I am not a Third Way Democrat. I never will be.

[mmonk]

I am a New Deal Democrat in the tradition my party gave this country. I will not be a part of dismantling what that tradition gave this country. Some of us cannot be what you wish for any political conveniences. That is just the way it is. I'm not extreme. My position was a majority in this country at one time and it helped shape some of America's finest hours many times in advancing a fundamental fairness that was lacking before it. There really isn't any need for us to always compromise. We prefer to fight and always keep that tradition of forwarding those ideals.

There has been a lot of threads about what makes a Democrat. I'm one. Not the only one. That is just the make up of this one. Therefore, the third way, if it is to dismantle and substitute something else in its place because of dissatisfaction of "liberalism", I will not be that kind. If the Third Way accepts violations of international law of which the precepts derived from the New Deal age and Nuremberg, do not expect me to. I will not be that kind.

I am what I am. My decisions are based on what I am. Therefore, my donations will go to Democrats that share in the values of what I am. My vote as well. Some politicians will ultimately fool me. So therefore, I will make mistakes in judgment of their judgment. But they will not change me.

[eridani]

1. +1 n/t

[FLAprogressive]

2. K&R

[KittyWampus]

3. Well, I'm a Social Democrat in the European sense but I'm smart enough NOT to be Norquist's chump

and politically savvy enough to understand how sausage gets made.

What is astounding is how many DU'ers consider themselves progressive but end up being nothing but reactionaries... always fighting yesterday's battles.

[ProSense]

12. Exactly.

Reactionaries in elections too. The 50-state strategy was a perfect example of that. People were so cocky and confident about some of the very same Democrats they now disown. They referred to some of the more progressive Dems already in the Senate as ineffective. Fresh blood was coming, and they've been disappointed ever since. The next batch who earns their support, and manage to get elected, will disappoint them equally. Al Franken is already out.

Not understanding the process goes a long way in setting up oneself for disappointment.

[Ken Burch]

78. There's no reason to blame the 50 state strategy for the Blue Dogs

They were Rahm's fault. He was the one who picked them, sometimes imposing them over electable progressives who were also running.

It's silly to argue that we'd have a more progressive Congress if only we'd kept writing off half the states.

[clear eye]

20. You're only a backer of what you're willing to stand up for.

Otherwise you're just a gasbag.

See post #6 below about what lying down while Third Way "sausage get made" leads to.

[ima_sinnic]

35. but you're apparently not bright enough to write anything without the word "Norquist"

you and your pal who seems to be on an alternate shift from yours.

[sabrina 1]

44. A Single Payer system

in this country has just been declared as tomorrow's, not yesterday's battle. If it were yesterday's the battle would be over. If only it was yesterday's so many Americans would not have needed to die simply because they were poor.

But we are being told the country isn't ready for that yet, and maybe that's true. But clearly those fighting for it, and I'm sure they will not give up, are not fighting yesterday's battle until we catch up with and achieve what every other civil society has. For them, the battle is won, for the US it is just beginning.

[timefortherevolution]

80. I like your optimism but I believe our president has just delivered our enemy

the nuclear weapon they've wanted—UNBELIEVABLE amounts of money, in the form of our mandated
health insurance policies.

If we've learned anything from this battle, its all about who's got the most $$$.

This will make single payer another 30 years in the offing with what these corporations
now have to fight with.

[defendandprotect]

82. Agree -- this is an unprecedented turning over of taxpayer money to corporations ...

and when you add up all the things we can have -- more war, more homelessness, more poverty,

more foreclosed homes, more bailouts, less Social Security, less Medicare, no Habeas Corpus,

more wiretapping, less unions, less jobs, more infringement of trade agreements on our rights and

employment, more taxpayer money for abstinence, more taxpayer money for CHURCH . . .

more Patriot Act, more Homeland Security, more drones, more death . . .

they are all things which benefit the right wing and corporatism/fascism.

That's going backwards --

[tnlefty]

99. Welcome to DU, timefortherevolution!

I agree that this giveaway will make it years down the road to untangle anyone who wants to be untangled, from the bullshit insurance industry. :hi:

[sabrina 1]

115. Yes, I know ~

Maybe it's time for us to start working on getting some money, the way the right did? There must be people who have money who are not pro-war and pro-Wall St.

[grahamhgreen]

45. The bill gives trillions to Big Crapsurance that will crush any further reform - THAT is how sausage

is made, duh!

