"Kennedy: Democrats Need Progressive Agenda"

[GreenPartyVoter]

WASHINGTON (AP) - Democrats should have talked more directly about fundamental values and ideals in last year's presidential campaign, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy said, outlining a progressive agenda aimed at moving the party and the nation forward.

In remarks prepared for delivery Wednesday to the National Press Club, Kennedy, D-Mass., said Democrats must do a better job speaking about the principles they believe in and that have guided the party.

"We cannot move our party or our nation forward under pale colors and timid voices," said Kennedy, who has served 42 years in the Senate. "We cannot become Republican clones. If we do, we will lose again, and deserve to lose."

But at the same time, Kennedy said Democratic Sen. John Kerry's narrow election loss also showed that the party must "recognize issues of deep conscience in policy positions we take." Referring to abortion, he said Democrats should not yield on a woman's right to choose, but should also acknowledge that "we are a better society when abortions are rare."

http://apnews1.iwon.com/article/20050112/D87IIRG80.html

----------------------------------------------------------
Save our country one town, county, and state at a time!
http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/electionreform.htm#why

[buddhamama]

1. i'm gonna listen to it

this afternoon. I'll withhold comment till then.

thanks for posting.

[GreenPartyVoter]

3. Yeah, it won't mean as much if he endorse Zell Miller or something.*l*

----------------------------------------------------------
Save our country one town, county, and state at a time!
http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/electionreform.htm#why

[mattclearing]

2. About time, Ted. Can a Dean endorsement be far behind?

eom

[bklyncowgirl]

10. I'm gonna guess no.

I don't know if Kennedy's still carrying water for Kerry but Chris Heinz is publicly supporting Rosenberg.

Could be wrong though.

Actually it would be in Kerry and also Hillary Clinton's interest to have Dean at DNC. One less primary candidate to split the Northeastern liberal vote.

[mattclearing]

12. It would also be in their interest to have a DNC with some principle.

But hey, these people don't even know why we lost the last two times, so why does it matter?

Centrism is the goal of a government, not of a political party.

[CWebster]

4. sounds like mish-mash rhetoric

highlighted by more willingness to chip away at yet another party position instead of defending it with no qualifiers.

[IrateCitizen]

8. How so?

Do you think we're a better country when we have lots of abortions? I don't. Such a stance would violate a fundamental respect for life, the same value that propels me and many others to oppose war and the death penalty.

I didn't hear anything in Sen. Kennedy's rhetoric that talked about infringing on a woman's right to choose whether or not to have an abortion. However, I also believe that we need to strongly push for policies like comprehensive sex ed and readily available contraception in order to minimize the NEED for abortions. Talking about ways to reduce the number of abortions by reducing the NEED for them is not the equivalent of chipping away at a woman's right of reproductive choice. In fact, I'd say it's quite the opposite -- trying to reduce the number of instance in which a woman is confronted with that difficult choice.

[CWebster]

9. It shouldn't even be up for discussion

is what I think.


I have attended many demonstrations and protests in my life, but by far, the largest was the pro-choice rally in Washington that swept Clinton into office. People forget that. The press of bodies was so tight that there was a danger of getting swept away by the crowd if hands weren't tightly held. I will never forget it--and no, I don't like it, not one bit, when politicians, especially male politicians seek to advice and preach to women about the morality of abortion.

My grandmother died as a result of a butchered abortion and I resent the piety of men with their moral judgements.

As for Teddy, he pulled all those strings for his boy Kerry--what kind of reflection is that on his progressive credentials? Hmmmph!

[IrateCitizen]

11. So then, your focus is not on convincing others...

... but maintaining a hard line, no matter how your rhetoric may actually work against you?

If you re-read my post, you will see that in no way, shape or form am I attempting to infringe on a woman's right to CHOOSE whether or not to have an abortion. But, it's an unfortunate reality that the right wing has been successful in framing the Democratic Party's view on abortion as being in favor of abortion, as opposed to being in favor of choice.

Personally, I think that the whole debate surrounding reproductive choice in ALL its forms is a PUBLIC HEALTH issue, not a POLITICAL issue. Unfortunately, it has been seized upon by demagogues as a political issue to further a right-wing agenda. And since that's the unfortunate reality we're stuck with, we'd better start talking about it in a way that will neutralize the rhetoric of the anti-choicers and instead show that upholding a woman's right to reproductive choice is the true compassionate position, along with working to reduce the number of instances in which a woman is confronted with the choice as to whether or not to have an abortion (i.e. reducing unplanned pregnancies).

As for Teddy's progressive credentials, he's a liberal -- not a progressive. However, the issue I raised in my post wasn't about him, but about how he portrayed this issue. Personally, I have no problem with people in the Democratic Party who personally don't approve of abortion, so long as the official party platform is to completely support reproductive choice in ALL of its forms.

