JOSHUA FRANK: The Democratic Quandary - War Opposition or Party Allegiance

[Tace]

By Joshua Frank -- World News Trust

Can you really oppose the occupation of Iraq and still call yourself a Democrat? I’m not so sure. The majority of Washington Dems continue to applaud Bush’s invasion of Iraq as well as his debauched crusade against terror. A few antiwar voices have echoed though Democratic corridors, but none have produced any genuine shifts in ideology, let alone direction. Nor will they.

It wasn’t long ago when a handful of activists hailed Rep. Dennis Kucinich’s bid for the White House as worth fighting for. He seemed to oppose the war in Iraq and even offered a plan to get troops out quicker than any of the Democratic frontrunners. People were hopeful their support for Dennis would make an impact on the presidential race -- and maybe even pull the Democratic Party in their direction. It never happened. Two years have now past and those who handed out fliers and buttons for Kucinich have nothing to show for their efforts.

So, why are Dennis Kucinich and his most loyal supporters still Democrats?

That’s a question I wish someone would answer. As far as I can tell, the reason the Dems can’t stand up to Bush is that they actually believe in this foolish war. They aren’t afraid or spineless, as so many claim -- they just support the president and his imperialist ventures. If Kucinich opposes the occupation, as he and his supporters have said over and again, then why is he still a member of a party that overwhelming backs it? Where the hell has he been, anyway?

Sorry Big D, whatever you are doing out there it’s not working all that well. Your party doesn’t need you. A new one does.

more

http://worldnewstrust.org/modules/AMS/article.php?storyid=2835

[Norquist Nemesis]

1. Hmmm...I guess the same could be said of Ron Paul and the Cons. n/t

[JeffR]

2. He's asking the wrong question

The real issue is why the hawkish stay-the-course elected Democrats haven't woken up and realized they're the ones on the wrong side of the issue, as poll after poll of public opinion on Iraq has demonstrated.

This election year, and the next one, will be about sending a message not only to Republican opponents, but to a segment of the Democratic Party in desperate need of enlightenment.

The Democratic Party isn't dead at all. It's just bipolar.

[mmonk]

3. Because politics is now basically fixed

to allow only two parties, someone would have to break through as an independent on the national stage to shake things up. The problem now is the two party system is leaning to a one party system.

[acmejack]

4. He asking the right question! And it MUST be answered soon!

snip>
Last week Feingold introduced S. Res. 398, which calls for the “censure” of the president over his illegal wiretapping incursions. Such a plea was long overdue. All leading Democrats immediately took cover, dodging any sharp-shooting questions about the resolution. As of March 21, not a single leading Senate Democrat had come out in support of the bill. Feingold stood alone.

So, what are you doing Russ? Why are you still a Democrat, anyway?

And there’s your biggest problem. Feingold’s fight to restore integrity in Washington (if there ever was such a thing) is hindered by his party allegiance and reluctance to break rank. The same can be said for every other DC Democrat who is willing to criticize Bush, including Rep. John Conyers. At the end of the day Conyers, like Feingold, McKinney and Kucinich -- is still a member of a party that supports the occupation of Iraq and Bush’s war on civil liberties.

Whatever they say won’t change that. Worst of all, when push comes to shove, and the Democrats nominate another pro-war candidate, all their causes will be sidelined. Party loyalty will matter more than the mounting death toll in Iraq.

I hate to say it, but that kind of bullshit will never end a war.

http://worldnewstrust.org/modules/AMS/article.php?storyid=2835

[mmonk]

5. The only quip I have with it

is the title. Is he saying to be a loyal democrat, you must be for the neocon republican war?

[welshTerrier2]

8. i think he's saying the opposite

i think he's saying that if you oppose the war, you shouldn't remain a loyal Democrat ...

[JeffR]

7. I'll say it again

Feingold, Kucinich et al are saying things a majority of Democratic voters agree with by a large margin.

The question that should be asked is why the Iraq hawks and the Bush-policy-appeasement segment of elected Democrats are still in the party.

They're the ones who are out of step, not Russ Feingold.

[welshTerrier2]

6. it goes way beyond just Iraq

the real issue is not just Iraq but rather US foreign policy and blatant imperialism ... a few days ago on DU, i wrote:

in the end, my friends, the US desperately needs a real opposition party to stand up to this imperialism ... either we are a country that respects the rule of law and the sovereignty of other nations or we are an outlaw nation seeking only to serve our own greedy objectives ... when those on the "far left" argue that there is no difference between the parties, they see a symbiosis between republicans and Democrats to support US imperialism ... they see both parties as complicit in this game of exploitation ... are they right? i hope you know the answer; i really don't ...

for some great insight on the issue, check out this article: http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_mike_whi_060319_centcom_2c_the_central.htm

[Douglas Carpenter]

9. John Conyers becomes Judiciary Chair if DEMs take the House

If the Democrats take the House this November

10 members of the Progressive Caucus would become chairmen of committees

John Conyers becomes Chairman of the Judiciary Committee

I am fervent anti-imperialist and in a more perfect world with a more perfect system I would only vote for anti-imperialist. But we do not have at this time a more perfect world with a more perfect system.

A Democratic majority this November would create a whole new paradigm to challenge a very flawed, immoral and self-destructive foreign policy.

[eridani]

10. My reply to Frank

Re: your article castigating Kucinich for remaining a Democrat.

He pretty much talked me into it also. I was a Nader supporter in 1996 and 2000, but in 2004, Kucinich asked me to join the Democrats, become a PCO, and talk to my neighbors. Nader only asked me to lobby for his inclusion in the debates.

Because the Dems are the only opposition that really exists in the electoral realm. 2/3 of the House Dems voted against the Iraq war in 2002! How can anybody sane not call that opposition, especially when the ultimate stupidity of the move was not as apparent then to the general public as it is now? How many Greens or Libertarians voted against the war?

On last year’s bankruptcy bill, 125 of 198 Democrats (63%) against it in the House of Representatives, and 25 of 43 (58%) Democratic senators voted against it. On the CAFTA bill, 187 of 202 Democrats (93%) against it in the House of Representatives, and 33 of 43 (77%) Democratic senators voted against it. All but four Democratic Senators joined Maria Cantwell’s filibuster against drilling in the Arctic. 21 out of 23 Senate votes against the Iraq war were Democrats; in the House 126 out of 133 no votes were Democrats. And in Washington State, gay rights were finally added to our state’s antidiscrimination law because both branches of the legislature and the governor’s office are controlled by Democrats.

How can anybody not see that 2/3 of the Dems are usually where progressives want them to be? I think it's more effective to join and strengthen that opposition than to just snipe from the sidelines about how inadequate it is. I'll consider going back to the Greens when they decide that having PCOs and legislative district organizations is important if you actually want to seriously contest elections.

[MH1]

11. Frank is an idiot. But then, we've been here before. Yawn.

[The Magistrate]

12. Locking

Constructive criticism of Democrats or the Democratic Party is permitted. When doing so, please keep in mind that most of our members come to this website in order to get a break from the constant attacks in the media against our candidates and our values. Highly inflammatory or divisive attacks that echo the tone or substance of our political opponents are not welcome here.

You are not permitted to use this message board to work for the defeat of the Democratic Party nominee for any political office. If you wish to work for the defeat of any Democratic candidate in any General Election, then you are welcome to use someone else's bandwidth on some other website.

Democratic Underground may not be used for political, partisan, or advocacy activity by supporters of any political party or candidate other than the Democratic Party or Democratic candidates. Supporters of certain other political parties may use Democratic Underground for limited partisan activities in political races where there is no Democratic Party candidate.

Do not post broad-brush smears against Democrats or the Democratic Party.