Irrelevance of the Democratic Party

[pberq]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/07/opinion/07herbert.html?incamp=article_popular_2

"It's a measure of the irrelevance of the Democratic Party that a man who played such a significant role in the policies that led to the still-unfolding prisoner abuse and torture scandals is expected to win easy Senate confirmation and become attorney general. The Democrats have become the 98-pound weaklings of the 21st century."

[sui generis]

1. how utterly stupid can a human get?

so if the democratic party is irrelevant and everyone just becomes a republican, where did all the liberals go? That's right, now we're all republicans, except some of us are liberals. Wouldn't that make the republican party "irrelevant"?

What a dumbass - another irrelevant absolutist.

[LiberalVoice]

2. Where did you get that from?

Cuz I just read that article and the writer never even came close to saying "everyone just becomes republican" because the democratic party is irrelevant.

I don't know where you've been in the last four years but when is the last time our party faught for justice, and I mean really FAUGHT for justice, and won? This party has stood there and taken every bit of shit the republicans have thrown at them. Whether you want to believe it or not the Democratic party has become irrelevant.

[sui generis]

5. let me tell you where I have been for the last four years

I have been writing every senator, congressman, and janitor and visiting them in person. I have been part of every committee, organization, fund raising effort, get out the vote effort, drive your grandma to the polls effort, and political discussion that I could find. I hope you've done more than just piss and moan on DU, but I doubt it.

Our party fights for justice all the time - and just because we don't fight as a republican play-dough pumper number nine hairdo contingent monomind like the republicans doesn't mean that we're not fighting for justice.

And just because you fight and don't win doesn't make you irrelevant. Somebody has to lose in every battle, but what counts is whether the war is won or lost.

Now here's a really fine point for you to digest, but if nuance is beyond you then feel free to ignore it: we are perhaps irrelevant to republicans and apologists, but the qualities and values that define us as democrats are very relevant and have not gone away.

Jews were irrelevant to the Nazi party. What a fucking stupid thing to say.

[pberq]

6. Maybe irrelevant is too strong

I agree with you that there have been many brave fights fought by Democrats in recent history. There are some outstanding Democrats in Congress - Barbara Boxer, Dennis Kucinich, Jesse Jackson, Jr., John Conyers, Pat Leahy, etc., etc.

On the other hand, what about the massive Democrat support for the Iraq invasion? There was plenty of information available before the invasion showing that none of Bush's claims were true.

What about the massive Democrat support for the PATRIOT act?

What about the Democrats on the 9/11 Commission who supported that whitewash?

The list could go on. . .

Yes, maybe irrelevant is too strong. On the other hand, much more can and should be done about the deabacle of the Bush administration.

And yes, I have sent numerous messages to congress, made phone calls, etc. to put pressure on these people, and also to thank those who have stood up for truth and justice.

[sui generis]

9. okay I can go with that

sorry for the crabby sui post

I agree with you on those points though; and the hard thing is that as dems we shouldn't be voting to support activities that remove freedoms and protections from individuals. It's a criteria that is fairly easy to use as a test for what fits our philosophy versus what fits the republican corporate plutocratic philosophy.

It is really sad when some people buy into the republican propaganda, but we're not necessarily talking about ideology in these case. The dems that yield votes to Patriot Act are worried about being re-elected, not because they themselves are uninformed but because there are dems in their district who buy into the republican b.s. about needing to give up some of our civil rights, and those dems are manipulated by fear. Our lawmakers instinctively know that the kind of dems that are easily manipulated by fear and bullied by authority are also easily led to the other side, so they're playing a political survival game.

And maybe that's being generous - some of our lawmakers are just butt stupid too.

We do need to redefine ourselves in stronger terms. When someone says dems are immoral for NOT supporting a constitutional amendment against gay marriage we need to lash back hard instead of retreating and defending our position. The other side is immoral and bigoted for trying to remove the constitutional rights of a group of tax payers and americans, and they used EXACTLY the same arguments 40 years ago about interracial marriage.

I'll go a bit further - the leaders we put forth have to be snooty little angels without a bit of tarnish anywhere in their past. The kinds of people that can live to be a real human for 40 or 50 years without some kind of scandal are pretty damn conservative and that means they don't take chances. That's where we failed with Kerry - I was only ever lukewarm about him and now I'm ice cold. He was not a fighter - and by extension not an effective leader. Our elected leaders (some of them) are irrelevant, bland, uninspired and uninspiring people.

On the other side, nobody cares if their leaders are evil or good, just that they are strong. I think there is equal irrelevancy to the "real" ideology of republicanism in that regard - but the outcome is of course, clearly different.

[LiberalVoice]

7. blah blah blah

Our "leaders" make us irrelevant because no one speaks for us or our values. Not to the point of making any changes anyway. Face it...the people we elected to lead us chose a path of corruption and greed. If almost all the leaders of our party are just like the republicans then that does make us irrelevant.

And as for your childish "piss and moan" comment...I was replying to yours.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

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

[LiberalVoice]

11. Holy crap you got me!

What do ya say we bust out the ruler and see whos is longer? :eyes:

[sui generis]

13. don't need a ruler for that

just aim at each other, lean and see who's catching air. :evilgrin:

truce -

[LiberalVoice]

16. truce

All i'm saying is that most of the people we have chosen to lead us make everyone else ignore us. If we want change we need people like you and I(People who can get angry) to lead us.

We need a screamer! Vote Dean in 08! :)

[sui generis]

18. You the man!

I'm outta here for the weekend - have a good one -

:hi:

[LiberalVoice]

19. Enjoy it...

60's and sunny here in Pgh all weekend! I know I will.

[sui generis]

17. nice /nt

[sui generis]

12. and another thing

nobody is going to hand you a leader. You have to either be one or vote for one and according to your philosophy, since you apparently can't come up with a brilliant leader who speaks for your values, you too are irrelevant.

[pberq]

3. What message does confirming Ganzales send to the world?

http://www.ccr-ny.org/v2/reports/report.asp?ObjID=U7F2HkHaId&Content=492

<snip>
Said CCR Executive Director Ron Daniels, “To confirm Gonzales as Attorney General will send a message to the world that we feel no shame for the torture and abuse that has occurred at our hands. Asking him tough questions is not enough: opposition to the nomination must have backbone. The nomination is an affront to the rule of law, and we call on Senators to vote their conscience and declare that torture is not an American value.”

CCR, which is the only organization in the country that actually represents men and women who were tortured in Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo, charges that Mr. Gonzales knowingly and willingly provided counsel and advocated policies calculated to evade or circumvent domestic and international laws prohibiting the use of torture and inhumane treatment.

Yesterday, a group of retired high-ranking military officers wrote an unprecedented letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee in which they charged that the policies of Alberto Gonzales “have fostered greater animosity toward the United States, undermined our intelligence gathering efforts and added to the risks facing our troops serving around the world.”

<snip>
“Making Alberto Gonzales the Attorney General of the United States would be a travesty: it would mean taking one of the legal architects of an illegal and immoral policy and installing him as the official who is charged with protecting our constitutional rights. The Gonzales memo paved the way to Abu Ghraib. The fact that officials in this Administration’s own Justice Department felt compelled to repudiate the earlier torture memos should itself be sufficient to persuade the Senators that he is not fit to be the top law enforcement official in the land,” said CCR President Michael Ratner.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

4. What is the point of fighting a losing battle?

Gonzales was always going to be confirmed. There's no way the Democrats could stop it, no matter how "relevant" they are. I, for one, am glad that they at least had the guts to put his record on the table (which is a hell of a lot more than they ever did with Ashcroft.) Since they couldn't actually kill his approval as AG, they did the only thing they could do.

[pberq]

8. There is a point in fighting this

I'm not so convinced they did all they could.

The point of fighting this is that at least some members of government would be on record of opposing this travesty. People in the rest of the world are watching.

[txaslftist]

14. Skrew yew, NYT

What dipshit writes, 'it's a measure of the irrelevance of the Democratic Party that...'?

I'll tell you who. Some dumbass whose parents made better than minimum wage because of the Democratic Party. Some idiot whose access to education was ensured by democrats. Some moron who was not passed over for his job because of his skin color. Some dickwad whose freedom to even write editorials in the newspaper is protected by democrats.

A better question might be, who gave this chirruping little shrivel-balled weasel a job?

[jswordy]

15. Uh, it's an opinion column from an opinion columnist who is...

...paid to write his opinions, and happens to be from the right. Big frickin' deal. Don't get bent over it. We got our Molly Ivins types, ourselves.

Sigh.

[txaslftist]

20. NO, I'M GETTING MORE PISSED OFF.

I MIGHT HAVE TO WRITE IN AN EVEN BIGGER FONT OVER THIS CRAP. IF YOU POSTED THIS BECAUSE YOU THINK THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS IRRELEVANT, GET THE DAM-HELL OFF OUR WEBSITE. IF YOU POSTED THIS BECAUSE YOU ARE A FREEPER TROLL, D!TTO.

'the Democratics have become the 98-pound weaklings of the 21st century.'- SCREW YOU! THIS IS ONE 198 POUND NOT SO WEAKLING THAT CAN POUND YOU INTO WHINEY PASTE -since we're being metaphorical.

Don't you friggin' whiners know anything about fighting the fights you can win versus fighting every fight every time and looking like constant losers?

We can't stop Gonzales. We don't have the votes. He serves at the pleasure of the president, as part of his cabinet. He's a killer, a torturer, and a monster, but we cannot stop him.

Stop expecting our leaders to be supermen who can do what they cannot do. Instead, get out and get people to talk to and give them our message. Then we can get the votes to give our leaders the power to do things we want them to do.

Until then, don't post this kind of crap, especially under the flamebait title you posted it under. How about, "New York Times Editorial says Democrats Irrelevant", dipshit.

[otohara]

21. Locking - Dupe

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x95672