Our Unity is Real Despite Our Passionate Differences

[Tom Rinaldo]

Watching snippets of Convention coverage on major media yesterday, (when I wasn't trying to get work done) I was struck by how eager so many commentators are to point out how unrepresentative the tone of the official Convention program is from the feelings of the actual delegates in attendance. To hear them tell it, this Convention is a disconnect, a virtual charade. The Democratic Party hates Bush, they say, our delegates overwhelmingly oppose the Iraq war, but the Party choses to pretend its base enthusiastically backs a ticket that appeals to middle America, a ticket that moderate Americans and swing Republicans can relate to.

Well it's true that many Democratic activists hate Bush, but it's not simply because he is a Republican, and it's not simply because of ours differences on issues. Few Democrats hate McCain, for example, though many strongly disagree with him on a number of issues. Carter nailed it when he said "You can't lead the world by misleading". Sure many of us we get worked up over Bush, I am appalled at the way I believe he intentionally manipulates facts to obscure the truth. But the best way to counter that is to tell the truth to the American people, to explain our profound disagreements with Bush's administration, and to put forth our vision for protecting our people, and advancing our goals of Peace, Justice and Prosperity, at home and abroad. No Bush bashing needed for that, just the truth as we honestly see it. I have friends I can share my anti Bush jokes with, I don't need a Democratic Convention to do that for me.

And as much as the media tries to keep stirring the pot, attempting to contrast and even pit a "pro-IWR" ticket against anti war delegates, we are too wise to fall into that trap. Kerry and Edwards may or may not have done everything they could have done to keep George Bush from getting us into this mess, that has and maybe always will be debated. But neither man would have gotten us into this mess themselves. Bush did. And almost every Democrat understands how dangerous it will be to the entire world if Iraq slides into total chaos, or under the control of the most rabid and extreme religious elements. That would be akin to another Afghanistan under the Taliban, with Al Quada training camps operating openly, and we all know where that led to. So we know that the repercussions of the Iraq invasion can't simply be undone by pulling every American soldier out of Iraq tomorrow without solid international cooperation and planning to manage the aftermath. And we know that President Kerry is infinitely more likely to pull that off than President Bush.

It isn't an illusion of unity that the Democratic Party is portraying at this Convention. It is reality. It's all boiled down to Kerry vs. Bush now, and there is absolutely no confusion or hesitation about what we need to do now or why. Send John Kerry to the White House.

[unfrigginreal]

1. Good post

Bush is the catalyst for our unity and Kerry will be the beneficiary.

:thumbsup:

[derby378]

2. There is, however, one lingering disconnect

This convention is where the DLC and the DNC get to strut their stuff. Howard Dean managed to mobilize a new generation of grass-roots Democratic activists by bucking the DLC/DNC brass, and he forced all the other candidates, including Kerry, to sit up and take notice on the Iraq war.

A lot of the folks at the convention are country-club Democrats like Diane Feinstein. They've been around forever, and they got their start in grass-roots as well. I remember she was one of the first to learn that Harvey Milk was assassinated in San Francisco. But age often has a way of dulling the exuberance that brought them into the Democratic machine.

We're thankful for the convention, but the brass at Boston need to sit up and take notice. Some of us wearing donkeys want gay marriage legalized, the assault weapon ban repealed, and/or a healthcare overhaul that kicks insurance companies out of the driver's seat. We're paying attention, guys. Don't let us down.

[Tom Rinaldo]

3. That brings up the second media talking point

How our fake unity will dissolve if Kerry gets elected. The Unity is real AND the differences are real. They are not mutually exclusive values, to paraphrase Clinton's wonderful comment about Strength and Wisdom in his speech last night. There will be battles inside of the Democratic Party after the election. That is normal. That is healthy. That is DEMOCRATIC for God's sake. Even Republicans engage in it, with Primary challenges like the one waged against Sen. Specter. There is nothing dishonest or subversive about the fact that many of us want to see profound changes in the way the Democratic Party is organized and run. This hand has been dealt and now we are playing our cards to win in November. How we may seek to have the deck reshuffled in December is a very important, but different, matter from our uniting to get Kerry elected now.

The November election isn't the only battle, but it's the one in front of us now. A lot of us are paying close attention though to how the game has been and still is being played.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

4. Notice how you have to resort to namecalling

'DLC/DNC brass' and 'country-club Democrats' are simply loaded terms meant to inflame passion.

But let's look at the the Senator you mentioned, and the isssues you mentioned. Feinstein. Gay marriage, health care, AWB.


What are your actual differences of opinion with Feinstein on these issues?

[derby378]

5. I don't really consider it "namecalling"

Since when has "DLC/DNC brass" become an insult? It was just a description.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

6. So where exactly do you disagree with Feinstein

on gay marriage, healthcare and AWB?

[Tom Rinaldo]

7. I disagree with Feinstein on her vote for Bush's "Medicare reform bill"

In my opinion that is a good example of one of our own caving. That's the bill that, among other things, prohibits the U.S. government from negotiating prices with the Drug companies, while the rest of the world is free to cut their sweetheart deals at U.S. taxpayer expense. But I don't really disagree with the point I think you are making. Democrats have to be careful about eating our own, while we are still a minority in Congress especially.

But I fault someone like Feinstein for her vote less than I might otherwise, because too many members of the Democratic Party have not made a strong enough point of consistently making our feelings known to our elected representatives and Party leaders. At its root, that is all I am advocating, involvement in the trenches.

I met with Feinstein regarding homeless youth issues many years ago in San Francisco by the way, when she was Mayor there. To make a long story short, she was essentially a good person who was significantly out of touch with the real nature of the problem. Her inital instincts were problematic, but she came around just fine after enough community input. The latter was the key. The higher the office someone is elected to, the more likely they are to drift further out of contact with street level concerns. It is understandable, and there are exceptions to the rule of course, but I do not knee jerk condemn wealthy politicians for being out of touch with most working people, even when I feel that they are. Part of OUR job is to keep them in touch.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

8. I totally agree

but, for example, the other poster brought up the AWB, something Feinstein is strongly in favor of. My point being, don't be upset about differences that don't actually exist. Don't label someone and start assuming they disagree with you. That is not the way to build a coalition, or find common ground.

[derby378]

9. I do want the AWB repealed

Feinstein supports the ban, and I know a lot of Democrats do as well. But it doesn't set well with a lot of my fellow Texans.