I'm adjusting to my new identity as a Radical Alternative Dem

Because I have decided that parts of the description are actually accurate.

(See this thread if you don't know what I am referring to:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8678383#8708815)

"Radical Alternative Democrats feel that there is a deep structural problem in the country that has corrupted not just the Republican Party but has fatally wounded the Democratic Party." That's the part I agree with with - I have no idea what the blather about "taking on the basic premises of society" is all about

I HAVE actually been radicalized by recent events out of being a comfy, cosy, knee-jerk straight ticket voting Dem. It's all a combination of acknowledging to my deepest inner self that I am supremely dissatisfied with President Obama's dual nature (what he says vs what he does), his cabinet, Rahm Emmanual's latest boasting of corporate goals met, healthcare non reform, etc.

To be clear - I have been radicalized by the actions/inactions of DEMOCRATS! By their perfidy while they posses the trifecta of power - Presidency, House and Senate.

What's Radical Alternative Dem (RAD) to do? (Aside from refraining from posting)
Does a Democratic victory in November require the votes of RADS or are they totally dispensable? Are they just a tiny subset of the Dem population?

I could offer an alternative name for my group - Disenchanted Base or DEBs. I kind of like that because it reminds me of the great Labor leader Eugene V. Debs.

I like "DEBS," too -- it appeals to "the inner-Wobbly!" ;-)

I love it!

Debs is an American hero.

Republicans will never get beyond their own pocketbook.
Third parties, while not entirely out, seem impractical right now.
Which leaves two possibilities - work within to change Democrats or move to Canada.

They're voting against their self interests because they've been fooled.

Caveat: I don't know any billionaires.

Do it on the DL, just like the crazies took over the GOP.

perfect post number for that post :)

DU is the secret clubhouse for the armchair radical brigade.

:boring::boring::boring::boring::boring::boring::boring::boring::boring::boring::boring::boring:

all.

an carry one little sign that would be ignored by the corporatist media, I can sit here in my "armchair," click a few buttons, and:
1) Make very meaningful donations to NGOs that help them be major pains in the ass of the status quo; and
2) Support alternative media that make public things that expose war crimes and hypocricy.

A lot of activism can be done with an armchair, the diversion of disposable income from meaningless consumption to meaningful NGOs, and a laptop.

Those in power should think twice if they believe the absence of people demonstrating in the streets is evidence of apathy.

Hardly a week goes by when I don't see some evidence that my money is going to a good purpose.

One of my Senators changed her mind about health care, probably because of pressure from her constituents-- people phoning and emailing from their armchairs.

The other was on our side to start with.

People sitting on their asses typing accusing others of sitting on their asses and typing.

If the pen is mightier than the sword, then in the 21st Century so is the keyboard.

Especially when I can identify an issue and an organization working to address that issue in a way I support, and with a few clicks send money from my checking account to support that activity.

As far as radicalism goes, some of the organizations I support are so far out on the edge that I sometimes pause before hitting that final button and going on record as supporting them.

Radical.... from the root word radix... meaning "root".

Radicals get to the root of the problem, to determine the appropriate action.

...does not have the same roots as "radish."

DU: It's edutainmental-tastic!! :D

"The radish is another plant belonging to the Cabbage family and it is considered to be native to Asia and domesticated in the Mediterranean. It was firstly cultivated by the Egyptians in 2780 BC and by 500 BC, it was already grown in China and in Japan in 300 BC. The Greek term for radish was raphanos while the Latin one was raphanus. Anyway, the English term derives from the Latin word for root, radix.

http://misc.thefullwiki.org/Radish_greens

Maybe you could now find something actually important to argue about.

Like... how about cabbage?

:rofl:

...Then let it be known, I, too, am a Radish Dem'crat. Lettuce romaine liberals!! :patriot:

>>> ...Then let it be known, I, too, am a Radish Dem'crat. Lettuce romaine liberals!! :patriot: <<<

I love it! :-)

:D I am witn you ,btw. :hi:

Except for the first tuesday in November, when you are supposed to trot over to your polling station and vote.

Same link as above in OP: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8678383#8708815

Funny thing about the "Underground" part... speaking as one of Rahm's fucking retards... Us RADs have been made to feel just as marginalized by our own party, as we were when the rePukes were in charge.

Maybe it's the "Underground" part that needs to go. Might unintentionally mislead.

:shrug:

Or is the name calling strictly defined as per the quoted and now infamous missive?

some here have it as their new avatar.

Who knew???

:shrug:

I think your comment is right on.

is that a radish Democrat? Either way, I is one. And as to the site and it's posters, in most threads it seems that the RADs FAR outnumber the Solids. Maybe it's the "Underground" part of the site name that attracts us. Now the Solids are pretty noisy sometimes and seem to think that any new rules are to THEIR benefit alone, but once again, that doesn't really seem to be the case either.

The more right you are, the more you think that EVERY change from the top is to YOUR benefit because you SUPPORT authority so how could it not? And the more left you are, the more you're suspicious of authority, so how could top down change benefit you? These truisms are the reason that we had so many hard lefties leave when the new (old) rules were announced and enforced AND why every post you have a few posters inviting the rest of the lefties to leave because we wouldn't feel "comfortable" staying and posting under the new rules. I'm sure I could STILL be proven wrong, but the new rules don't seem to have played out the way the more "centrist" posters probably expected.

As to the OP, I'm right there with him/her. I used to be a straight ticket voting fool, D all the way. Pragmatic. Lately, I've gotten a WHOLE lot more radical. Moreso, than I have been since I was a kid in the 60s. I don't have much choice to my eyes. The capitalists are literally KILLING us with growing rapidity. They MUST be stopped.

I think that is fine. Debs was a socialists and had a lot of good ideas that could be used to improve life in this unexceptional country.

the Democrat and it's being allowed to stand. So I'm guessing that what you mean is that as long as you don't openly advocate for left leaning third party candidates she'll be fine. Advocating for right leaning "independents" apparently is perfectly acceptable.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=8697828

K&R

:D

:bounce:

:hi:

And couldn't respond until now. Did you consider that might be a possibility?

Anyway, I will get out and vote for my idiotic incumbent Congressman Glenn Nye, who is trying to out Republican a strong Republican and will get his ass handed to him as he hasn't differentiated himself in any way shape or form from the REAL Republican.

He might try something radical - Be a Democrat! Nope, too obvious.

I think it is past time to send a message to the dem party. I will vote for the 2 dem candidates who deserve my vote, but otherwise I will vote a straight green ticket.

I will not send ANY money to the dem party, but will continue to send to those few deserving individual dems around the country. I will give money to the green party.

I too am a RAD, or what used to be known as the mainstream of the dem party.

Democratic Party.

Or even a return to the values that once guided the Republican Party (In the 1890's, the Republican Party took out ads in Chicago newspapers supporting the strikers who were out in the streets. Source: Howard Zinn)

Now we don't have either party supporting the middle incomed and the working person.

Your parents aren't concerned with those issues -- you might be willing

to support them?

Or maybe whether we're actually setting up to attack Iran?

But . . . that wouldn't be a "radical" idea, of course!!!

:eyes:





Stirrings of a New Push for Military Option on Iran
Analysis by Jim Lobe*

WASHINGTON, 9 Jul (IPS) - "From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August," explained then-White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card back in September 2002, in answer to queries about why the administration of George W. Bush had not launched its campaign to rally public opinion behind invading Iraq earlier in the summer.

And while it's only July - and less than a month after the U.N., the European Union (EU) and the U.S. Congress approved new economic sanctions against Iran - a familiar clutch of Iraq war hawks appear to be preparing the ground for a major new campaign to rally public opinion behind military action against the Islamic Republic.

Barring an unexpected breakthrough on the diplomatic front, that campaign, like the one eight years ago, is likely to move into high gear this autumn, beginning shortly after the Labour Day holiday, Sep. 6, that marks the end of summer vacation.

By the following week, the November mid-term election campaign will be in full swing, and Republican candidates are expected to make the charge that Democrats and President Barack Obama are "soft on Iran" their top foreign policy issue.



http://ipsnorthamerica.net/news.php?idnews=3188

Democratic programs. :eyes:

Instead of bashing the President and providing an assist to the Republicans attacking him on Iran and everything else, perhaps you could consider supporting and defending him from the constant Republican attacks.

Oh, no, I'm sure undermining him in any way possible is a much better way to help guard against Republican and Media attacks and pressure to go after Iran.

I'm sure helping a Republican take-over of Congress would be an even better way to protect Social Security. :eyes:

Rather it looks to me like the Panel is set to "bash" Social Security and

Medicare -- at least that's what Wm. Greider is pointing out and many others --

and what common sense would tell you --

And I thought it was the US which was "bashing" Afghanistan and Iraq -- 30 years of

bombing Iraq isn't enough yet?

Get your head straight -- these aren't "Republican attacks" -- these are criticisms

from the liberals and progressives who support the Democratic Party and its Platform.

I guess that's one way to support Obama . . . don't support public education, and

turn Social Security and Medicare over to a right wing panel?

You might want to go backwards into the GOP attacks on Medicare and Social Security --

most of us want to progress -- and that takes liberal ideas, not more "Bushism"

as Helen Thomas might say!

Labels become more meaningless every day -- as Nixon would say to his supporters . . .

"Watch what I do, not what I say" -- remember that one?

:toast:

I'm pro-labor and anti-war.

I'll support candidates who are pro-labor and anti-war.

because the people whose vote you should have been soliciting listened to your smug self-puffing and didn't vote with you? You want Blue Dogs re-elected, then you have to give people a reason to vote for them. The usual tactic used on DU to convince people who are disappointed with Obama's performance to vote for him and the other DLC crowd is to call them names and tell them to go away. That may make the "in" crowd feel so special, but is sure as hell doesn't do anything to help Obama.

So what will your plans be for between now and November? Feel cool and smug by pissing off as many as possible or actually try to campaign for your candidates and win votes for them? (I have my suspicions about which one.)

So far, that has been how the White House has dealt with the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party.
That, and pretending we don't exist.
.
.
.
Worked great for Gore in 2000.

Me too.



bvar22
Proud member of the "Fucking Retards" wing of the Democratic Party.

K&R

Fucking Democratic Retards. :D

Thanks for the help with the name, Rahm! :hi: Hugs and kisses!

the parties themselves became a power force -- and both parties have now

used their power to prevent any competitition. Who benefits from that?

We now have presidential debates controlled by a private organization put

in place by both parties!!

But, that couldn't be a "radical" idea -- could it???

It should be considered an outrageous and illegal maneuver -- IMO.

:hi:

here.

Just another construct to convince everyone. But all I see are a minority who post prolifically in most every topic they disagree with, proclaiming themselves to be the "true" DU.

But it is obvious, if you spend time looking at the greatest and throughout the site, that the so called "radicals" are a larger number. They just don't post a bazillion entrees a day like a small group here.

I've radicalized as hell recently. :D

:kick:

I knew Obama was not our best choice - out of the ones running I would have gone with Mike Gravel or Dennis Kucinich, but I had no idea he would cater to corporations over people the way his administration does. I'd love to vote for a Dem, but I can't just vote for someone because they have that "D" beside their name anymore. It's not working.

Yeah, you're really a kewl radical.

And a big :kick: and rec.

(And thanks, Phoebe, for articulating what I've been feeling for awhile now. :thumbsup: )

for what, I don't know, but I'm interested in actually doing something, versus just complaining and knocking down those who would want to make progress.

Don't stop with Afghanistan and Iraq -- which we've been bombing for 30 years now!!

Pelosi day after '06 election . . . ON VIDEO --

"DEMOCRATS WERE ELECTED TO END THE WAR!"



Stirrings of a New Push for Military Option on Iran
Analysis by Jim Lobe*

WASHINGTON, 9 Jul (IPS) - "From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August," explained then-White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card back in September 2002, in answer to queries about why the administration of George W. Bush had not launched its campaign to rally public opinion behind invading Iraq earlier in the summer.

And while it's only July - and less than a month after the U.N., the European Union (EU) and the U.S. Congress approved new economic sanctions against Iran - a familiar clutch of Iraq war hawks appear to be preparing the ground for a major new campaign to rally public opinion behind military action against the Islamic Republic.

Barring an unexpected breakthrough on the diplomatic front, that campaign, like the one eight years ago, is likely to move into high gear this autumn, beginning shortly after the Labour Day holiday, Sep. 6, that marks the end of summer vacation.

By the following week, the November mid-term election campaign will be in full swing, and Republican candidates are expected to make the charge that Democrats and President Barack Obama are "soft on Iran" their top foreign policy issue.



http://ipsnorthamerica.net/news.php?idnews=3188

Oh well, glad I didn't waste the pic!

If a policy is wrong and we do not oppose it, we do more harm than good. It was radical activists that lead the way in righting many wrongs in history.
Your accusation that we do nothing is BS and you know it. My father, who was a union organizer in the 50's and a life long Dem, said the difference between R's and a D's is we are willing and able to stand up and criticize our party and reps when they are wrong.

ON EDIT: I really like your avatar. It's cool.

I am new to this board but not to politics. Based on what I have read here I too am radical but, I think, radical in the other direction. I will offer up a set of opinions below and will look for your opinions to see how they differ.

1. I do not support the surge in Afghanistan and want us out except for special ops against terrorist cells.
2. I believe that the stimulus package was very poorly designed and did not work well.
3. Like Krugman I believe that we need to short run stimulate the economy with deficit spending but unlike Krugman I want to see a specific targeted plan (see next point below).
4. I believe that solar and wind power are expensive silly pipe dreams and would strongly support a federal plan to replace all coal and oil fired plants with nuclear plants (this would make a good stimulus/jobs bill too).
5. I believe that social security is a ponzi scheme and should be replaced with a national income assistance program that is not aged based.
6. I believe that Medicare should be for EVERYONE and not aged based.
7. I believe that we need to allow ANY LAW ABIDING PERSON who can support themselves to immigrate RIGHT AWAY. NO limits (this would also be good for the housing market).
8. I also believe that we should bring our military home and protect our own borders from the criminals who are crossing it illegally.
9. I believe that there is an immense about of pork spending and that it should be stopped.
10. I believe that we need a credible long term plan to balance the budget.
11. I do not support cap and trade because I believe it to be nothing but a pork barrel for handing out favors or punishing political enemies. However I would support a HUGE tax on gasoline/diesel at the pump to encourage use of alternatives.

Okay, so do these beliefs make me a radical on this message board? What do you believe?

I think your views on energy are seriously misguided. First, the best part of the stimulus bill is that the largest amount of spending went to efficiency and renewable energy projects. I've seen those jobs created in my town and others. That part of the bill worked.

Nuclear can't be built reliably and safely at a market competitive price. That's one reason why so few are interested in building them. The technology for wind and solar is ready and the jobs are being created right now. There's nothing stopping it but the political power of the fossil fuel and nuclear industries.

A tax on gasoline/diesel wouldn't impact the top source of man-made global warming pollutants: coal power plants.

I thank you for your reply Radical Activist.

Would you be willing to change your mind about wind & solar versus nuclear if I offered proof that the first two are not viable and the latter is?

From June 2010 of Electric Power Monthly (DOE): http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/epm_sum.html Here you see that half of electric comes from coal and 20% from nuclear.

From the web site Nuclear Power Economics you can see that nuclear costs about $1.83 per thousand kwh which is comparable to coal and 1/5 the cost of oil. Oil and Coal are both far cheaper than solar. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf02.html

Well, my thought being that coal is used for electric generation. If we tax the pump and support a nuclear replacement of coal fired plants we get the jobs, get the electric, get the carbon reduction and all without creating the easily tampered with cap and trade bureocracy.

Thanks again for your reply.

I understand that wind and solar currently make up a small portion of the market. That's changing rapidly. The current energy makeup is not an accurate predictor of the future.

Nuclear power is cheap if you're only measuring current plants. Not if you measure the tremendous costs of building a new plant in full compliance with modern safety standards. And of course, the price of coal is artificially cheap due to government subsidies at every level of operation.

The studies in the second link are dated. Once cost comparison was from 2003. Solar in particular is changing rapidly. New utility scale solar can be built faster than coal or nuclear and be cost competitive.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Comparative_electrical_generation_costs

Solar will grow as a peak demand power source. Wind is already growing rapidly. We currently have enough unused natural gas capacity to shut down at least half of the coal plants in the country. And reducing demand through energy efficiency is always the most cost effective option. That's all we need.

... good grief, I am now of the opinion that intellectual honesty to some people is like a combo of garlic infused holy water on a sunny day to a vampire.

great alternatives if we have enough national will to do the investment. Nuclear could be a decent alternative if there was a reasonable way to store the waste, there isn't. Also, we can expect BP-like cost-cutting and dangerously irresponsible construction of new nuclear plants that will add to the risk. Like the oil spill, nuclear is all but impossible to correct once an accident happens.

Social security is the greatest boon to protecting the elderly and disabled from poverty ever devised. It is characterized as ponzi scheme by the right wing but it is nothing of the kind. They only want an excuse to raid it so they promote this talking point. Social security only needs to be separated from the general fund and protected from raiders. As with solar and wind it is only a matter of will.

Sorry, but this is not a right wing notion but a definition.

When a retirement account does not invest the deposits but instead pays out current deposits to the original 'investors' that is by definition a Ponzi scheme.

When the Ponzi scheme runs out of new depositors it runs out of money. Guess where we are with social security ...

If we democrats want to live in la-la land then we can pretend that all is well and social security is all good. If we want to be relevant to the land of the living then we need to do something to fix it. I suggest raising the retirement age and means testing.

However, I am open to other ideas. Yours?

but it certainly isn't Democrats that want to preserve social security.

And you expect me to believe you are a Democrat? Democrats simply do not describe social security as a ponzi scheme. You are, or have recently been, ideologically a Republican. Take your right wing beliefs and talking points elsewhere.

Enthusiast,

The Republicans have been saying that the democrats (INCLUDING ME!) do not have any relevant ideas for the real problems facing social security. Their idea is to privatize the program. I personally think that privatizing is the wrong way to go. Your idea seems to be to call me names and to say that I am not a real democrat because I called social security exactly what it is, a Ponzi scheme.

PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING DEFINITION: "A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to separate investors from their own money or money paid by subsequent investors, rather than from any actual profit earned. ..."

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&rlz=1I7ADRA_en&defl=en&q=define:Ponzi+scheme&sa=X&ei=crU5TMTGFMGC8gasrPGnBg&ved=0CBIQkAE

Now, if you still think that social security is not a ponzi scheme then I suggest that you post a message here congratulating yourself on your true democratic credentials and noting how much more intelligent true liberals are to everyone else.

However, I have offered two reasonable ideas. One is raising retirement age and another is means testing. I have other ideas too, such as offering special tax credits for hiring the elderly (which would work well with means testing). Another idea is to place the elderly in low stress, part time government jobs. Another idea is to radically change the immigration laws to vastly expand the young work force as fast as possible. But right now, Social security as you have known it is broke. It went negative this year. That is a fact and NOT A REPUBLICAN point of view.

And saying it is an often repeated Republican theme.

The SS surplus IS invested in special U.S. treasury issues.

The problem is that the surplus is used for other things.

SS is an outstanding successful program and the fact that it generates lots of money makes it desirable to Wall Street raiders who would love to see it privatized.

It's solidly funded until 2040 at 100 percent and 75 after that if nothing else is done. IF something is done--like raising top tax rate--it can go on much longer.

We'd be better off focusing on bringing our military home and reaping that dividend. We still have thousands of troops on Okinawa for crying out loud. We can reach for empire until it destroys us--or take care of the things that can make us a great country.

It's up to us.

First of all, thank you for your kind reply.

I am an investor and have been noticing minor articles here and there about SS going negative this year. So I did a search and discovered lots and lots of article on the same.

I picked one without much ado but I invite you to search and read up on the issue.

Here is the quickie picked from a 5 second search: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-02-07-social-security-red-retirements_N.htm

SS is not solvent until 2040, it is broke now.

That may just happen.

Let's not forget the LADs (Labor Activist Dems) - they've also been kicked down.

Yes, Virginia, there's a price for ignoring and dissing a big block of party activists. They don't turn out and knock doors for you again. Without Labor, the Blue Dogs will have to buy their own pizza and answer their own phones down at campaign HQ.

Karma is a bitch.

I just wonder who the fuck these people think will walk the streets and sit on phones hour after hour..and who will do fund raisers..and who will bring in the money for them?

Because I sure as fuck am not doing another damn thing for those who now want to call me names or put me in a box ..or divide us into groups..or marginalize many of us..

Perhaps the people doing this think ..THINK..they are helping the party or Think they know wtf they are doing..but they will only effect the opposite results...and they are working non-stop at doing so.

They are now only marginalizing themselves..but they are the ones hurting this party!

And they are indeed hurting the Democratic party!

Many of them have me so pissed off ..I may sit my ass home in Nov..maybe then the party will realize these tactics won't work! Maybe that is the only way I can effect change ..with my one person, one vote.

I am fed up with this shit.

This was a repuke tactic..and to now try it on we dems??..it will back fire and it will back fire big time!

Count on that!

... I'm one of those too.

I really really dislike Ralph Nader and I think if he'd done what he promised in 2000 Bush would have never happened.

That said, his pronouncement, that there isn't a dime's worth of difference between the Republican and Democratic parties was absolutely correct.

How did this happen? Money has taken over our government, that's how.

Sid

The word 'radical' comes from the Latin for 'root' which is of course, the base and foundation of plant life. The actual meanings of the words fit very well. The words are most often used as terms of art, but they do have actual meanings.
Tell me how a root is not the base of the rose bush.

but radical and base are not congruent in today's political climate.

Sid

There are a relatively small number of conservative and moderate Democratic Senators responsible for watering down or stopping nearly everything Obama proposes. The US Senate is the main roadblock. It's well to the right of Obama and the House. There's every indication that Obama will sign almost any progressive legislation that can conceivably be passed by this Congress.

Which means the most logical targets are: getting progressive Democrats into Senate seats currently held by conservatives (Democratic or Republican).

The habit of blaming every compromise on Obama kind of misses the point and probably doesn't bring us closer to passing more progressive legislation.

Especially this: "I could offer an alternative name for my group - Disenchanted Base or DEBs. I kind of like that because it reminds me of the great Labor leader Eugene V. Debs." I love it, as matter of fact! :-)

But VERY TIC-ly, if we decide to be "debs (of another sort)," can we have a cotillion? Besides senior prom that was a total waste of time, I've never really been to anything dance-ish. ;-)

it is the crux of the situation happy or not.

:-(

...are Always Simple Solidarity Dem or Always Solidarity w/ Principle Dem, you really can't be blamed.

But of course you will be, if that elusive last half of one percent of (genuflect) Swing Voters can't be manipulated with another tens of millions of donations shoveled into the pockets of pollsters, PR gurus, and propaganda (in the best sense, of course) euphemedia buys.