[RetroLounge]

49. Did you forget to mention Hamsher in your post?

Not paid by the post, huh?

RL

[Political Heretic]

69. Do people really believe that?

That there are people paid to post here?

I don't.

[defendandprotect]

83. I believe it . . .

[Jamastiene]

102. Believe what you want, but some people are paid to post on these sites. n/t

[Jackpine Radical]

63. The problem with that sausage factory business

is that the progressives always seem to get thrown into the grinder.

[defendandprotect]

85. And like any slaughter house, it needs cleaning up and clearing out . . .

This is allegedly a people's government --

I don't think anyone should be bragging that they realistically view our government

decision making as "sausage" making --

[Political Heretic]

68. You are what you stand for.

It's pretty simple.

[defendandprotect]

81. Recognizing what we're suffering is corporatism/fascism also recognizes that

it blocks any real democratic action between people and their government --

That's the purpose of corporatism/fascism --

That's the purpose of pre-bribing and pre-owning our elected officials --

Yes, ONCE "sausage" did get made -- but that's long gone.

Tbey are not only blocking democratic action for citizens they have overturned the

New Deal and lifted all restraints on capitalism --

Unregulated capitalism is merely organized crime --

And after the last 8 years and trillions in bailouts that should be abundantly clear!

[edc]

108. It's almost enough to make ya wish

for the good old days when the Soviet Union was still around to scare Wall St. into believing they needed unions and a middle class to win the Cold War.

[Dragonfli]

4. K&R

[laughingliberal]

5. K & R nt

[OHdem10]

6. They might do well to check out the Third Way and what has happened

as a result of their policies in UK. Read an article just
a few weeks back. More Poor, a hurting middle class, rich
getting richer. The writer was attributing this to Third Way
Policies.

The Third Way in this country is essentially a Moderate Republican
Agenda. This is why our Leaders keep digging the Bush Hole Bigger
instead of taking us on a new path.

As intelligent as Obama is, I thought he would see this and change.
Seems he is sipping the cool aid.

[Autonomy]

51. Then the writer does not know what he/she is talking about

The middle class had not done better in decades than they had under Clinton. The gap widened under Bush. Sounds like your author has a disingenuous agenda.

[Jackpine Radical]

64. Clinton did some very good things, and some not so good.

Reinstating a bit of progressive taxation was good. NAFTA and many other things were not. Remember that he had his own Iraq war, which, although it was a low-intensity one as far as we were concerned, produced a lot of casualties, many of them children. Clinton also had the good fortune to preside over some amazing boom times that he didn't create, but whose aura illuminated his tenure in office. It was the era when the personal computer and the internet took off, the economy soaring with them.

[Autonomy]

73. So you're on board with the point

that the only Third Way type president we ever had did not increase the gap between the rich and the poor, and that the middle class did better under him than it had in decades?

Just trying to keep the focus.

[TheBigotBasher]

103. It was my post I think

and "Third way" politics continued under Blair in the UK and Bush in the US.

The "third way" set about turning the Anglo American economies into service economies. It was a Clinton Government that cut unemployment benefits. It was a Labour third way economy that cut unemployment benefits in the UK.

In the mean time, wage rate inflation slowed, a major part of that was as a result of removing property prices from the inflation indexes. Wage rates did not rise, but people felt richer because they had "increasing capital".

This uncontrolled inflation in property prices is what really lies behind the recession now and that will never be tackled.

In the mid-1990s, the United Nations published a report showing that the U.S. had already become the most class-stratified society among all the advanced industrial countries. Now, wealth in the U.S. is even more concentrated in the hands of a few. "It's remarkable how little growth has trickled down to ordinary families," Krugman explained. "Median family income has risen only about 0.5 percent per year--and as far as we can tell...just about all of that increase was due to wives working longer hours, with little or no gain in real wages."

In their 1992 campaign for the White House, Bill Clinton and Al Gore liked to point out that the top 1 percent of Americans owned 40 percent of the country's wealth. They also said that if you eliminated home ownership and only counted businesses, factories and offices, then the top 1 percent owned 90 per cent of all wealth. And the top 10 percent, they said, owned 99 percent! But once in office, Clinton and Gore did nothing to redistribute wealth more equally--despite the fact that their two terms in office spanned the economic joyride of the 1990s. On the contrary, inequality only continued to grow.

http://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/218/46532.html

Tell me how third way politics are good for anyone? They are a betrayal of democracy and have led to the effective merger of Political Parties and agendas.

