What's the real purpose of critics who neglect to distinguish between different Democrats

What's the real purpose behind these articles and posts which lump the majority of our Democratic legislators together in their criticism ?

I think these broad-brush smears come mainly from folks who couldn't care less about maintaining our Democratic party, and in some cases, from folks actively working toward our party's defeat, like Greens and Libertarians (and, of course, republicans) who would like nothing more than for the Democratic party to fail, splinter our support, and (they hope) cause the disaffected to join their own organizations.

I personally don't think we can afford to have our party collapse and lose their majority in Congress which many folks worked so hard to accomplish. I don't think we can afford collapsing our party and just wait for some virtuous alternative to become elevated to a position (like our party enjoys right now) where they have an opportunity and potential to effectively challenge the administration.

If it's not an intention of ours to pull our party down, then I believe we have to be careful to highlight the majority of Democratic legislators who regularly defend principles and values most of us can agree on, and not allow our criticisms to give those looking on the impression that our party reflects and supports that minority of Democratic legislators who regularly work to undermine those principals and values.

We need MORE of a majority of Democrats to effect the changes we seek, and to provide resistance to the anti-democratic efforts of the republican opposition; not less. We certainly can't afford to have our party descend into the minority in Congress again.

Let's concentrate some of our energy on highlighting the legislative efforts from the majority of our party, and try and refrain from promoting the false impression that the capitulations of a minority of our legislators represent the attitude, intentions, and efforts of the vast majority of our elected Democrats.

Our disappointment and frustration with certain individuals in the party should not be interpreted or framed as unhappiness with the collective voice of the representatives and those Democrats who work and govern at the grassroots level.

Thank you. :kick: MKJ

Do you see a lot of differences between the wings of the Two Party when so many on both sides continue to enthusiastically support the occupation of Iraq? Continue to denounce full, equal rights for same sex couples? Continue to allow the administration its claim to unilateral rule by decree with no accountability?

There are exceptional Democrats with the courage and spine to stand strong against the tide of militaristic fascism, but sadly, the are the exception. Don't get pissy just because you are more loyal to the party banner than you are to the Constitution.

we band together to get enough support to elevate US ALL to a position where we can begin to challenge the republican opposition. I would argue that there isn't any one faction within our party which could achieve the majority in Congress on their own. That fact challenges us all to work together to reconcile the many different views and strategies from the many diverse regions of the nation whose voters choose to band together under our party banner. They don't check their ideals at the door, but no one group is in any position to unilaterally dictate what they want to the rest of the party; much less, roll over the opposition.

I would further argue that the majority of our party DOES regularly represent and work to advance our core principals and values into law or into action. The legislative defeats we've suffered in this Congress have been enabled by a MINORITY of Democrats who have joined with a unified republican opposition in advancing Bush's initiatives.

I believe that part of that minority complicity has been enabled by mismanagement from the Democratic leadership, like in the way they allowed the spy bill to come up for a vote in both houses. But, in that effort and in others, the majority of our party has remained true to the values we elected them to represent. The results of their efforts don't show that, but the majority's commitment to upholding those principals and values in their mere 7 month reign has been unmistakable and evident in their rhetoric and votes.

For example, the spy bill was passed with the complicity of about 41 Democrats in the House and 16 in the Senate. The vast majority of our party did the right thing. They deserve our support for that.

I am not allowed to condemn those who side with fascism? I am not allowed to demand my rights as a gay human and American? I am not allowed to point out the gross violations of international law, ratified treaties and human rights being carried out by the United States in Iraq? All because they have a D behind their name?

Who, then, is going to hold these people accountable for their actions?

Why should the vast majority of our Democratic legislators, who regularly work to advance our principles and values, be subject to the same scorn and condemnation that those who work against our interests deserve?

What's wrong with distinguishing between individual legislators and their individual actions? Is that so hard to do?

I see lots of very well deserved scorn dumped on those who do not. Again, we must remain silent against those who deserve scorn to maintain the illusion of party unity? If we are to distinguish between individual lawmakers, why are we ordered to vote for any and all Democrats regardless of whether they deserve our vote?

You can not have it both ways.

And, I don't see anyone 'ordering' you to vote. You do take a chance with these Democratic centrists we elect, but, if they organize with our party, they help elevate our party to a position where we can actually begin to confront Bush. A lot of these centrists do subsequently pull away from the mostly progressive majority of Democratic legislators on some key issues, but the benefit in electing them -as opposed to electing the republican alternatives - should be more than obvious to anyone who is concerned with obtaining and holding the majority in Congress. That republican alternative represents the certain and utter defeat of ANY of our ideal or initiatives.

You are the one making an assertion of broad brush attacks. Please support your assertions and convince me that I am wrong.

As for ordering me to vote, look around. Any post where someone says they are sitting out an election rather than vote for a DINO who does not represent Democratic ideals is deleted. Any poster who expresses support of any kind for a non-Democrat is solidly shouted down for "betraying" the Democratic Party before having his post deleted (while the posts pouring vitriol over the OP remain in place, presumably as a warning to anyone who DARES to express independence.) I would be happy to provide links to support my claims but, as I said, the moderators are quite vigilant in suppressing such posts.

I don't have the time or interest to compile them all. Most folks know very well what I'm talking about; Democrats this, Democrats that . . .

This fella starts out specifically attacking the leadership then goes for the generic label as he flails his criticisms at 'Democrats' . . .


. . . the Democrats "are not spineless or weak. Nobody pushes them to do what they don't want (no matter how much the Digbys would like to explain away their actions that way.). They're completely corrupt and fully, volitionally complicit." The reader also pointed me to a comment they'd left on Glenn Greenwald's takedown of the vote: "It doesn't take any courage to do what you want to do. Just the opposite. They WANT all these things, but can hardly reveal that to their often sincere but easy-to-dupe followers, so they hide behind the 'we were threatened, Bush made us do it, we're spineless, and we don't want to look weak,' meme. They cop a plea to the lesser charge but the truth is, tragically, far more dark."

They cop to cowardice to cover up complicity.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1525073


It's really not that hard to be specific if you really want to. I think these folks want our entire party condemned to the shit pile, and they appear to be gaining some ground on that.

local level.

That is the intent of the worst elements of our government and businesses. MKJ

party are those elected democrats that support the illegal and unconstitutional activities and unchecked powers of this republican administration. Otherwise they would vote to take those unwarranted powers away from this republican administration and strengthen their own party.

They certainly don't deserve to be associated with those legislators who stand up and do the right thing. I think they should be isolated and scorned with every resource we have available, including their exclusion from the support we provide to those legislators who work to advance our core principles and values.

It gets so discouraging though. I'm tired.

the Gingrich 'revolution'

the entire Regan administration and his and George HW Bush's weaseling out of Iran Contra, capped by Reagan's goddamn name on my airport

The entire Bush1 administration . . . we're fighting the rebirth of those elements, even now

I've never allowed myself to believe the fight we faced was in any way easy or assured. Even in victory, we need to remain extremely vigilant. We need to stay focused and resolute.

I'll take this opportunity to say we have our work cut out.

In a parliamentary system, like most of the free world, most of us would probably be in the Green party, and we would be successful in electing about 25% of the Parliament. The elected officials would then decide with what repugnant idiots to form a majority with.

In our "winner take all" system, we have to decide who to sleep with. To do otherwise, like the Nadar idiots, is to had the country over to those who you could never sleep with.

And I am very, very tired of itching all the time.

than the 16 votes in the Senate and the 41 votes in the House.

Moreover, there appears to be an ACTIVE effort to hide the extent of this support.

For example:

There were two versions of the FISA bill in the House. The Democratic version gave Bush/Gonzo far less powers. Both bills obtained a majority vote, but, because Pelosi/Hoyer required that the Democratic version needed a 2/3 vote, only the Bush version passed.

Under these circumstances, just how are we supposed to separate the "Good Democrats" from "The Few Bad Apples"?

We are being openly lied to by our leadership. So far, I haven't seen anyone in the House ranks openly complain of the treachery. Guilt by association is becoming harder and harder to suppress.

and, they should be ousted for their capitulation in allowing these bills to come up for a vote at all. I really think they're more incompetent than they are deliberately complicit with Bush.

Its been 6 years since 9/11 and we've been just fine without it.

at all.

