marginize by calling us fringe or extremists because we have a vision.

We vote for candidates who:
1. Feel strongly about our top progressive issues
2. Will represent us with passion and conviction
3. Are "electible"

Yes, that is the rank order.

As a group, we agree to abide by this selection process though caucuses, the state convention, and the national convention.

Core issues, passion and integrity first.

It will take resolve and discipline to not compromise but we will do it.

Of course, we may win and our candidate will screw us over in the end. But since we are supporting candidates with good character, this is less likely to happen.

Now you have our strategy.

[MrBenchley]

13. And then flying monkeys will come out of David Cobb's ass.....

Worth noting that the progressives have their own organization JUST LIKE THE DLC (the only real difference is that it solicits grassroots support, unlike the DLC).

It's never mentioned here at all. Not even our stalwart progressive purists give a rats' ass about it. Instead they spend all day and all night pissing and moaning about the DLC.

[katinmn]

15. We have our own organization? Cool. What's its name?

I want to join!

[MrBenchley]

18. You DON'T know?

Shame on you.

[katinmn]

20. Still waiting for you to cough it up!

[MrBenchley]

21. Hahahahaha!

Well, I'm not going to. Guess you'll have to go on being powerless and openly wondering why.

[katinmn]

23. I don't feel powerless. But you feel threatened, don't ya?

You see how the tide has turned.

[MrBenchley]

26. And that's why I'm laughing....

and the person who announced grandly "As a group, we....," can't even NAME the group....

[SaveElmer]

53. Katinmn...

The organization is called the Progressive Democrats of America...www.pdamerica.org ....you might want to make a note of it.

MrBenchley is right though...why is it no "progresives" here seem to know of this organization, but DLC "dupes" like myself support it monetarily? Perhaps because we recognize all wings of the party are going to be necessary to defeat the righties, and recognize that between the DLC and PDA there is probably 80% agreement on issues!

[katinmn]

57. PDA? I'm a charter member. There's nothing secret about PDA

PDA kicks ass! :patriot:

[SaveElmer]

58. I think Mr. Benchley's point...

Is that we hear alot from progressives on DLC...but they never seem to talk about, or even realize PDA exists!!

I'm glad you do though!

[katinmn]

16. Come on McB! I really want to know about this secret organization.

waiting

[MrBenchley]

17. Why is it a secret?

It's not like people from the group don't start threads to promote their programs...however, they all sink within few minutes with few if any responses.

Aren't you curious as to why that is?

[Kahuna]

40. "This time".. Didn't you forget..

the sarcasm tag?

[EFerrari]

14. What about securing your elections so you actually get to

take office when you win?

Maybe the Greens should go down and raise hell in Ohio -- wait, we already did that and are still doing that.

Never mind. :eyes:

[LoZoccolo]

38. They have probably already missed one crucial milestone in their goals.

That's getting their candidate on the primary ballot. It probably varies from state to state, but in Illinois, they have to be in like ninety days before the primary. If they haven't been working to get this done, then they've sort of lost some of their opportunity to complain about the party, especially since I put up a warning about this weeks ago and it ended up on the front page.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=2203808

[MrBenchley]

42. Damn the DLC for making them miss the deadline!

[LoZoccolo]

47. The DLC distracted them with Senator Clinton!

The stuff she was saying in her speeches made them so mad that they forgot how elections work!

[MrBenchley]

48. By the way, it's amazing to see the many plans from the far left....

isn't it?

And remember, this time their group is going to stand firm--if only they knew what the name of the group was, who else was in it, or what it was proposing.

[LoZoccolo]

49. Actually, yesterday they came up with a plan.

Some of them decided to forego the electoral process and go right for the general strike!

[MrBenchley]

51. LOL!

What would DU do in the event of a walk-out by the antiDLCers? We'd be left with nothing but threads SUPPORTING Democrats.

[Moochy]

95. You are a uniter, not a divider, right?

[MrBenchley]

50. I guess so....(snicker)

Imagine her not speaking up for such grand American values as burning the flag or pretending to gun down black people.....

[killbotfactory]

55. I didn't know all anti-DLC democrats were fringe

Nice strawman you built there.

What are you, on their fucking payroll or something?

[Moochy]

89. Aww now we can't cast aspersions

on an OP so filled with RW straw men, no it's not an inflammmatory divisive trolling post..
and PS yes I alerted, and he's on ignore mods. Modus Operandi Flamebaiticus.

[MrBenchley]

59. Hard to choose amongst this deluge of plans

[Lydia Leftcoast]

73. Yo! Benchley!

Post #63

You've read right past it and gone on to taunt other people.

[MrBenchley]

75. Yeah, it's a deluge of ONE

It appears the PDA is actually doing something like your number 2....

Hilariously, it's the DLC who has a handbook for prospective candidates that allows them to accomplish your #3--one doesn't even have to be a member to access it.

[DerekG]

60. Ah, so now the Left is at fault for our lamentable state

Henry A. Wallace and the Progressive Party should have stayed silent while Harry Truman and his Cold War liberal cadre were busy setting in stone the national security apparatus that doomed us to perpetual war. (The pinkos were out to get us, you know.)

The Left should have extolled Humphrey and his pleasant endorsements of a genocidal war against Vietnamese peasants (Humphrey and Johnson, by the way, didn't even have the courage to expose Nixon's October Surprise).

Greens and progressives should have played along with centrists like Carter and Clinton, even when the former all but abandoned the War on Poverty, and the latter drove a stake through the New Deal by way of Welfare Reform.

My goodness, what were my spiritual antecedents thinking?

You don't like leftists? That's fine. I myself don't care much for party loyalists, who express moral outrage when Republican administrations murder for the almighty dollar, but have a proclivity for looking the other way when, say, Madeline Albright deems the starvation of half a million Iraqi children "worth it."

This looney leftist has every intention to be a thorn in the side of your idols. (Oh the fun we'll have when Madame Clinton nabs the nomination.)

[jonnyblitz]

61. ..

:applause: :thumbsup:

[SaveElmer]

74. This is how bad they have gotten...

Complaining Hubert Humphrey, Lyndon Johnson, and Jimmy Carter weren't liberal enough...

Any Democrats you do admire?

Any Democratic Presidents you admire?

[jonnyblitz]

80. did you actually READ what he wrote? you have no problem

with the things he mentioned? you are OK with it all? are the issues important to you or is it just the personalities you care about? you people who overlook positions on the issues just because the person is a democrat are something else. i think the only reason many of you are against Bush is because he ISNT a democrat. If he were doing what he is doing now, but a democrat, you all would probably be just fine with him.

[SaveElmer]

85. If I apply a purity test to every public figure...

I would hate all of them...there is not one politician or president in the entire history of this country that has not done something I would dissaprove of...I look at the totality of the person, the times they lived in, the poitical, economic, and social pressures they were under, and the lay of the political land...then I come to a conclusion.

I also go beyond sloganeering and look into the motivations of the person ...

The men he mentioned are on balance are all highly admirable...all with flaws to be sure, but all doing what they thought was best for the country and not for their own person, political, or financial aggrandizement. Hubert Humphrey was a great man, who accomplished great things, moved the Democratic Party away from a reliance on states rights and did more to advance civil rights than just about any man has before or since (unless you include Abe Lincoln which I do) He was caught in an untenable situation as LBJ's Vice President. Lyndon Johnson was a tragic figure who did more for social policy in this country than any President (including FDR), and Jimmy Carter brought dignity and honesty to the White House...

That is why I asked who he might admire, because it would be relatively easy to cherry pick their flaws and turn them into devils...

[Moochy]

87. I bet they love them some Gen. Clark!!

The consortium of scared soccermoms and fascist-lite militaristic law-and-order kill-tookie squad speaks loudly and clearly.

Too bad they are in the wrong party.

[DerekG]

111. My response

The issue, SaveElmer, is my fear and loathing of "guns n' butter" liberalism; yes, Johnson, Humphrey, and Truman (to a lesser extent) all boasted admirable domestic visions...they also were responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths abroad. They were all ardent proponents for empire. I fear the Johnsons and Trumans of the world, for they--far more than the rightist militarists--are able to shroud their sins (by way of their Fair Deals and Great Societies).

You may associate HST with his desegregation of the Armed Forces, but I can only recall his atomization of Hiroshima and Nagasaki; you may associate LBJ with, say, HEADSTART, but I can only envision the sheer horror of the Indochina bombardment.

P.S. To satisfy your curiosity, I look favorably on Senators Kennedy, Boxer, Byrd (on issues of war and peace) and Feingold, and openly admire Representatives Kucinich, Sanders, McDermott, Conyers and most of the members of the Black Caucus.

Although I rarely extoll presidents and generals, I would, with some measure of reluctance, deem Franklin Roosevelt (the target of an aborted '33 fascist coup) and John Fitzgerald Kennedy (who, in the second half of his thousand year presidency, posed quite the threat to the military-industrial complex) courageous leaders. We won't see their like again for some time. The system won't allow it.

[SaveElmer]

113. DerekG...

Thank you for the civil response...my schedule precludes me from responding in detail this minute...but I will within the next day if you don't mind?

[DerekG]

129. Civil posts such as yours demand civil responses

My decidely confrontational original post was aimed at the author, who was obviously looking to spark something.

[Critters2]

82. Hear! Hear!

Henry Wallace is my hero!! The party loyalists really screwed him in '44...in the name of prudence, ya know. That's the same thing as "electability".

Yep..Henry Wallace, my hero!

:applause:

[KG]

62. this leftist is going to get out the popcorn and watch as the dem party

fumbles away a chance to pounce on the repook fuck-ups, by supporting them instead, and lose ground by continuing to pander to a shrinking demographic that is never going to vote for them.

then this leftist is going to laugh is ass off as the loyalists whine on DU that the continued death spiral of the dem party is somehow the fault of those 'socialists/greens/fringe Dems'.

it will be great fun.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

63. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, and assuming that you're

actually asking a serious question instead of assembling your usual tag team to taunt us "fringe folk," here's what I would do if I were advising the party on 2006.

1) Let no Republican go unchallenged. Send out a sacrificial lamb if necessary. Even if the lamb doesn't win, at least part of the population will have heard an alternative to the Republican line.

2) If possible, recruit local candidates who are known and well-liked for community activism.

3) Assess the specific needs (not demagogic wedge issues) of the local constituency--jobs? better schools? a cleaner environment? better disaster relief?--and run heavily on three to four issues with specific suggestions for each one. Of course, the candidate should study up on a wide range of issues and shouldn't be let out in public until he or she has something to say about most of what locals are likely to bring up.

4) Don't let the Republicans set the agenda. If the R's bring up "God, guns, and gays," the Dem candidate should sigh in exasperation and say, "They keep bringing that up because they have nothing to offer you. They're waving flags and Bibles in your faces so they can pick your pocket."

5) Expose the candidate to as many local voters as possible by holding low-cost fundraisers, following the example of Peter DeFazio's $35 beer and pizza parties. Hold $5 coffee parties in poorer neighborhoods where the candidate can meet with underserved voters. In the end, it's not necessarily the candidate with the most money who wins, but the candidate who gets the most votes, and if $5 coffee parties and $35 pizza parties will bring the candidate face-to-face with the voters, who can become committed word-of-mouth recruiters, you'll still need some media ads, but not as many.

6) All candidates should emphasize that voters who are dissatisfied with the way the country is going should vote for them. There should be one nationwide plank (doesn't matter what it is, except that it shouldn't be one of the typical wedge issues) that ALL Dem candidates around the country should run on. Tell voters that if they vote Dem and enough of the rest of the country votes Dem, this idea will be introduced as a bill in both houses. (If Bush vetoes it, fine, that's something to run against in 2008.)

[wyldwolf]

78. Rich

assuming that you're actually asking a serious question instead of assembling your usual tag team to taunt us "fringe folk,"

Let's be honest here. What group here starts the taunting?

Your list sounds like what I've seen the Democratic party actually doing in various degrees for the last 13 years or so. Now, I'm not referring to you specifically becuae I don't know you, but anyone who has been involved in party politics for any reasonable amount of time knows this or they should.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

79. If the low-cost fundraisers are standard operating procedure, how come

we don't see them more often?

How come we don't see more Dem candidates laughing off Republican attacks on the wedge issues and changing the subject to make the Republicans follow THEIR agenda?

If local activists are the favored candidates, where do all the bland empty suit businessman types come from?

If Congressional and Senate candidates are already talking about local problems, why are so many issues being totally ignored?

What is going to be the Democratic Party's issue for 2006 that all candidates are going to run on?

Just wondering.

[wyldwolf]

90. answers

If the low-cost fundraisers are standard operating procedure, how come we don't see them more often

As a former candidate and as someone who has worked on local campaigns, I see them all the time.

How come we don't see more Dem candidates laughing off Republican attacks on the wedge issues and changing the subject to make the Republicans follow THEIR agenda?

I see that quite often, too. Paul Hackett comes to mind. So does Wes Clark. I thought Kerry and Edwards both did an outstanding job in the civil rights arena by putting a human face on Cheney's gay daughter.

If local activists are the favored candidates, where do all the bland empty suit businessman types come from?

We still have a Democratic process. Voters will vote for who they like. I never want to see the day the DNC runs community activists simply because they're community activists. Locally, I've seen liberal community activists run and win (and lose.) Running liberal community activists in rural GA, for example, won't play. Trust me.

If Congressional and Senate candidates are already talking about local problems, why are so many issues being totally ignored?

There aren't enough hours in the day or money in the pot to touch on all topics. Politicians have to prioritize and appeal to more than just one narrow constituency. What is a problem to you may be hunky dory to me.

What is going to be the Democratic Party's issue for 2006 that all candidates are going to run on?

Simply put, there will be no ONE issue all will run on. Because Senators and Congressmen are elected by their states and districts to represent such, issues will be a varied as states and districts. Look for the economy to be a buzz issue. The Iraq War will be big in blue states but not so big in red states.

[Bongo Prophet]

92. I think you make some good points here

1> that different strategies are necessary for different circumstances

2> When the "media line" was being put on Hackett's coments against b*sh -"Don't you want to apologize for those comments?" he just said, "Yeah, i meant it, and I'll say it again!" BOOM. That is a refreshing and all too rare populist approach. I think all dems should be more direct and unapologetic, whatever part of the imaginary spectrum thay happen to be defined as occupying.

3>Some activists do not make good politicians. The importance of activists is often not in being candidates, but pushing issues. What we need is honest discussion between factions, and often a coordinated triangulation can take place. No betrayals, no walkouts, etc. Some trust and followthrough could help mitigate this infighting BS.

4> No ONE issue. Yep. But also consider the wedge issue and referenda that are put up which rallies the rightwing base. Activists, astroturf-roots orgs, thinktanks, media shills and politicians all colluding to create "common wisdom" and trends and imaginary mandates. We are fighting very organized enemies, and if we don't learn to work together, we are so f......


Anyway, thanks for the real thoughts, and not more flammmable material.

[Moochy]

91. You are very generous Lydia

You are admirably generous to the OP, who obviously had nothing but a "taunting" intent.

[radio4progressives]

121. Accomplish all these goals with a genuine progressive plan:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2317058

[LittleClarkie]

65. "Mom, make him stop touching me!"

That's IT. Go to your room, the both of ye!

Y'all are stuck with each other. Suck it up.

[Pirate Smile]

115. Perfect, LittleClarkie.

I have this picture of some pissed off siblings sticking their tongues out at each other.

[loudsue]

67. This thread has been bought & paid for by the DLC.

Note the posters, folks. And don't feed 'em.

:kick:

[Celeborn Skywalker]

68. Yeah right, the DLC send out operatives to DU

:tinfoilhat:

Paranoid much?

[radio4progressives]

69. "Fringe Left" - is Starting off on the Wrong Foot

if you expect to be taken seriously, you damn well better get honest.

[MrBenchley]

71. Can't imagine a more honest description

Especially given the tenor of some of the posts here.....

[Lydia Leftcoast]

72. Yeah, and I actually answered the OP's question

in a non-confrontational way and got no responses.

That tells you how serious about finding out our opinions the OP actually was.

[wyldwolf]

77. yeah. less than 2 hours after making the post I'm replying to now

Silly me for going to work and supporting my family and not sitting on DU all day.

[Bongo Prophet]

81. Yes, you gave a "benefit of the doubt"

An honorable position, and an honest answer.
To an obvious, taunting "pseudo question" - i clicked on the thread hoping for a good, strategic way for progressives to move the party forward, and then work in solidarity with whomever gets the nod. A discussion we need to have, and often. What I don't get is the wedge of alienation and name calling of the supposedly responsible "Benchley" - damn, he is all over the place lately, sowing discord. WTF? how does this help?

As irritating as purists can be, (100% agreement or I'm bolting!) the loyalist cries of "Looney left!" and other name calling just fans the flames and aids the right in their solidarity of ignorance. And their continual moving of the Left-right spectrum ever-rightward.

I would rather discuss things in a reasonable way. This happens occasionally, even on DU.
Strategize. Compromise, even when it hurts, can move us forward. All compromise is not capitulation.

And the bushes are multigenerational war profiteers with a decidely fascist bent. It did not take ESP to see this shitstorm coming down. This is when we need to tone down the factional infighting and work together to avoid outright catastrophe. Alas, it was not to be. Partly because of taunting tactics as this thread exemplifies.

Good for you, Lydia, for trying.

[MrBenchley]

98. "Discordant" little me-LOL!

"What I don't get is the wedge of alienation and name calling of the supposedly responsible "Benchley""

Yeah, it was awful of me to compare other Democrats to "Hitler" and "cancer"....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2315323&mesg_id=2315605

And it was shameful of me to draw up an enemies list and demand ideological purity....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2303592&mesg_id=2303592

I'm really ashamed that I started a thread asking for Democratic accomplishments and then told people "Shut up!" when they pointed to accomplishments....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2313108&mesg_id=2313108

I wish I had never started a thread suggesting Democrats sue to throw other Democrats out of the party...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2308512&mesg_id=2308512

And it was sure divisive the way I tried to imply Harry Reid was a warmongerer....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2302004&mesg_id=2302004

Or invented attacks by other DUers that didn't exist.....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2301689&mesg_id=2301689

Oh wait! None of that was me!

[Moochy]

101. Nice agenda

For you to have compiled that list, took some effort.

Keep it up Benchley your agenda is showing. Keep dividing, keep hating, and keep laughing.

