Nationwide, Democrats for Life did not endorse Kerry last year.

[madfloridian]

As I posted last night, the Florida group worked against him and advocated Anybody but Kerry. Kerry had a very good stance on this issue, but this group wants more. They are the ones who are meeting now with Howard Dean, and cozy with Reid and Pelosi and Roemer.

Howard Dean is getting shoved into the corner on this one. And so are those of us who are pro-choice.

Their goal is that their 95/10 plan will be at the DNC website, and that they be given a role in the party's agenda. This is the group whose president said in the late 90s that abortion was murder and those who had them would be accountable on Judgement Day.

They refused to endorse Kerry last year, yet many of our Democrats are cozying up to them anyway. They take Dean's words of welcoming pro-lifers to the party, and they are twisting them to mean he wants to change party policy. I have a video I post here where he says the opposite. He says we don't change what we believe.

Democrats for Life refuse to endorse Kerry, see little in DNC agenda to support

"Democrats for Life did not endorse Kerry in the presidential election, and it found little to support in the party platform. Nonetheless, DFL leaders were pleased with the 2004 convention because they felt they gained a bit more respect. DFL also held a public rally at the national convention that, they believe, helped increase their visibility."

Here is the article from Catholics for Life in which the Florida chapter wanted to be ABK, anybody but Kerry. It was written by their president, Valerie Mierzwa, and is very clear.

Anybody but Kerry

"Florida DFLA is committed to identifying and promoting Democratic candidates and electing officials who support the right to life. Because of his past voting record and public pronouncements regarding, but not limited to, all the above issues, John Kerry has disqualified himself from receiving our endorsement. Florida Democrats for Life of America, Inc., can only remain true to its convictions by urging Floridians to vote “ABK” - Anybody But Kerry! "

Here is an article by the president of the Florida group, also in the Catholic Online. It is a ahocker, called Is Kerry the Hitler of the Unborn.

Article comparing Kerry to Hitler in his stance on choice.

"I have been accused by more than one Kerry Democrat of being mean-spirited when I refer to John Kerry as the “Hitler of the Unborn.” I don’t use those words lightly. I have carefully considered his voting record on the life issues. I have listened carefully about the promises he intends to keep to Planned Parenthood, NOW, NARAL, and EMILY’s List. Kerry Democrats would have us believe that abortions will continue to drop under Kerry’s administration, but logic tells me that when he revokes the Mexico City Policy with his first promised Executive Order, millions of abortions will occur worldwide through the use of American tax dollars. I see clear parallels between Adolf Hitler’s master plan and John Kerry’s moral relativism concerning the value of human life. Therefore, I feel this image of Kerry as the new “Adolph Hitler” is justified."

I think the Democratic Party should remain true to its stance as pro-choice.

[tsuki]

1. I agree. I am about to break with the Dixiecrats down here. I

probably am being booted out as I type.

[MisterLiberal]

32. Hmmm

I wonder why they even call themselves Democrats if they aren't going to support the Democrat candidate.

I'm telling you, inviting the Anti-Choice crowd into our ranks WILL NOT INCREASE VOTES.

It will just dilute support for choice, that's all.

[Lerkfish]

2. I agree to your admonition...

"I think the Democratic Party should remain true to its stance as pro-choice."

if for no other reason than that every group that is anti-choice and wants to influence politics directly instead of by voting is frickin nuts.

IMHO

[alkaline9]

3. doesn't the logic go...

... Once you use a corollary to Nazis or Hitler, you have subsequently lost the argument? Like when you can't find any other fault, you inevitably go for the "he's a nazi" campaign... and therefore you have given in to defeat in the argument.