For Democrats, the past 7 years have been absolutely brutal and after last night, the anger is completely understandable. It's one thing to know the other party is responsible for all the crap that has happened, but it feels like betrayal once you realize they had some help from our side. Personally, I'll take anger over apathy any day of the week.

Do I praise those Democrats who didn't vote for warrantless wiretapping? No. That would be like praising an accountant for doing math or a waiter for serving food. Every member in Congress gets paid to do their job and the very least I expect from them is to uphold the Constitution.

with their complicity and betrayals. These legislators who stand up and do the right thing need and deserve our support.

The anger is understandable, but I think it can result in the apathy you speak of (among voters) if it manifests itself in misleading, broad-brush condemnations *of our party in general.

If it's a systematic pattern, the responsibility lies squarely upon the leaders in Congress.

and Dean doesn't get a pass.

controlled Congress, they have been pitiful at best, and co-conspirators at worst.

Is he a 'pitiful co-conspirator? What about Barbara Lee? Feingold?

What about the legislators who've voted as we would have them vote? Aren't they 'Dems?'

Or any of them, for that matter, that shows more complicity than having one or a few Representatives that are pissing in the wind, so to speak, because there own damned party leadership won't back their bills or motions. The responsibility for the mess we're in isn't evenly divided among all Democrats, or Republicans for that matter. Bush is the most responsible, obviously, however, that doesn't dismiss the responsibility of the opposition party to ACT as the opposition party.

When somebody does something right, it doesn't make the whole party fantastic.

we still need as much support as we can manage to help our party achieve a veto-proof, filibuster-proof majority.

The first organizing opportunity we have should be used to find unapologetic, experienced replacements.

And you appear to be one of them

these folks who spend most of their time haphazardly working to arbitrarily divide and defeat our party, and effectively divide and discourage those who would organize under our Democratic banner.

who cares deeply about our country. I always have cared deeply, and I've always identified with the Democratic party as I've worked to address and advocate for those issues and concerns I believe in and care about.

It remains the most effective and vehicle in place to confront the republicans; and to advance those issues and concerns that I advocate.

I trace a good deal of that support to the Democrats' belief in the primacy of the federal government, and in our party's traditional expectation of the federal government's responsibility to defend those rights expressed in the 14th and 15th Amendments. It's that belief and advocacy by our party over the years - and the lack of that philosophy from republicans committed to weakening the power and influence of the federal government - which has kept me solidly in the Democratic camp.

Of course, there are other issues which our party represents against republican opposition which compel me to support our Democratic legislators. But, our Democratic party's defense of the primacy of our federal government is more than enough to make me a lifetime Democrat.

I cried in day care/nursery school when the radio reported Johnson wasn't running. My parents got me a huge Humphrey button to wear. I've been a dead-dog Democrat ever since. I'd rather elect a dead dog than enable a republican to office.

I happen to believe that the majority of our party IS, and have (in my adulthood) supported the best values and intentions for our country, and have as much respect for the Constitution as your insulting posturing insinuates you have.

The Democratic party is a coalition of interests - all committed against the opposition party

It is the only collection of those concerns we have managed to elevate to the point where we can begin to challenge Bush and his republicans.

It's obvious that we disagree on tactics and strategies - even varying degrees of commitment on some issues. Those disagreements should not be animated to the point where we disintegrate the only vehicle we have in place to even hope to confront the republicans as they press their ambitions forward in our political system.

The majority of legislators in our party are still committed to reasonable solutions to confronting the abuses and crimes of the administration. The majority of our Democratic legislators are still committed to advancing progressive initiatives and concerns into action. I just can't buy into any argument which advocates or has the intention of weakening or dismantling our political vehicle; especially without offering any other realistic alternative which is in any position to assume the same elevation that we've achieved in the election of our present majority.

Let's not develop an amnesia about what we faced in the minority. Our party is worth defending; even if the best we're able to accomplish is to influence and maintain our own place in the coalition against the republican opposition.

You seem to have an empty hand as you attempt to squeeze the life out our party with the other.

so that I really don't have to rely on someone else's opinion to form my own.

