Who are you? I really wanna know?

[inthebrain]

Reading this board I see a lot of noise. I see those advocating candidates, running mates and impeachment. Yet, for the life of me, I can't figure out who anybody is in terms of the issues. If I am representative from the Democrat Party I can see that many like this person or that person. What I can't figure out is what issues turn your cranks regarding society and foreign policy.

Many here oppose the Iraq war. What is it specifically that you oppose about this war? Is it just this war or war in general? What consititutes a just war?

Do we need to re-evaluate the meaning of just and legal war? Can any such-a-thing exist?

What domestic issues stand out to you? Are you interested in social and economic justice?

How do you propose we fix this party moving beyond rhetoric? Can poeple work inside and outside the party to do it? What is your stand on third party candidates pushing issues that are important to you that this party ignores?

For the life of me I can't figure out who any of you are. I can't figure out from what exactly it is with this rah-rah cheerleading that goes on on this board from issues that matter to you the most. If I am a Democrat trying to issue new proposals in 06 I can't make out from Tom and Adam what it is that you want.

Right now the right wing is in defensive mode. I for one would like to keep them there way by putting issues on the forfront that everyone here faces. Everyone here has to have a story and ideas on how we can become a more just society.

I can't figure out how many propose to do that with all the campaigning that goes on in here.

[NMDemDist2]

1. you have got to be kidding

right?

health care, illegal war, civil rights, human rights, jobs, childcare, energy, verified voting

you must spend too much time in the lounge is all I can figure :shrug:

[leftstreet]

7. ROFL!

:rofl:

[inthebrain]

13. You mentioned illegal war and human rights......

Do not wars deprive innocent people of their human rights?

Children are the ultimate victims in war. This is regardless of the legality of the conflict. I would also question whether a legal war automatically equates to a just war. Furthermeore, if wars are ever just regardless of the legality.

[NMDemDist2]

15. i supported the Afghan war with the hope we'd put enough resources

to give women some rights there and rebuild that benighted country

WWII was probably the last "justified" major war

I am against death in general, so war is not my idea of a good idea. But we should have done something in Dafur and Kosovo was a good job IMO

like everything, there is no black and white, only shades of grey.

[inthebrain]

21. I now question the wisdom behind the Afghan War as well

You raise a good a point about womens rights. Yet I think by bombing them we take their rights away as well.

I think we when started that war I was charged up because of the attacks. I wanted to get the bastard behind. Looking at it now I think it was a bad idea. It has me questioning the reasons behind many of our engagements and whether we do a good job of leading by example.

I think wars result in the fact that we place to high a value in obedience. WWII might have been averted if our leaders really did embrace acts of free speech which we saw in the labor movements. The Ludlow massacre in 1914 and even the Kent State massacre are examples of what free speech means in this country. I am sure many others can point out other examples.

If we are to avert war and win hearts and minds we have a ways to go in leading by example. The elections in the Ukraine and the protests afterwards inspired uprisings in Jordan (or was it Syria). Perhaps that says much of what we can do here at home to encourage others to toos out their disctators.

As I said, we do a poor job of leading by example. I think others are inspired by acts of civil dissobedience. It makes it difficult for peopel like the Taliban in Afghanistan or George W Bush here at home to seek positions of power.

I have even read material (Which I find interesting not that I agree with it 100%) that WWII might have been avoided had real democracies not made great efforts to put down their labor movements. Imagine a Nazi Germany defeated not millitarily but by those that act as their "brothers keeper" by not going to work?

[punpirate]

2. Umm, you're newer than me. You first. Who are you? n/t

[Deja Q]

3. Uh-oh. Here comes the grammar police, you said "Democrat Party".

Oops!

:popcorn:

[leftstreet]

10. "Hands behind your head"

:rofl:

[MercutioATC]

4. Three simple answers:

1) A "just war" is one in which we are defending our immediate security.

2) Equal rights for ALL people.

3) Provide an atmosphere conducive to the success of EVERYBODY.


...that's basically it (though they all have lengthy explanations, especially #3).

[inthebrain]

5. HIT me with it

I'm curiouse

[omega minimo]

18. I'm curiouser

We turn cranks AWAY

"What I can't figure out is what issues turn your cranks regarding society and foreign policy."

[inthebrain]

31. You said you had a lengthy eplanation for #3

3) Provide an atmosphere conducive to the success of EVERYBODY.

I'd like to read it.

I am curious what you propose to get there.

[MercutioATC]

30. With what?

:shrug:

[EST]

6. Time spent reading the serious posts, as well as

related blogs (if any) would avail far more than calling out.

[Skittles]

8. LOL

I can't figure out for the life of me what you are f***ing talking about

[niyad]

9. sweetie, if you can't figure it out, then all I can say is that you are

obviously not paying enough attention. (others have pointed out some of your syntactical errors, so I won't bother.)

you don't know why we oppose the war in iraq? again, you are not paying attention. try harder to read with a certain amount of comprehension.

or did I miss the sarcasm button being on?

[inthebrain]

11. I know many here oppose the war in Iraq

I also know that many have their own reasons for it as do I.

Some oppose the "legality of the war". I further would like to know if those that oppose this illegal war also think legal wars are Justified wars as well.

Do you oppose warfare in general or just the illegal ones? Do you think that because a war is legal that makes it a just war?

[niyad]

12. I repeat, you really need to pay more attention. all of your questions

have been answered repeatedly, and at great length.

are you bored tonight? if so, it is not our responsibility to amuse you.

[hwmnbn]

16. If our country is attacked militarily.....

that is the ONLY reason to declare war. "Legal" and "just" are only talking points used by politicians to convince the weak minded to initiate bloodshed.

[inthebrain]

24. That's a good answer

Does 9/11 count as a millitary attack?

I answered in a post above that I question the wisdom of our response. I dont think you can beat terrorism with millitary action. The Israel/Palestinian conflict is a frightening example of this.

[guidod]

14. What? Huh? What?

Your turn.

[snowbear]

17. Hi guidod!

:hi:

[guidod]

19. Hi larissa!!

You never told me who your #1 hockey team is. Don't forget the WINTER OLYMPICS start next week!

[snowbear]

22. I know.. I started a long PM to you and didn't have time to finish..

I'll get to it this weekend! :hug:

[guidod]

23. Thanks, I'm looking

forward to reading it.

illegal codesmilie_remote(':woohoo:')illegal codesmilie_remote(':woohoo:')

[Blue_In_AK]

32. The Aces, of course. n/t

Hi, Larissa. :hi:

[applegrove]

20. Dupelicate

[Orangepeel]

25. okay. I am going to act like this is a serious post

DU is not monolithic. There are thousands and thousands of posters and each one of us is someone different (well, unless we are all Will Pitt, but that's an inside joke).

People get different things out of DU. Some people use it as a news source. The LBN forum is a terrific resource of articles from big and small sources from around the world.

Others use DU as a campaign vehicle for their favorite candidates. There is nothing wrong with that -- it allows people to learn about candidates and get in touch with others who support the same candidate.

Others use DU as a way to learn about or try to convince others of the rightness of their views on certain issues. We don't all agree on anything, as anyone who spends anytime in the General Discussion forum will soon learn.

Others use DU as a way to spur activism. It is a way that anyone communicate with a large number of progressives quickly. The administrators themselves have done this by recruiting people to be part of an "activist corps". Calls to do such and such go out and interested people participate.

Periodically, there are calls for DU to come together and put forth some sort of platform. It's never worked before and probably won't work, simply because opinions on DU are so diverse. DUers aren't all Democrats, and even if we were, it's a big tent party and the official Party platform isn't going to be developed by a bunch of anonymous strangers on a message board.

[inthebrain]

26. Thank you for stating the obvious

I assumed that posters here were smart enough so I wouldnt have to waste time with that explanation.