[MrBenchley]

105. LOL!

"Keep it up Benchley"
I plan to. But you guys are too lame to bother hating...and as far as dividing, it's not moderates threatening to stomp away like pouty two year olds if they don't get their way...that would be our "teen progressives."

[Bongo Prophet]

146. No one claimed you did all that.

I disagree with those that would say that.
i can see that you are not ashamed of something that you did not do. Makes sense.
I sense that you are shameless in escalating the ridiculous infighting.
You enjoy the hell out of the discord you participate in. That much is quite clear.
Snicker snicker. Blah.
A shame that you have so much energy and time, wasted on being so intensely alienating that you would drive away people coming to a thread hoping for a better discussion.
A pox on both of ya.
Oh wait, we are on the same "team" working for hopefully at least related goals.
Democracy is haaaard.
Less assholian behavior would further your goals better, I think.

[MrBenchley]

153. Nor does that sort of discord bother some people, because it's so "pure"

"I sense that you are shameless in escalating the ridiculous infighting."
In other words, you don't mind that our progressive purists are drawing up enemies lists and smearing folks...you just want them to be able to do it without any dissent.

[Moochy]

97. Project much?

tenor?

[radio4progressives]

104. Fine - From this point forward - Consider Yourself as the "Fringe Right."

Seems like a fair and apt discription of the tenor of your postings.

[kenny blankenship]

76. Run against Bush, instead of licking his ass and calling it icecream?

that'd be my plan.

[Critters2]

83. Hey!!

That just might work...it's worth a try!!

[Moochy]

84. Nice divisive post

Welcome to ignore!

[wyldwolf]

123. just make sure you ignore the OP of the thread that inspired it.

[nickshepDEM]

86. Good stuff.

Nominated.

[murdoch]

88. The presidency seems everything to you

The closest a socialist ever came to winning the presidency in the US was Eugene Debs. When he started doing well, he was thrown in prison, and still recieved over 3% of the national vote while campaigning from prison. In New York State, five socialist assemblymen were ejected from the assembly for being socialists.

One doesn't have to go back that far though. Look at the San Francisco mayor's race. I never saw Clinton and the whole DLC and Democratic leadership fight for something more than to get their millionaire pal Gavin Newsom elected mayor, and kick down the grassroots Green candidate who almost won. They certainly never fight Republicans, the rich, corporations and whatnot that hard.

The Communist Party never took power in France or Italy, yet it had an enormous impact on those countries. In 1956, PCF was the largest political party in France, and PCI won the election in 1948 (but had it stolen) and almost won in 1976.

It's a big world, and it doesn't matter who is the president of the US.

[Dora]

94. What a hateful, baiting post.

:eyes: I just love it when people invite open, tolerant, and genuine discussion of opposing viewpoints. :eyes:

Merry Christmas, Mr. Nice Guy.

[Moochy]

96. And Benchley wonders why only ONE brave "fringe" lefty

took the bait. (Thanks Lydia!)

HAHAHAHAA indeed. laugh it up Benchley, you are a gem.

[MrBenchley]

102. I plan to go on laughing....

And your post provides more inadvertant hilarity...

[Name removed]

106. Deleted message

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

[nashville_brook]

108. it's the divisiveness -- who needs this BS?

thanks for standing up to the bully.

[katinmn]

116. Actually, I answered the question in #11.

They can deride us all they want. This is a summary of the plan our caucus is taking to our local precincts, the state convention, and all the way to the national convention.

Progressives in every state are coming to the same conclusion and will be going in with much more determination than ever before. We're organized, we've built up networks and friendships, we've got our training calendar established for new delegates, and we're motivated.

At least in Minnesota, we are seeing many strong progressive candidates in the races (both Dems and Greens), from the state house, to the governor's seat, to the one open US senate seat, and almost all congressional seats.

Because we can cross party lines, the Green party will continue to make great advances in 2006, right along with progressive Dems.

I'm not worried about having enough votes. I AM concerned about election fraud.

[nashville_brook]

107. i thought flamebaiting was against the rules.

[LittleClarkie]

119. Near as I can tell, it must be okay

as the thread is still here, despite multiple alerts.

Beats paying the heating bill, I guess.

[Name removed]

128. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[depakid]

109. If you want to know-

There's a post on the editorial page about what traditional Democrats- as opposed to Republican "lites" would like to see happen.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x179647

What we don't want to see, is another losing campaign campaign like the last 6 the DLC and their allies have orchestrated.

[radio4progressives]

120. also see this link for a real progressive plan

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2317058

[Fovea]

112. A progressive plan

1. A platform with the following items actually getting a fair discussion.

a. repeal of the Bush** taxcuts, and a real progressive tax including capital gains.

b. universal healthcare for all Americans.

c. universal education to the baccalaureate, or vocational certification level.

d. repeal of nafta, cafta, and the creation of legislation removing the economic benefit from offshoring.

e. a full on energy/transportation/reindustrialization policy financed by nationalizing oil, natural gas, and coal.

f. a reduction of military forces, and a redeployment of a smaller, more responsive force designed to respond to threats, not occupy nations.

g. re populate and revitalize government agencies to the level where they are no longer 'Groverized.'

h. join Kyoto, International Criminal Court, re-commit to the U.N.


2. a mid-term Dem convention to refine state race strategies and prepare for the next cycle is a must.

3. Stop the ethics committee circle jerk and start kicking people out of govt who are corrupt.

4. publicly funded elections, with a top to bottom reform of practices and applicable laws on voter elegibility and districting.


There, that's a start.

[radio4progressives]

118. See this thread for the Progressive Plan

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2317058

[EVDebs]

122. Create a syllabus for DU readers on the tragedy of 'Globalization'

Greens and environmentalists are the first to be harassed and labelled. The rightwing's 'green is the new red' plan of inaction on global anything.

Start with End of Work by Jeremy Rifkin (be sure to take in the subtitle !).

Next, Wealth and Democracy by Kevin Phillips. Concentrate that wealth, baby !

Then, Perfectly Legal by David Cay Johnston, perhaps the most incendiary book written lately.

The ammunition is there, all that's needed is for DUers to read and FIRE !