It can seem torturous to have to admit to being a Dem of any kind these days. I wonder why that is?

FWIW, a party can't be "fatally wounded" -- though it can spend long periods in a coma. And the longer it goes on, the number of DEBs ready to rush to a Coming Out Party grows.

---

"Does a Democratic victory in November require the votes of RADS or are they totally dispensable?"

I think that we're all needed, but according to some here we're kind of like the crazy relatives that are only visible on holidays, and hidden in the attic the rest of the time.

...........other groups, but an FDR Democrat. What, now I have to change the name I consider myself? What the fuck kind of shit is that? During st ronnie's time I was called a liberal and was proud to be called that (and to this day). During Clinton's terms I was called "the left". Now a radical alternative Dem? Well, It ain't happening. I have been proud to refer to myself as a liberal even when it was a dirty word through Bush one and Clinton. I ain't fucking changing now.

Evidently, left and right are too explicit!!

And what might the right see as a solution to that?

Try to destroy the concept of the left by labelling it the "radical" left -- !!!

Encouraging however because the right for all its propaganda never did manage to

destroy liberal and progressive concepts -- !!

What we know about the right wherever they exist is that the noose is never tight

enough on free speech for them.



:)

putting his spin on my politics. It reminds me how the "pro-life" movement claimed the abortion debate.

My politics has not changed in over 40 years, it's my party that has, and I still proudly consider myself a Liberal.

I was a radical/liberal/progressive. Thanks, Phoebe.

REC.

Great post.

Where once I was considered conservative, my belief that a society cannot endure without caring for its members as a whole has rendered me a radical leftist.:eyes:

My friends outside WorkCamp America® still think of me as a conservative, but here, well "he's just this guy, you know..."
:kick: & R

I joked about being a radical with my family, but I didn't dream that I was actually on this team.

would ever be considered radical - live and learn I suppose.

I just made a pitcher of frozen banana daiquiris, Jimmy Buffett's margaritville station is on the XM unit, I might be considered downright dangerous by 8 this evening. :hi: This radical is going outside for a little fun time.

And I haven't had to change one of my views. I'm still voting democratic, and suddenly it's unDemocratic.

The Democratic party has become the party of "security," the party of "defense," the party of domestic and imperial neoliberalism.

By becoming the party of compromise, it has become a compromised party.

I'm voting the same democratic values that I always have. If the party isn't following those anymore, that is the party's problem.

:hi:

That was my aim.


I look forward to agreeing with you as much as possible.

as my time and my mega bucks and my blood sweat and tears have gone into the Democratic party for 40 years.. and although I never "thought" anyone would place me in a box..and tell me to agree with you or anyone else of who or what I was..or leave..I will wear that as a proud badge of honor..You nor anyone else will frame me or decide what box I am in..only I will do that!

And if you think this will bring democrats together..I think you will find out very quickly.,how much you have run others away..and you will have achieved the opposite effect!

I hope you are proud of your boxes and names!!

Because you will be responsible for effecting the opposite results!

It is descriptions like you made that are making me evaluate if I will remain a democrat!

And that is a sad day for me..but you are leaving me little choice ..as I am a free thinker and always have been ..and damn proud of that fact about myself...

Sorry but Your boxes or names or whatever the fuck you want to call it...have nothing to do with me as a democrat! In fact I find it insulting to the point of never voting again and never having anything to do with the party again!

No one will define me!

got that?

It is not my 'boxes'.


It was raised by a number of other posters all who used pejorative terms for people that they didn't agree with.


Mr. Skinner stated that the division at DU was a fact of life but that the terms had become a problem in that people
were taking offense at words like 'pragmatic' and so on.


He openly stated that he would welcome any poster that could define the groups in a less pejorative way.


You can find Skinner's comments in the thread referred to by the OP.


So far no one has found less pejorative terms and people in all three groups found the descriptions accurately represents their views.


The OP is among that group.


The point of the descriptions was to make discussion about the different 'factions' more civil.


If you have better descriptions then fine. If you have problems with 'boxes' or categorizing some pretty obvious groups at DU then you need to direct your comments to those that exacerbate the problem with inflamatory language or Skinner for asking for more civil terms of reference.

thread ..it made me sick!

Then if we assume that you can read and comprehend the words your allegation that they are "my boxes" can only be attributed


to the large chip you are carrying with you.


Again, the 'boxes' you are so deeply offended at were not of my making and were described by Skinner as a known 'fact'.


The exercise that robbed you of a precious hour of life was aimed not at creating 'boxes' but elevating the terms used to describe them allowing for a more civilized reference to them. To that point there was little disagreement and no one offered less pejorative terms.


If you are so deeply offended by the terminology then perhaps you could offer a better response to the challenge that Skinner put forth:

and what Skinner wrote .."which is not insulting to either side"..

well I believe what you wrote was insulting..extremely so..

You wrote your opinion..that is mine!

call me a radical..a RAD ...like I said, I will wear that badge proudly! But I will decide that..not you!

*Break up everything that is "Too Big to Fail".

*Return to Glass-Steagall (everyone KNOWS this is The FIX)

*End the stupid foreign occupations

*Decrease Military Spending to less obscene levels

*Protect American Jobs/Working Class/Organized LABOR

*Return the Tax Rate to Pre-Reagan levels

*Expand Medicare to cover all Americans

*Strengthen the Social Safety Nets

*Free Quality Public Education to anyone who wants it

*No Public Money given to:
Armed Defense Contractors, Private Prisons, Private Intelligence Agencies, Private Schools ("charters"), so called "Faith Based" scams, For Profit Health Insurance Corporations.

*Fair Competition Legislation that allows Mom & Pop to compete with Big Boxes and AgriBusiness on a level playing field.


THAT makes me soooo "radical".
30 years ago, that would make me a regular "Democrat".

This is a great list. Perhaps on the way to defining a platform that the dems should be supporting and speaking to. Change the meme in an aggressive way - seize the agenda and put the republicans on the defensive for a change. That is engage in real leadership and grow a spine.

I would throw in a couple I think shouldn't be too controversial and can even win some wingnut votes if messaged correctly:

* Restore the Constitution - Habeas Corpus, No arrest or holding without charges, No Warrentless searches or wiretaps. No rendition (imagine how we would scream if the Chinese government kidnapped someone in the US and sent them to North Korea for questioning!)
* No War Crimes (attacks without cause, overthrow of foreign governments), No Crimes against Humanity - Torture.
* Prosecution for those who have engaged in these crimes - or turn them over to the world court, so this never happens again.

Other Planks:

* Climate change is real, already at a crisis stage and we need to act in fast serious and major way. Think war time footing. That is the level of effort we should be making to avert and or prepare for this. That means major effort to evolve from oil and to alternative fuels and infrastructure.

* Full Support for gay rights and women rights

:thumbsup:

NONE of the things important to me are even on the radar with today's Democratic Party.
In fact, the "Centrist" Democratic Party Leadership are moving AWAY from most of them.

Rahm Fucks Up and tells the truth:



So what's UP with THAT?

Unfortunately, I suspect that you'll hear nothing but crickets.

:kick:

And no, that doesnt mean lockstep, and no that doesnt mean capitulation, and no that doesnt mean any of the other alarmist charges thrown at people trying to fight the good fight. It means that this party still stands the greatest chance of seeing the change you want to in your society. If I didnt believe that, I would simply not be a Democrat anymore.

Well said.

-Laelth

reporting for duty.

Looks like a Hemingway heroine.

Right now, it's the too-proper dems or American-screwing republicans. Guess who is better for the country? The dems. Case closed until there is a viable alternative.

Anyway, count me in.

Or is it out?

Read it, just read it.