Where is the next leader of the Democratic Party and this nation?

[ronleslie]

Where is the next leader of the Democratic Party and this nation? Do you see a leader among the current crop of Democratic candidates? Even on the issue of universal health care, the position of most of the candidates would still have us depending primarily on the health insurance industry for the quality of our care, and we know from past experience how little that industry cares for the wellfare of its customers. Our health care must be freed from the financial interests of the health insurance industry. Health care should not be a for-profit enterprise.

But more broadly speaking, a leader is someone with vision. Someone who, while having a pocketful of detailed policy proposals, can go beyond those proposals and present the American people with an overarching perspective, an ideology, from which those policies flow. People in all societies desire a leader who leads ... who in simple terms can state a phiilosophy to guide the nation and to which the people can relate.

Democrats in the post-Kennedy era have been long on policy and short on vision. If we are to win back the White House decisively and increase our majorities in Congres, we need to get beyond a laundry list of specific policies, step back, and look at the bigger picture to see who we are as opposed to the Republicans ... and be true to that. We need to have a clear strong message that resonates with the American people and wins their hearts and minds.

For a fresh look at what the Democratic Party should stand for, what principles should govern its domestic and foreign policy choices, and how it should differentiate itself from the Republicans, look at the new video, “What Do Democrats Stand For?” on YouTube, which is based on my book, "We Still Hold These Truths," by clicking on the following link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6JX-W4iIkw

OR, you can continue reading ... or do both. By the way, the video is NOT a talking head video.

Our nation stands at a crossroad. It’s not just the Iraq war. The Bush-Cheney administration and a radicalized Republican Conservative movement have been seeking to fundamentally alter the balance that our system has struck between private rights, the public good, and government. They are attacking the very heart of our democracy, our historic values every day.

And what do the Democratic presidential candidates do in the face of this? They talk about Iraq. They talk about this policy and that. But they don’t discuss what the Republicans are fundamentally up to. And they are failing again, like they did in 2004, to define what the Democraticc Party stands for … to provide an overarching vision.

Luckily, there is at hand an overarching perspective at once so simple and familiar yet profound that it will be immediately grasped by the American people … the words of the Declaration of Independence:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, … Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, ...”

These words are the core morality, the heart, the soul of American democracy. This is America’s common faith.

Our Declaration of Independence made a promise to the American people. And it should be the declared mission statement of the Democratic Party to build a country of greater opportunity where each and every American has the best chance to pursue those rights, where government meets its responsibility to secure that opportunity, and where all citizens have a shared responsibility to support the government’s efforts to promote the public good, each according to his ability. We must restore government of the people, by the people, and for the people.

All the domestic policies of the Party naturally flow from this mission statement. It is these policies that make the Democratic Party “life-affirming” and “pro-family”. It is these policies, which respect the value of all human life and the environment, that make the Democratic Party a party of faith – not Christian, not Jewish, not Muslim, not Buddhist … but deep faith. And while rooted in our past, this perspective compels policies that meet the needs of our economy now and in the future, in a world where many of the assumptions of the past are no longer valid.

It is this ethic that should also guide our foreign policy. In his farewell address, President Eisenhower, a Republican and an army general, made the following observation:

“America's leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched . . . strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment. ... Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt both at home and abroad.”

Those words were enormously prophetic, for during the Bush administration, arrogance, lack of comprehension of the Muslim world, and a failure to ask the broader public, not just those fighting in Iraq, to sacrifice have resulted in this failed and misguided war and in greatly damaging us at home and abroad.

Fifteen years ago at the Republican National Convention, Pat Buchanan made the now famous statement, “There is a religious war going on in our country for the soul of America. It is a cultural war ...” I put it to you that there is indeed a war going on for the soul of America, but it is a very different war than the one painted by Pat Buchanan. The soul of America that is being attacked is the very heart of American democracy. And defending that heart is the Democratic Party, as well as moderate conservatives of the old school.

The fight is not about the fine points of a multitude of policy proposals. The issue is what must the role of government be in order to live up to the words in the Declaration of Independence and what is the role of each of us under the American social contract.

Bush and company are not bad people … I have compassion for them, but they are very misguided people. What use is it if a man declares that he is born again if he goes on to betray basic tenets of his savior? Would Jesus do what George Bush has done. I think not!

To learn more about how I use the Declaration of Independence as a touchstone for analyzing the issues facing our country, read my book, "We Still Hold These Truths." James Fallows of The Atlantic Monthly endorsed the book saying, “Agree or disagree with his specific conclusions, the questions he is asking are the right ones for the public this year.” The book is available online through all the major sources, you can order it from your local bookstore, or you can go to the book’s website, www.westillholdthesetruths.com .

I urge you to let the Democratic Party know that you support this vision.

Thank you.

[msongs]

1. I see a lot of war mongering trying to out-bush Mr. bush nt

[ronleslie]

9. defensive tactic

Democrats always feel they have to be defensive about foreign policy and be tough. The odd thing is that it's the democrats who have taken us to war in every case in the past 70 years, except for the 2 Bush's and Reagan's silly adventure in the Carribean. The Democrats have always been strong on defense and supported a strong military ... they just haven't generally given the military carte blanche.

[Like It Is]

2. And the best of the Democratic Candidates is.---------------------------

JOE BIDEN

[napi21]

3. IF, and in my mind that's a big if, the biggest voting issue is Iraq,

then without question Biden is the MAN! I have preferred him to the others almost since the beginning of this campaign, but he really does have the most expertiese on Foreign policy!

[acmavm]

5. Surely your're being sarcastic.

Biden: Only a 'smoking gun' will oust Attorney General Gonzales


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2940830&mesg_id=2940830

[Like It Is]

7. Surely you're being stupid.

Biden is chairman of Foreign Relations. Leahy and Specter control Gonzales' fate.

[acmavm]

8. Knock off the insults newbie. I gave you a direct and ingnorant remark

made by the guy. If anyone's being ingnorant it's you.

edit: For any dem nominee to make that kind of statement in defense of lack of action against a treasonous, lying bastard shows exactly what he thinks of the American people and what they want, what our country needs. Smoking gun my great aunt Matilda.

[Larkspur]

4. None of the Dem Prez candidates are leaders

My Dem hero at this time is Gov. Brian Schweitzer (D-MT). He's not a wimp and has no problems fighting Rethugs and he can do that and govern his state too.

[ronleslie]

6. How do we make them better?

I obviously agree with you about the candidates. Al Gore is the only one that I see as a true leader, but from all I've read, I really don't think he's going to run. So the question is, how do we get the candidates to shape up and become leaders. Some of them do have the potential if they just stop being so calculating. If the candidates and the Party were bombarded with people saying what I'm saying, maybe that would have an effect. Back in 2004, I sent my book to about 20 Democratic leaders, including of course Kerry and Edwards. Most didn't even acknowledge receiving the book. I think I got 7 thank you letters back, but only Terry MacAuliffe indicated that he "got" my message ... the rest hadn't even browsed the book!

[TeenageDemocrat]

10. I like Hillary Clinton

Yay! This is my first reply, I'm hoping to get to know all of you intelligent people. I used to be a supporter of Borack, but then he said that thing about sending troops into Pakistan. I think we should just leave the middle east permanently, because we have no purpose there. Hillary Clinton has a lot of promise and seems like a good canidate, if I were old enough, I would vote for her in a second!
Bush is doing a horrible job with the Country, he's also breaking the Constitution. The Patriot Act is unconstitutional and idiotic. But, that's for another thread.

I've been looking for a website like this, thanks for creating it whoever did create it! :yourock:

[ronleslie]

11. But

Hillary is a good person and generally a pretty good Senator, except for her Iraq votes and not reading the 2003 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq before the vote, but she wouldn't make a good president. She's way too establishment oriented and she's not good about listening to people, which is very critical.

[Yurovsky]

12. Well, you may get a chance to vote for Hillary...

if you're 13 or older and she wins in 2008, you should get the chance in 2012.

I'm not a big Hillary fan, although I believe she'd be light years better than the current chimp in the oval office. Reading her earliest writings are truly inspiring, but I think she's become a "pragmatist", and gone along just to get along in the good-old-boys club that is the US Senate.

I sincerely hope that if she is elected, she'll feel free to be the progressive woman that so many of my friends and family members try to convince me she is. In the meantime, I'll try to do what I can to get Dennis Kucinich elected. Take a look at his statements and his record if you want to see what a real progressive President would look/sound like.

Oh, and welcome aboard from another new poster...

[ronleslie]

13. The problem with Hillary

The problem with Hillary for me is not so much her policies ... although I sure do differ with her on some things ... but I don't think she has the right qualities to lead the nation and govern well. The main problem she exhibited in putting together the failed universal health plan ... not listening to those who disagree with her and cutting people out of the conversation ... is a real problem. We cannot afford to have someone like that in the White House, regardless whether a Democrat or Republican. It makes for bad decision making.

As for Kucinich, he's great on a variety of policy issues, but I just don't think he has his feet planted on the ground. We need someone who is progressive, but not so over the top that he won't be able to accomplish anything. I can't imagine Kucinich working successfully with Congress ... and that's what's ultimately necessary if a president is going to move this country forward.

[Sparti]

14. The problem with Hillary

The real problem with Hillary is she's Hillary Clinton. If we elect her, the last four presidents will be Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton.

In a country of 300 million people, we can't find anyone better to lead us than recycled relatives of our previous presidents? Come on.

If we elect Hillary, we're no better than countries like the U.K. that continue to support "royalty" through their tax dollars -- only we'd be worse, because at least in England the "royal" family doesn't make any important political decisions. We might as well bestow titles of nobility on members of the Bush and Clinton families at this point. Again, our country has 300 million people and we can't find better leaders than Bushes and Clintons? Are name recognition and "fame" the only things that makes a good leader in the eyes of American voters? It disgusts me.

And for what it's worth, Hillary can't be trusted to take any solid stance on the war. All of us know she'll change her mind repeatedly according to public opinion polls. This is a pattern going back to 2003 when she voted for the war and sounded exactly like Bush.

If it comes down to Hillary or Obama, I'm going with Obama.

[omgiamgoingnuts]

20. NO problems with Hillary - only bonus - two for one I say.

I'm personally going with the CLINTON'S (plural). It's going to be great to have BOTH Clintons back in the White House. Our economy was the strongest it's ever been with Bill in the White House.

[LA Blog]

19. She is smart, but...

Sometimes it seems as though it's Bill is running the campaign FOR her. Are we electing them both??

http://witnessla.com/elections-08/2008/admin/the-risk-of-billary/

[Krashkopf]

15. Congressman Obey Stands up to Bush

Back on 10/2/07 Congressman Obey, the Chair of the powerful House Appropriations Committee, announced that he would NOT report any Iraqi supplemental funding bill out of his committee unless Bush agreed to significant changes in the Iraq War plan (including a plan aimed at withdrawing all combat troops before Bush leaves office, and, longer home tours for soldiers between deployment to the Combat zones).

I just got off the phone with Obey's home office, and they tell me that Congressman Obey does NOT intend to back down from that position!

Wake up folks, this is Civics 101.

Every funding bill HAS TO come out of the Appropriations committee. As Chairman, Obey has the power to "bottle up" a bill in committee. If he doesn't report out the Iraqi supplemental funding bill - FUNDING FOR THE WAR IS CUT OFF!!!

Isn't that exactly what we Progressives have been demanding?! Everyone who is opposed to this stupid "war" should be calling Congressman Obey's office and showering him with support.

And, why is the media not picking up on this very important story?

Three weeks ago, one of the most powerful members of Congress (a co-equal branch of government) challenged the out-of-control Executive branch. Yesterday, that Executive responded with a funding request seeking to extort another $50 BILLION dollars out of the American people, so that he could "stay the course" in Iraq.

This is the story of a political SHOW DOWN with hugh, Constitutional, ramifications.

Would someone in the media PLEASE cover it?!!!!!

Krash

[UstreamTV]

16. Clark

General Wesley Clark

[indiekid420]

17. Bill Richardson

Ignore the polls - Bill Richardson is the best dem by far, he just isn't the media darlings that hillary and obama are.

[omgiamgoingnuts]

18. PEOPLE need to KNOW this.

http://www.webspawner.com/users/islamfake/

Scroll down to the video snippet. SHOCKING! But not really.

Here's another for your pleasure:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,291788,00.html

OBAMA makes me GAG!

[mystwoman]

21. the PEOPLE

and Pepsodent smile coatracks don't get handed the national checkbook TYVM.