Why are we STILL Democrats when by all evidence our leadership has

[cidliz2004]

abandoned us? I am holding out hope after hope, but time after time, the Democrats do not rise up to meet challenges and time after time Democrats are not taking advantage of opportunities. So, why are we all still hanging on? Hanging on to what? We have nothing going for us right now and we haven't had anything going for us since 2000. How much longer will we just "hang in there" hoping against hope that someone somewhere will do somthing for all of us?
We all recognize all of the lost opportunities, we all have witnessed our Democratic leaders abandoning their values and grow more complacent over time. What is going to change anything if the leadership of the Democrats continues to stay mute and stand still?

[gizmo1979]

1. What's the alternative?

[Mel Brennan]

16. This is a false framing of the argument.

It's not about some distillation of a calclus of "victory" that takes both the Idea and current conception of factions/political parties as a given.

The question are these:

(1) having developed a relative mastery of the citizenscape, for what do you stand?

(2) Does the Democratic Party, in codification and in practice, stand for those same things?

(3) If not, can it be made to do so in a reasonable amoutn of time?

If the answer to (2) and (3) is no, move on. But don't be afraid to move on in a way that does not CEDE the citizenship ground to the notion of the (purposefully excluded from the Constitution) political party in any way.

What needs work, IMV, is not a re-creation ofthe Democratic Party, nor any other party. What needs work is an education system that has within it the seed of the Feedom Schools of the Freedom Summer of 1964 - a healthy cirriculum on the responsibilities and rights of citizenship, local to global. If I had the money, I'd start CITIZEN.COM - a one stop shop of representative and issue engagement that allowed, at the click of a button, one to get the actionable information we NEVER get from the so-called "news" in terms of keeping track of our representatives, to whom they are tranding to be beholden, and issues where the "demos" ought to play a larger, ore referendum-like roll...without the corporate politicalization and obfuscation of the polling systems in North America...

Citizenship; what does it mean? If the DNC were serving the demos, citizenship classes would be first on their agenda; the fact that that whole set of conditions where doing something that would be absolutely right for the nation but absolutely wrong for the DNC is the hole, the absence, the vacuum where DNC (or RND or any other "party") leadership will not be found is exactly why the party system cannot be trusted to do what's right for the nation.

BUt you cannot re-conceptualize the idea of political affiliation and end a focus on that and begin a focus on citizenship as a way of life (not civics, nor politics, but citizenship...you know the way of being in the world best reflected through membership in a nation-state and its concomitants) without examining ALL our touchstones...

Maybe when the supranational EU begins to flex its internal market muscles, and/or OPEC switches to the Euro, and/or China and India come fully, industrially on-line, maybe, then, possibly, we might, conditionally, have the discussion at the fundamental level at which we ought ot be having it.

I'm sure we've got that amount of time though.

[Gyre]

24. Green Party.

At least they fought for recounts. More than the dems did.

Gyre

[Blue_In_AK]

98. You took the words right out of my mouth, Gizmo. n/t

[GreenPartyVoter]

109. Election reform is the alternative

[gizmo1979]

112. States are all deadlocked on reform.

Repugs won't pass unless they attach voter ID.So it's not looking hopeful.

[GreenPartyVoter]

113. So go smaller. Go with towns and counties and work up from there

[patricia92243]

2. What is a viable choice? Other political parties have never won.

[enough already]

103. We're not winning either

So why put up with the same old same old?

[PeaceProgProsp]

3. Because John Edwards's campaign gave me hope that a Democrat

who doesn't whore for multinational corporations (much less, accept money from them) and who cares about the lives of working-class Americans can make it to the top of the ticket and win a national election.

[Catchawave]

61. Edwards is who brought me back to the party....

really miss that guy, but he's in a great place now helping the poor.

[cidliz2004]

62. Clark activated me for the 1st time in my life

I am holding out hope that he will, in some way, be leading the charge against the corruptness of politics in general and the insanity of the Neocons in particular.

Clark isn't bought and paid for by "corporations" like many of the other Washington Politicians are - so he is freer to speak out.

[LittleClarkie]

71. Clark got the ball rolling, then Kerry took it from there

I'd never worked for anyone's campaign for more than an hour before.

I have never been paying this much attention before, either.

And I only just go here, so I ain't leavin' yet.

[Ms_Mary]

77. Word. I hope he becomes a public figure for the greater good. nt

n

[Guaranteed]

86. He supported, and still supports the Iraq War.

WTH?

I never understood why people like that guy so much.

[PeaceProgProsp]

95. What I never understood is how progressives couldn't tell

the difference between a neocon/neoliberal and a person who isn't a neocon/neoliberal.

[FloridaPat]

4. The problem is, if we start another party we split the Democratic

party and the repubs will win elections for decades by default. The thing to do is run and elect people in the Democratic party that have backbones and will support the Constitution, not the corporations. It has to start with the voters who have to get together and run the Democratic party, not just sick back and watch.

It's the old "if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem".

[Al-CIAda]

7. They will win anyway. The dems are fine with rigged machines. -eom

[LittleClarkie]

73. Oh yeah, Kerry just loved being told he won

just before they flipped the vote over. I'm sure he was just fine with that.

Conyers seems just fine with the rigged machines as well. The Democratic Black Caucus was cool with them as well.

Dean held a demonstration of the possible rigging of machines, but he was really fine with the rigging.

Boxer, Kerry and Clinton have sponsored an election reform bill because they think it's fine too.

Yep, the Democrats sure are just fine with the election fraud.

:sarcasm:

[Al-CIAda]

91. Who is at fault for not exposing the PNAC?

Who is at fault for not exposing the PNAC?
Who is at fault for not exposing the lies of 9/11?
Who is at fault for not exposing the election fraud?
Who decided to NOT talk about such things?

[LittleClarkie]

99. Who's at fault for BEING the PNAC?

Who's at fault for TELLING the lies of 9/11?

Who's at fault for COMMITTING the election fraud?

Which direction should our rant cannons therefore be aimed?

And, as for getting the message out, who covers our leaders when they do try to talk about such things? Nobody, that's who. Kerry gave a fairly kick ass speech when he recieved his JFK award. Even the Globe barely covered it, if at all.

He railed against the media. I've seen one newspaper in LA so far that covered that.

Clark talks on a regular basis about the PNAC. Maybe if he did it in the nude with tassles on his nipples he'd actually get coverage for his speeches.

We are in hostile territory right now. Did you ever hear about the interview Kerry gave where there was a book on his desk called, I think, "It can't happen here" by, I think, Uptown Sinclair (probably my memory fails). Do you know the book I mean, the one about fascism in America. I found it interesting that he was reading the book and that he made sure it was visible on his desk during the interview.

Now, I'm not completely sure why he didn't come out and just say it. Perhaps for the same reason I have a blue paperclip on my lapel. Most of the sheeple wouldn't believe him, for one thing. The press is not our friend at the moment, with few exceptions.

[Al-CIAda]

102. Um, Kerry FAILED to mention the PNAC and its cabal

once. Not even ONCE did he say anything about this pre-planned mass murder and treason. Dream on Little Clarkie.


We have been sold out.

[LittleClarkie]

105. Um, I didn't say he did

I said I didn't know WHY he DIDN'T. Perhaps for the same reason I wear a paper clip on my lapel.

Dream on about what then?

Did any of the candidates mention the PNAC? Clark did after he dropped out. Did he before.

Have we ever had a whistleblowing activist running for president? How did he do?

Kerry may not believe as you believe. Or at least not yet. He may believe it, but didn't feel he could speak freely. If he had, perhaps you would have been happier. But would you have been happy about the result? He would have lost like McGovern if he had seemed unreasonable and too extreme.

Even Clark, bless his heart, or any of us for that matter, sound like we're wearing tinfoil hats when we talk about the PNAC. I don't think we would have been served by a candidate donning the tinfoil hat.

[ClassWarrior]

5. By ALL EVIDENCE?? Prove it.

NGU.

[Botany]

10. In winter '04 the republicans were caught red handed .....

..... hacking into the computer files of the democratic senators and
they did not say shit.

[ClassWarrior]

12. So because the Corporate Media didn't report what they said...

...that amounts to ALL EVIDENCE that the Dems are traitors?? :silly:

NGU.

[Botany]

18. Granted the media is complicit too but .....

..... If they had walked out of the Capital in mass and stopped everything
for a day a demanded an investigation into that criminal act of intellectual
trespassing "the media" would had to of cover it.

But they didn't.

[ClassWarrior]

20. So, assuming you're correct, prove how that's ALL EVIDENCE.

NGU.

[Botany]

22. It is evidence to me of a lack of spine.

If I broke into your house and stole money from you because you left the
door open would it not be a crime? That is exactly what the repugs said.
...... "Well it was easy to get into their files so what is the harm?" That was pretty
much the repug line when caught red handed.

[ClassWarrior]

28. The OP suggested we should abandon our political allies because ALL...

...evidence suggests they're more or less traitors. That's an extremely strong and damning accusation. I would like him, or you since you've jumped in here, to prove that.

If y'all can't, that's plain irresponsible.

NGU.

[Botany]

34. Not all are traitors and I don't support that but .....

.... I see little spine and a lot of go along to get along among the
democratic leadership. When are we going to make a stand?

Ohio could not have been stolen w/out some democratic help too.

Conyers report gave plenty of cover to all democrats to stand up against
the stolen election ..... The man I worked my butt off for John Kerry was in
iraq that day 1/6/05.

Besides what about I disagree with what you say but i will defend to the death your right to say it, Class Warrior?

[ClassWarrior]

35. There's a difference between taking a stand and downright bashing.

And you're mature enough to understand the difference.

NGU.

[Botany]

39. If we need to bash the current crop of democrats so be it.

How about the 18 who signed on w/ the credit card companies who
have been giving them millions?

On 11/3/04 i walked into Ohio State party HQs w/ proof of a sophisticated
hack into a voter protection hot line # to report fraud. I was treated as if I
had 3 heads. The hack was shut down with in an hour of Kerry conceding.

i turned in reports, gave sworn testimony, and had other call and be ear witnesses
to the hack .... it was strange ..... and not a damn thing was done by the state
party.