[American liberal]

27. piggybacking onto your comments

I see DU like a "dialed in" microcosmic view of the Left. As Gary Hart said yesterday on "Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me" (NPR game show), Republicans are corporatists pretty much in lockstep, whereas the Democratic Party is a party of "coalitions," comprising many, many groups of people. Although it is much more difficult for us to arrive at consensus, I think we're a lot more fun to go out for coffee or dinner with.

Our diversity is one of the things I LOVE about the Left. That said, I have posted several times recently that we MUST rally around leaders who are capable of consensus building and are media savvy if we are to gain some ground on the formidable Republican machine. And make no mistake, regardless of how we feel about the Republicans, they currently have the control and have been very effective in pushing their own agenda, so far. We can cry foul all we want, but it's only by taking action that changes can be made.

Out with the namby pambys in '06! In with courage and conviction! If we don't stand for something, we'll fall for anything! We can be all over the place here and amongst ourselves, but in the so-called public eye, our representatives MUST speak with one voice and we have to back them no matter what. I think, although I don't agree with her, that's what Auntie Bush meant in her thread about Cindy Sheehan, that she's diluting "our" message. Otherwise, the Right will use our very best quality (our diversity) to divide and conquer us, and they will win AGAIN! I've seen it happen. They've got a lot of tricks up their sleeves: Diebold, redistricting, fraud, corruption, and lots and lots of corporate funding. We have to be smarter, faster, more savvy, and more entrepreneurial if we are going to make progress this year.

I appreciate the OPer trying to get a handle on where the Left stands on the "issues." I agree that there is a lot of "noise" on these boards. We are, in fact, all over the place. Just scroll through the subject lines in GD. We cover the bases--and then some. And our representatives have their pet issues.

I was reminded yesterday while listening to the online Town Hall Meeting conducted by House Dems that it's the grassroots efforts of people like you and me that will truly make the difference in this next election. Remember, with the current makeup of the legislative branch, the 9/11 commission--regardless of how flawed its findings were--never would have happened if those Fire Department widows hadn't pushed and pushed and pushed to MAKE it happen.

We've got to get disciplined and organized and push and push and push our reps to support an agenda that WE determine is the most relevant. and MAKE them accountable to US! It's that simple. Now I really must get back to work. These boards can be so distracting sometimes.

Peace,
AL

[holdyourbreath]

28. war as last resort due to imminent threat!

also, if the Democrats truly showed consistency and integrity, then the 4 democratic candidates who authorized the war would have been admonished severely....or they would have at least apologized...and never run for President to underscore the point. But most Dems don't have that kind of character or consistency.

you want to be a democrat? then you should advocate living wages, protecting the environment and BALANCE between the workers and the corporations.

[LWolf]

29. You want my issues? Here ya go:

War: What is it good for? Absolutely nothing. I consider the phrase "just war" to be an oxymoron.

Civil liberties: I support each individual's right to be themselves, make their choices, and live their lives, up to the point that they interfere with the same rights of another individual. Equal rights and responsibilities for all.

Universal, single-payer, not-for-profit, complete, equal, healthcare to include vision, dental, mental, and various non-western alternative forms of care for ALL. Period. No waffling, no quarter given.

100% public financing of all campaigns. No pacs, no private donors. Equal air time and a level playing field for all candidates of any party.

Proportional representation; no winner-take-all.

A fairness doctrine regulating use of airwaves to promote propaganda.

Fair trade based on environmental and labor standards. No NAFTA/CAFTA, withdrawal from WTO.

Intense investment in clean, sustainable energy sources.

Intense investment in individualized public education, with the focus on individual growth and the thinking skills necessary to sustain a democratic system. Small schools, small classes, abundant resources, individualized curriculum and instruction, respected and well-paid teachers, and a rich support system for all outside the classroom.

Safe, clean, shelter, healthy food, adequate clothing, employment, and safe, clean communities as a right for ALL.

Focus on partnership and cooperation with the international community.

Strict environmental stewardship that protects the short term and long term health of the biosphere and its ecosystems.

No more privatization of public services.

No tax cuts for religious organizations that engage in political activity. A strong, clear separation between church and state.

Have I left anything out?

[abex]

33. ending the war and then go on from there