Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Democrats and morals - do we need to clean house first?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-29-04 07:35 PM
Original message
Democrats and morals - do we need to clean house first?

Under Currents: Note to Democrats: Principles Must Precede Popularity: J. DOUGLAS ALLEN-TAYLOR
J. DOUGLAS ALLEN-TAYLOR (11-26-04)

Poor Democrats. They stand like Jack Nicholson as the Joker in the Batman movie, deserted and alone on an inner city street, watching the Republican juggernaut disappearing in the distance overhead, wondering why their toys don’t work like that.

These days, the Democrats always seem to be functioning one election behind. John Kerry and the national party did all the right things to win the 2000 presidency, plugging all the holes left open by Al Gore’s candidacy. Unfortunately, our Republican friends were running a campaign built for 2004.

And so, now, the anguish. The soul searching. The pulling of hair and covering of bodies with dust and ashes as Democrats wonder, “What can we do to make the people like us again?”

The word of the day, today, is “morals,” with polls saying that the national election was largely decided on that issue, our Republican friends squatting contentedly on theirs, and Democrats scramble to try to find some place to make an inroad. The first such “opening” came when Republican members of Congress, worried that House Majority Leader is in some danger of being indicted by a Texas Grand Jury for possible election law violations, rescinded their own rule that an indicted Congressional leader must be automatically removed from his post.

Hypocrites!, the Democrats shouted. Why, you’re not moral at all!

The problem is, as my country friends used to say, that when you point a finger at somebody else, three of your own fingers point back at you.

And so Democrats, if they want to show the public that they are less corrupt than the other guys, might simply want to clean out their own stalls first, before going after the opposition.

In the largest state of the union—California—a good starting point would be declaring that any state Democratic legislative leader indicted by a grand jury should immediately be removed from her-or his-leadership post. That would send the nation a clear message that the Democrats were serious on this issue.

http://berkeleydailyplanet.com/article.cfm?issue=11-26-04&storyID=20176
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Sukie1941 Donating Member (463 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-29-04 07:38 PM
Response to Original message
1. What can we do to make people like us again?
We can be honest. We are.

I don't think it is "we" where the problem lies. We will learn the truth in the next four years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-29-04 07:55 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. I think what the author is alluding to
Is how the right will dump people like Newt, et al, when they do wrong while it seems the left will make excuses. True or not, that is now the perception.

Clinton Stayed, et al, and were defended while the right kicks out those they see as morally weak (newt and the guy referenced in this article as examples).

On the right - people are not perfect, and when they screw up acknowledge it, fire them, move on. On the left - deny it, tell people it was ok what they did, no one cares, etc and so on.

At least that is the general gist I am getting from the author. The right has boundaries and the left moves them around and does not really have any. When the right screws up, they kick out the people that did it, when the left does they blame someone else or pretend that it does not matter and we just need to move.

Agree or not, maybe the author is right and people percieve the dems as incapable of making the most base of moral decisions within their own party (ie, they don't call people on things).

Sure WE can go all day here on DU about * and his lack of morals, but then we would be preaching to the choir. The voters are who we need to reach (if we still believe that democracy/republic is right and good) and if the majority have a view than perhaps we would do well to take heed of that and make some basic moves to appease them.

When we get to a point that we think the majority of people are idiots and inferior than I would guess we lose even more votes as people see us as elitist snobs who know better how they should live their lives than they do. End result of that is we lose more votes.