[ClassWarrior]

42. So, when we encounter misinformation and obstacles, we just lash out??

Doesn't sound very Progressive to me.

NGU.

[Botany]

45. We have tried intellegnet discussion and the repugs and the media

Ignore, slime lie about, about us.

We need to fight! And if lashing out starts the fight so be it.

[ClassWarrior]

46. I never read anything good about lashing out in Sun Tsu. Did you?

NGU.

[Botany]

47. Yes in Sun Tsu's the art of the blog.

Lash like a cobra,
sink fangs into the flesh of the enemy.
Inject the venom .....
it will feel good.

For if the warrior next you does not not fight with you
when the battle is started they too are the enemy.

[ClassWarrior]

48. In other words, you don't want to answer.

NGU.

[Botany]

57. Answer what?

:nuke:

[cidliz2004]

37. No, I am not suggesting that we abandon our political allies, nor am I

calling all of our leaders traitors, what I am doing is trying to open a discussion on why we actually are Democrats when so many of us are so upset with our lack of leadership. As far as I know this is a discussion board, is it not? Maybe just maybe people may have some good ideas or good insight. Do you think? Obviously splitting the party would be counter productive if you want to defeat Bush, but there are many many ANGRY Democrats who feel that the Party isn't active or strong enough in countering Bush and who could blame them? I agree with them. I just want to know what is keeping everybody on board and what honestly could we do to affect change in our lifetime. I mean how many more elections will be stolen before we can have a chance for the WH?

Some people seem so afraid of dissention that they want to shut any discussion down that isn't within their parameters of acceptable opinion.

[ClassWarrior]

40. What does "Why are we STILL Democrats" mean?

Sounds pretty clear to me.

NGU.

[cidliz2004]

49. Rather basic, Why or (what) is motivating us to remain a Democrat

What reasons do we have for staying with a party that is so obviously dissappointint so many people. I'd like to hear the reasons, I'd like to hear the insight of why people still have hope.

What is so wrong with that? Why are we still Democrats - - - pretty basic question if you ask me. The word WE should clue you in that I am hanging in there as well.

[ClassWarrior]

50. That's not the question you asked. And "by ALL evidence"...

...it's dishonest to imply it was.

NGU.

[cidliz2004]

52. Yes, by all evidence there has been ample opportunity for the

Democrats to have spoken out loudly against many things, instead they have continually softballed most opportunities. I stand by my statements, all evidence (no unified major revolts have been witnessed against the many lies and other horrid things that the Repubs have done.) and Why are we still Democrats---again pretty basic question.

[cidliz2004]

54. Excuse me, but there are many ways to frame a question and to provoke some

thought, the way that you chose to interpret it is yours, own it. I didn't ask "why are you still Democrats" I included myself and as far as the evidence - well there is too much to mention and if you read much on this board, or listened to the political reportings on T.V. (yes, even T.V.) you would have caught them yourself and you wouldn't have to ask.

[ClassWarrior]

67. Such as framing it in such a way as to provoke responses like post #66.

NGU.

[cidliz2004]

69. If that is how the poster feels, then so be it. Why is that such a

thing? There will always be people leaving the party for one reason or another,the question was and still is why are we still hanging in there, surely there are reasons and not just more attacks on the question.

[Dr Fate]

110. Who stopped Hillary & Kerry from going on TV & "reporting" it???

???

[mattclearing]

85. In all fairness

My impression of that scandal is that they employed a poor understanding of Windows security.

Their permissions weren't set...anyone could go on network neighbohood on the senate intranet and go through their files.

To some extent that is the Dems' fault...and points to a lack of a sense of urgency in their day-to-day routine.

[cidliz2004]

17. What Democrat is standing in the forefront of the Party and leading a

revolt against the laws being broken and the lies told by this administration. When Clinton was the President -before he even officially took office- ALL WE HEARD were insults and accusations about him LOUD AND CLEAR, there was no mistake that there was an all out war against his Presidency. No matter how untrue or unimportant the accusation was it was made loudly and clearly and repeated over and over again. Where is that with the Democrats, who have such fertile ground and are witnessing the dismantling of our Democracy? Why are they not shouting at the top of their lungs? Why are they being so complacent therefore being complicit? What else needs to happen before they have the integrity to stand up and start fighting and I mean FIGHTING back? Who cares if some of their base gets pissed, Bush didn't worry about his radical stances alienating the moderate Republicans. What I see happening is that as long as the Democrats don't stand up for anything, there will be no passion among the American People who might otherwise be engaged in what is happening in our country. If our leaders aren't leading and representing us, then they should be fired? No?

Why are we sticking with leaders that are betraying us? We are getting screwed by sticking with them as much as if we didn't stick with them. What can we do to wake them up? We, perhaps, can no longer depend on them to look out for our best interests.

[ClassWarrior]

19. ALL evidence?? Prove it.

NGU.

[cidliz2004]

26. All Evidence, Stolen Election(s), Secrect Energy Meetings, Stalling

of 911 Investigation, 20+ minutes that Bush sat on his ass and went to a photo op while we were under attack - then lied about when he first heard that we were attacked- more vacations in 1st 9 months of office than any other President, Lies about being informed about the threat of planes being used as weapons, the fact that since 1991 Rumsfield, Chaney, Wolf, has been begging to go back into Iraq and get Sadam. No bid contracts to Haliburton, Programs that are lies - Leave No Child Behind- unfunded, Healthy Forests - led by a former lumber cutting lobbiest, "I never said that Osama wasn't important" (something like that) during the debates LIE, "I first met you John Edwards here" another lie. Prescription Drug Program sold for 4.5 B and actually going to cost over 6 (is that the latest number now)?
Abu Gharab - no one being questioned about that - except for the lowest of the low on the totem poll. Trying to dismantle SS, where are the Dems screaming from the rafters on this one? I see Bush's commercials attacking the Dems on this, but not anything from the Dems. Just an activist organization.

Come On people help me out there are many many more examples of ammuntion against this administration that at the most is being whispered about and the least - nothing is said.

Clinton got impeached because he lied about a blow job. That is the power of the Republican Party.

What are the Democrats afraid of?

[LittleClarkie]

68. You react like I do

I don't like the words ALWAYS and NEVER.

The thing is ALL evidence does not support his position. He is overstating. There are signs of life. Perhaps just not as fast or as dramatic as some want.

We have Dean for one thing, who has only just begun to build.

Gratuitous Python moment "We're not dead yet! We feel happy! We feel happy!"

[cidliz2004]

84. "All evidence"

maybe a bit strong, but all does not mean 100% one way or the other. All evidence means (to me at least) that there has been an overabundance of opportunities for the Democrats to have made statements, taken the lead, voted consicience rather than just go along with an obvious defeat. There are grumblings made at one time or another, but a solidified and unified effort by the Democrats...where and when? All the evidence means that from everything that I have seen of late there has been way too little and as the clock ticks it is becoming way too late, how many more lives are expendable, before the Democratic leaders say enough is enough?

All of the lies that GWB has made and it took on one lie from Clinton to bring him to impeachment.

All evidence to me means that there has been more than enough issues, more than enough opportunities and more than enough evidence of reason to get mad at the way our country is being hijacked.

I don't understand how somebody thinks that by saying "some of the evidence" is more accurate a statement to make.



One lie brought Clinton to impeachment

Countless lies by Bush and he is stronger than ever

Terry Schaivo had "some signs of life to some" but not to others, it is all in the perspective to.

Where is the confusion?

[ClassWarrior]

88. Always look on the bright side of life, I say.

:hi: Clarkie...

NGU.

[cidliz2004]

108. You can't get much brighter than that

[PeaceProgProsp]

21. So you think Democrats aren't hurling enough "insults and accusations"?

That's your measure?

I think the way campaigns are financed force Democrats to be more mild then they want to be, but I can't complain about that because if they didn't play by bad rules, we'd lose a lot more Democrats.

Look at McKinney. She's in a relatively liberal district, but even she got kicked out for a term. There just aren't enough places in America that will elect and reelect Democrats like McKinney and Barbara Lee, so they have to play by bad rules every now and again.

Nonetheless, there are many Democrats working hard to change the rules so that more of them can cut themselves free from the apron stings of mommy huge corporate donations.

[Dr Fate]

111. no, just blunt, truthful statements like "Bush lied to us about the WMDs"

"And he is lying to us now about (Insert issue here.)And frankly, Wolf, your bias is showing again- just like Jeff Gannon."

That would be a start- no insults or wild accusations necessary- just good old fashioned blunt truth telling.

[Botany]

6. What about Mr. "No retreat, No Surrender" Kerry?

Boy I feel so good watching my state Ohio, go down the tubes and
phony hearings run by Rep Bob Nye of Ohio, try to bury any evidence
of the electoral theft.

Long live the Boxer Rebellion!

[The Devils Advocate]

8. Lets register Republican, and then nominate liberals

Join the NRA as well, we could change it into an anti-gun organization from the grassroots.

Ah, maybe not.

[BlueEyedSon]

9. Two words: Howard Dean. nt

[patricia92243]

13. One word: Yep!!! :)

[OneBlueSky]

43. Howard Dean doesn't set policy . . . and he certainly doesn't . . .

tell House members and Senators how to vote . . . he's a good guy, but his position essentially involves administration and marketing . . . in fact, he was probably given the position so he wouldn't have any significant say on policy issues . . . imo . . .

[BlueEyedSon]

59. Go here.

(I know that you know that I know that no one person runs the show)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1702391&mesg_id=1702440

[bambo53]

11. Our biggest problem is the loss of labor unions

With that loss of huge chunks of money & middle class working people to support the Democratic party and policy, our leaders have had to turn to whoring for the same corporate money for mere survival.

There is no two party system anymore in this country, the corporations own it. How you gonna fix that?

[illflem]

14. Our problem is impatience

wait until you see who is running and their platform before thinking you've been abandoned.
Heck, you never know it could even be the repukes who have a better choice in candidates next time round.

[ClassWarrior]

15. What the hell do you expect when all you've done is "'hang in there'..."

"...hoping against hope that someone somewhere will do somthing for all of us?"

Have you joined your county party?? Have you run for office? Have you tried to take the damn party back from the people you apparently despise??? If not, then you get what you deserve.

NGU.

[cidliz2004]

32. Yes, I have

Now what do I do?

[ClassWarrior]

33. You said, "How much longer will we just 'hang in there'..."

"...hoping against hope that someone somewhere will do somthing for all of us?"

I assume you were speaking for yourself, since you DON'T speak for me. Yet NOW you claim you're not only involved, but you've run for office.

So which is it?

NGU.

[cidliz2004]

56. Why can't it be both?

I have joined locally and been active locally and I am wondering about our National Leadership, why is that so hard to do?

[Frances]

23. I really don't like whining.

Why don't you run for office yourself?

Or, at the very least, why don't you volunteer to work for someone that you think would be effective?

The Repubs took over for two reasons:

(1) They had the corporations to fund their campaigns and to buy up the media to spread their message.

(2) They started a grass roots campaign.

Dems can't compete with corporate money or corporate media, but we can start a grass roots campaign.

[cidliz2004]

29. I have done both

And Bush is still being handled with white kid gloves by the leaders in Washington.

[ClassWarrior]

30. Prove it.

NGU.

[cidliz2004]

58. How do I prove it? Are you calling me a liar?

Why are you so hostile? Why must I be a villain to ask some simple questions that are of real concern to me. Do you kill flies with hammers to?

[ClassWarrior]

89. There are people who come here with the deliberate intent...

...to stir things up, to sow dissent within our ranks, to undermine confidence in our best warriors. If you're not one of them, then so be it. I'm a trusting soul. But then please understand this lesson: Words are powerful. We all need to be responsible in how we use them.

Fair enough? :toast:

NGU.

[cidliz2004]

96. Fair enough, even though I stand by my words and say what you

bring to the question is yours to own. I am simply asking questions including myself into the group that I am questioning, maybe you should have asked me why I am still a Democrat. That may have gotten the type of response that I was looking for from others. I have my reasons, even in the face of some major problems I still hold out hope. Sometimes I don't understand why I still do, I have been so repeatedly let down and frustrated by the events since the early 90's. People around me just throw up their arms and have signed out of the system. I cannot say that I blame them. My analytical side says that I should do the same. My heart and my soul keep me hoping. There is a common thread or I should say common threads that are keeping all of us going and I think that it would be a good thing for us to identify what they are. Other than being bored with "games" such as sports on T.V. and card games and I feel more challenged by the game of life. Politics almost seems to ruthless and too much down the dirt roads. The closer I get to it, the less I like what I see. I do hope for our future and that lies best with the Democrats who are concerned and not afraid to admit that we care about the less fortunate, and that bigotry and racism have to be changed.

The Democratic Ideals are my ideals and the TRUE Christian Ideals. Whether or not your Christian you can still appreciate the intention of the Party.

The leaders in Washington try to talk the talk and are not doing so well. Many other Washington Leaders have long since abandoned us and are drunk with power. Left and Right. We need to make changes and maybe the best way is going to be from the bottom up, but how does the bottom unify when simple questions of concern get turned into something ugly just because it isn't phrased the way that everybody feels comfortable with. What way could it be phrased that everybody could agree with? People get their nose out of joint and go on the defensive so easily that nobody will ever agree on anything. Our society as a whole is getting more and more anemic and thin skinned.

[OneBlueSky]

44. the Republicans took over because they own the voting machines . . .

and they counted the votes . . . period . . .

[Leilani]

90. Actually, that's not true

The Repub building effort started with a small group: Paul Weyrich, Grover Norquist, etc & they were funded by a small group of ultra conservatives such as Joe Coors, Mellon-Scaithe, etc.

They worked for years bulding think tanks & funding candidates. It was a step by step process & took years. They supported young candidates at the local level, & helped fund state wide candidates, such as Reagan for Governor.

They worked first on ideas & philosophy, & worked from the ground up.
They didn't do this with corpoate funds...they did it with private wealth.

The DEms could study the model, & copy it, but it will take years, & you won't see progress, because it will be behind the scene.

The people who did this were never politicians themselves, instead they were tied together by philosophy.

What worries me is I don't see a clear philosophy from the Dems. I see interest groups who want their issues addressed. I don't see new ideas on the horizon.

You can organize till the cows come home, but what are your ideas & what is the plan to implement them.

One issue for example: schools & education. Our country spends more per pupil than any other country, yet our kids are falling farther behind. Teachers unions are a Dem constituency. The only idea I hear is spend more money. Why don't the Dems come up with some new ideas about more effectively educating our kids?

[stillcool]

25. Our biggest problem is that we've arrived too late.....

to the party. Now, government is too massive, too lawless, and too out of control. Who knew? If it were only the Senate, the House, the Judiciary, and the Executive Branch, perhaps we could exert pressure. But, over 1,000 military bases...more than 700 overseas, Global expansion of Corporations controlling and influencing policy on a daily basis, of which we and our representatives are not privvy to. A Corporate Media that reports all the news government wants you to hear. My hope lies in the fact that each person that visits this site, and others, becomes better informed. If the vast majority are unaware of the perils looming directly in front of them, nothing will change. Fixing something broken, with something broken, does not produce great results. We are all responsible for speaking the truth and ringing the bell, and we still, allow peripheral 'issues' to dominate our conversation. Such as, should democrats be more conservative?

[ClassWarrior]

38. You speak wisdom, my friend.

But the only way people will become better informed is if we correctly frame the message. And that is a big task, since we only own a small portion of the media. That's why, just as you said, it is important for each and every person of conscience, everyone who believes in the cherished American values of responsibility and empathy, to do his or her part.

Never Give Up.

[stillcool]

82. ...and i learned it here...from you guys..... n/t

[BillZBubb]

27. Your claim is absurd.

The Democrats continue to stand unified in defense of Social Security. Do you think if the progressives abandoned the Democratic party and from that the Repugs gained super majorities in Congress, that Social Security would remain public and secure?

The Democratic leadership continues to stand against right wing wack job judges at the appellate level. Do you think a Repug super majority would stop any of them?

The Democratic leadership has fought consistently for tougher environmental laws. Do you think a Repug super majority would even consider the environment?

There is evidence that the Democratic leadership is weak-kneed on many issues. It's a tactical response that most of us don't agree with. But, we are arguing over tactics, not core principles. That is where you have made your biggest error.

Work for more aggressive leadership. Don't take your ball and go home.

[cidliz2004]

31. Two Presidential Elections may have been stolen, how more serious

is the lack of Democratic leadership than that? Why are there challenges? Why aren't there investigations - major investigations?

[Frances]

41. Who is going to investigate?

Both Houses of Congress are controlled by Republicans.

The only way you get an investigation is to work your heart out for Dem Congress Representatives so that the Dems will have the power to investigate.

There's no way a Dem controlled House would not investigate DeLay and then send him packing.

Right now the Repubs control the House and their leader was legally able to take the honest Repubs off the ethics committee and replace them with Repubs who have CONTRIBUTED money to DeLay's defense fund. No way that would have happened if the Dems had been in charge.

And yes the Dems are united in their opposition to the change in the ethics committee. They are doing all they can with their limited power to get the ethics committee to be reasonably honest.

[cidliz2004]

51. Maybe it is time to think out of the box, since the Repubs seem to own the

box

[Frances]

94. Think outside the box?

Do you mean move to another country?

As long as we are in the U.S., we have a Congress and the only way to have power there is to have more of "our" guys than "their" guys.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

36. Both parties way too much controlled by corporations but Dems less so.

Lesser of two evils there are still some with a conscious in the Democratic Party and the minorities help us to be more morally aware of what we should be trying to do to help the working class and disadvantaged.

[Totally Committed]

53. Bobby Kennedy, Jr., on the state of the DNC:

Kennedy: Fascist America
by Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman

01/23/05 -- Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. wants to run for Attorney General of New York State.

-snip-

We asked him what he thought of President Bush naming the building after his dad.

He said he wouldn't comment on the record.

But he did call President Bush "the most corrupt and immoral President that we have had in American history."

-snip-

Early in the campaign, Kennedy endorsed Senator John Kerry for President, but last month he expressed disappointment in Kerry's campaign and in the Democratic Party.

"The Republicans are 95 percent corrupt and the Democrats are 75 percent corrupt," Kennedy. "They are accepting money from the same corporations. And of course, that is going to corrupt you."

-snip-

"The biggest threat to American democracy is corporate power," Kennedy told us. "There is vogue in the White House to talk about the threat of big government. But since the beginning of our national history, our most visionary political leaders have warned the American public against the domination of government by corporate power. That warning is missing in the national debate right now. Because so much corporate money is going into politics, the Democratic Party itself has dropped the ball. They just quash discussion about the corrosive impact of excessive corporate power on American democracy."

Entire article:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7804.htm

--------

Things have gotta start changing soon. To govern, we must first win.

TC

[cidliz2004]

55. Thank you for some great insight and a great link.

We probably need to know the root of the problem before we can formulate a plan of attack.

[Totally Committed]

60. You are very welcome!

I agree that the "root of the problem" needs to be tackled if we are to succeed. If that means taking a hard look at our Party's electeds, leadership, and modus operendi, then so be it.

TC

[welshTerrier2]

70. devastating ...

it is such a sad business to know that he is speaking the truth ...

[LittleClarkie]

63. I would say that was an over statement

All evidence does not show that our leadership has abandoned us.

Can we give Dean a honeymoon, for instance, to get the party together.

Kerry is making some fine and good noises. I don't see complacency there. I see him doing a slow burn.

"Give em Hell" Harry has at least been talking a good game, and we shall see with the filibuster and SS how effective he really is.

We have the ever lovely Barbara Boxer.

Plus I see evidence that folks are waking up to the fact that we need to get moving now, not at the next election. Membership locally has swelled.

IMO, now is not the time to abandon ship. Now is the time to man our battle stations.

Never mind the leaders. What does being a Democrat mean to you. What values do the party as a whole represent that you find good. Is it health care for all? The right to unionize? Pro-choice? A fair wage for all? Then fight for that. There are plenty of people within the party who agree with you.

