Life is full of compromises

[question everything]

no earth shattering news there. We all know that we have to compromise at work and with family members. Many, though, like to be able to find one place where one doesn't have to compromise, and many of us find such a corner here, on the pages of DU.

We know that politics is full of compromises and many of us compromised when we voted for Dukakis, and for Clinton, for Gore and for Kerry. Too many, unfortunately, chose not to compromise in 2000 and voted for Nader and we are still living the results of that disastrous desire not to compromise.

The need to compromise, has been a hot topic on this board since the March on Washington that was organized by ANSWER.

I did not plan on going and, therefore, did not look too closely at who organized it. However, reading about ANSWER since then, I would have felt stupid and used had I did march under this umbrella.

The answers to William Pitt http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4904262 are No, No, No and No, for all of them, though I don't think that comments about Cindy Sheehan and about ANSWER should have been included in the same thread.

Each of us chooses the area where one feels comfortable compromising and for those who were willing to march under the ANSWER umbrella - good for you. But for many of us this would have presented the red line not to be crossed.

moddemny http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4895425 expressed one point of distaste because ANSWER supports communism and, apparently, war criminal Slobodan Milosevic.

Many of us have a problem with ANSWER's apparent anti-Israel stand. I don't want to say too much about this topic so that this would not be moved to the I/P forum, yet, this is an opportunity to mention several points for many DUers who have never known Israel as a country under siege. A county that, until 1967, was embraced by all the progressive and socialist groups in the world as a country where the ideas of socialism were adopted and implemented for every day life.

- The Middle East would be unstable even if Israel never existed. This goes back to the end of WWI when France and Britain divided the region into spheres of influence, arbitrarily establishing borders to create new nations and completely disregarded the presence of separate ethnic groups. The borders of Iraq, for example, threw together Kurds, Sunni and Shiite Muslims and deliberately tore the oil rich province of Kuwait.

- While the UN called, in 1947, to establish a Palestinian state in what we now call the West Bank, the Kingdom of Transjordan annexed the land. While the majority - about 70% - of the citizens of the Kingdom of Jordan are Palestinians, it is ruled by the Hashemite monarchy since this was the prize that the British offered to Sharif Hussein for participating in the revolt against the Turks. King Abdulla, the great grandfather of the current king, was assassinated by a Palestinian in Jerusalem shortly after the annexation.

It has been unfortunate that many liberals have taken to attacking Israel and Zionism, instead of condemning specific Israeli governments and policies.

After the last elections, there have been talks that many American Jews - traditionally Democratic voters - voted for Bush thanks to the war in Iraq. Sure, Israel has benefited from the war, as were Iraq other neighbors: Kuwait, Jordan and Iran. But I have been thinking about the older generation of liberal Jews, who were always in the front of progressive movements, who were denounced by Joseph McCarthy, who were in the front of the Civil Rights movement - and two of them were murdered in Mississippi.

And I don't know how these Jews feel when former allies denounce Israel and Zionism and equate it with racism and many other .isms against which they fought all their lives, risking their lives and their liberties.

And I suspect that many of them just chose to stay home on election day. This was their compromise.

Since the last elections we hear about other compromises. About including "faith" in the platform; compromising about women's right to choose and about gay union, about unions and about public schools.

I doubt that any of these compromises will bring red voters to our fold. I know that many of us will stay home and not vote at all, or will vote for a third parry candidate, if such compromises are part of the Democratic Party platform.

[lcordero2]

1. and I'm going to be compromising less and less

I was livid last November when I had to choose in between war criminal number one and war criminal number two. To me a yea vote to H.J.Res. 114 makes one a war criminal.

In the future, I will not play a card game knowing that the deck is stacked against me and that is final.

[Guaranteed]

2. I never responded to Pitt's thread, but I DID go to Crawford.

In fact, I drove 1,000 miles there and 1,000 miles back, with my girlfriend, to join the demonstration there and bring as many supplies as I could.

I DID suffer the 100+ degree heat and sun, the Port-o-Potties, the hard work of lugging around water and a cooler full of food and ice, as well as our tent and clothes and medicines, toilet paper, plastic bags, etc. I picked up garbage around Camp II. I was THERE when the massive storm came in Saturday evening, with the lightning flashing everywhere and the wind destroying so much of the camp- including our tent.

And I had a great time. Most of the people there were actually *informed* about what is going on in the world today, which in itself made the whole trip worth it. They were friendly, good people. While I strongly disagree with many of the beliefs of the "blanket" anti-war movement, I understood that the anti-Iraq-War movement is extremely important, and I put those issues aside, while I suffered out there- and I wasn't the only one. Through all of my concerns that, at the moment, the face of this movement, because of the lack of leadership from our party leaders, is coming off as unfocused, out of the mainstream, and, at times, anti-American, I suffered. I did it because it was the right thing to do. I've sacrificed, my body and my principles.

But things can't stay that way, if we want to win. If we're going to have an effective message, we need help from our party leaders. They need to set up, and the leftists need to step up. EVERYONE needs to find that common ground.

So, EVERYBODY, put away the BULLSHIT.


Great OP, BTW. Rec'd.

[question everything]

4. Thank you. I think that most of us would at least separate Sheehan

from ANSWER.

And, yes, we have a problem with the message of our party. Have had it for a long time.

As we saw last November, ABB can carry one only that far. Same with "don't stand in the way of a train wreck" and "a long rope to hand oneself." We need to offer a clear way of where we stand. Many surveys showed that when we break our message into specifics: security of jobs, access to health care, education and retirement - that most of the voters, even the "reds" are receptive.

But our leaders are scared and I don't know why.

Again, thank you for your efforts, for actually getting out from behind the keyboard.

The problem of the Internet has been that, while millions can now be informed in split seconds, and participate in the debate, too many just click and nod.

[wmills551]

3. Great Post!