[Selatius]

124. I'm a Libertarian Socialist, and I think the DLC is ABSOLUTELY IRRELEVANT

They have no base of support with ordinary voters. Their credibility is shit with average Americans. Nevermind the fact that most Americans have never heard of them.

I believe if the Democratic Party wants to regain power, it must speak to the working man. It must talk about people's jobs, the education system that educates its kids, the deteriorating health care system that is slowly pricing more and more Americans out of the system and leaves them to die because they have the misfortune of being poor.

I have never seen a concerted effort by any Democrat except the few economic populists such as Kucinich who would fight to correct issues such as health care and public education. Might be why Kucinich, who has been characterized by the corporate owned news as a "far leftist," continues to be elected and re-elected by his constituents by sizeable margins, not just adequate margins to hold one's seat. It might be why Bernie Sanders up there in Vermont is demolishing the competition in the race to become that state's next senator in Congress. He, just as Kucinich, speaks to the working man about his problems. Maybe this is why he is so popular even though he is up front about his socialist economic ideology.

Too many Democrats have historically been cowered into taking pale, timid stances for the working man either because of corporate-sponsored politicians attacking them endlessly with charges of extremism through the corporate media or because they're convinced to pander toward corporate interests because they have vast sums of money, ownership of the radio, the television, and the newspaper which may come in handy when building up name recognition with people during elections.

It may be enough to win enough just enough votes to get into office or hold one's seat, but it damn sure isn't enough to save this country from the corporatists who have hijacked the Republican Party and who are currently playing both sides of the political aisle by donating to BOTH Democratic and Republican parties.

I am registered as a Democrat because that's the only option I am given when I was born into a two-party system. (For the record, I find the two-party system is stifling compared to models adopted by our European neighbors) It was either the Democrats or the Republicans, and I simply can't tolerate Republicans on their social positions and economic positions.

[Selatius]

125. You want a PROGRESSIVE PLAN? FDR PROVIDED ONE:

Read it here on this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=5599113

This is from a man who laid down this blueprint SIXTY YEARS AGO, and he is remembered as one of the most popular presidents in the 20th century for his economic positions.

[bvar22]

126. I reject the premise of the OP.

The MAJORITY of Democrats support:
*Withdrawal from Iraq

*Universal HealthCare

*Protections for LABOR

*Withdrawal from NAFTA/CAFTA

*Some form of regulation on Corporations

*Re-Regulation of Investmant, Banking, Insurance, Lending, Energy

*Strong Environmental Protections


That makes the DLC "The Fringe"!
Most Americans agree with "Progressive Issues".


Please go here and click on the 1st link:
http://www.democracycorps.com/reports/index.html

The Democrats' Moment to Engage
Analysis
Survey
Graphs

Click on the "Analysis" link. It will be in Adobe format which is why I can't Copy & Paste here: I WILL be posting this information later today as a separate thread. Please note that this analysis was co-authored by James Carville, a Conservative Democrat and Campaign strategist for Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996. Many in the Clinton administration give Mr. Carville much of the credit for the Clinton successes. He is generally considered a brilliant campaign manager and and unrivaled expert.

Here are some excerpts:

"Over 3 surveys in three months, Democracy Corps national survey show (that)...By a 20 point margin (56 to 36 percent), voters think the country is seriously off on the wrong track.

<snip>

But for all that, Democrats are at risk of making only modest gains in 2006. The Democrats gains in in the congressional battle have come more from Republican slippage than Democratic gains and, alarmingly, the president's deep troubles have produced no rise in positive sentiments about the Democrats.

<snip>

The Democrats can achieve major gains, however, if the party moves
decisively to a new stage of engagement. They must poise sharp choices- ones that define the Democrats, not just the Republicans and ones that, in every battle, make the the instrument for reforming and changing Washington"

http://www.democracycorps.com/reports/index.html
2005-2006
The Democrats' Moment to Engage
Analysis (link here)

The "We're just like Republicans only nicer" campaigns of the Centrists Democrats have proved to be a disaster. Whether you agree or not, the average citizen sees the Democratic Party as an imitation Republican Party.This is the result of two disastrous campaigns where the Democratic Party ignored traditional issues , and chased after mushy republican voters with campaigns of "Centrism". These polls shout that voters want a sharp distinction, NOT Republican lite.

If the Democrats want to turn the bush*/Republican drop in popularity into positive gains for Democrats, the Democrats must offer choices on issues that are "sharply different" from the Republicans.

The Democrats MUST offer clear alternatives on issues:

*Instead of Free Trade and Outsourcing, the Democrats MUST offer Fair Trade and (at least some) protections for American Jobs (not corpoWelfare tax credits, LEGAL protections)

*Instead of Staying the Course, the Democrats must offer options for withdrawal

*Instead of Big Business, the Democrats must offer REAL protection and support for the Working Class and Poor

*Instead of Patriot Acts, the Democrats MUST offer protections for Individual Rights and Freedom from Big Brother and BIG intrusive Government.

*Instead of Fighting Terrorism by expanding the Military Wars overseas, the Democrats MUST offer improved security within our borders, and International Cooperation of Intelligence Agencies to track and capture International Criminals

*Universal Healthcare...the Americans WANT it. The Democrats MUST offer it. (To hell with contributions from Big Medicine and Big Pharmaceuticals)

*Instead of a Bigger is Better Corporate Policy, the Democrats MUST offer restraints, consumer protections, and Fair Competition legislation that makes it possible for Mom&Pop Businesses and Family Farms to compete with Wal-Marts and Corporate Factory Farms.

"Let's start with economic policy. The DLC and the press claim Democrats who attack President Bush and the Republicans for siding with the superwealthy are waging "class warfare," which they claim will hurt Democrats at the ballot box. Yet almost every major poll shows Americans already essentially believe Republicans are waging a class war on behalf of the rich. They are simply waiting for a national party to give voice to the issue. In March 2004, for example, a Washington Post poll found a whopping 67 percent of Americans believe the Bush Administration favors large corporations over the middle class.

The "centrists" tell Democrats not to hammer corporations for their misbehavior and not to push for a serious crackdown on corporate excess, for fear the party will be hurt by an "anti-business" image. Yet such a posture, pioneered by New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, is mainstream: A 2002 Washington Post poll taken during the height of the corporate accounting scandals found that 88 percent of Americans distrust corporate executives, 90 percent want new corporate regulations/tougher enforcement of existing laws and more than half think the Bush Administration is "not tough enough" in fighting corporate crime.