You can't change diddly squat from the outside.

[welshTerrier2]

74. "What does being a Democrat mean to you? ... um, glad you asked ...

how about No More Money For War ... if the Democratic Party remains an ally to bush in his quest for global empire under the guise of "fighting the bad guys and bringing democracy to all", what the Democratic Party will mean to me is that they are complicit in the building of the evil empire ... I won't look back at past votes; but I will be focussed like a laser on the next budget bill to continue bush's "100 years war" in the Middle East ... if the Democratic Party doesn't stand up "as one" and say "Enough!", the Party will have shown its true colors ... let's hope, and work, to see that doesn't happen ...

interesting that you only listed domestic issues ... was that just an oversight?

[LittleClarkie]

78. "Was that just an oversight?"

You have discovered me. Now you must die.

That's right. I'm part of the

VAST RIGHTWING CONSPIRACY

(cue evil laughter)

(shrug) I wasn't working for a comprehensive list. Just a few examples off the top of my head of what I meant by deciding for oneself what the party means to them and what our values should be.

As for your criteria, you're welcome to it, but we've had enough discussions on the subject for us both to know that we don't completely agree, so I won't go into it further (esp. as I desperately need a Starbuck break right now.)

[welshTerrier2]

83. as they say ...

all seriousness aside, i have indeed discovered your evil plot ... your plan to cede foreign policy to the neo-con-trollers is now legend ... admit it and set yourself free ...

btw, the truth is that, rightly or wrongly, the Democratic Party has become totally irrelevant on foreign policy ... why do i say that? go take a poll about whether voters understand the basic republican position on foreign policy ... it's a pack of lies but most will tell you republicans are gung ho on fighting terrorism and the war in Iraq ... i'll bet most voters have no idea where the Democratic Party stands ... some will think they "must oppose" all this war because Democrats are "weak on defense" ... and many more will have no idea what Democrats think ... this is only speculation on my part but i don't think most Americans have heard the Democratic Party's message on foreign policy ... maybe that's a good thing ... i've heard it and i don't like the message ...

so, you vast right-wing conspirator, quit peddling your "domestic agenda only" strategy ...

and, btw, perhaps you object to my speculative nonsense about the role foreign policy has been given inside the Democratic Party ... i have a very obscure website you can look at to understand the issue more deeply ... the url is: www.democrats.org ... after the page loaded, i searched for "Iraq" ... nothing on the home page ... but i wasn't discouraged ... only a few issues were covered on the home page ... so i took it to the next level ... i clicked on a link for "more headlines" ... this page listed some 15 to 20 headlines ... surely Iraq was important enough to the Democratic Party to make the top 20 ... nope ...

when the Democrats come calling for more money, i'll be sure to mention that little oversight to them ...

[Leilani]

92. I've been arguing this point for years

& have been flamed as a war monger.

The Dems will not, not become the dominant American political party until they are as involved & concerned with FP as they are with domestic policy.

Ask me who are Dem FP experts...I can name a handfull.

Ask me who are the Repub FP experts...I can name countless people.

[More Than A Feeling]

64. Politics ain't beanbag

I forget who said that, but they are right.

Consider our opponents. They walked in the wilderness from 1933-68, with much more humiliating margins in the senate and the house.

They didn't give up on the Republican party, and in time their faith was rewarded.

We give up now, and we are lost. We keep our powder dry, our heads up, and take our medicine with courage and pride, and we too will be triumphant.

[welshTerrier2]

65. the importance of the BP's view

it doesn't matter whether "our leadership has abandoned us" as the BP asserts ... those of you arguing against this statement fail to acknowledge the importance the statement holds ... fwiw, i too feel the leadership of the Democratic Party has ignored the base ... i think our Party lacks "democracy" ... but whether it does or whether it doesn't is not the issue ...

the issue is that there are tens of millions of Americans who no longer vote at all ... are these just a bunch of stupid, apathetic people or do they see no relevance, whether they should or not, to their lives by what passes as a political process? i think it would be fair to say that the large majorities Democrats once held have been severely eroding over the last 30 years ... do you think Americans would walk away from a Party that they saw as doing a good job representing them?

we can blame all sorts of factors on the causes of this loss of registered Democrats ... the commercial and right-wing bias in the media is a popular factor to identify ... i always add the abuses of big money in the political process to the list ... but a little bit of introspection never hurt anybody ... the Democratic Party "blind faithful" on this board seem to refuse to acknowledge the political damage the Party's leadership has caused ... go look at the stats on what percentage of registered voters were Democrats 30 years ago compared to today ... are you going to place the blame for that on everything except the Party's leadership?

the point here is NOT that the Party needs to "be perfect and do whatever the left says" ... i'm so sick of hearing that old canard ... the point IS that the Party needs to find a way to energize not just its base but also the tens of millions of people who have thrown up their hands in disgust ... a rigid, top-down control of the internal Party processes has not worked and will not work ... a new vision is needed ... screaming for loyalty is a totally bankrupt style ... how about starting with an acknowledgment that we need to "win people back" and we don't do that by criticizing them for leaving ... whether you approve of it or not, the perceived alienation from the Party that many feel is very, very real ...

[cidliz2004]

72. Thank you, finally another answer from somebody who isn't just a black

and white person. It really doesn't have to be the "if your not with us, your against us" attitude, it could be what are we going to do, why are we still here AND that is an important question, because other than being an eternal optimist, WHY? The reasons could help us do something other than be victimized in another election. We need something that will bind us together as a whole and not just a groups of individuals screaming "me, me, me!" What can we as a whole identify as common ground for staying with a party who right now at least is showing rather dismal if not totally ineffectual leadership.

If we can begin to identify the why and start building on it, then maybe we can, as a whole find some solutions. As I heard somebody say of the Vatican, the changes may have to come from the bottom up. The bottom just has to unify.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

66. I'm still a Dem but will be voting Green in '06.

Both my senator Cantwell, and rep Baird have sold out with their votes.
Their votes cost them my votes.

[w4rma]

75. Rethug contributors to the Green Party thank you for your support. (nt)

[welshTerrier2]

76. and Democrats who want to attract back Green Party voters

thank you for your hostility and lack of respect for those who have left ... i'm sure this is a sound political approach to recapturing these disaffected voters ... keep up the good work ...

[LittleClarkie]

79. First I will have to decide if I want the party to go Green

Still debating with myself where the party is going or should go.

And I'd rather the Green Party voters worked in a positive vein in that party than in a negative one in the Democratic Party.

We all should be working for positive change in the party that best floats our boats. Grumpy supporters tend to bring down a party, and I really think we need positive energy right now.

Gads, I sound New Age.

Eh, so be it.

[welshTerrier2]

81. well then ...

i trust you will join me in criticizing those who complain about Green Party voters ... whether we try to at least "hear them" from their location in the Green Party or whether we try to "hear them" from inside the Democratic Party, we will get nowhere with them if we aren't willing to listen and are only willing to criticize ...

[Jack Rabbit]

80. Because we, the people, have to tell the DLC to get in line behind us

Otherwise, From, Reed and Marshall will just complain endlessly about how the Democratic Party has entirely too many Democrats for its own good.

[ClassWarrior]

87. I'm working on it from my end Jack...

:hi:

NGU.

[JI7]

93. so why don't you leave the party ?

if you have such a problem with it.

[cidliz2004]

97. It amazes me how much so many don't value their fellow Democrats

I don't know maybe it is too much work to talk things out. Maybe it is easier to be flip. Maybe GWB has the right idea "If your not with us your against us" Unfortunately, I see that sentiment all too often voiced by Democrats.

[JI7]

100. yeah, there are people i don't "value"

but this isn't about one issue. your entire post seems to be a disappointment of the entire party and it's negative enough that i wonder why not just leave the party ?

i would leave the party if i felt that way.

[googly]

101. Democrats are a diverse party. ......................n/t

[mtnsnake]

104. Freepers must love thread titles like this one

Like others have asked, what's the alternative?

What would YOU suggest, BTW?

Instead of asking "Why are we STILL Democrats?", why not come up with suggestions on what our Democratic leaders should be doing to fix the party. You're all but implying that we should consider splitting from the party instead of hanging around to fix it.

Bash our Democratic leaders & spokesman...they surely deserve their fair share for being such meek losers in recent times, but I'd rather see bashing and criticizm than questioning why we're still Democrats. It's almost like you're making us part of the problem for being so loyal.

[LittleClarkie]

106. The DEMOCRATIC Underground must be tickled pink as well

though this IS a marketplace of ideas. We are not required to be in lockstep.

[Generator]

107. I appreciated your post

I'm sure many here have thought the same darn thing (I know I have) but you have the courage(foolishness-same thing?!) to admit it.

My favorite thing you said is another post down the line-"think outside the box". That's what Dean has done. That's what I think Kerry learned from Dean. The more dire things become-there comes a time when more couragous acts are warranted.

I don't have any answers. But I know many, many of us are tired of feeling like we have been sold out.

There are (and many disagree with my assesment) few Democrats that I trust implicitily. Kerry, and Dean, and Boxer and Conyers, and Edwards are the ones that come to mind.

Clinton is not there. Sorry. I don't trust her and I want support her. I think it's time to wise up as Democrats. Isn't that what Progressive Democrats of America is all about? I don't know that much about it. But they old battleplans are failures. It's time for a new Democratic party and those that aren't willing to change-and those that are going rightward and pandering like Clinton are not part of it. Those like Lieberman that would be just as happy being a moderate Republican are not part of it. Those like that woman in Louisana that doesn't appear to be a Democrat at all to me- are not part of it.

THEY don't represent ME and what I believe. So I will not support them. That's pretty basic. 50% Democratic ideals is not enough. We need a little more than that, or what is the point? I don't want the American Taliban that is being shoved down my throat.

I want MY Democratic leader to come out and say there is a seperation of church and state in this country and it's fundamental to what this country is about. The consitution is paramount to this country, not the bible. People like me-non religious, moderate middle class mothers-do not want to live in this version of America that is being embraced by many Democrats and most Republicans. Not only do we think of leaving the Democrats-we think of leaving the country. How much more serious can it be? Something must change.