Democrats Missing In Action Again by Arianna Huffington

[Itsthetruth]

AlterNet
March 29, 2005.

Democrats MIA Again
By Arianna Huffington,

This column is not about Terri Schiavo and the wrenching spectacle that has surrounded her tragic fate. May she rest in peace. It is about Congressional Democrats and how they once again pathetically misread what moral values mean in a political context. May they miraculously wake from their persistent vegetative state – or it won't be long before they are receiving their political last rites.

Before the cards had even been dealt, Senate Democrats decided that the Republicans already held all the aces. So instead of calling Dr. Frist's bluff, they folded, sat out the hand, and headed into the kitchen to see what kind of sandwiches Felix was whipping up. Not a single Democratic senator formally objected to the pro forma voice vote that sent the Schiavo bill to the House, where, with a few notable exceptions – especially Rep. Barney Frank and rising star Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Shultz of Florida – Democrats were nearly as compliant.

So the Democrats punted; Frist, DeLay and Bush got their photo ops; and the reptilian Randall Terry was born again as a media figure. Then the polls started pouring in – with each and every one showing that the vast majority of the American people thought the Republicans had wildly overreached, seeking a political advantage as opposed to acting out of concern for Terri Schiavo.

But the Democrats, having gone MIA, were unable to ride the tidal wave of public sentiment. Yet again. For years now, they have failed to grasp that when it comes to their party's core issues – including providing affordable health care, protecting the environment, safeguarding Social Security, gun control and basic abortion rights –they are on the same side of the fence as the majority of Americans.

http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/21628/

[NYCGirl]

1. Dupe:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1695010

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=103&topic_id=116266

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=3380128

[Itsthetruth]

6. OOOpppppsssss!

Sorry. Didn't see it on the boards.

[blm]

2. Fuck off, Arianna. If the Dems had rushed back to DC to be in this circus

then THEY would have been the ones targeted for politicizing this tragedy.

WTF do you think we have in this country....real journalists? HAH....they would have been crawling all over themselves to blame the Democrats for trying to seek political gain off a dying woman. NOONE in congress should have moved to dignify the GOP's machinations.

Where have you been the last 10 years, Arianna? Why don't you EVER attack those responsible for a change? Force of habit?

[oasis]

7. Exactly. (eom)

[qazplm]

3. I strongly disagree...

I think that if Democrats had gotten STRONGLY involved and front and center the Republicans and the media would have played that as a political ploy by the Democrats to use Terri to score points.

I do NOT think that the media would have played it to the Democrats benefit, and I think the best course was in fact to let the Republicans have all the limelight (and the criticism) to themselves.

I do not think people are out there saying, yeah but what about the Democrats, they ARE out there saying what the heck are these Republicans doing??

Sometimes you have to get out of the way and let your opponent blow himself up.

Of course, now that it has mostly blown over, Dems SHOULD be out there making a lot of noise about how if Bush gets the judges he wants, the outcome in the Schiavo case might very well have been different.

[demosincebirth]

4. So true, Ariana.

We need a Bulldog in our party in this day and age. Some Senator with some huevos!

[Lone Pawn]

5. Fuck off, Huffington.

The Democrats were right to stay out of this one. We actually gained a few political points by not getting involved in this tragedy--and if we were to go on and on about how bad the Republicans were, you can bet your useless ass that we'd look just as bad as they did. Seriously, girl. Every word said about this case in Congress hurt the party who said it--82% of America said Congress should not be involved in any capacity. Do you really think that people who want Congress to stay out of this family's personal life are actually trying to say that what they really want is Congress to be involved in partisan attacking and counterattacking over who's trying to profit more? Does getting in a war of "we're not as terribly offensive as you are!" really make us look good?

Christ. If you want to just sit there and bitch, run for office already. You constantly bitch that our Democrats are terrible, that they never do anything right. So why don't you just run for...oh, wait. You've never managed to get yourself elected to office, despite trying. And you live in California, where they're as liberal as they come. So maybe you DON'T actually have a fucking clue as to how to keep a political party in office.

[Itsthetruth]

8. Those Dems Sure Got Smarts!

I think you missed the point in her article.

So this is no time to defend the Constitution and privacy rights? Democrats should bury their head in the sand and pretend this issue and the right-wing attack on privacy rights doesn't exist?

What political savvy person can disagree with such a marvelous political strategy called "silence"? It's obvious to all but the most raw political novice, that Democrats should hide and not wage a big public fight against government intervention in the Schiavo case because ONLY 83% of Americans were against it!!!!! We sure don't want to go out on the limb on this one! And besides, we certainly don't want to alienate that 17% who favored Congressional action because Democrats need those "moderate" votes!

Oh my! This is such a divisive issue .... wish it would go away.
Democratic leaders should talk about something else like SUV's or bird crap to rally the American people against Bush and the Republicans.

That's the battle plan! It's a winner! Those Dems sure got smarts!

[blm]

9. The constitution wasn't at stake here. This was a private FAMILY matter

that no LEGISLATIVE body had any business taking on. The Dems should have been absent COMPLETELY from even DIGNIFYING the antics of the GOP in this circus act.

They let the GOP have their publicity stunt because it would demonstrate without interference how far they will go to manipulate the American people. No amount of Dem interference could have done the job that the cameras did just by training their lenses on the only yaps arrogant enough to open them on this issue.

[blm]

11. Why did you start a new thread with your post? Censoring/ignoring

the replies here?

[Itsthetruth]

13. Not At All

"'Censoring/ignoring' the replies here"?

Not at all. Please read reply #8.

[blm]

14. I did...replied....and you started a new thread instead of replying.

In case you didn't notice.

BTW...did you know it's not proper protocol to start new threads with your own replies to your original thread?

[Itsthetruth]

16. It Was An Attack On The Consitution

""The constitution wasn't at stake here. This was a private FAMILY matter"

You had Congress interfering in a matter that was decided by the courts, over and over and over again. It was an attack on the seperation of powers. Isn't that right?

This was just pointed out in the following thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3388117&mesg_id=3388117


11th Circuit rejects latest appeal by Terri Schiavo's parents
JOHNNY CLARK
Associated Press


ATLANTA - With time running out for Terri Schiavo, a federal appeals court Wednesday rejected her parent's latest attempt to get the brain-damaged woman's feeding tube reconnected.

"Any further action by our court or the district court would be improper," Judge Stanley F. Birch Jr. wrote in a concurring opinion.

"While the members of her family and the members of Congress have acted in a way that is both fervent and sincere, the time has come for dispassionate discharge of duty," Birch wrote.

Birch went on to scold President Bush and Congress for their attempts to intervene in the judicial process, by saying: "In resolving the Schiavo controversy, it is my judgment that, despite sincere and altruistic motivation, the legislative and executive branches of our government have acted in a manner demonstrably at odds with our Founding Fathers' blueprint for the governance of a free people - our Constitution."

http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/11268761.htm

Do you still hold to the position that this has nothing to do with the Constitution?

[blm]

18. If the Dems would have dignified this claptrap with debate on the Senate

floor, THEY would have been the targets of the media.

Where have you been for the last ten years that you don't know that the GOP controls most of the broadcast media in this country?

The Dems did EXACTLY what they should have done to keep the cameras focused on the ONLY arrogant idiots to politicize a family matter that had already been adjudicated.

If you haven't a clue who controls the media, then I suggest you start reading mediamatters or dailyhowler.

[blm]

19. and further....YOU keep posting against Democrats while praising Nader YET

you claim to be so fired up against Dems here when NADER sided WITH the Bushes on this issue while YOU are trying to beat up the Dems for respecting the privacy of the family decision.

I see your scorn is only for Democrats and praise only for those who work AGAINST Democrats.

That puts you on the same page with David Horowitz in my book.

[Itsthetruth]

20. Do You Still Think This Was Not An Attack On The Constitution?

Do you still hold to the position that this was not an attack on the Constitution?

Please try to address this question rather than engage in personal attacks. OK?

Thank you.

[blm]

21. YOU attack any Democrat you can...you have no consistency.

The Saturday night this came up, the Democrats in the Senate were IN RECESS, and had no reason to let the Republicans push their buttons on this, dragging it to the floor of the Senate as if it belonged there.

The next day, with the GOP congress set to push it further, it was becoming a greater issue as Bush also pushed himself into the picture. THEY made it into a constitutional matter.

The Republicans blew this up into a larger matter. It had NO BUSINESS on the floor of the Senate or Congress. The Dems got that right. Blame the GOP for turning it INTO a constitutional matter.

YOU have a history of bashing only Democrats here at DU while praising Nader who sided with the Bushes. Why don't YOU clarify why your outrage is selective and only directed at Democrats? Have you no consistent standard?

[Itsthetruth]

22. We Shouldn't Encourage Democrats To Vote For Bush's Policies

"YOU have a history of bashing only Democrats here at DU while praising Nader who sided with the Bushes."

Well, It's true that I and many others on DU have been critical of Democrats who have voted for Bush's appointments and legislation. I make no apology for that and I hope you also opposed those Democrats in Congress who functioned as "Bush enablers".

However, I never "praised" Nader for supporting Bush's appointments and/or legislation. Perhaps that's because Nader hasn't supported any of Bush's reactionary presidential appointments and legislation.

I think it's good that progressive Democrats and independents are critical of those Democrats who vote for Bush's agenda. Don't you agree?

[blm]

23. Most Democrats ARE NOT voting Bush's agenda and you still give Nader

a pass for supporting Bush on this Schiavo business at the very SAME TIME you attack Democrats for showing forebearance not to involve themselves in a sideshow entirely of the Republican's making.

You give NO credit to those Dems fighting the Bush cabal. I have good recall of most of your posts, and almost all are attacks on Democrats and Democratic leaders.

[Itsthetruth]

25. You Need To Improve Your Monitoring My Posts

"you still give Nadera pass for supporting Bush on this Schiavo business"

You didn't read my post captioned: I Don't Agree With Jackson/Nader Comments Posted.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3377554#3377573


"You give NO credit to those Dems fighting the Bush cabal. I have good recall of most of your posts, and almost all are attacks on Democrats and Democratic leaders."

My criticisms have been directed at Democratic Party leaders who vote for Bush's appointments and legislation. Do you support votes in support of Bush's policies and agenda?

You haven't read most of my posts even if you have kept yourself busy monitoring them. In fact, the great majority of my posts have not been on the subject of Democratic politicians who vote with Bush. And my friend, those who vote with Bush do not speak for a majority of people who consider themselves Democrats. It seems you just don't want to read any of my posts on other subjects.

Were you a hall monitor in school?

[blm]

26. I didn't say they were on that subject, did I? Why pretend I did?

I said most of your posts are attacks on Democrats and Democratic leaders. Most of the Democrats do not vote with Bush as you have claimed to be your reason for constant criticism.

You rarely post anything positive about any Democrat and have inconsistent standards for Democrats and those like Nader you DO claim to hold in high esteem.

Heck, you even took shots at Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn for supporting Kerry.

YOU do not want Dems to gain ground against BushInc. Neither did David Horowitz, though he certainly claimed to be "advising" the left "for its own good" for some time, didn't he?

[Itsthetruth]

27. Setting The Record Straight

I'd rather discuss the subject matter on this string, but since you have decided to contimue making false claims regarding my posts I find it necessary to set the record straight regarding your false claims.

" Most of the Democrats do not vote with Bush as you have claimed to be your reason for constant criticism."

I have never claimed that most Democrats have voted with Bush on all issues.

"You rarely post anything positive about any Democrat ...."

You never read any of my posts about Dennis Kucinich and other members of Congress who have done positive things that deserve our support.

"Heck, you even took shots at Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn for supporting Kerry."

I don't recall ever taking "shots" at either Chomsky or Zinn for anything. In fact, I have posted links to their articles on DU!

Like I said. You haven't done a very effective job in monitoring my posts. However, I will no longer respond to any new false claims you may make regarding my views and posts. I believe in democratic discussion and debate, not "flaming" wars.

[Lone Pawn]

12. And why did this reply need to be its own thread?

My response is in your vanity thread, btw.

[blm]

15. Proper protocol is to keep to original thread.

Or it becomes a form of spamming. Maybe the original poster is unfamiliar with the protocol here.

[hopein08]

10. That is exactly how I feel!

The Democrats had better starting digging themselves out of this hole quickly.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not a Democrat basher.

I want to stand firmly behind as many Democrats as possible, I really do. But sometimes it is just impossible.

[Dr Fate]

17. BULLS EYE. If you don't oppose Bush, folks will assume he is right.

Or at least sincere.

[xchrom]

24. indeed.

it is a subtlety sometimes lost.

[Piperay]

28. Correct

'no guts, no glory', is there anything that the Democrats have the guts to stand up for. They need to get off the fence and stick their necks out I'll say that for the repugs they risk it all and that has helped them get to where they are today.