<snip>

On energy policy, those who want government to mandate higher fuel efficiency in cars are labeled "lefties," even though a 2004 Consumers Union poll found that 81 percent of Americans support the policy. Corporate apologists claim this "extremist" policy would hurt Democrats in places like Michigan, where the automobile manufacturers employ thousands. But the Sierra Club's 2004 polling finds more than three-quarters of Michigan voters support it including 84 percent of the state's autoworkers.

<snip>

Even in the face of massive job loss and outsourcing, the media are still labeling corporate Democrats' support for free trade as "centrist." And the DLC, which led the fight for NAFTA and the China trade deal, attacks those who want to renegotiate those pacts as just a marginal group of "protectionists." Yet a January 2004 PIPA/University of Maryland poll found that "a majority is critical of US government trade policy." A 1999 poll done on the five-year anniversary of the North American trade deal was even more telling: Only 24 percent of Americans said they wanted to "continue the NAFTA agreement." The public outrage at trade deals has been so severe, pollster Steve Kull noted, that support dropped even among upper-income Americans "who've most avidly supported trade and globalization who've taken the lead in pushing the free-trade agenda forward."



You REALLY MUSTread the rest of this!
http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/20774

summary:
The Republican Party is seen by most Americans as the Big Business Party. Polling data analysis combined with performance in 2000, 2002, and 2004 clearly indicate that if the Democratic Party is to be able to capitalize on the low ratings of bush*Republicans, the Party MUST clearly and publicly show itself to be the Party of the Working American.

A UNIFIED PRO WORKER/PRO-LABOR Platform similar in format to Gingrich's Contract with America MUST be produced and SUPPORTED by the Democrats AS A PARTY!!




BTW: I am also a member of the Progressive Democrats of America. There are many more members of the PDA at DU than there are members of the DLC.
http://www.pdamerica.org/




The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

In EVERY case, "Barriers to Trade" and "Restrictions on Corporations" were created to protect something valuable!

[radio4progressives]

127. excellent post bvar22 - need to link this to the real pda thread n/t

[hiley]

130. bvar22

thank you.:applause:

[katinmn]

135. Well said, bvar!

:)

[Peace Patriot]

132. Wyldwolf, you want to drive people like me from the Dem Party? --just

keep it up. 40 years a loyal Dem Party voter, with only one anti-Dem vote--only one in that entire time--against Humphrey (wrote in a vote for Pope John XXIII, a wasted vote). Couldn't vote for Humphrey with upwards of TWO MILLION PEOPLE being slaughtered in Southeast Asia. Just couldn't do it. Bloodbath. Horrible.

I've walked precincts. I've phone banked. I've sent money. I've raised money. I've written I don't know how many countless letters. I've lobbied for my beliefs. I've organized. I've talked on the radio. I went down to Alabama in 1965 and joined the voting rights campaign of MLK. I fundraised and phone banked for Bobby Kennedy. I've voted for Dems for 40 years, and gotten many others to vote. And I am a socialist (with qualifications)/Green hearted/and a "fringe" Democrat (whatever that means). And I WILL NOT BE TOLD what to think, how to strategize, or whom to support by some whippersnapper.

This assault on people like me is unconscionable, and divisive. In 2004, who was out there in the trenches, registering people to vote and getting people to the polls, and phoning all over the country, and raising millions of dollars on the internet to MATCH Bush's money chest--but all the grassroots antiwar, environmental and human rights groups in the country, and individuals like me? Also, in 2004, former Nader voters from 2000 voted overwhelming for Kerry! So stop dissing the Nader voters. Just stop. What is the USE of doing that, except to inspire them never to vote for a Democrat again?

And who was it, in 2004, who defended peoples' right to vote in Ohio, and other states? Who was out there counting votes and fighting Kenneth Blackwell? Who was it? It wasn't the Democratic Party. It was the Greens! God love them. They backed off in 2004, so Kerry could win. You know they did. And then they tried to save his win! They tried to save DEMOCRATIC votes!

This is the most destructive OP I have seen here at DU in a long time. And I hope every one of you who have commented here in favor of this kind of machine gunning of very good people, most of whom ALWAYS support the Democrats, will think hard about this matter.

Are WE the enemy, we who want peace and justice and a healthy planet for all, we who may not march in lockstep with every Democrat who comes along, regardless of what they say or do, because sometimes we just can't stomach it any more; we who do the hard work of the party, and often get screwed by the party and the corporate/military interests who control the top of the party, but generally get out there and get out the vote anyway?

And I'll tell you, my loyalty to this party has been sorely tested since the 2004 election, because I believe--and I'll give you the facts if you want them--that the leaders of our party, in Washington DC, and at the state/local level have utterly betrayed us on the matter of electronic voting, and have sold away our right to vote and our right to transparent elections for reasons of venal corruption, in some cases, and because they don't care, in others--they'd just as soon see Bush slaughter and torture some more Arabs in the Middle East, and take the rap for it, so they can come in like "saviors" and promise to slaughter and torture a few less.

That's the truth of it, in my opinion. So I'm hanging by a thin thread here, for several reason:

1. Germany 1932, and the splintering of the center/left, which paved the way for Hitler.

2. I regret my wasted vote in the Nixon/Humphrey election--I think we should have tried to work with Humphrey (a good Minnesota labor liberal), and persisted in an antiwar, and an anti-military/industrial complex program, rather than give up.

3. I think we have one opportunity--one very narrow window of opportunity--to put this country right again, quickly and on national basis, with election reform by Congress under a new Democratic administration (otherwise it's going to be a long slog at the state/local level, with a serious barrier of local corruption). We cannot turn things around with Bushite corporations counting our votes with "trade secret," proprietary programming code, and virtually no audit/recount controls. We MUST change this.

But you don't have time for my historical perspective, my age, my wisdom, my experience or my loyalty, do you? You've got your own shtick, that all your troubles, and all the Democratic Party's troubles, are caused by us socialists, and leftists, and Greens and "fringe Democrats."

My first vote for president was in 1964. I voted for the "peace candidate," LBJ. (I kid you not. That's how they sold him to us.) Result: The most horrendous war crime this country has ever committed.

So I happen to believe, from long experience, that we will not be permitted to HAVE any true populist antiwar candidate, who represents the majority opinion in this country, ever. I've seen THREE populist antiwar figures in this country gunned down--JFK, RFK and MLK. And probably a fourth taken out with a plane crash--Paul Wellstone. I've seen the most recent populist antiwar figure run out of the campaign for a trumped up reason--Howard Dean. There is simply no way--especially with these corporate-controlled voting machines, and with the war profiteering corporate news monopolies--that any such person can survive and make it to the White House.

That is reality. I think we NEED to face reality. And I think we have to angle for election reform, however we can get it. There is nothing else we can do, until we have made the election system transparent again. And how we get it is by playing along, by fully supporting whatever Democrat is selected by the corporate-military rulers, and work on their commitment to the progressive value of honest elections, and get it changed. I do think we have a chance, with an overwhelming turnout, to overcome the fraud. I also think that a pro-war Democrat may actually be installed, in order to get a military Draft (which Bush and the Repubs can't do), and for other purposes (so they can start placing the blame tfor Bush's financial and foreign policy disasters on the Democrats).

But this doesn't mean I don't get to raise holy hell in the primaries, and before the primaries, about who I think represents me and most Americans, and who I think doesn't, and to vet them on the issues, and promote what I think is important. Are we a Democratic discussion board here, or not? Do we get to hash these things out here, or are we all supposed to just shut up and bend over for whatever "our leaders" do or say? And if someone despairs and naively cries out, "I will NEVER vote for Hillary Clinton!", so what? We all know they won't have a choice in the end. And what we'll have to do is hearten people, and help them understand the reality of our situation, and hang together on election reform, and I will be telling people this, from the bottom of my heart...

....never, never, never, never, never give up on your right to vote! NEVER!

[katinmn]

136. Peace Patriot, it's your party. You helped build it. Let THEM leave.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

138. Yeah, you tell 'em, Peace Patriot!

Here in Minnesota, the vast majority of Greens and peace activists and national health care advocates were out door knocking and phone banking for Kerry. In fact, your "fringe left" people formed the bulk of the volunteers and kept Minnesota blue.

Have fun alienating the people who do so much of the grunt work on Election Day.

[Selatius]

145. I'm glad to know I'm not the only socialist here

We're the few, a minority that has always been easily attacked for our "extremist" and "fringe" views. We were some of the first to be lined up and liquidated in Germany, and we were the first to be broken during the days of the Wilson Administration during the first Red Scare and later during the 1950s. It's a lonely road sometimes. There's a few of us out there still. You're not alone.

[radio4progressives]

150. Peace Patriot: This a Gold Start Post!

I am humbled, inspired and honored to have had the luck and the privilege of coming across this truly salient and poignant writing from Peace Patriot.

my first election was in 1972 - i wasn't quite of age to vote in 1964 or 1968.. but my family (staunch Democrats and Kennedy supporters) was in the thick of events of the times. Military, Viet Nam, living in the South (where I was born and raised) and experiencing the amazing Civil Rights movement. My family was vilified as "Freedom Riders", just because we had Black friends who stayed with us from time to time.

Dad didn't know until after his second tour in Viet Nam, that he was raising something of a socialist - he would never have considered himself one with all the anti-communist rhetoric at the time, and though he didn't realize it, he too had the same leanings.

Having lived and been active all these years, and all that we have seen and worked hard to push back wrt the right wing extremist tendencies in this country (socially and politically) it's more than just a little painful to be vilified for it.

And yes, thank you for mentioning the great work done on behalf of Democrats (and our democracy)by the Green Party, they truly are our natural allies on all of these issues, and they should be EMBRACED by the DP members, not marginalized and vilified.

What you say about Howard Dean is an important fact which seems to be missed by many here at DU for some inexplicable reason.


Again, thanks so much for your excellent contribution!

And I'll join you in the call to never give up the right to have our votes counted!

[MrBenchley]

155. Hello-o-o-o-o

Stay or go as you please. There's nobody who's pro-DLC, or moderate, or centrist, starting enemies lists and demanding that this or that Democrat be purged from the party.

Nor is it anyone on my side of the aisle angrily stomping around threatening to leave the party or not vote. Or demanding ideological loyalty tests.

"It was the Greens! God love them. They backed off in 2004, so Kerry could win. "
Well, I've seen some silly claims in my life, but this might be the silliest. Are you really trying to pretend that a tiny party of crackpots would have fetched the voters, but chose not to out of "principle"?

"And then they tried to save his win! They tried to save DEMOCRATIC votes! "
Actually, by rushing to file groundless lawsuits based on no evidence when they did, they pretty much scotched any serious discussion of possible fraud and relegated it to the lunatic fringe.

"This is the most destructive OP I have seen here at DU in a long time."
Guess you missed a shitload of them then. This is mild compared to some of the far left vituperation and slander unloaded here every day.

" I've seen the most recent populist antiwar figure run out of the campaign for a trumped up reason--Howard Dean."
Again, it's always nice to see fantasy. Dean only won his favorite son primary. Most Democrats preferred a Democratic candidate they had actually heard of...and many of those who had heard of Dean and knew his record didn't much care for him.

"Are we a Democratic discussion board here, or not? "
Evidently only as long as we bash other Democrats and wring our hands about what victims we are.

[IndianaGreen]

161. Are you saying that suing the State of Ohio for vote fraud was wrong?

Actually, by rushing to file groundless lawsuits based on no evidence when they did, they pretty much scotched any serious discussion of possible fraud and relegated it to the lunatic fringe.

I believe that Kerry was part of that lawsuit, or perhaps you prefer Lieberman's actions in 2000 and just let the GOP steal another election?

[MrBenchley]

163. Reading comprehension difficulties?

"I believe that Kerry was part of that lawsuit"
Yeah? Prove it.

The lawsuits were by the woowoos from the Green and Libertarian parties....and by rushing to court they pretty much relegated any questions to tinfoil hat land.

[Name removed]

162. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wyldwolf]

159. so, what you're saying is...

...the left here can post all sorts of pooh pooh about Democrats being "DINOS," "purging the DLC from the party," and countless made up fantasy stuff. They can run away when challenged to at least provide proof of what they say.

But as soon as people give it back to them, they're driving people from the party?

Sheesh!

[MrBenchley]

166. You nailed it....

Not only that, but you're keeping peacepatriot from expressing her views: namely, that you ought to be kept from expressing your views and driven from the party. Because we're all so progressive.

[IndianaGreen]

160. Wyldwolf is only an internet poster in a privately-owned board

He/she couldn't drive anyone out of the Democratic Party anymore than I can get anyone to become a Marxist or to join the Socialist Party.

The reality is out there, on the decaying streets and neighborhoods of America, in the closed factories, and in the struggling public schools. That's the reality that most of us have to deal with. Most of us are activists of some sort. Each of us comes to DU for one reason or another, mostly to vent or to read stories not available in our local news market. DU is only known among political internet junkies. The vast majority of people I know have never heard of it, or for that matter, have never heard of Free Republic or DailyKos.

The vast majority of people I know are too busy trying to survive in an increasingly harsh and uncaring society. This does not mean that they are uninformed as to what is going on in the world around them. They know that something is very wrong! They know that it is a lot harder for them to stay afloat, and to keep their families and loved ones safe. Many of them have been touched by the crime and violence that has become such an integral part of America. Even those that have fled to the suburbs and to rural areas have seen crime follow them. No one is safe anymore!

The DLC has nothing to offer other than old platitudes, a watered-down and repackaged version of Reagan's trickled down economics. I doubt that even progressives can address our nation's ills, for they are based on the exploitative nature of capitalism. As the mighty American military machine becomes a hollow shell of what it once was because of Iraq, it becomes more difficult to keep the illusion of the "American way of life." America's prosperity was built on the backs of the exploited. The American empire is crumbling and its hegemony is being challenged from North to South, from East to West. The Iraq experience will leave a bitter taste in the mouths of most Americans. They won't support any attempts to re-colonize the Americas. We won't have the troops to do so, and the people of Latin America know that time and history is on their side, not ours.

Latin America's political map could find itself being redrawn as 12 of the region's countries prepare for presidential elections between November 2005 and the end of 2006.

One of the key issues - being closely watched by Washington - is whether the recent left-wing trend in the region will continue. And, if it does, what will be the likely nature of any new left-leaning government. Will newly-elected leaders be of Venezuela's Hugo Chavez variety or of the moderate Brazilian President Lula variety?

Also long-awaited elections will decide the fate of three countries currently ruled by interim governments: Bolivia, Ecuador and Haiti.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/guides/456900/456942/html/nn1page1.stm

[LWolf]

165. Peace Patriot tells it like it is.

:yourock:

I haven't read it better anywhere.

:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

[Tom Joad]

133. I would reply, but i need to feed my horse. eom

[izzybeans]

134. Simple minds want simple answers. nt

[ulysses]

137. why, it's obviously to alienate heartland voters

by pouring molten chocolate over our naked bodies while reciting "Howl". And demanding universal health care. Damned fringe!

[AuntPatsy]

139. Glad to see a rebuttle thread, the two should definately be enlightening..

Now I will read this one in it's entirety.

[dethl]

142. Just because I'm a Green

Doesn't mean that I'm throwing my vote away.

I switched from the Democratic party because I got tired of the current Democrats laying down and taking it from behind from the Republicans. They don't represent me anymore.

That said, I still vote straight Democrat (I have voted Republican once in local elections, but for very personal reasons).

[stickdog]

143. And they killed JFK & RFK & MLK, too, right?

[lostnfound]

147. The beautiful thing about this thread

is that it is just so darned ugly I just had to recommend it.

It's quite a sight, to study and behold.

Is it an apple barrel, with spoilage seeping out of overripe places?

A teenage boy, craving in his mostly innocent heart for a real first experience with his mostly innocent girlfriend, is corralled instead into the seedy lobby of a house of ill repute by his drunken greasy father, who says 'go be a man, boy!'.

Teeming over with love of our fellow man and big hearts abounding.

Being unsophisticated is the ultimate sin. They will laugh you out of the junior high locker rooms for that.

Is it the would-be mentor, who shouts at the rowdy pupils, "you tedious numbskulls are incapable of learning the most elementary things, count yourself lucky to shut up and dig ditches for a living while your betters handle the harder tasks"? Then the class predictably erupts in spitballs?

Oh, for a clean well-lighted place. Among my friends and comrades. Let us only blow kisses at any sad and angry men we pass on the street, sidestep the pools of gasoline, and not holler back obscenities.

[Douglas Carpenter]

148. An utterly sincere question

Do you want progressive/left Democrats to work for and within the Democratic Party?

[eridani]

151. Way to smear the people who did all the work in 2004

--and who would like to do the same in 2006. You know, the doorbelling, the phonebanking, the event tablesitting, the house party organizers, the people who coordinate rides to the polls. We even raised more money than Bushco.

[ulysses]

156. I keep saying

that if the centrists can do this all by themselves they should just let everyone know. That'd free up a lot of time on the left during election cycles.

[spaniard]

157. "smear" denotes something false. You may not like the content and tone...

..but what is false in it?

[Douglas Carpenter]

164. one question

Who specifically; individuals or groups do you consider "far" left or "fringe" and what policies do they support that makes them "far"left or "fringe"?

And one more question. Do you want progressive/left Democrats to work for and within the Democratic Party?

[wyldwolf]

167. I'll answer that

It isn't specifically a policy (though they usually have one issue they hold as litmus tests) or group but rather an attitude. They are consistantly rigid and uncompromising in their politics. Or, as was posted last week, they "are on constant guard for political heresy and correctness. They loathe the perceived heretic in their midst more than their political adversary."

Now, I personally want then in the party BUT I could do without their attitude.

Which brings me to another point. On DU, where anti-DLC/moderate/Centrist threads outnumber the anti-Far left threads by a substantial margin, and where the anti-far left threads are usually in response to the anti-DLC/moderate/centrist threads, why is it that someone alway comes into the anti-far left threads with a question like yours but never into the ant-DLC threads with similar questions?

[ncrainbowgrrl]

168. Locking.

This has turned into a flamewar. In addition, it's gone way off topic- unless the topic was a primer on how to engage in personal attacks!

:hi: