I wish I had not watched NOW tonight on PBS. It increased my disappointment...

with our party leaders. I should have known better than to expect any Democratic leader to say of course women should make their own health care decisions. Howard Dean used to say things like that, but tonight he did not.

Tonight hearing Howard Dean on PBS saying that recruiting those to run who are against abortion is okay as long as they are with us on other issues....was a huge disappointment. I do not agree with his stance at all. When he was DNC chairman he stayed out of primaries, but the committee leaders like Rahm and Schumer chose anti-choice candidates to run and funded their campaigns. But apparently he agreed with them.

The problem with that philosophy can readily be seen when you apply it to any policy for which Democrats are supposed to stand. There appears to be nothing left of our traditional value systems as a party.

I felt sad to hear Dean agree with that philosophy. It just added to the frustration I have felt this month with the party.

The women's rights issue has gone so far to the right that a woman in Florida was hospitalized against her will to keep the fetus alive. She was not allowed a second opinion.

Not a single Democrat anywhere spoke out about this outrage.

I have been around health care givers for a while as my husband recovers. I have been around many whose families are in crisis. I have seen our party with its majority fail to stand up for the real reforms they promised. I have seen the crises in ERs because so many are without health care.

They have allowed conservative Democrats to hijack the process of health care reform, they are seemingly clueless to the great needs of people right now.

When I hear of their plan to cut Medicare I feel sick inside. What I have seen and heard lately makes me sure we will lose it all in November if they follow through on those cuts. People are frustrated and angry.

Even the Democrats I trusted to stand up for the rights of women, the strengthening of health care safety nets like Medicare....are not coming through.

I am seeing the dismantling of public education under a Democratic administration. I am seeing billionaires being allowed to decide how schools will be reformed. They are turning schools over to companies who want to profit from them.

I am seeing our party actually refuse to support the Ohio Secretary of State who worked her butt off during the election to keep things honest. Jennifer Brunner was told by the DCCC chair Bob Menendez that she had not gotten enough money and that he was not afraid of her.

How dare he.

There is the new effort under Democrats to complete the privatization of Social Security that we fought so hard against when Bush was president. Did we fight just so the Democrats could do the deed themselves? They are already using the terminology of privatization.

I once posted the question here about when and why and how the Senate began to need that 60 votes to have a majority. It never has made sense to me unless they are doing it to keep a one-party type system.

I have been around more lately who are conservatives, fundamentalists, and see things from the right wing point of view. That's how it is here where we live. In normal times we mostly see those who are more liberal like we are, but that has not been possible lately.

I notice when a health care issue comes up, I don't even try to defend stuff anymore. Because the right winger can throw anything back at me and say that our party is doing it also.

I wish I had not watched NOW tonight. I guess it brought out the building grouchiness in me about how those of us who believe in standing up for Democratic values are being marginalized.

I tend to agree with you even though the my practical side says that's not realistic.

Not at all.

You merely said that you were disappointed that some Democrats don't agree with you on every single issue. That's clearly not the same thing as ideological purity. My bad.

And you know it.

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

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

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

:crazy:

also considered civil to drop in to sneer at the concerns of women as "idealogical purity"

Emily's List originally put even Repug women in office because they were female

and supported choice!

Many other women's groups will support the Democratic Party to the bitter end . . .

as long as their position is faintly pro-choice! Maybe even as long as the Dem

position is an iota better than the Repugs!!

Drives me nuts --

But, for a number of years now, it's been obvious that the Democrats are not only

going corporate, but giving up social reforms that liberals and progressives fight for --

and that includes becoming wishy-washy on abortion!!

If you're a capitalist trying to influence government, in the end you will stand against

all human rights because capitalism is based on exploitation of nature and even other

human beings!!

Anyone who is in denial of that reality should look to the past --

Elites don't change their suicidal agenda.

:evilfrown: :wtf:

It infuriates me that the only response they give for selling out women and gays is that we are "ideologically pure"

Will they be surprised when the new progressive movement is led by women and other marginalized/disenfranchised?


BY VIRTUE OF BEING FEMALE WE ARE LESS THAN? WORTH LESS? :evilfrown: Seeing Red is RIGHT!!!! :kick:

fascism --

and I say "fascism" purposefully --

Patriarchy is fascism --

Organized patriarchal religion -- male-supremacist religion -- is fascism --

Capitalism is fascism --

:evilgrin:

:hi:

time, and I put them on "ignore." It's a term right out of the GOP/ DLC playbook.

Some folks have gotten tripped up into thinking like rightwingers from all the brainwashing and do sometimes recover fully, but takes time.

Not excusing the behavior, just putting an exclamation point on the power of thought viruses.

that values trump everything else. The part cannot cross those lines. Unfortunately, our party has no such lines, and will throw away any issue, any constituency, any group's rights in exchange for another warm seat.

But if you have the warm seat, but got it by sacrificing your values, what is the person in that warm seat going to support? You are left with a party that doesn't support anything?

It isn't ideological "purity." It's having reasons to have a party to begin with. It's the purposes or goals we're electing people to uphold. These are their reasons for being democrats, and our reasons for electing them. We can't be electing people just for the hell of it, or just for the sake of having value-less democrats in power.

It is getting beyond sad and sickening that people treat the democratic party the way they treat their favorite football team; as a team to cheer and support for no other reason than because it is your team. People are deciding that their only purpose as democrats is to cheer the party and see the party win, win, win, but they don't care what the party wins, as long as the party wins.

This isn't a sports league, and there isn't a trophy or ring at the end of all of this. There is legislation that will severely effect millions of people's lives. Supporting our values is our only way of having an impact and making sure we get the legislation we want and need.

to act like it is acceptable to treat half the population as LESS THAN HUMAN.

of the population. As long as women don't vote as a monolithic group, and most can be coerced or tricked or browbeaten into voting for anti-choice dems, "because who else are you going to vote for, the republican?" he can ignore women.

We need woman, and men, to join together into an absolutely insistent, adamant block and vote only for pro-choice candidates. If there is no pro-choice candidate, cut all funds and create a huge public outcry until there is one.

We need to insist that being pro-choice is an irrevocable part of party platform and can not be sacrificed. We need to insist that all democrats MUST be pro-choice.

We need to have a short list of core values that are absolute, and this absolutely needs to be on it! Otherwise our party doesn't have any values and exists only to exist.

It's another gamble that people have no where else to go and will support Dems because Rs are so unbelievably heinous.

IMHO its a very dangerous gamble at this point.

Of two evils is somehow a "good."

It is yet another reason why we are not taught as much about critical thinking as are people in other nations.

If we're gonna pretend we don't know we have corporate government aka Fascism now, in order to continue voting, we damn well better have something to vote FOR rather than the same old hollow promises and flippant threats.

Nowhere to go? That may include the polls.

and find there is nothing appealing on the menu, in fact the items turn my stomach, what do I do? Do I choose the least offensive meal? No. I walk out, go hungry, eat a protein bar, go home and make something I do like. I'm not spending money on something I do not like. Politicians are the same thing. They cost us money. What do you do if there isn't one on the ballot you find appealing? Why would we waste our money on a candidate who is the equal of haggis, lutefisk, or raw monkey brains?

I've been thinking about this a lot lately. Chicago just had it's primary last week. When my choice is between candidates that turn my stomach, I plan to leave it blank. I will vote for those who truly represent my interests. This makes a bigger statement than sitting out. They know how many ballots were given out. So if Candidate A gets 10 votes and Candidate B gets 12 but 30 votes were cast, that should be a wake up call, that we don't like what they are serving. They can keep their political equivalents to a Survivor Food Challenge, I can't lower myself to vote for utter crap. I have to vote my principles before politics, pragmatism, policy, party, or whatever else

rather than leave blank.

is anyone still giving money to the Democratic Party???

Or to any Dem they don't feel absolutely personal confidence in ????

Wow!!

Rahm Emanuel Is the Definition of Unprincipled

http://www.progressive.org/wx060909.html

The White House never lost its sulfur stench. It does smell a little sweeter though.

:evilgrin:

Oh and a :sarcasm: to confuse.

of women -- which cannot be denied!

The last sentence in your post leaves me wondering... who is our representative voice, who supports our values? When in the end, it all seems to come down to party loyalty and rah-rah after all? The lone voice out there for me is DK.

On another note: A short while ago, in a thread about poverty and homelessness by a very dear DU friend, I noticed your responses and how you came to her aid. Being still fairly new here at DU and not familiar with the particular rules of etiquette, I'd like to ask you if I may add you to my buddy list.

:hi:

Please check your PM. :)

I hate the way the sports mentality has permeated the American consciousness.

This is not the fucking Super Bowl!

This is the fate of our nation and society, and for those of you who have children and grandchildren, the fate of your descendants.

This is the best post of the day & I thank you for it.

Is a 'purist' argument with this current financialist/bankster
administration?

You? Obama?

from the Republicans. Damn right its about purity. Purely being a different party so the American people can have a choice. Purity meaning that you stand for something.

That's the kind of approach that leads to bad government.

up for bargain. When we do, come back again and tell us about your definition of "purity".

control her destiny and is forced into motherhood, there is no Democracy, no Justice, no Liberty and no Freedom for 51% of the population.

Purity? Go suck on some purity.

Wanna end abortion, deballing would work. How does that sound? Something like forced motherhood?

Because, in that case, why have 2 parties? What, exactly, defines whether one is a Democrat? If we our leaders will not stand for protecting the rights of women, the protection of Medicare or SS, the rights of workers, what does separate us now from the Republicans?

These are, at a minimum, the issues I would think would define a Democrat.

If you define it by what is ascribed to by the majority of the party, "Democratic values" are corporate toadying, excuse making and caving in to Republicans.

while the other is holding hands with the Republicans...

He interviewed the doctor who protested and was arrested during the hearings on HCR. She said they wouldn't listen to doctors and those who "knew" and already had their minds made up about what they wanted -- and that this was coming from the WH. We're seeing the same thing in education -- they won't listen to teachers and Arne/BO know what they want to do: privatize education.

I am so disappointed I'm not sure what to think.

and I certainly can no longer vote for such an agenda!!

we can't be expected to support any of this any longer. The teabaggers are breaking away from the GOP, and it's time that liberals/ traditional Dems brake away from the GOP/ DLC. They don't even pretend to represent us anymore.

originally i thought dean might be a part of that. i am very disappointed in what appears to be his reactionary view on abortion.

kucinich 2012 with or without the democratic party!

and other corporatist policies. The DLC is probably thinking: what are they going to do? Sit on their hands and let a RW get elected? Maybe it's time to call their bluff. Could it be any worse?

as many of us predicted.

Hopefully those two other SCOTUS justices that want to step down, do so and before 2012 is all I am saying.

:-) We as a society are on the verge of something new. We are changing. The old ways just are not working for most of us. Historically, political parties have come and gone or altered themselves philosophically. This may just be the natural evolution of the party. We all knew it was time for change. We've been ready for it. That's why we voted for it. I'm ready to embrace it.

If we look 5 generations into the future and consider our decisions' impact on the future, we would create a much better world. Political and financial near sightedness is destroying us. We need people with a long view to run for office. We need to create the change we voted for, and that very well may mean 3rd party.

Wow, eHow has instructions for this too!

http://www.ehow.com/how_2067003_start-political-party.html

Some here say it's our own doing for believing in hope and change and giving less weight to the carefully chosen rhetoric.

I really don't know anymore.

You aren't alone and you are powerful. Remember that.

:grouphug:

The question is, could we win in some conservative states if we didn't have moderate to conservative candidates?

Do we compromise on certain "BASIC" principles in order to control the agenda?

