I guess you can call me a "purist".

I never used to be one. I used to be a fairly moderate person, coming from a background in the Southern Baptist Church.

In 2002 at DU I was way too out of place, and I am sure it showed. I had never been around such liberals, and I guess that showed also.

By 2003 I was still pretty moderate, but I was really caring about keeping our country from invading a country that we knew had nothing to do with 9/11. It infuriated me to hear our Democrats agreeing with George W. that it was for our security, that we must attack.

I started really getting passionate on the opposite side of issues than I used to be when we attended our church...before we left over the "holy war" on Iraq.

I moderated back a little for a while, but it did not last. I guess I am becoming a hopeless liberal and progressive. I find I have little tolerance for words that mean nothing...for Democrats who go on TV and spout nonsense that we know is not reality.

SO all the talk lately about the "purists" here at DU...count me in, I guess.

I firmly believe in full and equal rights in every way for women and for gays. There should be no lines drawn, saying this is okay but that is not. We all get equal rights.

Odd, but that makes me a purist in this Democratic party. Abortion is really only available now to women with good financial resources. DADT and DOMA have not yet gone away. Many of our Democrats are also willing to sell out birth control to please the extreme religious right.

I believe in a real public education. Not one run by private corporations. Our party made its decision on this with the president's appointment to the DOE. He is a powerful man, that Arne Duncan. He has a lot of money, a lot of it...and he is using it to bribe school districts to do it his way. Teachers have been treated badly.

I do not believe it is honest and moral to judge children and teachers on the results of one test, written in secret and graded in secret...totally unregulated.

I believe in unions. I believe that unions gave us the strong middle class we had for a long time but which we no longer have because both parties have been union busting with all their trade deals to make other countries happy.

I believe strongly in separation of church and state. Our party does not seem to share my passion on this. They have strengthened the faith-based initiatives begun by Bush. Of the 25 members, 19 are anti-choice...and they were chosen by our party. So they knew and did not care.

I believe that Catholic bishops should not be helping Democrats write bills that are anti-woman in nature.

I believe that we should have used our majority to get a powerful health care reform bill. We did not. We catered and pandered to the right, and our party ignored the progressives and liberals entirely. They let a small minority control the agenda.

I believe strongly that when a huge uprising of purists, liberals, progressives, independents, and others gave a president and congress a resounding majority....they must use that majority for the common good. Or they will lose it.

I think one of the worst things that is happening now at DU is the constant lecturing and putting down of those of us who are truly worried about the failure of our party to uphold Democratic beliefs that are long-standing and traditional.

There are many terms used to describe those of us who continue to challenge our party leaders. Purist is a common one.

It is a term like "fringe", coined by conservative Democrats to make us sound like we are not so very bright and sensible.

Well, guess what, I am both. And if it is necessary to apply the purist to me because I believe in the above ideals...I proudly accept it.

The Republicans went looking for a place to hide, they found the democratic party.

Apparently now, one can be a good Democrat and support torture, oppose unions, approve discrimination against gays,support government control of a woman`s reproductive organs, support immoral invasions and occupations of other countries, approve of hired mercenaries,corporate control of the party. You can also be a good Democrat and overlook unemployment, ignore poverty,ignore homelessness.

In fact, you apparently can be a good Democrat and support the very same exact policies you were against under President George Bush. And, if you say you`re against bombing civilians or having a church write policy for the government or protecting John Yoo or booting a linguist out of the military because he`s gay, a DUer offers you a pony.

So, here`s to torture, four more wars, more homeless children and a bronze statue to Joe Lieberman and Olympia Snowe, all in the name of being a better Democrat.

What you said is true, and we can't keep making excuses for it.

Where we conspire to accord people equal rights, and enforce the Constitutional edicts of Separation of Church and State.

And by the by... my personal opinion is that spending enough on public education to get class sizes in all schools, not just affluent schools, down to the 20-25 range would do more to improve "test scores" than creating a whole new Charter School System... but, of course, Charter School Systems employ Non-Unionized Teachers.

(Co-incidence? Cheaper teachers, allows hiring more teachers, allows smaller class sizes, leads to better "test scores", leads to accolades for administrators- as if they've done something more spectacular than busting unions to make it cheaper to have smaller class sizes- leads to further points for arguing for Charter Schools... leads to a public-discourse-friendly justification for Teacher-Union busting...)

(Yes, I'm probably just delusional. The Democrats would never try to undermine the interests of their own "constituents"/"base"...)

Proof that an open mind is the prime symptom of wisdom.

eom

:applause:

:yourock:

:)

We simply voted for Democrats. The ones who sit in the legislature have all the power. We only become active participants but once every two years. In every other instance, we're simply passive participants at best. No amount of phone calls or letters or marches changes the fact that they need a lot of money to run a re-election campaign, and only a small few have the money. Naturally, the rich have a competitive advantage over the poor.

Progressives have nothing to own in this cluster fuck. If anybody owns this catastrophe, it's the Republicans and the sell-out Democrats who would rather go-along-to-play-along to avoid rocking the boat and Democrats who know they are selling out and willingly do so because they know they are going to get big bucks from lobbyists come next election.

But your underlying point is a good one: The best we can do is

1. Vote for the right people, and
2. Hold their feet to the fire.

All this obfuscation about "Obama did exactly what he promised to do during the campaign" is disingenuous, at best. We're a looooooooong way from the ideals espoused in the party platform.

PRECLUDE them working for legislation which will benefit the public ---

and that includes Health Care ---

What a joke putting Baucus who is knee-deep in "for profit" health care money in charge

of the health care hearings!! And rather than actually seeing the farce of all of this

we have people arguing over had to work with it !!!!???!!!

Corporations began to buy government and our candidates more than 40 years ago --

we all know this -- yet that reality continues to be ignored by Democrats, including here

at DU where people should be well informed???

Is it self-delusion???

Owe you a "smilie" -- couldn't get them to come up!?

who used to be part of the mushy center right because they really hadn't been shown what was wrong with such a position.

Well, they know beyond a shadow of a doubt what modern conservatism is leading to now. That's just peachy with people who think being part of the majority will protect them. Those of us with more upstairs than that have come around to a much more radical point of view.

I remember you from those days and thinking you were wrong headed. That doesn't happen any more.

Welcome to the loony left. Our numbers are growing every day as more of what conservatives have done to this country becomes known.

I came to DU a full fledged radical leftist back in 2002 as well, holding moderate to lite socialist leanings.

I hold many of your same views, go further on others, and some we share the same goal but find different methods.

For example, I don't just support a woman's right to choose to have an abortion. I support both a man and woman's right to do whatever they choose with their body. That includes selling it for sex. I support legalized prostitution, for both pragmatic and ethical reasons. Ethical because women and men who engage in prostitution are subject to many dangers. Pragmatic because, even though I don't necessarily morally agree with prostitution, it happens anyway and will continue to happen regardless of my or societies approval.

My view on drugs is largely the same. I believe in the legalization of all drugs, including hard drugs. The drug war hasn't stopped people from using drugs, and has done nothing but create a black market that empowers criminals, punishes addicts, and fosters violence.

So, over all, I'm still an extremely radical leftist. In fact, I've become more radical.

Yet, at the same time, I've also moved away from my socialist leanings, and turned more to capitalism and free markets. That's unpopular here at DU and among many liberals, but I see it as a natural extension of liberalism. Liberalism, in my mind, is fundamentally about freedom. I watched Bush for years abuse the powers of government, using it as a weapon against the people. I watched as giant corporations brought ruin upon us all.

The common American liberal view of government is one of a benign force that can be used for good. I once saw it this way, but no longer. I see government as the source of power that allows corporations to thrive. Virtually every major problem associated with business can be associated and drawn back to government in some way.