[CWebster]

13. You are right

I am probably "hardline" about the invasion of Iraq, Social security and a host of other issues Democrats feel they have to "soften" to appeal to those who have been swayed by the way the Right has framed the issues.

[IrateCitizen]

14. Where on earth did I say anything about "softening"?

I get so frustrated by these kinds of discussions, because we end up acting as if we're on opposite sides of the issue as opposed to being 99.9% on the same side.

I'm not talking about "softening" the issue here, CWeb. I'm talking about presenting it in a manner that indicates that the left is not about supporting ABORTION, per se, but about supporting a woman's right to CHOOSE whether or not to have an abortion. There are significant portions of the populace that believe that the left wants to impose abortion on them, but when presented with the argument that the right wants to OUTLAW abortion whereas the left wants to ensure that it is legal for a woman to simply CHOOSE whether or not to have one, they say that they support the right to CHOOSE, even if they don't personally believe in ABORTION.

Reframing is not about softening a view. It's about restating it in different terms. Dammit, I'm on your side on this, CWeb! I would NEVER support a politician who wanted to place more limits on ANY kind of reproductive choice. I'd NEVER support a politician who wanted to restrict, in any way, a woman's access to an abortion. But I would like to see this issue FRAMED and DISCUSSED in a different way, because as it is now the right wing has somehow framed their oppressive and intrusive stance as the compassionate one, and ours as the rigid and uncompromising one. It's a needless disadvantage that we need to eliminate.

[CWebster]

15. Question to self: Do I feel like tangling with IC?

Answer: Only half-heartedly, since I admit to clicking back on out of curiousity when I should be getting this lot ready for bindery.

And I just wrote that before I read your response.

Actually, to be really truthful, I didn't read what Kennedy had to say since I am inclined to be more than annoyed with him already and I generally like what he has to say - if not what he always does politically.

Anyway, you didn't use the term, "softening", true, because I thought: "Did IC even use that term" and checked. I must've seen it somewhere and it stuck in my mind. I figured you would know what I meant.

I understand what you are saying but on a gut level I am very uncomfortable with it. Is it reframing or is it triangulating? Hard to tell in this climate, because for so long the Dems have not stood firm on one side of an issue and defined it from their own perspective.

[IrateCitizen]

16. Thanks for the chuckle, CWeb...

I'm glad you decided to "tangle" with me. ;-) Since it seems we're largely in agreement, I'll just address your last paragraph...

Am I advocating "triangulation" on this issue? Hell no! Like I said, I would reject any politician who advocated placing any legal restrictions of any kind on abortion, or any other reproductive choice rights.

Are the Democrats advocating "triangulation"? Who the hell knows, although like your impression of them, they have done very little to engender any confidence in them from my corner as well.

WRT Kennedy, I am much from the same school of thought as you. I like a lot of what he does, but he's no progressive. He's an old-school liberal. Not that old-school liberals are bad, but I think that they're a little too close to the status quo and too resistant to standing up for positive change and reform.

[sadiesworld]

19. Did you read the article?

Kennedy specifically mentions the preservation of SS as an issue to be focused on.

[ooglymoogly]

18. right on iratecitizen

[txaslftist]

5. I'm with Mr. Kennedy on this one.

But we've been saying this at DU like, forever?

About time he clued in.

[baby_bear]

6. Read: Roemer is the wrong man to head the DNC

And I couldn't agree more. I would feel totally betrayed.

b_b

[welshTerrier2]

7. Kennedy on Hardball tonight

i haven't watched Hardball since the election ... i just can't stand looking at that pompous, pastry-bloated face ...

not sure I can take it even with Kennedy on ... let me know how it goes ...

[ooglymoogly]

17. can you imagine that dumb foghorn blaring stupid questions

at a very great man? wouldn't miss it for the world. thanks for the heads up

[Gloria]

20. Why do they have to keep reinventing the wheel on abortion??

Clinton said it best...."Safe, Legal, and Rare."

Democrats keep screwing around with their basic messages...keep it simple, stupid.

JEEBUS

[joanski01]

21. Kennedy said in his speech today

that the biggest threat to Social Security was "George Bush and the Republicans". He said this Administration turns everything into a crisis and fear. I thought his speech was really great.

[spirok]

22. I totally agree

Democrats should look more at individual people and not at their race. They should give inner city children more opportunities to excel. They should hire minorities to top posts in their offices. They should be closer to simple folks rather than make narrow judgement about their intelligence. In other words, they need to be TOTALLY UNLIKE Republicans.

[newyawker99]

24. Hi spirok!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[kentuck]

23. Kennedy is on the right track...

Democrats would do well to listen.