These are very tough questions

To me it really comes down to this:

Whatever the makeup of Congress is, we must have a Democratic president WHENEVER their is a chance that the Supreme Court will have people retiring

:thumbsdown:

I agree that there may be parts of the country (e.g. parts of rural Minnesota that are conservative Catholic) where a pro-choice candidate could not get elected.

But are people in the "red" states really OK with corporate control of everything?

I was astonished when the usual freeper suspects on my local paper's website were adamantly opposed to the bank bailout, even under Bush.

What the DLC is doing is running moderate Republicans against hard-right Republicans. The voters in the red states haven't seen a real Democrat for about a generation.

What about going into Southern mill towns and criticizing the corporations that sent their jobs overseas?

What about going into rural America and criticizing the agribusiness complex that is driving people off the land?

Hope and Change marketing threw a bunch more.

The 50 state strategy necessarily said we would take the fight to every district. Honest to gawd Progressives do win election in heavily Republican districts by having the courage to stand up for average people. It's all the wishy-washy triangulating that gets Dems into trouble.

No, we do not compromise on basic principles, it is not a tough question. Take that silliness to the other side and see how they treat it.

The question is more, who controls the DNC and who sets their agenda.

The people who are recruited or join the party should accept basic principles. Consider it something like the principle of stare decisis that judges take to uphold established principles. It doesn't mean their views aren't nuanced, just that they will not betray the basic principles of the party within which they would like to maintain their membership. I know, big tent excuse, and herding cats metaphor, Dems without backbones, whatever.

If your only principle is to win, then I am sorry I cannot stand with you on that.

parties controlled by corporate interests --

candidates pre-BRIBED and pre-OWNED by corporations --

we are only going to get MORE of the same!!

Elites morphed into corporations --

Their system of capitalism is based on exploitation -- of nature and even other human beings!!

That's not going to change -- it's a suicidal agenda which has already given us

genocide, enslavement of Africans here, oppression of women -- and Global Warming!!

As long as the only competitition the Democrats have is a neo-fascist GOP, then the party

will continue to be moved to the right -- to the EXTREME right!

Tonight I watched the first in the HBO series "When the Levees Broke" about New Orleans. I think that movie depicts what the politicians and very wealthy are allowing to happen to the US. We are just being allowed to sink.

:thumbsdown: we live in a nation of cowards and hypocrites

Figure out how to motivate people by love and we will lick this mess.

I won't deny there are cowards and hypocrites among us, but that is only part of our story.

aka "not being a coward and a hypocrite" :thumbsup:

They love their comforts more than they love truth.

As a former teacher, I am definitely onto the whole motivate yourself versus motivate others divide. We need both.

We can have our comforts and truth too, just takes an open heart, an open mind, work and time.

It's possible, we can do this. :patriot:

And takes a spark of the inner fire to fuel the open heart and mind and recognize one's power and responsiblity. That's the real secret. People are afraid of their own power.

For the 2nd half he had a pediatrics dr on who was heading a health care coalition of health care providers. Their group had been promised a seat at the table. Initally they got one but when they started advocating for a single-payer they were cut out of the process. She's been arrested twice trying to get a letter to Pres Obama. She's convinced that the White House is responsible for shutting them out of the process. She doesn't understand why Obama is doing what he's doing/not doing what he's not doing.

Quite disappointing on so many levels.

because, she is not only advocating a sensible health care plan for the nation, but I would bet because she is a woman also advocating for women's health rights. Obama's team is treating her like a fringe wacko and she isn't. I think it's Dr. Zeke Emmanuel who is influencing the President in this.

as those under mandates age into Medicare age and stay under mandate plans.

The Senate HCR and the privatization of public education ala Arne are corporate and conservative wet dreams and not in the interests nor wants of a majority of Americans.

which is the beginning of the privatization of Medicare. Many who, laughably, kept telling everyone who would listen how it would get 'fixed' later. It'd get fixed, alright. Just not the way they think.

With the bill likely to die, now, we will see the 'deficit commission' move to privatize Medicare. They can just cut out the interim steps.

Regardless of the Sarah Palins and Michelle Bachmanns of the world, politicians really need to be aware of how capitulation on those issues that matter to women because of a minority of hypocritical conservative bankers and industrialists who are ruling the roost because of the 60 vote rule are going to backfire on them. I think the fight is going to begin. Younger women are beginning to realize that they are being marginalized and when they wake up, watch out.

True dat. Great post, Cleita. And as Capt. Hilts points out, women are 51%!!

This is why I no longer care about any of the politicians.A very few speak out occasionally on the right side.Franken and Grayson.But they are new and who knows how long they will continue to do so? There are no liberals left and I refuse to support any of the stealth GOP. And I do blame Rahm and Obama for catering to them.

The jig was up when they passed Stupak. And the ill informed on DU persisted in believing that the Senate, of all places, would be more liberal and fight it in the blended bill. LOL! They forgot about Nelson.

We have gotten substantially nothing from a Democratic controlled House, Senate, and WH. Occasionally they throw us a bone like the morning after pill being mandatory on military bases but we can't get decent health care for all, they are assisting in the dismantlement of public education, they have vetoed drug reimporation and sucked up to Big Pharma. And the only reason they might consider repealing DADT is because they need more cannon fodder.Now they will consider letting GLBT die for their country but they will never let them marry.

I woul like to know why we even bother drafting a party platform if it is expedient and treated as though it is barely a suggestion?:mad:

in the lack of politicians who stand up for what have long been considered Democratic party values...or policies.

.. politics, sadly. You can easily campaign, pretending to be for everything that pleases everyone. Governing that way is impossible. In fact, you're more likely to piss off the people who put you in office by doing so. Barack Obama has been a case study in that, unless of course, you are a corporatist or a conservative pretending to be a Democrat. It's painful to watch as he has proven the old axiom. over and over:

"If you won't stand for something, you'll fall for anything."

and build a new progressive movement........?

'Purity' may cost the GOP - Christensen - NewsObserver.comThose calling for ideological purity have a short memory. Helms was repeatedly angry and frustrated at President Ronald Reagan, who would provide only lip ...
www.newsobserver.com/248/story/205305.html -

Terrific article with some great background.

Compromise may be necessary, at times, but total capitulation is more what we are seeing?

Recommend.

and so many other things. They've been internalized by the Democratic Party. It's sick.

Democracy is over. Gone. Done.

Get over it. Stop expecting blood from a turnip.

It is a corporate world now. And corporations don't care about you (us).

I have given up on political parties. They are not here to serve us, but to manage & pacify us, while they serve their corporate/banking masters...

I'm not falling for the scam anymore.

the number of abortions and have his balls removed.

The world has a fit when this is mentioned....but forcing women to bring unwanted children into an already overpopulated world is just fine.

and got a visit, at least I think. I get a little emotional sometimes and say things I don't always mean, will get me TS'ed for sure. I just wished the Congress member would get sick and die, is all, a little Grayson tribute if you will. Messing with HCR that way was just plain stupak, condemning people to lose their homes, family members or just plain die. The staffer acted like I intended to harm Stupak and made a big deal about knowing the address I was calling from like I should be frightened.

I still had my Obama sign in my front garden and was messing around out front trying to work off a little frustration after the phone call. A dark suburban pulled in my driveway a few hours after I called and the driver looked at me for about a minute while I was working my shovel then just left. Thank gawd I wasn't working with my pitchfork. I don't know if the visit was just a coincidence or not but I can tell you I haven't had a car pull into my drive way in all the time I lived here that wasn't here for a reason.

Can't be afraid of our government. We need to make these folks uncomfortable. Lives are at stake and our representatives think they are something special. When they don't work for the people, they deserve no respect. Fine line between respecting the office and the person, I'll concede that.

it was after the 2004 Election and I headed up a MoveOn Protest about saving the Filibuster.

I had dudes sitting in front of my apartment....when I would wave at them, they'd scratch their nose and leave. Then a few hours later, another car/truck would show up. I went out and got his license plate number...and he took off. Eventually they gave up watching me...my life is too boring.

I saw Stupak on Bill Moyers last night. He makes me sick. He'll get his...Karma always works. Men have hated women for centuries...guess we're lucky they're no longer burning us at the stake!

and his weakness on the health care issue http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7653200. I believe I had good reason to call him out on that issue, and I'm far from alone. It apparently is okay when some DU members do it (e.g. kpete http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7642278&mesg_id=7642278) but not others (like me).

I'm not one who has dissed Obama in general -- I think he's been strong in some ways, weak in others. I have very mixed feelings about him, very negative when it comes to his handling of health care.

But, as you've concluded here, my disappointment in the Democrats is pretty profound. I'm saddened by their lack of spine and the lack of integrity. I'm just plain saddened these days -- too many of our Democrats aren't even coming close to what I think they should be. Not even close.

kpete has a massive following, me included. Those that come up with lame excuses seem less likely to try something when there are a lot of truth seekers around to challenge them.

Several of the folks who piled onto you are experienced practitioners of the form of disruption that seems to be permissible here. Those interested in honest discussion of your contribution and not just shouting it down, made themselves pretty obvious.

That story, not just your op, received an immediate and aggressive response.

I'm also a kpete fan, I was just interested in the hypocrisy of the people piling on when it wasn't a DU star doing the talking. But thanks for the feedback -- that was pretty much my interpretation.

:hug:

I've been really down this week -- the actions of too many of our Democrats have been part of that -- and it's people like you that help swing that mood in an upward direction. Too much negativity in my life right now and those that throw some positivity my direction really help. So thanks.

a democrat. If he does he becomes a DINO. This issue is one of those issues; Period, full stop.

You thought that was just a fluke? Bad judgement on Dem Party's strategy that they didn't work for a stronger candidate? That Axelrod came out and said they didn't think they would lose the seat so they kind of were not as engaged as they should have been, until the last minute? :shrug:

When Ted Kennedy's seat was not defended to the death by Obama Administration and Tim Kaine...we had to know it was curtains for us.

And to think of how much Ted Kennedy's endorsement did for Obama starting off. It's a hard thing to deal with...how politics work. But, to lose the "Lion of the Senate's" seat( the last of the Kennedy Legacy) in such a way is really disgusting...and shameful. There is no excuse for that.

Except that that was the way it should be. The way it was intended. To expect differently now seems to be hopelessly misguided in the way the whole system works. Yeah..I'm one who got suckered.

NO ONE'S RIGHTS ARE NEGOTIABLE!!! Woomen, gays, labor....we are all being betrayed by the DLC..Rahm Emmanuel, Chuck Schumer...and the rest of those that will sacrifice the principles that have made us support the Democratic party.

We must unite as Progressives and become a force to reckon with!!


:mad: :puke: :wtf: :spank: :grr: :nuke: :thumbsdown:

Pro-life means against the death penalty, for a living minimum wage, for Freedom of Speech, for National Health Insurance, for The Geneva Conventions and for the Hague Conventions. It means against the persecution of anyone at anytime, for any reason.
We all knew that George W. Bush was never pro-life. He ran and lost the election bragging about how many people he executed in Texas as Governor, including the innocent.

All Obama is, considering what he did to health care(compromised reform to where it meant nothing), his violations of the Geneva and Hague Conventions, is George W. Bush 2.0.
We should kick him out of Democratic Party, so he can join the Teabaggers and Republicans.


You may not know this but the Uganda Persecution Law has interesting codicil in it. If you know of anyone gay and do not report them, you will be exterminated also. So if you are 17 and you know that your 12-year-old brother is gay and don't report him for torture and murder, you will be tortured and murdered also.

I rememeber Miep Gies speaking of the fear she felt. She knew that protecting Anne Frank and her Family was the right thing to do, but if the Nazis found out they would execute her and her family too. She was a woman of courage and character.

In case you didn't know it, the Uganda Extermination, Torture and Final Solution Law was written by American Fundamentalists and Televangelists. Goes to show you that the dream didn't die in the Bunker in Berlin in 1945

I remember that Pope John XXIII. Though a man of Peace, he used every tool at his disposal to fight the Nazis. He showed kindness and love to all, regardless of race, creed, color or religion. And he loved those who disagreed with him. Unlike Bishop Tobin, who as a "Secret Bully", told Patrick Kennedy your not entitled to having a conscience or considering the interest of Non-Catholics. I am the Fuhrer of Rhode Island and you will follow my orders or I will Excommunicate you.
All I have to say to Billy Graham and Bishop Tobin is Zieg Heil!

As too abortion, I am opposed to it. But because of those who falsely claim to be Pro-Life and aren't, I will use reason, logic and compassion to guide my voice on the issue. If a majority of people disagree with me, then I will recognize that there voice should prevail. And I will never support persecution of women who do have abortions or the doctors who provide them.

:rofl:

I haven't watched NOW yet. Now I'm forewarned.

Back then it was a consensus decision by the "liberal and progressive" women's rights movement to forgo calling out other women who supported positions that clearly disempowered women, and only oppose men who did so.

The thinking behind this was that all women whether they accepted it or not were victims of the patriarchy, and they would have no part in furthering that oppression by humiliating them in confrontations re: women's rights. They wouldn't entertain the patriarchy by engaging in political mud wrestling matches with other women.

In short progressive and liberal women decided to turn the other cheek when it was other women delivering the figurative blow no matter how many times they got hit.

I'll always sadly remember Eleanor Shmeal pleading with Phyllis Schaffley desperately trying to catch her line of sight in hopes of connecting with her as a human, but to no avail.

It was Phil Donahue I think, and Phyllis refused to look at her, inferring she was morally bankrupt, an agent of a sort of decadence that if accepted would destroy our nation.

Phyllis in the entire hour did NOT look at her once, even though Eleanor spoke directly to her, made her points to her, and asked her questions.

Phyllis pretended like Elanor simply wasn't there. If she responded at all, it was indirectly to Phil.

She treated Eleanor as if she felt Eleanor was so morally repugnant that sitting next to her was offensive in and of itself.

And by letting her get away with that, she rendered herself utterly inneffective. Even though she was right on every point, the audience was listening to Phyllis, wanted to identify with Phyllis not Eleanor.

A few nights later, I saw Eleanor again on PBS confronting another anti-choice person, but this time a man.

This time she deadly effective she was measured but forceful, and didn't let a single distortion or lie get passed her.

Most importantly instead of the pleading begging persona she adopted with Phyllis, she was authoritive and passionate.

No one could doubt that she truly believed her cause was just and right.

Watching her let loose with both barrels of logic and reason loaded with passion and belief showed me in a nutshell just what a devastating mistake it was to have handled Phyllis with such kid gloves.

It's the reason why Phyllis looked like the winner, and Eleanor just looked pitiful.

Unforeseen was how this tactic morphed into a sort of "have your cake and eat it too" behavior on the part of anti-choice women.

This directly impacted the fight for the reproductive rights, because it showed the anti-choice forces who were mostly all men at that point how to wage a winning fight against pro-choice women who up to that point had the public on their side more than not.

The public face of the anti-women choice became and still is today mostly other women. The Faux News Babes all regularly voice their anti-choice views.

And while this sort of laying down and refusing to fight other women has gotten less pervasive, progressive women still seem hesitant to engage women on the right with the same sense of righteous passion they will use with a man.

Whenever you see a woman vs. woman re: women's reproductive rights, the woman for those rights is apologetic, receding, and concedes basically that reproductive rights are at best a necessary evil.

Of course the anti-choice women take that inch and turn it into a mile.

They naturally are offended that the pro-choice woman thinks she has the right to foist her immoral, baby killing beliefs on her, and double down in their denunciations once the pro-choice woman concedes the "morals point."

With that pro choice forces lose so many women even those who believe its their right.

The leaders are responsible for giving those they lead a sense of "righteousness." Choice women forfeit that when they admit the right to choose is not inherently a just and proper thing. No sense of "wrongness" should ever go unrefuted.

With that having been the tenor of battle on the part of progressive and liberal women who support the right to choose, it should have been no surprise that Democrats as a party would do likewise.

The party has always been a follower on this issue. Women were the leaders (Congressman Abzug, Gloria S, Betty Freidan Etc.)on the choice issue.

They formulated what they thought the party's position should be on the issue, and then sold it and pushed it relentlessly in public.

However when the next generation of leaders like Shmeal came in and it became the norm for women to fade in the battle it wasn't long before the party felt safe retreating as well.

Now sadly women are the victim in this battle, and perhaps that is part of the problem.

They remained victims even when they won the war with roe vs. wade.

As an "interest group" who fought hard to get those rights, they never adopted the mindset of "victor" which would have allowed them to see the folly of not fighting to win when confronted by right wing women.

The right to choose will always be in peril as long as women who strongly support the issue feel that they alone aren't enough to keep it.

It was women way back when who fought for and claimed that right.

The damage done by this tactic is extensive, and I don't claim to know of a quick solution.

For it took time for progressive women to loose their leadership role on women's rights to right wing goose steppers who shouted louder, fought harder, and never gave an inch on the moral grounds of their belief.

While that sort of behavior may irritate the highly educated progressive woman, it is the behavior we in American culture associate with "being right" "being strong."

If there is one thing I think should stop is women, pro-choice people starting out apologizing for the horror of abortion, stop yielding the moral high ground in a futile effort to connect with opponents. It's clear now yielding the high ground means they will kick dirt down on you.

A woman should never apologize or be allowed to feel badly for doing what she has to and thinks is right.

There should be no equivocation of the right to choose. The righteousness should be on display in the passion, not hidden behind apologies.

This is true for all major single issues in politics. and the groups pushing that single issue.

If/when the particular group within a party most affected by something steps away from the leadership on that issue, they will cease making progress.

The party, all parties are generalist in nature. Parties, not even the Democratic party are well-suited to taking the lead on single issues.

Johnny

this starts in the WH and with our President. And it is just not with the abortion issue. As you say--HEALTH CARE REFORM. Its been insurance reform since day one. The clinic where I work is swelled with middle class families. We have decreased staff and rely on the medical school for health care providers. It is awful for all, the staff, and the families who wait months just for an appointment. In the meantime, they are told to go to the ER. It is there only resource.

Dean said that we can't allow the anti-choice Dems to take over the Party because then we would lose on the choice issue. He never said that it is a Party plank to have choice, and should matter, but he did say that we should "push back" against the conservative Dems who are not the majority of the Party. This was the most disingenuous part of what he said and the most disappointing for me. They do not have to be the majority of Dems. Once they are in the Democratic Party in the Senate they join with the Republicans not only on the choice issue, but on every issue that might gain them something having to do with choice, as with the health care reform bill, which became an anti-choice bill. They may be a minority in the Democratic Party, but they have a majority once they are added to the Republicans, in terms of choice, to kill choice, and Dean is telling us it is OK if they do not have a majority of the Democrats, even if they have a majority of the votes. This is so disheartening. I could not believe that he was instrumental in this debacle, What is the point of having the majority of you do not have the majority of votes? Not to mention that on paper these recruits may have agreed with Democrats, but they seem like Republicans to me on almost everything, probably not as right-wing, but hard to tell who they are there to represent if not big business. If they keep recruiting them in the House they will have a majority cross-vote with the Republicans there, too.

to the point of FEAR! Living down here in Florida is scary to me, but there are many other states living with the SAME thing!

Our Democrats aren't like any Democrats I've associated myself with for a very long time, and yet it CONTINUES!

Too many questions, and NO ANSWERS! And yet, we sit and take it! I can't count the times I've said it, but I have NO IDEA how to fight back anymore... nothing has done any good! We got them elected and here we sit with our hats in our lap and our mouths wide open in surprise!

Outta here, have to leave before I get too worked up! Great post, but very disturbing at the same time!

just more drivel from the same person that turned on Obama less than 48 hours after the election.