The major problem I have with the Republicans.

[coloradodem2005]

Throughout history, we liberals have had to deal with the frustration of dealing with the conservatives' collective junk. It could be irritating. But the beauty of Democracy (at least in theory) is that they have to put up with some of our collective junk, thus it evens out. It is the art and beauty of compromise. This is what makes Democracy great. The thing about these idiot Republicans today is that they want to make it so we Democrats and liberals have to put up with their shit all of the time while they have to put up with none of ours. This is contrary to the spirit of democracy. It is more evident that they want to take the voice away from a good chunk of Americans. Now half of America will be voiceless while we put up with Bushco's junk and they have to put up with none of ours. So, now we have something that is way too lopsided in our democracy.

[Up2Late]

1. I say it's the HATE

the Hate speech, the Wars of stupidity, and the Lies! :grr:

Yes, It has to be the Lies!:mad:

[coloradodem2005]

2. And the word liberal as a pejorative term.

[housewolf]

3. Not according to John Kennedy

'What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of "Liberal."

But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."'

[coloradodem2005]

4. Yes, but I am talking about from the Republican perspective.

Thanks to Rush Limbaugh.

[housewolf]

6. Limbaugh does not trump John Kennedy!!!

Not yesterday, not today, not tomorrow, or ever! That big air bag does not trump John Kennedy!

[Debs]

14. I am embarrassed

That Limbaugh is the same SPECIES as John Kennedy, assuming that to be true

[ComerPerro]

5. That has been the problem for the last ten years

The Republicans have no interest in compromise.

[ChristianButLiberal]

7. Republicans these days are totalitarians

to the likes of which would put Stalin to shame.

[Jackie97]

8. That's one of my problems with Republicans too, but....

whose fault is it that they're not putting up with as much shit as we do? Is it completely their fault or is it ours for caving in so easily?

One problem I've had with the democratic party over the years is that they compromise too much. Before Howard Dean got so popular and got so many people following in his footsteps, I was thinking of the Democratic Party as the Republican Lite Party. A lot of spirit was awakened in the party with Howard Dean. I think some of that spirit came from a progressive movement that's been loud and proud for at least four years now. If we could have more of that in the party, we might be able to get more done. I think one problem people are having with the Dem party is that because of so much compromise, we're coming off as a party without conviction. What are we about to do? Compromise our rights away? It's got to stop.

[trezic]

9. I agree

I think part of the problem was that the Party got focused on soft issues rather than hard. Soft issues tend to be social in focus like gay rights, civil rights and the like. Hard issues include the economy and national security. Soft issues require a stable economic base to sell. If people are doing well, they're a lot more open to the idea of social change. The trouble is that the economy has been in the tank for most Americans for the last 30 years.

I'd like to see activists get out and learn about the hard issues. These are the issues that the GOP is most vulnerable on. Master em and pound the opposition.

[ThorsHammer]

10. Agree as well

I think Kerry would have won if he had drilled Bush on the hard issues. He definitely played too nice, and did not attack enough. Clinton could have pushed the social issues as the economy was doing well, but Kerry would not be able to for a while.

[Jackie97]

12. In Kerry's defense, he tried.

He focused a lot on the economy and national security. People didn't want to hear it.

I am very strong on those "soft" issues that you mentioned, and I don't want to bend for anybody for them. However, I do think it would help if we concentrated more on the hard issues so people will know that we're not just a party for minorities. I have to say that the Democrats don't exactly sit at the sides of the minorities in the way that one thinks though. Democratic politicians will sign away certain rights in a minute if the minorities don't stay on their back, and they can get away with it better than Republicans because minorities think they're safe with a Democrat in.

But I do think it would be important to be more open about the other issues.

[trezic]

13. One idea

One thing Democrats should do without reservation is challenge anyone who makes race (I really despise that word since there's only one race: human) or ethnicity the focus of their identity. Men like Dr. King and Frederick Douglass didn't fight for civil rights so they could be equal in their own ghettos; they fought for inclusion into the mainstream of American society. I would love to see the Democratic Party one day openly and unashamedly champion...the phrase I can think of is 'race mixing.' It's goddamn time people realized their ancestors aren't off in Britain, France, Kenya, or Korea but were George Washington AND his slaves.

Sorry for the rant, but sometimes I just can't help it.

[Jackie97]

17. Well....

I can see your point. Making race an issue doesn't always help things for the Democratic party. However, the problem is that when one is treated differently for being black, female, poor, or some other thing; it really does become a major part of their identity. As a result, they can normally have a perspective that other progressives don't have. I was reading from the Disability board from progressives who thought that other progressives ignored their cause. They have a unique perspective. I have a unique perspective because I come from a poor background (unlike a lot of the movement, who is often middle class), so I think I have a unique perspective. We all do as individuals with different identities. They can't be ignored.

That doesn't mean pretending that one is African and not American though. I think it should mean ackowledging that people are different, but equal.

[trezic]

18. Let me clarify

My problem is when people make their particular concern a take it or I'm leaving problem. I generally agree with most people here on the soft issues. My primary difference is that unless we fix the economy and the current distribution of wealth, those soft issues won't be saleable nor important. To me, the task of this generation is more along of the lines of the New Deal as opposed to the Civil Rights Act. People gotta eat first :P

[ArkDem]

11. Deep thoughts.

[Debs]

15. I think there are two

Disadvantages to the liberal position that will be hard to overcome. The first is we suffer from our successes while they benifit from their failures. For instance we got environmental protections like the clear water act, now conservatives attack it by saying we have the cleanest water in the world, or we started feeding the hungry now conservatives claim that the poor in the US are fat. While conservatives starve education of funds and now say look at public education its failing. We need to privatize it.

Second, Raygun proved that the right can lie without consequences, Raygun just lied so much the press stopped pointing it out now Bush the dimmer, does the same and no matter how often the lies are shown the next thing out of his mouth is gospel to the mouthbreathers. If a liberal politician, even one I respect starts lying to me, I will stop believing him. These are institutional problems I dont see an answer for

[Mountainman]

16. You are right and they figured out how to do it years ago. We haven't yet

I'm talking here of conservative dogma politics. Conservatives had to put up with liberal shit until they got Reagan elected then they built on that with all their behind the scene think tanks and building up talk radio and media control and rigged elections.

I think that like you we tend to think that the world should be fair but it isn't and we act like it is.

The whole 2004 elections were about the lies from the Reps and us having to defend ourselves and putting out the truth. The truth didn't matter to them because they knew that half the people would eccept anything they said as truth. That's what all those years of work did for them.

We need to make a country were the real truth gets told and the lies are pointed out as lies. It takes a bunch of objective reporters and a media to employ them.