Change takes time and effort. Clean house, listen, and work to make things more palatable to the people who cast the votes. If we take the view, and announce it often, that the majority are idiots then we will never ever get them to vote in out favor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-29-04 08:22 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. You have individuals who call themselves Democrats who do
some very nasty things on a local level. I wish there was some way to clean house of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MichiganVote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-29-04 07:39 PM
Response to Original message
2. California and the gropenator. Now there's a "morale" to that story
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Avalux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-29-04 07:43 PM
Response to Original message
3. This is bullshit.
Edited on Mon Nov-29-04 07:43 PM by sparosnare
The election was stolen. Democrats can change until the cows come home but it won't matter if the repugs CHEAT and LIE and get away with it. Dammit! :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-29-04 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. The Missing course is: Steps to take for True and Clean Elections 101
HHHMMMMmmmmmm Lemme count the ways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goforit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-29-04 07:49 PM
Response to Original message
5. The DEMs are over..............Kerry won't stand up when he's won!!!!
So The DEMs are non existent!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wurzel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-29-04 07:50 PM
Response to Original message
6. Republicans "squatting contentedly" on their "morals"?
Reminds me of where their "morals" come from. I couldn't have put it better myself. The image is priceless!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sleepless In NY Donating Member (749 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-29-04 08:16 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Dems have to break this republican "morality" myth
because it just doesn't exist.

I hope your "country friends" are kidding when they talk about the 3 fingers pointing back, because its definitely pointing back at them. These hypocrites ought to try looking in their own mirror.


Corruption? Try Neil Bush & Tom Delay, & Ken Lay for starters. Even two faced McCain has had his own problems with the Keating scandal.

Rush, O'Reilly, Gingrich, Hyde, Morris, Bennet, Giordano, The bush twins, cheney's daughter, el al...how are thier morals any better?

Compare bush/cheney's military service to Kerry/Clelland. Then ask these hypocrites who really supports the military.

Reagan was the 1st divorced president.

Red states lead in divorces,(born again christians have the highest divorce rates) teen pregnancies, and sexually transmitted diseases.

Fox & Rupert Murdoch give us all the smutty tv shows we have.

Dems should be pointing out the hypocrisy on the other side, instead of trying to "appeal" to these losers. Remind them , just who is collecting "welfare". Red States dont seem to be to "proud" to take handouts from the Blue States. We should be fighting back, not "appealing" to a myth.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HuskiesHowls Donating Member (582 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-29-04 08:45 PM
Response to Original message
10. I disagree wiith this argument
Having read the whole article, in the latter part, he states that the Democrats need to work from the local level, find out the concerns of people, and then work to help ameliorate those problems. I believe that this viewpoint has been brought up here before, and I agree with that wholeheartedly.

In no way can I agree that the Republicans are more moral, that they kick out the people who have "disgraced" themselves. Tom DeLay is a great example of this. Another one is Rush, and his drug problems. All that they usually do is complain about any investigation being "politically motivated", doing their poor, poor, pitiful me imitation. Only when the public gets outraged to an extent that it may hurt the party, will they kick someone out. Notice that they don't use facts, they just keep repeating whatever someone makes up, until everyone believes them. Also, they don't allow discourse, they just shout down anyone with an opposing viewpoint down.

The Republicans have done a great job of renaming issues: estate tax becomes "death tax"; Late term abortion becomes "partial birth abortion"; doubling your income through marriage becomes a "marriage tax"; uniform testing in schools becomes "no child left behind". The Republicans have taken over the language, and the Democrats have failed to EDUCATE the public as to what the real motivations are behind these changes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
welshTerrier2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-04 12:12 AM
Response to Reply #10
16. exactly !!
this is the essential point:

Democrats have failed to EDUCATE the public as to what the real motivations are behind these changes.

well said !!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
welshTerrier2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-29-04 09:04 PM
Response to Original message
11. democratic immorality ...
Edited on Mon Nov-29-04 09:06 PM by welshTerrier2
killing more than one hundred thousand innocent Iraqis with our "war machine" ??? republicans back the policy ... and some democrats do also ... so yes, on this we do need to clean house ... cast the war supporting democrats out and replace them with peace candidates ...

allowing big money to lobby and ultimately define government policies that serve the wealthiest rather than the needs of all the American people ... republicans never met a pro-corporate policy they didn't like ... but far too many democrats refuse to acknowledge this as an issue or do anything about it ... so yes, on this we do need to clean house ...

and as our electoral process is eroded by those who block many from voting, by unverifiable voting software and by putting winning ahead of a reverence for our democratic institutions, republicans say nothing ... all is well ... but far too many democrats are allowing our most precious freedom to be eroded ... and they are immoral for failing to speak out in the face of such abuses ... so yes, we do need to clean house ...

too often when we hear talk of morals, we incorrectly assume that only church goers get to define the great moral issues of our day ... too often morality is defined far too narrowly ... we have killed many innocent people all over the world and yet the national dialog talks focusses on a superbowl boob ... we live in a nation where millions of children have no health coverage and yet "liberals" are trying to destroy the institution of marriage but seeking greater freedoms for many of their fellow citizens ... we live in a nation that has exploited a greatly disproportionate amount of the world's scarce resources and caused irreversible, maybe catastrophic, environmental damage and yet we debate whether Clinton smoked pot ...

the immorality of far too many democrats has nothing to do with the narrowly defined "fundie" issues the right likes to talk about ... the immorality that needs some house cleaning has to do with the great issues of our time ... and too many elected democrats just don't get it ... start working those brooms and let's bring the right democrats to power ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oilwellian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-29-04 09:18 PM
Response to Original message
12. The Politics of Victimization
Watch Dan Rather apologize for not getting his facts straight, humiliated before the eyes of America, voluntarily undermining his credibility and career of over thirty years. Observe Donna Brazille squirm as she is ridiculed by Bay Buchanan, and pronounced irrelevant and nearly non-existent. Listen as Donna and Nancy Pelosi and Senator Charles Schumer take to the airwaves saying that they have to go back to the drawing board and learn from their mistakes and try to be better, more likable, more appealing, have a stronger message, speak to morality. Watch them awkwardly quote the bible, trying to speak the new language of America. Surf the blogs, and read the comments of dismayed, discombobulated, confused individuals trying to figure out what they did wrong. Hear the cacophony of voices, crying out, “Why did they beat me?”

And then ask anyone who has ever worked in a domestic violence shelter if they have heard this before.

They will tell you, every single day.

The answer is quite simple. They beat us because they are abusers. We can call it hate. We can call it fear. We can say it is unfair. But we are looped into the cycle of violence, and we need to start calling the dominating side what they are: abusive. And we need to recognize that we are the victims of verbal, mental, and even, in the case of Iraq, physical violence.

As victims we can’t stop asking ourselves what we did wrong. We can’t seem to grasp that they will keep hitting us and beating us as long as we keep sticking around and asking ourselves what we are doing to deserve the beating.

Listen to George Bush say that the will of God excuses his behavior. Listen, as he refuses to take responsibility, or express remorse, or even once, admit a mistake. Watch him strut, and tell us that he will only work with those who agree with him, and that each of us is only allowed one question (soon, it will be none at all; abusers hit hard when questioned; the press corps can tell you that). See him surround himself with only those who pledge oaths of allegiance. Hear him tell us that if we will only listen and do as he says and agree with his every utterance, all will go well for us (it won’t; we will never be worthy).

And watch the Democratic Party leadership walk on eggshells, try to meet him, please him, wash the windows better, get out that spot, distance themselves from gays and civil rights. See them cry for the attention and affection and approval of the President and his followers. Watch us squirm. Watch us descend into a world of crazy-making, where logic does not work and the other side tells us we are nuts when we rely on facts. A world where, worst of all, we begin to believe we are crazy.

How to break free? Again, the answer is quite simple.

First, you must admit you are a victim. Then, you must declare the state of affairs unacceptable. Next, you must promise to protect yourself and everyone around you that is being victimized. You don’t do this by responding to their demands, or becoming more like them, or engaging in logical conversation, or trying to persuade them that you are right. You also don’t do this by going catatonic and resigned, by closing up your ears and eyes and covering your head and submitting to the blows, figuring its over faster and hurts less is you don’t resist and fight back. Instead, you walk away. You find other folks like yourself, 56 million of them, who are hurting, broken, and beating themselves up. You tell them what you’ve learned, and that you aren’t going to take it anymore. You stand tall, with 56 million people at your side and behind you, and you look right into the eyes of the abuser and you tell him to go to hell. Then you walk out the door, taking the kids and gays and minorities with you, and you start a new life. The new life is hard. But it’s better than the abuse.

We have a mandate to be as radical and liberal and steadfast as we need to be. The progressive beliefs and social justice we stand for, our core, must not be altered. We are 56 million strong. We are building from the bottom up. We are meeting, on the net, in church basements, at work, in small groups, and right now, we are crying, because we are trying to break free and we don’t know how.

Any battered woman in America, any oppressed person around the globe who has defied her oppressor will tell you this: There is nothing wrong with you. You are in good company. You are safe. You are not alone. You are strong. You must change only one thing: stop responding to the abuser. Don’t let him dictate the terms or frame the debate (he’ll win, not because he’s right, but because force works). Sure, we can build a better grassroots campaign, cultivate and raise up better leaders, reform the election system to make it failproof, stick to our message, learn from the strategy of the other side. But we absolutely must dispense with the notion that we are weak, godless, cowardly, disorganized, crazy, too liberal, naive, amoral, “loose”, irrelevant, outmoded, stupid and soon to be extinct. We have the mandate of the world to back us, and the legacy of oppressed people throughout history.

Even if you do everything right, they’ll hit you anyway. Look at the poor souls who voted for this nonsense. They are working for six dollars an hour if they are working at all, their children are dying overseas and suffering from lack of health care and a depleted environment and a shoddy education. And they don’t even know they are being hit.

http://mathewgross.com/blog/archives/001041.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
welshTerrier2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-29-04 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. fantastic analogy ... everyone should read this !!
great post and very insightful ...

the greatest leap, and the most dangerous leap, will be for democrats to stand up and tell the truth ... too many seem afraid to acknowledge that our country is broken and seem to fear that saying it is would be seen as unpatriotic ...

it's time to stop saying "we're all Americans" and start saying that some are trying to destroy the America we value ... this is not a left-right battle; it's a struggle for honoring our democratic institutions that all Americans should participate in ...

too many democrats are watching America circle the drain ... and the abusers will only grow more assured until they start fighting back ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lapauvre Donating Member (387 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-29-04 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. I think there is a very valid premise for this post.
Our country is very divided at this point and it is because of the pressure from the religious right. At least I think so.

There was the famous poll that indicated that 80% of regular church attendees voted Republican, while 80% of Democratic voters do not.

I am going to try to be as serious in this post as I can be, but I may slip into irony, humor, ridicule, speculation and other distortions. Feel free to how your thinking reads my words.

Morals are taught in many ways. It is totally okay, and even an honor, to eat your dead grandmother in certain cultures. It is morally acceptable to that culture.

It is morally acceptable to sell your twelve year old daughter into whoredom, in certain cultures.

It is morally acceptable to sell your son into involuntary servitude in certain cultures.

At the moment, it is not morality that should be questioned, but our culture.

It is morally acceptable to require a living widow to be burned alive on her deceased husband's funeral pyre in certain cultures.

It is morally acceptable for husbands, fathers, brothers, to kill females who do not conform to their culture.

It is morally acceptable to sexually mutilate young females in a most horrific manner in some cultures.

It is morally acceptable to put infant daughters, or impaired infants, including twins, out in a jungle and be left to the local fauna to devour their innocent bodies.

So, morality has a lot to do with culture. Don't you think?

I have a part two, concerning what ARE American morals, our cultural morals.

I am an elderly person, and I find that the attendance to any church whatsoever, guarantees absolutely no affirmation of morality. Read the news.

I do not find that NOT attending any church, or disavowing a religion, has anything to do with morality.

It has to do with our "culture."





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HuskiesHowls Donating Member (582 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-29-04 11:54 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Yes, very much so!!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-04 12:16 AM
Response to Original message
17. This is a joke right?
Look this is a TRAP, and what we have is a massive FAILURE IN ETHICS... not morals

Speaking of ETHICS... anybody care to pass the news to this dork that Thom Delay was protected from this prosecution he calls for, by his FEDERAL HOUSE....

Thank you
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-04 02:17 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. I think one of the overall things the author was addressing
Was how people percieve things at a higher level, or to put another way - 'newsworthy' stories and how the general public boils them down and digests them.

In high profile national or local cases which merit news coverage the perception can be that which he describes. In the 90's we had clinton and newt. Newt was out. Clinton stayed in. No matter all the details people often in their busy lives will start to boil such things down to some non-detailed overall look.

Republicans more often than democrats punish their own from losing status or position or job. Not always the case but it does have something of a longer term effect in general populace view. People remember such blurbs down the road even if intially it may make the republicans look bad (ethically) over time it looks like they behaved in a way that was based on moral values.

Truth and perception are often defined in ways that don't seem right or reasoned, to people like yourself and others here we can see a bigger more detailed picture, we are more in the know on some things, and we also have a bias. Joe six pack hears the news in blurbs and is more interested in his own life, sports, movies, spending time with family, et al - mentally they have less space dedicated to all this so they condense the information and process it in a filtered way (with some bias as well but less entrenched bias - ie they may see things more locally related to people in office more than a party name which is why you get local votes for dems and state or national they vote republican).

I think the author is saying from where he sits the repubs have a more clear message, are more consistent with it, punish their own more based on their morals(ethics) - but that does not mean it is true - it only means the dems have failed to coherently put together such a PR machine that reaches middle america in way that appeals to them.

In the next 2-4 years we have to reach people, and to reach them we need to understand them. Not ridicule them, call them names, etc. This is a time of reflection on a larger level for the party. Those within the party will mostly stay but the other half of the population we need to advertise to - see them as consumers who have an image of our brand. Right now that image is not what we would like it to be. If we want to sell them on what we offer we should do so in a way that makes them want us not in a way that makes them feel they are bad and the only way to be good is to buy our view (which boils down to a religious message in a sense, follow our faith and you are good don't follow it and you are a sinner).

What do we have to offer? How does it relate to the consumer? How can we package what we sell in a way that they will want it? What do the surveys show? People will buy anything from pet rocks to lava lamps, we can sell to them as well - we just have to listen, accept them as who they are, not try to change and ridicule them, but reach out to them with a clear message where they can see that the product we are selling is what they really want.

Before we do all this selling, once again, we need to see what they see as wrong with our brand. It does not mean we are wrong, it merely means we need to spend some time discussing things and how they look to those outside. Maybe we can change some things, maybe we need to. A look at DU on any given day will show that. If people internally can discuss things they see as wrong (or poorly managed, et al) then why can't we look into how people external to the party see things and work to make what they see different (without gutting our core values and goals)?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-04 12:17 AM
Response to Original message
18. The moment this author equated Democrats with The Joker, I quit reading.
I'm not interested what this joker of an author thinks, if he thinks that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yupster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-30-04 02:30 AM
Response to Original message
20. My pet peeve for the last 20 years
is Senator Byrd.

There's no way that a former fu&^%*^ng Knight Rider of the Ku Klux Klan could stay in office were he a Republican. That just wouldn't be accepted. So why do we accept it?

I know it was a long time ago, and I know about forgiveness.

In fact I do forgive him. I just don't want former fu&^%&ing Klansmen anywhere near places where laws are written. There's not a good Democratic senate candidate in West Virginia who didn't belong to the Klan?

I just hope the old bigot will retire and let us put to rest once and for all the era of the southern Democratic racists.

I'm glad Hollings, the old Confederate flag raising governor called it quits too. It won't be too soon for me to put this era on he history shelf.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC