#7&9
I'm not talking about "historically". I'm talking about the stated Agenda of today's Democratic Party.
"Democrats will fight to end discrimination based on race, sex, ethnicity, national origin, language, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, age, and disability in every corner of our country, because that's the America we believe in."
This is quoted from the Party Platform. I assume that the platform will change very little for 2010 or 2012. BTW above this statement they show a photo of those present, including MLK, for Pres. Johnson's signing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. So it seems the party is equating their "fight" and expectations for success, to the hay days of the Civil Rights Movement. Or so they wanted and want us to believe.
#8
"heh, you be bad...what is good for the nation? What, iyo, is the nation?"
I believe that delving into the minutiae of my post to ask me to define a concept is counterproductive. Everyone has their own definition for what "the nation" means to them. It doesn't matter if our definitions are different, what matters is that our leaders are keeping their promises to "fight" to ensure that most of us can be proud that our nation has not gone so far astray that it can no longer be recognized by any of us. I don't believe that the Obama Administration has corrected our course far enough away form the injustices of the Bush Administration. They have not addressed FISA, The Patriot Act, Rendition, etc, etc, etc.
#10
Your post summarizes what I tried to get across to the OFA cheerleaders on Tuesday. My Rep. Joe Donnelly has not proven himself to be better than a Republican. He wants to keep DOMA, DADT, and is against EDNA. His name is on the list of Reps that have stated that they will not vote for the Senate Health Care Plan unless Stupak's anti-choice wording is in the bill. This anti-choice crap is a red herring. They could have easily just dropped in the Hyde wording. But no, the "status quo" isn't good enough. They want to make abortion virtually unavailable, uninsured and therefore unaffordable.
As a Dyke, why do I care? Because it's a "slippery slope" to these guys taking more control over MY body. It does not affect these MEN at all. This will not affect woman who can afford to pay out of pocket. They always have and always will be able to get an abortion. This affects middle class and poor women
. And these rich white men don't seem to care one way or another as long as it gets them votes and allows them to take communion.
Again from the Part Agenda:
"We are committed to ensuring full equality for women: we reaffirm our support for the Equal Rights Amendment, recommit to enforcing Title IX, and will urge passage of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women."
There is no specific wording in either bill about male reproductive "rights".
I demand a amendment stating that there will be not federal funding for "male enhancement" or "erectile dysfunction". Maybe then these old white guys will get it. I still have my doubts.
Oh and don't give ME any of this crap that erectile dysfunction is a medical condition, so is pregnancy. DUH!