No, I'm not quitting; i'm kicking the right-wing hawks out of OUR Party

[welshTerrier2]

is our Party totally fucked up? do the pretty people sitting in key positions of power give a damn about anything but their own political careers?? do they give a damn about what's going on in the country??? why won't they listen to what the majority of us is saying???? how can they seriously ask for our help when THEY DON'T REPRESENT US????? perhaps they have had too much power for too many years; one thing's for sure, it's time we found some real Democrats who remember that they are there to serve our interests and not the other way around ...

Americans are deeply troubled by America's role in the world ... their faith in their own government has been destroyed ... they know we are seen as the ugly Americans all over the world and they no longer feel the image is unjustified ... and yet, our Party's "leaders", regardless of their nuanced differences, continue to support bush and his neo-cons in Iraq ... they refuse to accept that bush is there for immoral purposes ... they continue to play politics with an issue of life and death; with an issue that has destroyed America's moral authority to lead ... the consequences of US policy in Iraq go beyond the loss of more than 1800 good and noble Americans; the consequences go beyond a stable Iraq; the consequences of remaining in Iraq FOR ANY REASON means that the US government accepts the premise that the US has a right to wage war and occupy other nations even if there is no threat to our country and even if there is no evidence (especially after 2 and a half years) that we are bettering the lives of the Iraqis ... clearly we are NOT ... i will never support any right-wing hawk who advocates otherwise ...

so i will not be supporting the Bill and Hillary's, the Kerry's, the Biden's, the Bayh's or any of the other so called "liberal hawks" ... i will not send money or work for the DSCC ... we have to throw out those who are "oh so smart that they need not respond to the vast majority of Democrats who have had enough of this fucking occupation and appeasement of neo-con imperialism" ...

explain to me, you who disagree, why it is OK to allow those ENDORSING THE NEO-CON OCCUPATION to clog our Party's apparatus? if you support them, you allow them to continue to vote for more war ... or worse ... you have Kerry, Clinton and others who not only don't want to get out and call a failure a failure, they want to EXPAND THE FUCKING WAR ... they want to muscle their way to a "win" in Iraq to prove to Americans how tough they are... NOT how right they are; NOT that they represent the majority of us; just that they are oh so tough ... that is NOT what the American people want and it is certainly NOT what Democrats want ... the Democratic hawks would know this if they held regular public forums in their states to give their constituents a say ... but they are apparently far too important to busy themselves with the trivialities of democracy and good representative government ...

anyway, that's more than enough from me ... please read this:

source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/beltway-dems...

First the very bad news. The article notes that the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) is once again undermining the Democratic Party. This time, it has "accused war critics of 'anti-American bias'" (wonder if that includes Vietnam War hero and Republican Senator Chuck Hagel?). This is a pristine example of self-proclaimed Democrats literally regurgitating the most offensive and dishonest right-wing spin out there. <skip>

More bad news: the Democratic Party's Senate and House campaign apparatus is telling Democrats to keep their mouths shut on Iraq, for fear they will look weak on national security. Most recently, these pathetic souls desperately tried to divert attention from how the Iraq War played an instrumental role in Iraq War Veteran Paul Hackett's congressional race in Ohio. Apparently, the class of professional election losers in Washington, D.C. thinks Democrats can win by saying almost nothing on Iraq (like the party often says nothing on lots of issues, thus perpetuating the perception that Democrats stand for nothing). As one "Democratic strategist" told the Inquirer, "Let's not refight the origins of the war, who was right or wrong. That discussion has run its course." The strategist then said "Let's keep hitting Bush when he's not being straight with the people."

That's all well and good - except, it assumes that Americans are stupid. The fact is, doing what these strategists suggest will reinforce the idea that Democrats stand for nothing, because refusing to address the Iraq war is the equivalent of Democrats "not being straight with people" in the same way Bush isn't being straight with people. It's the reason why we can drive up Bush and the GOP's negatives all we want - but that doesn't mean it is going to help us. The fact is, Democrats will not capitalize on any of this until they start speaking clearly about where they actually stand on the war, and whether they actually have the guts to say what polls show most Americans believe: that the Bush administration deliberately lied to us about why we were going to war, that the war has made our country less safe/secure, and that it's time for a serious exit strategy.

Finally, there is some good news: the Inquirer story reminds us that there is a growing outrage outside the class of professional election losers in Washington who are starting to flex their political muscle. That is, the millions of ordinary, hard-working citizens who actually make up the ranks of the Democratic Party are getting sick and tired of the split-the-difference politics that has led Democrats to loss after loss after loss. People like Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) and Paul Hackett are showing that there are talented and effective champions who are listening to us, and are ready to take up the fight. And others like top-tier Senate candidate Bob Casey (D-PA) are rejecting the Iraq advice from the all-too-comfortable consultants in Washington.