But, if it makes you feel any better, I'm actually inspired to recall those experiences, that knowledge, and those beliefs in responding to your hollow criticisms.

turn people away from the Democratic Party. That is the green/3rd party agenda. Their whole goal is to infiltrate the party, gain people's trust and manipulate them into seeing things their way thereby attempting to steal them from our party. They are leeches and bloodsuckers. That's their whole purpose. They befriend dems and use deceitful propaganda to attempt to steal them away for their own party. It's why I can't stand the green party and those that partake in such things. They share ignorance of the highest order and they are dishonorable and sneaky. That's what they do. Their purpose is to destroy our party and steal its members with just as much vitriol, dishonesty and deceit as the right wing uses.

It has become increasingly evident that many of them are here and are doing their damn best to split our party and 'convert' party members into their ignorant cult. It's about time we just simply come out and say it.

So yeah, I'd say your hunch is correct. We need to be vigilant in not allowing them to get away with their deceitful, provocative and baiting bullshit.

:rofl:

Aside from that, I'm seeing things quite clearly. The agenda is obvious and the infiltration here is readily apparent to anyone with even half a functioning brain. Are you disputing that we have a bunch of 3rd party supporting trouble makers who when it comes down to it can't stand the Democratic Party and are doing their best to get others disgusted with them so that they will join their ignorant ranks?

If you are, then I would not only recommend you holding on to your pills, but also requesting a good pair of reading glasses as well.

third party, and third that there are any "ranks" at all. The Left wing of the Democratic party is hardly cohesive, with dozens of factions and disagreements, now just imagine the same, but ten fold, for those NOT under the Democratic party label at all. There's no grand conspiracy here, just differing perspectives. Besides that, given your avatar, I would imagine you would want these people to vote for the Democratic party, rather than driving them away. You do that much better with honey rather than vinegar.

That way they can feel all superior and shit.

*sigh*

... "I told you so" punch, and are scared of being late to that party.

in their speech, typing, maybe in our thinking as well. People get frustrated and let loose. So, extreme or impassioned statements need to be taken with a pillar of salt. (Maybe Skinner should mail DU salt cellars instead of bumper stickers. :)

So far, they're doing a pretty good job of it too.

The Democrats in the House have a large enough Majority to pass any bill they WANT to pass. Having MORE of a Majority means jack in the House. Things is, the party has been infiltrated by repukes posing as Dems. I knew this would happen if they were welcomed into the party. Big, HUGE mistake.

Yes, the Blue Dog Dems are traitors and they should be distinguished from those Dems who favor the Constitution, but I see this whole debacle as a failure of our Dem Leadership to reign in the Blue Dogs and vote with their bloc. If Pelosi and Reid really wanted the opposite outcome from this vote, then they could have worked to create it. They chose not to; therefore, they SUCK!

J

when they allowed this republican substitute bill to advance to votes in both houses.

We need someone leading our party who won't be swayed by the blather from the WH and their republican enablers. Gotta include my own state's Hoyer in that *criticism, along with Pelosi and Reid.

I still can't fathom what Pelosi might have to fear from her constituents, who are probably the most likely to support any decision to kill a Bush Bill. Reid, I could see some self-preservation concerns, and as for Hoyer, I suspect he's a Neocon/APAIC shill.

J

It does not matter what party is in the majority of Congress when the President may wire tap citizens in direct contradiction of explicit prohibitions in the Constitution, imprison innocent persons by executive fiat, declare persons to be criminals without due process of law, and force the nation into costly war after war.

You can talk about the glory of big tent until you're blue in the face, if the party is undisciplined, which it is, it will be unable to function effectively, which it doesn't. The current situation in congress means that the democratic party holds a symbolic majority, but the inability to marshall that majority ends up with them carrying water for Bush

Another poster gave it a name, but it is a subset of Democrats that vote with the Republicans and are actively obliterating the Republic by a combination of blatantly Unconstitutional acts against its citizens and debilitating, ongoing, perpetual war.

Together, this new de facto coalition essentially makes up a new party, and it shall be called the War Party.

or a Dennis Kucinich or a Howard Dean on the Repukes side of the isle. Maybe a Ron Paul, but only one or two - Dems have a large number of dedicated people trying to impeach Dick Cheney and make the AG tell the truth. I see very few to none of that from Repukes. When people lump ALL Dems together, I believe it is out of ignorance for what the few good are doing. Most just go about their business.

I want change and I see it with the Dems, even if a lot of them vote against the peoples best interest. Still a zillion times better than the Republicans!

Zillions.