[Autonomy]

116. I disagree with your every point

including your definition of third way. To say it continued under Bush is to wrongly conflate Bush with Clinton. For one, their tax structures were much different.

Clinton contributed to the economic boom of the late 1990's with sound fiscal policy that included trimming domestic spending, reversing the budget deficit for the first time in decades, raising consumer and investor confidence, which allowed the boom.

Interesting you should mention measurements and wages. Income gaps between the lowest 20% and the top 1% were falsely inflated in the period because of including senior citizens who were income poor, but asset rich. Wages relative to inflation still rose for the middle-class more than they had in decades.

You mention the property/housing bubble and burst. Recall that happened under Bush.

Check some of this out:

http://clinton5.nara.gov/WH/Accomplishments/eightyears-03.html

We have to rethink the policies of the 1930's, 50's & 60's all the time. I count myself as a liberal BECAUSE we are reality-based. If something is not working completely, then it needs to be fixed. Welfare can be helpful to those in need, but has been highly destructive, especially among some communities. Applying 1930s solutions to a 1990's (or 2010's) world is not reality based; it's merely a loyalty to a long defunct world, and like a previous poster said, is highly reactionary and therefore not progressive.

[defendandprotect]

86. Agree . . . the trade agreements alone are responsible for immense job loss ....

Obama is evidently now going to run a job stimulus program thru corporations ---

i.e., trickle down jobs!

Reminders of crap Poppy Bush pulled with nickle and diming minimum wage employees which

substantially rewarding companies for "training them" and employing them!

[Autonomy]

117. Protectionism has its own costs

The developing world is catching up to the developed, and can produce for cheaper. We could pass tariffs so that China could not sell stuff so cheaply in the US, but that would not stop them from selling it cheaply everywhere else. Our exports would not be able to compete. The repercussion would have a domino effect on the economy. It's a global economy, like it or not, and returning to protectionism is self-defeating. It may have worked in the 1930's, but this ain't the 30's.

[defendandprotect]

118. We used China to finance our war debt and tax cuts for the rich . . .

the trade off was they got our jobs --

Bush family has been in China profiting and exploiting for decades --

Eagleburger/Kissinger -- and weren't they also involved in selling arms?

"Protectionism" is a cover up for the concept of competing with slavery -- which

no nation is foolish enough to do voluntarily.

This is more corporate fascism --

And an economy -- any economy -- is man-made --

The structure of this one is capitalism which was invented by the Catholic Church to

succeed Feudalism when that system was insufficient to run their Papal States.

Capitalism is a ridiculous King-of-the-Hill system intended to move the wealth and resources

of nations from the many to the few. And it succeeds at that mightily!

Unregulated capitalism is merely organized crime.

All of capitalism should be re-regulated -- and this time to snuff it out.

That's what FDR should have done.

Move on to democratic socialism --

Let's change the values from profits over people -- to humanity and nature before profit.

Simply on the basis of the suicidal and destructive nature of capitalism we should toss it.

From total pollution of the planet to ozone holes and Global Warming!!!

[Autonomy]

122. Command and control economies and dinosaurs

had their chance. Nature selected them for extinction. And for good reason. To tell is IT is in charge.

The market has to be in charge to some degree, though some markets can and should be regulated. Capitalism was not a man-made construct; it evolved. It's not a conspiracy and all that wackiness.

China is able to out-compete us in manufacturing because it is developing and its wages are low. China's entrance into the world marketplace will actually raise its people OUT of slavery -- the slavery of a command and control economy that kept them in poverty for so long.

[defendandprotect]

125. The "market" if you've ever noticed is often faked . . ENRON/OIL INDUSTRY...????

Wall Street is also a large scam currently given the lack of regulation --
And that's precisely why Bush was trying to move Social Security money into Wall Street!

Profit makers are dependent upon access to natural resources --
and are often our polluters which is obvious from the 100+ years of the industrial revolution.
What it amounts to is destruction of nature -- and there is NO PROFIT which can repair that
damage nor appease the loss of it.
That's why the system of capitalism is based in suicidal insanity.

Whether you're dealing in Enron stock or seashells . . . every economy is man-made and requires
permission and license to exist.

"Manifest Destiny" and "Man's Dominion Over Nature" are the licenses issues by organized patriarchal religions to exploit nature, natural resources, animal-life -- and even other human
beings according to various myths of "inferiority" -- for the benefit of the few.

Any "King-of-the-Hill" system such as Capitalism is a conspiracy --
When was the last time you played a game of "Monopoly, Inc." or watched "Tucker"...?
Or reviewed the Enron "crisis" ?

China is providing us with oddles of money for our debt -- which we are spending on tax cuts for
the rich and WARS.

China is providing SLAVE labor -- which you don't seem to have noticed?

You want to see China's labor force rise? Let's unionize them --

[Xicano]

7. K&R. +10

Very well said. I am also comfortable with the company we keep now and through history. I too will not compromise much less abandon my Democratic party principles nor support any official who does.

:dem:

[Individualist]

8. I'm with you, mmonk.

[bfarq]

9. Your positioms are STILL the majority

There was over 60% support for the HCR bill when it had real reforms. The support for the bill crumbled AFTER Obama sold out to Lieberman and basically turned the bill into little more than a giveaway to the insurance industry. That's not the "third way". That's the Republican way, plain and simple.

FWIW, if you look at what the polls say about attitudes about the environment, health care, education, reproductive rights, gay rights and foreign policy, the public is far more progressive than the Washington bubble people would have you believe.

[liberal_at_heart]

11. You wouldn't know it by how the democrats in Congress act

[TheBigotBasher]

112. Not all of the Democratic Party

a tiny majority who are getting away with blackmailing the Party for their Republican agenda.

They are a Party within a Party and as a result of cow-towing to their agenda, Reid is Senate Leader who is in office but not in power.

[Enthusiast]

60. And this is COMPLETELY

ignored by the M$M. Clearly they have conspired to keep this secret because it is so thoroughly unspoken.

"There was over 60% support for the HCR bill when it had real reforms. The support for the bill crumbled AFTER Obama sold out to Lieberman and basically turned the bill into little more than a giveaway to the insurance industry."

We only hear the % of people against the HCR bill as it now stands. Funny when a majority of people were for it, the polls were seldom mentioned. Now every right wing hack repeats it.

[defendandprotect]

87. This is an overwhelmingly liberal nation . . . that's why corporations have to BUY

government and BUY our legislators -- and keep tight controls on MSM, TV/radio,

periodicals, publishing houses -- libraries --

As Newt Gingrich made perfectly clear to Clinton . . . "If we told the truth, no one

would vote for us!"

Well, true -- and as time goes on the smallest pebble of truth can shatter their

mirror of myths!

PS: And steal elections --

We really have never discussed how the coming of the LARGE computers also increased

the power of MSM - they began to come in during the mid-1960's. Prior to that time,

MSM could really only report actual vote totals. Yeah, they could get a few buys together

to opine -- to crystal ball areas and candidates. But it was the large computers which

gave them the power to PREDICT and to CALL elections for candidates -- and by states with

electoral votes for presidents.

Then, in 2000, they simply reversed this power to RECALL Florida from Gore and later to

RECALL it for Bush!

Coincidentally, the large computers and the individual voting computers began to come in

during the mid and late 1960's . . . just about the time we were passing The Voting Rights

Act!

[Thickasabrick]

10. K&R Great post nt

[liberal_at_heart]

13. k&r

[MercutioATC]

14. What if "your" Democrats proved to be as corporatist as Repubs?

Might you reevaluate your definitions?

[HowHasItComeToThis]

15. IF YOU ARE PROGRESIVE, FOLLOW MY TWEETS

http://twitter.com/NeilAbbey

[MercutioATC]

16. M'kay. I'll follow you on Twitter because you refuse to answer internet forum questions...

...actually, you didn't even refuse to answer, you essentially just posted an ad.


Grow the fuck up.

[mmonk]

24. No, I would reevaluate those Democrats. I will make mistakes.

I also don't expect others to be me or share my values which were acquired through my experiences and spaces in time.

[Kermitt Gribble]

33. Then you find different Democrats to support.

You have it backward if you think a constituent should change their ideals to suit their representative's beliefs.

[defendandprotect]

88. Exactly and this is what Wm. Greider, Michael Moore and others are talking about in TARGETING . . .

pre-owned and pre-bribed Democrats who are voting against the people's interests and

for private interests/corporate interests.

No different if a Dem is corporate owned than if a Repug is corporate owned -- !!

[aquart]

17. k&r

[Forkboy]

18. I couldn't triangulate if Pythagoras was teaching me.

[mmonk]

27. Lol.

It's hard. The mind can't twist but so many ways.

[snot]

19. Let's outlaw labels, whether of parties, or human beings. Let's talk fundamental principals.

Like our Founding Fathers did.

Progressives today stand up for the Constitution, when no one else remembers why what it says matters.

Progressives today understand the importance of balances of power, and of balances of knowledge; because knowledge is power. We must know at least as much about our gummint (including the corporations that have more power over our lives than do traditional gummints) as they know about us; that's not how it's going.

[mmonk]

65. True. They know much more about the people

than the people know about them. It's never a good scenario.

[suzie]

107. The Constitution that enshrined slavery?

Is that like interning Japanese-Americans, something that those who call themselves "progressive" just ignore?

All Democrats except some select group are bad, because they don't adhere to the values of the New Dealers, which included interning Japanese Americans.

Or to the values of the Founding Fathers, which included labeling some people as only 3/5 of a person. And making some fairly severe restrictions about who could vote, as I recall.

[DisgustedInMN]

21. I suspect we still are the majority.

Otherwise, why would politicians feel the need to lie to us and tell us they share our values? ObamaCo will reap the whirlwind for their betrayal, mark my words.

[glitch]

42. Excellent point, lies make a good barometer. nt

[Cary]

76. Doubtful

I can't speak for anyone but myself, but if the Democrats lose and Republicans regain power I will blame radical leftists, just as I blame Ralph Nader for 2000.

[defendandprotect]

90. And you'd be wrong in both cases . . .

You are going to have to take some risks in STOP backing DINOs who are basically

Republicans. In Nevada, evidently they call Harry Reid, Repug lite!

Otherwise, you are going to remain in a downward spiral -- is that OK with you?



Re the Nader nonsense . . . wake up!

Gore won no matter how you count the votes ...

Including Florida where a handful of votes decided the race --


Other third parties took thousands of votes --

300,000 Florida "Democrats" voted for Bush --

More than 600 "illegal" military ballots were counted for Bush --

More than 3,000 "butterfly" ballots went to Pat Buchanan --

We had a GOP "false flag" riot that STOPPED the vote counting in Miami-Dade

County MANDATED by the Florida Supreme Court. No police interference.


AND, finally US Supreme Court Gang of 5 undermined the Florida State Supreme

Court ruling and gave appointed Bush to presidency.


HOW could you ignore all of this and buy the propaganda that it had anything to

do with Nader --?

Keep in mind that the Democratic Party is no happier with Nader -- nor the Green Party --

than the Repugs are --

Neither wants anyone like Nader challenging their two party tyranny --

nor telling the public what is actually going on.

[Cary]

93. It's good you're so defensive

You should be.

[defendandprotect]

95. And truth looks "defensive" to you .... ???

Let's see your evidence that Nader lost the election for Gore . . .

especially when Gore WON the election, including in Florida.

[Cary]

104. You aren't "truth"

If people who voted for Nader voted for Gore it wouldn't have been so close and Bush wouldn't have stolen it.

[defendandprotect]

96. And truth looks "defensive" to you .... ???

Let's see your evidence that Nader lost the election for Gore . . .

especially when Gore WON the election, including in Florida.

[sabrina 1]

100. This is a sincere question because your comment

the way I read it says that politicians do not have to earn our support. If they fail to act on behalf of the people, so long as they are on our team, it is not their fault if they lose the support of the people, it is the people's fault.

If I misunderstood then what is your opinion of what those who elect politicians to represent them should expect of them?

For the record, if we get a Republican majority again, a disaster we all worked hard to prevent by entrusting Democrats with the power Republicans had abused, I will blame Democrats.

[Cary]

105. We have a plurality system

That means that any third party or splinter party pulls votes from one coalition party or the other.

I have made no comment on your expectations or what those expectations should be. You're just being defensive too.

If you don't like what your Democratic Senator or Representative or President is doing then make your voice heard where it should be heard: in the primaries or caucuses.

[sabrina 1]

113. I asked an honest question. I am not defensive as I know where I

stand and can respect other people's opinions without feeling the need to put them down. And if they have ideas I haven't thought of, I can and have considered them.