[madfloridian]

4. Their website and award to Tim Roemer for their Hall of Fame.

Democrats for Life

Roemer thinks the Republicans are lax about the abortion issue. So that means this group is more anti-abortion? Just wondering. Roemer's statement on abortion at their recent dinner:

“We have made more progress on abortion in the last six months than the last 30 years. The Republican Party's policy on abortion over the past five years is like having a bunch of tin cans tied to your back bumper -- It sure makes a lot of noise but is not very pretty and certainly doesn't accomplish much. Democrats have a plan that does, The 95-10 Initiative.” said former Indiana Congressman Tim Roemer"

[saracat]

5. Which is why Dean should NEVER have welcomed the pro-lifers!

They cannot be considered part of this party. And they should not be part of the "big tent'.Dean opened the door and now we are paying for it.People like this are NOT Democrats. Watch this be flamed but I am sick of it. Choice has always been a major tenant of our p[latform, just as civil rights. It is a civil right, and I don't think its support should be optional.

[madfloridian]

6. Saracat, Dean is being pressured.

He is being pressured by the party's congressional leaders who are not for choice. I wish you would not put all the blame on him. He is sincere about saying we need to welcome them, but he is hearing from a lot of people about this group.

I think he and some others of our Democrats are not aware they could be a possible trojan horse.

I don't intend to get into it with you. I am pro-choice myself, and I do know that some of the Democrats are tightening the screws on him.

Blaming him is not productive right now. This group is not really that Democratic. That is the issue.

You can now say I worship. I don't care anymore. This is too serious an issue to play tit for tat.

[Lerkfish]

9. I think the message is correct, though...

that allowing anti-choice into the tent is a potential (although I think obvious) trojan horse, just like chiding democrats to become more homophobic and pro-war in order to "win elections" is insidious and wrong. It's an attempt to reshape the democratic party into republican lite and then simply eliminate it as the vestigial organ they wish it to become.

I didn't read saracat's post as ONLY blaming Dean (even though he might be), I read it as cautioning against the trojan horse, in general.

Its important to remember that if we must become more like the enemy to defeat the enemy, we have already lost.

[madfloridian]

11. I am cautioning also. I just pointed out that Dean is in the middle.

He must listen to all sides as chair. I was trying to be fair about this. But whatever. Not going there.

[Lerkfish]

15. no, sorry, I'm more agreeing with you...

just saying I didn't read into that post as strongly as you did.
but I could be wrong.
I was saying the message about the risk is more important than who gets blamed for opening the door.
but I probably explained it poorly. You and I are copacetic as far as I'm concerned.

:toast:

[madfloridian]

18. Thanks, did not want it to turn into an argumentative thread.

It is too important for that. :hi:

[saracat]

33. Not arguing MadFloridian. We agree more than we disagree.

Dean is by no means alone. I just don't think anyone who is chair needs to consider views that are contrary to the core values of our party. I understand what a fix he is in, but he can just say no.I am just going to continue hoping.But the day we give equal consideration to the people who want to take my privacy and medical rights away due to my gender is when the Party and I must think about parting company. And I really don't want to do that.

[saracat]

10. He gets the same blame as everyone else on this issue. They all say they

pro-choice but welcomr pro-lifers, who are anti-choice. All of those who do this are wrong,IMHO. And if Dean can't withstand pressure, he isn't the man everyone says he is. ! I think He really is sincere in welcoming these people, and it won't work and isn't right.

[madfloridian]

13. I am not going to argue with you anymore.

We are basically saying the same thing. I would have no respect for the chair if he did not listen to all sides. I am pointing out some research I did, which is pretty good in fact. This was a general over all post about Kerry's not being endorsed, and it is not mostly about Dean.

Not going there.

[tsuki]

35. And the movement is now away from pro-life. Pro-life is not for

whites only. They are anti-abortion.

[Larkspur]

20. Anti-choicers were inside the Dem Party before Dean became DNC Chair

Many Catholics and other Christians support Dems social programs but personally oppose abortion. My mother and paternal aunts were that kind of Democrat and they were Democrats before many on this board were born. My mother and paternal aunts were FDR Democrats, and because of their religious beliefs, they found it hard to support Democrats who supported abortion. In most instances they voted for the Dem because they supported the Dem social programs and except for abortion, they wanted them protected.

I think Dean's approach of pro-choice and anti-choice Dems sharing common ground -- reduce abortions by reducing unwanted pregnancies via social uplift programs but keep abortions legal -- is the way to go.

[MisterLiberal]

38. Really!

Would FDR have admitted a pro-Japanese or pro-Nazi person to be Secretary of War?

[Eloriel]

7. I think the Party is CRAZY to give ANY quarter to

pro-lifers at all. It opens doors -- just as you've described -- which are going to be very difficult to keep closed. It opens doors to wolves in sheeps clothing. It opens doors to the dismantling of Roe.

I don't think for a minute that this group Democrats for Life is entirely free (or even free in any way -- who knows?) of infiltrators.

And AFAIC, that is a problem with so-called "moderates" in the party as well. I've seen longtime DUers who call themselves "moderates" post appallingly racist and xenophobic shit againt immigrants recently -- all under the guise of "moderation," of course. Bull puckey.

[madfloridian]

8. Ditto as usual.

I think Roemer and some others are going to put bigtime pressure on Howard. This group claims to be about 3000 nationwide, and they often work with Feminists for Life.

Hey, then my mind went like this: why do we oppose Jane Roberts' stances (Feminists for Life) and go along with this bunch which is similar.

There are far more of us who are pro-choice, period, bottom line. I think we will be heard.

[NaturalHigh]

12. As I understand it...

this group doesn't want to make abortion illegal, they want to give women plenty of options to PREVENT unwanted pregnancies. They also believe that abortion is wrong but that the Roe v. Wade decision should stand. Are you saying that ANYONE who believes abortion is wrong should not be allowed in the party?

[madfloridian]

14. Way to misread, beautifully done.

I won't try to explain it to you if that is all you think this is about.

[madfloridian]

16. Clue: this post was about this group's opposition to Kerry.

They claimed to be Democrats but did not support him, and in many cases worked against him, especially in Florida.

I would appreciate it being kept at that level.

If a group gets access to the party through Reid and Pelosi, the leaders of congress, then they should have at least supported the candidate last year.

[BillZBubb]

17. If they didn't support the Democratic candidate,

they are DINOs and should be given no voice.

That they would rather support Bush and his slaughter of tens of thousands of ACTUALLY BORN INNOCENTS IN IRAQ shows them for the sorry excuses for human beings that they are.

Someday our side will learn that we need to first PURGE our party of these lunatics before we can come together as a cohesive, powerful majority party.

[madfloridian]

21. They supported Bush's 2nd term by not supporting Kerry.

And it makes me furious.

[Larkspur]

19. I don't think Dean will be pressured by Dems for Life but it would be

good of you, madfloridian, to send this info to Dean. He probably has this info but you never know.

I just listened to Dean's interview with Aaron Harber in Denver, CO. Dean restated his pro-choice position, so he's not going to support an anti-Roe position.

From what I heard Dean talk about in the past about welcoming anti-choice Dems into the "tent" is that pro-choice and anti-choice Dems share common ground -- reducing abortions via reducing unwanted pregnancies via social uplift programs and supporting pre-natal and post-birth programs for at-risk parents. That is the "compromise" Dean will seek. I don't see Dean, who sat on Planned Parenthood's board for many years, caving into Dems for Life anti-Roe position.

[madfloridian]

22. I pretty much agree.

Several of us sent this info to the party. Someone also posted it at DFA blog, and the DNC blog is acting crazy.

Since most people are surprised that they did not support Kerry, it may be that he does not know.

Note they also said there was not much in the Democratic agenda they did support.

That was a great video. One of the best. I tried to keep it kicked here but it disappeared. I transcribed some of it.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

23. That you for keeping this group...

on the front burner.

I have been somewhat disturbed but still willing to at least listen to all the talk about "reaching out" to the "values" (bleck) voters.

But when I read your very illuminating posts about the group DFL and what their agenda is, my worst fears were confirmed. I want to repost here a clip from your thread yesterday, and my response:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Mad Floridian: I welcome them, but they want control of the party. Read this paragraph. It was a speech by the president of Democrats for Life, as well as the state contact for Feminists for life...the group in which Jane Roberts is highly connected:

'The Democrats for Life and Feminists for Life organizations are proof that all people can and should be pro-life. It is consistent with the root principles of both the Democratic Party and the feminist movement to respect life and to encourage the development of everyone's full potential. Freedom and equality are unattainable if there is not first life.

So, my rallying cry for this rally is to call upon former Democrats who are pro-life to come back to the party, take your place, and make your opinion known. Democrats who are closet pro-lifers, I call upon you to stop being afraid to speak the truth. On Judgment Day you will not be asked if you are a follower of the Democratic platform, but if you were a follower of the word of God. A little political power is not worth becoming an accomplice to the murder of millions of babies. Pro-Life Democrats, let's take our party.


HHNF: From what you've posted... I say that "Democrats" for Life can just fucking bite me.

I'm not going to let some right-wing nutter take away my basic civil rights, why the fuck would I let a "Democrat"???

Keep your stinking religion outta my life!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I am utterly appalled that a group of "Democrats" can be so flagrantly anti-separation of church and state.

I cannot and will not ever support such a group.

Period.

I will fight tooth and nail anyone -- including those with a "d" after their names -- who tampers with my civil rights as a woman.

Seems harsh? Not conciliatory enough?

Tough. Shit. :mad:


Hear that, Harry Reid? Nancy Pelosi?

[madfloridian]

24. You're welcome. I missed your post. Thanks.

This is a serious issue.

[FreedomAngel82]

25. Oh good grief

If they think Dean is welcoming pro-lifers they're obviously not paying any attention to what he is saying. :eyes: He believes a woman should be able to make up her own mind with her own health care which includes abortion.

[blm]

26. Dean's not going to cave to their pressure just as Kerry didn't. It's one

thing for pro-lifers and pro-choicers to try and find ways to lessen the need for abortion through family planning and education, but, no way would Dean or the Dem party turn its back on the LEGALITY of the reproductive rights position.

[madfloridian]

27. He may not have a choice.

That is what I fear. Reid and Pelosi are on board with this group.

Also they want more than to lessen the need for abortion.

[blm]

30. heh...I have faith that Dean won't cave on this. The only bug here for me

is that Dean is spending any time on this as an issue when most of the problems with the vote is NOT on issues, but, on the security of the voting machines.

If Dean would spend a greater amount of time exposing the GOP control over most of this nation's voting machines, we can PROVE that the people of this country ARE with the Democrats on the issues.

[BIG Sean]

28. Well..I supported Mr. Kerry.

Hi,

I ran a fund raiser for him. Hosted parties, and of course voted for him.

I am a Pro Life/Anti Choice Democrat.

I joined this forum never realizing that I was not welcome in this party.

[madfloridian]

29. Level of misunderstanding of this post is alarming.

Or maybe not. How does one explain the unexplainable. :shrug:

[Idioteque]

39. You are welcome in the party! Nobody is saying you aren't...

...what we are saying is pro-life Democrats who support Republicans and work to defeat Democrats shouldn't be welcome.

There are many good pro-life Democrats, iincluding Harry Reid and Tim Ryan.

Nobody minds pro-life democrats that support democrats. We just don't like the ones that call our candidate the "Hitler of the Unborn" (Florida Democrats for Life).

[Vincardog]

40. If you are against abortions don't have one. No body said your were not

welcome in the Democratic Party. You are welcome here until and unless you want to take other womens' choice away from them.

Do you believe that every pregnancy should be carried to term?

Would you jail a doctor for performing a single abortion?
Would you jail a women for having an abortion?

Does your belief include a women pregnant as the result of rape?

Please explain your position to me. I defend your right to choose.
I defend your right to have any belief you choose. I just want to know what you support.

[Pirate Smile]

43. You supported the Democratic Candidate for Prez in 2004 but this

group didn't. You aren't them.

I don't really know why they call themselves Democrats.

So who did they vote for in 2004 if their position was ABK? :shrug:

It doesn't sound like you actually have the same position as they do so don't take the criticism against them as criticism of you.

:hi:

[MissMarple]

31. If you truly want to decrease abortions, pro-choice has to be included.

Just making a law and not addressing the contributing issues, which no one will do if a law supporting more government interference in pregnancies is passed. I say more interference, because as amended by Casey government can intervene in ending post viability pregnancies. Most people support this but feel that measures must be included to protect the health of the woman and in cases of rape or incest. The people who insist most on government oversight of pregnancies do not want to include the exceptions. What is wrong with these people?

Abortion as birth control or to maintain a woman's health will never go away. Limiting it by attacking the root causes will decrease the need or perceived need. Perception does seem to be a sticking point, doesn't it? And control freaks think only their perceptions are valid. It would all be so simple if the rest of us would just acquiesce and listen to the people God really talks to. :eyes:

[Nikki Stone 1]

34. If the Dems are doing this, women's rights are gone

recommended. With great sadness.

[Nightjock]

36. No endorsement means nothing now

The elections are rigged. God could come down from the heavens and endorse a Democrat. It does not matter.

Democracy is dead thanks to Diebold and these crooks in the White House.

[jbnow]

37. Look at all the lives they saved by

helping support bush.

They should be very, very proud. Why support a man like Kerry who supports life and to give the living quality of life but supports the right to choice, when you can help elect a man who disrespects the living that aren't rich supporters, who maims and kills and poisons the earth that supports us all. After all, he says he is against choice and against helping the babies once they are born and growing. bush is their man. cool.

[WildEyedLiberal]

41. Why the fuck are these people Democrats??

Seriously?

They can kiss John Kerry's (and my) pro-choice ass.

[Pirate Smile]

44. That is my question as well. You say your a Democrat but your

position is to vote for Anybody BUT the Democratic Candidate.

:wtf:

I can understand people who are anti-abortion but don't vote based on only one issue, so because they agree with Dems on most of everything else, they vote Democratic. I understand that and those are the people we need to include in the Democratic Party.

[bliss_eternal]

46. Here, here! Bravo!

:applause:

...They can kiss mine, right after they finish kissing yours!

There were people on this very board that came out in full force when John Roberts was announced as the nominee, to tell those of us that are pro-choice to ignore it and to 'let them (the GOP)have this.' Sadly, it wasn't just men saying we should 'roll over' and ignore this nominee and not fight it. Truly a sad state of affairs when other women, deny the fact that OUR rights are at risk!

I was offended by this stance, as a woman, as a woman of color and as a pro-choice Democrat.

[WildEyedLiberal]

50. It truly is an issue of rights

I won't support any Democrat who supports a change in the Democratic platform to deny women's rights. I can *tolerate* Democrats who are personally opposed to abortion but who have no desire to make it illegal or impose restrictions. But I have no patience for these assholes who can't support our liberal candidate because he refuses to kowtow to their anti-woman agenda. John Kerry didn't abandon women's rights; let's hope Howard Dean has the same resolve and doesn't invite people like these into the party to help craft the platform.

[PatsFan2004]

42. Purging pro-lifers helps to unify the party but many blacks of faith

are pro-life by religious belief. They are pro-social programs but abhor policies they consider immoral. Should we alienate an important voting bloc with such a purge?

[madfloridian]

48. Who is talking about purging anyone?

The level of misunderstanding of my post is beyond my comprehension.
:shrug:

[bliss_eternal]

49. true--madfloridian said nothing of purging anyone...

edited per poster--to delete off topic rant.

lol...

[sojourner]

45. are their numbers large enough to truly make a difference? they sound

rather marginal...........why wouldn't it be just as important to get the "Green" party and "Independent" voters, whose values are a lot more in line with basic Democratic values?

[madfloridian]

47. I think it's more whose ears are listening.

"Sen. Ben Nelson (Nebraska) and Reps. Jim Oberstar (Minnesota.), Tim Ryan (Ohio), Marcy Kaptur (Ohio) and Bart Stupak (Michigan) were among the 16 members of Congress who participated in the meeting. They said they have the backing of the top Democrats in Congress, Sen Harry Reid and Rep. Nancy Pelosi."

I hesitate to link to some of the articles which state Dean is for "stopping abortion on demand" as I call that pure BS. The wording is way off, and it sounds like divisive spin.

Roemer was just inducted to their hall of fame. This group is serious, and I don't think they should be the voice of the party as they say they want to be.