I was once idealistic, but have become very cynical. I no longer view government as working for the good of the people, but rather the good of the well connected and wealthy. I do not believe this will ever change, so long as human nature remains corruptible. Recent events surrounding health care reform have done nothing to change this cynical view, and everything to reinforce it.

I think that a government-run department store is every bit as stupid as a for-profit fire department. However, capitalixm needs one hell of a lot more regulation than it is getting.

A commune established without any involvement by the state would be one example. Another would be a labor co-op where the firm is collectively owned by the employees.

I'm a strong believer in individualism. I believe individuals should be able to do what they want, by and large, so long as they follow the rule of non-aggression. In my mind more freedom equals more happiness.

I'm not an anarchist, but when it comes to government intervention I don't like it as a general rule of thumb. I like the idea of an immigrant coming to America and establishing some small business on the side of the street. I don't want the government showing up and telling him he can't peddle his wears, and I don't want him to have to pay a huge fee or go through a ton of bureaucracy to do it. I like the idea of people having the ability to choose to end their lives with dignity, or to choose to have an abortion, or to choose to have sex with whom they want, when they want, without the government poking their nose into their business. I like the idea of individuals being empowered to go after polluters, demanding reparations for the toxic sludge they dump, rather than allowing those businesses to be "grandfathered" in through regulation - freeing them from having to answer for their crimes.

Yet, now I feel as if I'm some kind of idealistic radical. At least, that's what I keep being told on DU. Expecting anything has somehow become the mark irrationality and unreasonableness. Holding this President to his own words has somehow become dirty pool, the province of haters, proof of shady intentions at best if not outright sympathy with the politician's right-wing enemies.

Well stated, Mad. All of it. So nice to finally read a rant with so much solid substance.

Though I left the Southern Baptists behind before they all became Republicans and even before I knew the term Dixiecrat. My grandfather told me to "just pull the Democratic lever" when I first voted. I resisted that and researched every candidate. My open mind always got me in trouble and now it gets me called a purist. So be it, I'm as pure as the driven snow. And DLC is just another name for corporatist Republicans in Democratic clothing.

And with much of my Republican family also.

I just keep my mouth shut now unless I am talking to one of the very few liberals around.

I don't anymore. I love living in the northwest. My thirty year high school reunion is coming up soon, so I may well visit for that, but I'm happy to be away.

We went to one or two...then decided never again.

I hear they have been interesting lately. The one in charge for the last few years has been one of the most rabid Republican women ever. She even believes that if you can't afford health insurance you don't deserve health care.

I know someone who ran her out of his office for being so much of an a**hole that the others in the office were getting ready to fight.

but when I went to my 10 year the people I went to high school with had been replaced with neat people. It gave me warm fuzzies.

When I went to my 30th, people who openly bullied me way back when were tripping all over themselves to apologize.

I would rather gnaw my arms off than ever go through that again. I consider it a great triumph that I neither killed nor was killed during that awful time and I was one of the "quasi-popular kids". I cannot imagine anyone wanting to go back there willingly.

an unfair wholesale attack on the Democratic Party.

"It infuriated me to hear our Democrats agreeing with George W. that it was for our security, that we must attack."

Why do you need to paint the glass as empty? Why can't it make you happy that a MAJORITY of Democrats in the House voted against the Iraq war resolution? Does only the negative count? What about the speech from Al Gore? Didn't you hear that?
http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2004/gore/gore092302sp.html Did Gore say that 'we must attack'? Or did he say this?

"If Saddam Hussein does not present an imminent threat, then is it justifiable for the Administration to be seeking by every means to precipitate a confrontation, to find a cause for war, and to attack? There is a case to be made that further delay only works to Saddam Hussein’s advantage, and that the clock should be seen to have been running on the issue of compliance for a decade: therefore not needing to be reset again to the starting point. But to the extent that we have any concern for international support, whether for its political or material value, hurrying the process will be costly. Even those who now agree that Saddam Hussein must go, may divide deeply over the wisdom of presenting the United States as impatient for war."

You seem to be looking for negatives from Democrats. Apparently it is only Democrats "who go on TV and spout nonsense that we know is not reality."

In the same way I apparently should have little tolerance for you, since in your opening about the Iraq war you spouted nonsense that we know is not reality.

See how fun zero tolerance is?

What nonsense are you talking about? I think you may be misreading between the lines.

It's not like we are writing history on blogs, it's opinion and if the op chooses to talk about personal experience and our shared values and principles, more power to her.

You are way over-reading the op. I think I do that pretty often too, so peace.

"It infuriated me to hear our Democrats agreeing with George W. that it was for our security, that we must attack."

That statement was nonsense. It is half-true at best as I tried to demonstrate.

The rest of it seems to be much the same. Because 30 members of the Democratic Party do something, like vote for the Stupak amendment, then the whole party sucks and we might as well elect Republicans - 99% of which voted for the Stupak amendment. The OP's philosophy seems to be "when life hands you half a glass of water, don't think "well, half a glass is better than nothing" and have a nice drink, instead get angry and smash the glass on the ground because broken glass and angry people are better than a stinking half a glass of water."

That is my point.

No, my statement is not nonsense. The only ones who spoke out against war were brought down by their own party.

I have not heard one single Democrat speaking out against Stupak.

Neither does Kucinich? Neither does Byrd? http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0319-04.htm Neither does Clark? http://clarkiw.wordpress.com/2002/10/

Dean was not brought down by his own party. He was brought down by Iowans and lost a primary. It happens. I switched from Dean to Clark because I thought Clark was more electable, but I never got to vote in that primary anyway.

Just because you have not heard one single Democrat speak out against Stupak does not mean that no Democrat has done so. I quickly found one who has

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-kirsten-gillibrand/nyc-women-unite-against-s_b_361071.html

and I bet there are more.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I don't know of a better pronoun for that purpose.

;)

Because only Real Democrats (tm) care about passing a bill and getting a "win" for "our team" without looking at the actual text of the bill.

Hang in there, MF. You're not alone.

at least I think I might sometimes depending on the issue I am discussing

but this OP was about one person saying "I hate the Democratic Party. I am too good to think about supporting their imperfect and corrupt and stupid leaders" with the idea that lots of DUers would say "yeah, me too"

No, not really. Not at all.

I am disappointed, though. They had it all and are throwing it away.

this has happened before --

Under George Mitchell's leadership I can tell you that the Senate was simply turned

over to Bob Dole --

Why? Corporate money --

We all know this -- we've known it for 40 years --

Yet, our actions seem to say that we prefer self-delusion?

Does corporate ownership of government smack too much of a conspiracy?

Well, those who think so should understand that the Establishment, itself, is a conspiracy.


Add into that the rest of the right wing corporate farce -- from creating the right wing

religious movement here in America to creating the VIOLENT Islamic movement and moving it

into the Middle East -- See my Journal on that -- towards the bottom.

US/CIA created the Taliban/Al Qaeda --

And it is an old story -- Patriarchy's strongest and most prevalent tool is using organized

patriarchal religion to undermine and co-opt nations and their people!

Patriarchy/organized patriarchal religion/capitalism -- that's the hierarchy.

If we want to win against this power, DU should listen to Jane Hamsher --

We are fighting corporatism/fascism --


PS: For some reason, I can't get the "smilies" to come up -- but sending you a handful!

What a shitty, snide little comment.

shitty and snide nails it.

Is that a good thing?

.

Don't have kids, and am way too obsessed over the minutiae of health care policy. I really appreciate that you are informing us all of what is going on with education, though it isn't front burner enough to demand attention from most of us.

being part of the "reality-based community."

At least, that's where I still am.

Cheers!

I do believe America will be much better off in three years than it was before we elected a Democratic President. I know I will not get all the Liberal wishes I want, in fact probably none of them but I also know the USA was absolutely careening off a cliff under Republican management and now we are at the edge of the cliff but have not yet moved away from it. What bothers me the most is the LIES. I actually trusted Obama and I feel like I have been played...Played for a huge fool and that feeling is not a good one.

But if you have a good majority you must accomplish something or lose it.

That truly worries me.

Well stated, as usual.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

But, God forbid that doing so might threaten "Party Unity".

I am starting to think that way more and more.

I like your story. It makes me feel that fantastic feeling that one gets when someone becomes a friend. One of the best feelings in the world. Like success.


I like good music, food, bike rides, health, friends, movies. Which tells you very little about me since those could be anything from lousy to phenomenal. Which is also why we're having such a hard time with progressive agendas. When I say purist I mean someone who likes the best. But that still doesn't work. Best? Good?

I'm trying to find a way to describe to people something that would make them want it. Something that would make Lieberman's phones burn up with calls. Or Olympia Snowe's office to shut down under the weight of the nation's concern over health care. We could do it. But people don't see what "it" is.

We have Fox so-called news, and crap music and food. Our education and entertainment are just about as pathetic and low as it can get, especially considering just how much money goes into producing them.

I like music, but I won't listen to the same thing over and over, interspersed with shouty commercials. Or tv news with banners and flashy lights in the background. I can hardly take Rachel Maddow's page turn noise. I've about had it, except she's good. I like chocolate, but not sugar and brown food coloring. I like coffee, but I finally found that unless I'm making my own espresso, it's just not something I want in my mouth.

And health is more important than anything! So why isn't the entire nation clamoring and insisting that we all get cared for properly?

It's like most people are willing to listen to a band that's out of tune. I hang out on a European forum, and this morning sevreal members said they literally quit their jobs to get away from the 3 hour music loop that played over and over in their offices. How different is that from any other low quality thing in life?

I want to improve. I never want to go in reverse. It's what makes getting old so difficult. And what makes being ill so difficult. It's not purist at all. It's the desire for quality. Good quality.

:applause:

:patriot:

Here, I'm a radical leftist and a naive and stupid one at that.

So few people I talk to on a day to day basis seem to notice the world politics.
The US government isn't a very diverse group of people, Dems and Repugs alike.
Seems you can cram most of the two party system into one corner of the political compass.

Time and time again I find myself in the opposite quadrant.

The words associated with our corner have been so demonized that few will identify themselves with them, but when asked their positions on various issues, the majority have a liberal view.

:thumbsup:

:kick:

Love you madfloridian, you make coming here worth while these days.

Hang in there, we are hanging on by hang nails at this point here.

And as always, if you and yours are ever in the Northwest, we got your room and board covered, it would be our honor.

Alyce, also never shutting up to sell out elected representatives.

Extremely well said.

You keep at 'em kid!

Don't pay any attention to the colostomy-baggers. You know, the ones who are full of shit! I've got most of them on ignore, anymore.

Thanks for the thread, madfloridian.:thumbsup:

I am pure about that and I am proud to say those words mean everything to me. It is those in the upper 1-10% that are the fringe element in America and they purposely hinder our country and her people from ever seeing true change and progress for all.

/add a word

how to compromise with corporate power in the main --

We should be arguing for full employment --

Arguing over the details of MEDICARE FOR ALL --

Re-instanting Glass-Steagall -- Re-regulating capitalism --

Knocking out the trade agreements --

Strengthening labor so they can unionize --


What we seem to see here is self-delusion re the actual control of our reality by corporations --

and their control over the entire government agenda!!!




Owe you two smilies -- can't get them to come up!

Here, we can share this one for now.:hi:

Way to tell how many unrecs.

From the Top Ten, recs only.

"General Discussion
I guess you can call me a "purist".
120 recs : By madfloridian"

That's a lot for an opinion piece that is not an attack piece.

Interesting.

Amen. I've been sick of it at *least* since a "shut up" post set off one of the gay purges.

meh, but the whole country is going to hell in a handbasket, so why should this place be any different? I counteract one of your unrecs, btw.

is the instant dismissal of all things not "pro" Obama.

Yes I supported the man (politician)
Yes I voted for the man (politician)
Yes I still have HOPE for the man (politician) to do the right thing.

but....

when he makes a poor decision, he needs to be called on it. Failure to do so is to just be a sheeple like all the freepers we have made fun of for years. I for one simply will not be a party to march in lock step with Obama simply because of a (D) attacked to his name.

I would love to see this site get back to fighting for what is right, instead of being cheerleaders.

Something has happened to it along the way... some call that "something" pragmatism, others call it evolution. I call it prostitution.

The labels do not matter to me - only the results. And the results of DLC-style pragmatism are unacceptable.

I agree. The party has pandered too much to the very people who nearly ruined this country.

:kick:

Who appointed these hall monitors who write cute posts accusing people of being selfish and having temper tantrums when, in fact, they are exercising their constitutional and personal right and duty to call out those we elected (this time around, we *really* elected them) who are ignoring We, The People, in deference to corporate and religious (same thing, generally) interests who *do not* have our interests at heart?

(Wow, that was a long sentence! But I'll worry about grammatical perfection later. Passion counts for more than commas!)

Thanks again for all your hard work!

K&R to solidarity!

Liberals always end up doing all the compromising.

When a "centrist" accuses you of being a purist- it's just projection.

After all, since when has a "centrist" ever sullied his conservative purity by compromising on a issue in a way where a Liberals get their way on an issue?

They may be out there, but I cant think of a single example of a centrist DEM giving something up or ever compromising with a Liberal on anything.

:dem:

-Laelth

n/t

I am glad you are here, madfloridian, regardless of how you may be labeled.

:toast:

:dem:

-Laelth

:toast:

Because it's time to make some more room for me if there is! :patriot:

I see I'm in good company!!

If it weren't for you, it would be a lot darker here for many of us. When you stand up for democratic ideals, and refuse to be co-opted, or silenced, that is what keeps real hope alive. It is hard sometimes to watch the constant struggle of our times, often it seems we go quite a while without gaining any ground. But of course there are so many courageous things done every day. Sometimes they are shown in the form of a wrenching display of bravery, against the most desperate trouble. Other times it is in the simple act of speaking truth & talking justice as an ordinary every day act.

It meant a lot to read that.

:hi:

and if it did come together what "Plan B" might be to wrest control of

the Democratic Party from the corporations who now own our government????

Of course, that began with corporations buying government -- and our Congress --

both parties -- one hell of a long time ago -- !!!

Something so many here still want to ignore--

You can't ignore it and make sensisble decisions!!

:)

Great post --- :)

You rock!

You have an unrealistic expectation of Catholic bishops there. It is their job as members of the Catholic hierarchy to kick women down. Asking them not to push for anti-woman legislation while remaining Catholic bishops is like a vegetarian asking a McDonald's clerk not to sell meat, while remaining employed by McDonald's. I heartily agree with you on the separation of church and state, and women's rights, including abortion rights. Elected leaders, backed by citizens who understand that a proper understanding of citizenship involves a secular state, must reject faith-based meddling in public business, but you can't realistically expect clerics not to try and meddle: yearning for theocracy is part and parcel of religion.



I agree. Republicans have so ramped up the use of cloture, that the Senate Democratic caucus, 60-strong, has excellent and obvious grounds for abrogating the rule of 60 votes for cloture, in favor of simple majority. That they haven't done so, in itself demonstrates conclusively that fewer than 51 (the number required to change Senate rules) are determined to enact more powerful reform, and it suggests that 59 are glad for the obviously fake excuse that 41 prevented them from doing what they really wanted to do.

So, um, no.

My mom's first vote was for FDR. She brought me up to believe that the Democrats were the party of the working people and that it was a sin if not a crime to vote any other way. Well, she is 90 now, and does not recognize her Party, and is devastated that she will not live to see it change back to what it was and should be.

Democrats SHOULD be the party of working people.

So much has changed.