My question was 'what should voters expect from the people they elect' which was based on my interpretation of your comment, which I acknowledged could be wrong, that politicians do not have to earn our support and if they fail, we are to blame.

As far as third parties, again, if a party so fails those who voted for them that enough people walk away and support a third party, it is my opinion that those politicians should be asking themselves what they did wrong. People do not lightly walk away from a party they belong to. And they don't do it because of one issue. There has to be great dissatisfaction and disappointment to cause such defection from a party.

We have all let our Reps know when we think they are going in the wrong direction, but only once in the past several years, did they listen. That was on the bail-outs. And then they had their arms twisted again and demonstrated whose opinions were worth more to them. And we participated in the primaries and will again. But none of that answered my original question. If you don't want to answer it or don't have an answer, that's fine.

[Cary]

121. I gave you an honest answer

We have coalition parties. Our whole system is based on compromise and the definition of compromise is that no one walks away happy. You seem to want instant gratification. It seems to me that you're unrealistic both in terms of what you expect currently and in terms of the longer term implications of what you're saying.

I am not defending your Reps. I am certainly not defending Blue Dogs. Vote them out by all means, but whatever you do don't end up putting in Repubicans instead.

Also there is nothing good that is going to come from the kind of negativity that has been expressed here. Nothing good at all.

[sabrina 1]

123. Compromise means that both sides are willing to give up

something in exchange for something they want. We have not had compromise on this bill. The majority of the American people wanted a choice, they would have preferred a Medicare type healthcare system, something they support and are overwhelmingly in favor of.

The people's interests weren't even considered. Only one side, the Private Insurance Corps, got to have several seats at this health care table.

When a spokesperson for your own party, after you try to express your opinion on a topic as important as this, tells the world to ignore you, orders those representing you to 'STFU' and stop criticizing those who are opposed to the people's opiniions, well sometimes people assume, to be pragmatic about it, that their party has told them to 'get lost'.

Blame those who have told Democrats they are not needed in the party. You are blaming the wrong people. What is the point of belonging to a party which has told you to get lost and that you will be ignored?

I am using the word 'you' generically but that is where we are now, and that is why so many Democrats are disgusted. Your advice to let them know how people feel seems moot at this point, they know and they do not care.

So, if those at the top of the Democratic Party drive people away, and they've done a great job of that so far, then it is they who have to accept the responsibility for the consequences of their actions. I will definitely be blaming them for any resurgence of the Republican Party.

[DisgustedInMN]

120. I see.

Failure to deliver that which a politician campaigned on...

... is now "the fault" of those that believed in them and worked for them.

Well...

..that IS a take I hadn't considered.

:banghead:

[defendandprotect]

89. Well, think we should find out . . . liberals/progressives should come together as a voting bloc --

begin to discuss NOT doing the same thing over and again and seeing the same

corporate results --

Discuss Plan B -- or whatever!!!

[H2O Man]

22. Thank you.

I am a Kennedy Democrat. By that, I mean JFK's speech to the American University; RFK's run in '68; and Teddy Kennedy's advocacy for health care.

[mmonk]

25. Very good. The Kennedys always advanced the cause

of the citizen against forces that would otherwise limit the possibilities of a better society. They were bold enough to take civil rights to the forefront and better our institutions.

[proud2BlibKansan]

57. Add in anti-war and I'm right there with you

:thumbsup:

[H2O Man]

79. The American University speech

defined a path that the human race could take to end war. RFK in '68 was one of the strongest voices opposing US involvement in an immoral war.

[defendandprotect]

91. In our corporate military, we're fighting the same corporate/fascism . . .

that is blocking any true exercise of democracy thru our elected officials --

Even worse . . . a privatized military -- with allegiance to whom?

It's all corporate-fascism --

Pre-bribed and pre-owned legislators --

:)

[proud2BlibKansan]

97. Yes I remember

If elected, RFK would have ended the war.

[Myrina]

23. K&R

N/T

[Odin2005]

26. K&R!!!

[Peacetrain]

28. I am an old line Democrat, and a liberal..

that is as far as I can define myself..
:)

[mmonk]

29. That is well defined.

[Kltpzyxm]

30. I regret

that I have but one rec to give to this OP.

[mmonk]

31. Thank you.

You are very kind. One is fine.

[scentopine]

32. But wait - the new democrats say torture is just part of 3D chess - they can't be wrong?

[suzie]

39. The New Deal Democrats that interned American citizens--they weren't wrong?

[scentopine]

41. They are both wrong. We are not learning from mistakes. -nt

[suzie]

53. No, you wanted to go on about how bad "new Democrats" are, when the discussion

on this thread was about "old Democrats".

No one said anything about learning from mistakes, they were praising the people who interned U.S. citizens as the model in comparison to the worthless "new Democrats".

[liberation]

55. Is that it? Is that all you got?

LOL you are sad...

[scentopine]

58. LOL! You said "worthless new democrats" not me. I guess we can agree on this.

[OnyxCollie]

59. Did the "old Democrats" intern people in secret, against the will of Congress?

Against a signed and ratified international treaty prohibiting such action?

To support a war against a nation that had not attacked the US, and did not have the means to do so?

Using flimsy legal reasoning that gave "enemy combatants" less rights than lab animals?

Did they do that?

False analogy.

[Enthusiast]

61. Zactly! False analogy.

And no torture was performed on Japanese Americans.

[suzie]

109. Gee, I thought that FDR, the head New Dealer himself, authorized the internment camps

by executive order.

BTW, I believe that a good many of the "enemy combatants" never made it to a Nuremberg trial. Many were disposed of separate from any judicial proceeding.

Not much legal reasoning when you're executed in the field.

[mmonk]

66. Yes, they were.

In a paradox, they gave us the Nuremberg principles.

[Kermitt Gribble]

34. K&R! n/t

[Unca Jim]

36. Meh.

I agree that most people and most Democrats want Health Care Reform, but also that they are unwilling to do the work and suck up the crappy parts that need changing as it develops.

If we were actually looking at the crappy Senate bill as a possible reality, I'd understand the hyperbole.

[PassingFair]

37. Fringe Weirdo!

:sarcasm:

[suzie]

38. So you believe in interning American citizens at will?

Because I think that was just as much a legacy of the New Deal age as Nuremberg.

[liberation]

54. Just because you "think" it, it doesn't make it even remotely correct...

If you think the interment of Japanese citizens is a direct result from the New Deal, you are too obvious in your intellectual dishonesty.


Good grief. You guys don't even pretend to be reasonable anymore, do you?

[Enthusiast]

62. That unreasonable

kind of argument reminds me so much of Reich Wing radio hate talk shows. It is so like the Limbaugh talking points. They will say anything.

[suzie]

111. Funny, I had this idea that FDR had a lot to do with both the New Deal and the internment of

Japanese citizens, but I guess I was wrong.

Who knew?

[YOY]

72. Don't look now Suze! But folks who are living in a septic tank shouldn't point out turds in the sea

Because if we start listing the little "third way" screw ups we'll be here all night.

[LWolf]

40. I am not a 3rd way Democrat,

and I will NEVER AGAIN cast a vote for one.

[sellitman]

43. I am a Socialist Democrat

I love saying that to Rethugs...the effect is priceless.

[grahamhgreen]

46. I like Social Democrat - it's a direct rebuttal of social conservative...nt

[Cleita]

47. I think you speak for the majority of us.

We still are the majority even if a few parliamentary tricks let the minority rule the majority. I hope that can change in the future.

[Enthusiast]

48. I'm with you, mmonk!

And very well said! Anything less is not the Democratic Party we grew up with.

[RetroLounge]

50. K&R

The so-called Dem in the white house has lost my vote.

RL

[liberation]

52. You ROCK!!!

Right on! No need to ever apologize for wanting a better future, a fairer society, and recognizing that we all do better we WE ALL do better.

I come from a traditional Dem family, who fought in almost every war and theater this country has been involved, who don't feel like they have to ask to have their patriotism "validated" because they wanted and fought for fairer labor. My family taught me to cherish education and seek exposure to other cultures, they felt that taking care of your fellow man is not something to be ashamed of, but something that we are supposed to do because our goal in life is not to sink other people in misery just so that we can feel better about ourselves in a relative way. I was taught to make money the old fashioned way: by earning it. And that making money for the hell of making money is a silly thing to do, the goal is to live a full life not owning as much crap made in china as you can. That respect is earned not granted. That the amazing diversity that we have in this country is something to cherish because it is a beacon of hope to other people to know that everyone from every corner in the world can come here to better themselves and in the process making us even better... not something that is a hinderance. And that it will be a cold day in hell before I have to kneel before anyone nor kiss anyone's ass regardless of who or what they are.

The DLC types can kiss my ass for all I care, and they should stop being such chickenshits and fill out the GOP application already.

[Goldstein1984]

56. Another Democratic Socialist

My decisions are also based on principle, not party. Unbridled capitalism has hurt many times more people than it has helped. It's driving our military spending.

If any other world view created as much poverty, suffering and death, it would quickly be labeled evil.


Rec to +111

[davidwparker]

67. K&R

... in the tradition of FDR.

[StarfarerBill]

70. A Debsian socialist here. K&R

[AllyCat]

71. Nicely said!

[emsimon33]

74. Ditto!

The Democratic Party that built the middle class and the engine of true U.S. economic prosperity.

[YOY]

75. Same here...and not a goddamn bit of name calling is going to change reality.

n.t.

[defendandprotect]

77. Agree . . . New Deal was a positive turning point -- a time of ideals . . .

not sufficiently carried out because National Health Care was never put in place ---

Henry Wallace should have succeeded FDR, for another --

MIC had taken hold by then -- and the CIA --

OTOH, we've know for more than 40 years that corporations were buying government and

pre-bribing and pre-owning our elected officials. Where have we been in reacting to that

reality? What are we doing voting for Democrats whose pockets are stuffed with corporate

money. Corporatism = fascism -- it's a one way street to slavery and hell.

:)

[bvar22]

84. I'm an FDR Democrat.

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens.

Oddly enough, FDR was the leader of a Party named the "Democratic Party", which bears NO resemblance to the Party using THAT name today.

Some self proclaimed "Centrists"or "Pragmatists" at DU would call FDR a "Purist" today.
If so, then I AM also "Purist".
"I welcome their hatred."

[tblue]

92. Me, too. And no amount of namecalling and chastising can change that.

It's in my blood and it's not up for negotiation.

[WillyT]

94. +1000 % - Thank You mmonk... EXACTLY !!!

Our party wrote the damned playbook. And yet we refuse to use it.

:patriot:

:kick:

[madrchsod]

98. i`m an old school democrat

my parents were old school fdr democrats with a healthy dose of liberal methodist thrown in. i have passed my experience to my children.

now if you really want to know about old time democrats you`d have to meet my wife...just do`t mention republicans or wimpy democrats around her.she`ll go "skittles" on your ass...


no third way-neo liberals in this house!

[paparush]

101. Rahm Emanuel Courted my Blue Dog Rep (Shuler - NC)

Called him night and day for weeks, convincng him that he'd have plenty of time to spend with his family, etc.

Emanuel knew exactly who he was getting; a corporatist who's initial appeal was that he was NOT Charles Taylor (aka Chainsaw Charlie).

I'm sick of the liberal wing of the party being lied to, shat upon, and marginalized.

[democrank]

106. K & R

I`m:
an anti-torture Democrat
a health care for all Democrat
a bring the troops home Democrat
a public funding of elections Democrat
a let`s manufacture it here Democrat
an affordable housing Democrat
an alternate energy Democrat
a Geneva Conventions Democrat
a habeas corpus Democrat
a lend-a-hand Democrat
a justice for all Democrat
a no more homeless children Democrat
a support our troops and take care of our veterans Democrat
a let`s fix our infrastructure Democrat
a let`s fix the student loan program Democrat
a let`s get rid of DADT Democrat
an equal means equal Democrat
a let`s take non-violent drug offenders out of prison and into rehab Democrat
a make the Pentagon`s hired mercenaries accountable to someone Democrat
a voting only with a paper trail Democrat
a stop hunger Democrat
an I`ll vote my values Democrat

[Skittles]

110. I AM NOT A THIRD WAY DEMOCRAT DAMMIT

I WILL NOT CHANGE TO ACCOMODATE GARBAGE I CANNOT BELIEVE IT

[phasma ex machina]

114. K&R

[JHB]

The New Deal was an actual "third way" between...

...between communism and the sorts of capitalism which gave birth to it.

The so-called "Third Way" is just smoke and mirrors for wrecking anything that actually worked for ordinary citizens.

[JHB]

119. The New Deal was an actual "third way" between...

...between communism and the sorts of capitalism which gave birth to it.

The so-called "Third Way" is just smoke and mirrors for wrecking anything that actually worked for ordinary citizens.

[TheKentuckian]

124. Oh, you mean a corporate toadie/social darwinist-social moderate

No fucking way.