You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #15: Yes. I think it's important (I wasn't privy to earlier discussions here.. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
Brotherjohn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-18-03 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #7
15. Yes. I think it's important (I wasn't privy to earlier discussions here..
... on the matter).

I do not think this is trivial. We are talking about the single most important core principle (IMHO) of our country. Kucinich and Gephardt's favoring of such an amendment also put up a red flag for me.

As far as Dean, it is entirely different to say you support a "law". That's been done, and if that law cannot pass consitutional muster, it will inevitable be struck down. It's a bit wishy-washy, but I can forgive a candidate for being wishy-washy on an issue more than taking the wrong side altogether. I don't necessarily expect a candidate to take a stong stand in defense of such a right when it is politically charged and unpopular, and, as you say, it isn't something the president really has control over. But I DO NOT expect a candidate to clearly take the wrong stand on a first amendment issue. I expect him to take a strong stand in defense of free speech, or at least not a strong stand against it.

As far as Kerry, he did the former. His position is right on the money and not wishy-washy at all. Yes, he may want to punch someone doing it in the face, but he also realizes that one of the reasons he served his country was to defend that guy's right to burn that flag. He forcefully and clearly stated, I think, his opposition to such an amendment.

As far as the other comments here about "what the people want", that doesn't wash for me. A president can't support a degradation of the First Amendment because "it's what the people want". It's up to the president to stand up for these things. While I admit Dean is being wishy-washy (if he supports a "law"), I think Clark is simply making the wrong stand in supporting such an amendment.

All this being said, I don't necessarily think it's a litmus test, even against the other dems (certainly not against Bush, where Clark wins hands down). I also understand it comes from his military background. I'm just saying it's a real concern I have about supporting him in the primaries.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC