I am a moderate liberal, more left than right, activist as opposed to office holder....

[madfloridian]

Actually that makes me pretty much a part of the majority of our party.

I believe we need to get out of Iraq while we still can, before our military literally becomes hostage.

I don't think we will because a couple of groups in our party believe looking strong on National Security trumps everything else. They will play games with the lives of Iraqis and our military rather than appear weak.

I believe in some form of earned citizenship for those who have been here for years and lived good lives. I believe in the old way...that pastors and priests and congregations have a right to give sanctuary to an immigrant being unfairly targeted. It was always that way until Bush.

I believe it is wrong to criminalize clergy for that.

I believe it is wrong to criminalize doctors if they give a woman a late term abortion to save her life. I believe that is her decision and that of her doctor.

I believe the Social Security and Medicare are sacrosanct and can be managed as is without being privatized. I know my grandparents would not have made it through the depression following the 1929 crash without that new FDR Social Security program. They worked hard all their lives. They did not live to see the Medicare put into place, so often they did not get the medical care they really needed.

I think there is a place for religion and it is not in the government. It is not in our bedrooms or doctors' offices. Religion should not dictate what medication we get.

I believe that those who voted for the war were aware they were giving permission for Bush's policy of pre-emption. I believe they knew it would continue through the middle east.

I do NOT believe they saw the cruelty of the this administration, and now they can not really speak out about it.

I believe corporations now control our country, and that it was possible because of the Democrats who sold out to big business in the late 80s. They did it for big money, they got the big money, and they got the power into the hands of corporations.

I think the attacks on the "Liberals", "left" "activists" are motivated by the group that did that. Most of us here are pretty moderate people over all, but there is an effort to spin us as lefty and out of control.

I think that is a great mistake. I think in the long run it will hurt our chances in 08.

I have been reading some blogs today I don't usually follow that closely. Something's afoot. A couple of folks are leaving MyDD and changing their philosophy to standing up for ideals and issues instead of the traditional partisan/bipartisan stuff that is no longer working.

I think the think tanks who have been our handlers for years are aware the wind is shifting somehow, and the attacks on us here and everywhere will grow. They are not sure what it happening, and frankly, I only have an inkling.

The trade bill done in secret, the funding bill with no restrictions, now the vote today with Tancredo. People are getting nervous.

I am a Democrat, and at this point I intend to remain one. I would like to see Howard Dean proved successful in 08, as there is still that part of me will not get over 04. So I most likely will stay to see that happen and help it along. That is if he remains.

I think the attacks on the "liberals" "left wing" "activists" here are not accomplishing anything at all but anger.

[madfloridian]

1. And further I believe these words from Bill Clinton the saddest ever.

The last point I want to make is we've got to be strong. When we look weak in a time where people feel insecure, we lose. When people feel uncertain, they'd rather have somebody who's strong and wrong than somebody who's weak and right.

http://www.ppionline.org/ndol/print.cfm?contentid=251085

Those words should never have been glorified.

Just imagine how things would be today if our Democrats had spoken for what was right about Iraq and dared to appear weak. Instead they embraced the "strong and wrong" theory.

And it has nearly destroyed our country and our credibility.

[ShortnFiery]

4. The American People have had their fill with "strong and wrong" ... that is a no brainer!

Unfortunately the M$M erroneously believes that if it cheer-leads long enough, we'll all come around.

Nope, we all just STOP watching and/or giving any credibility to the USA's M$M. :shrug:

Thanks for the thoughtful insights. Of course, you know by my unabashed liberal views here, I'm in agreement. :hi:

[madfloridian]

5. Those 3 words have had a very negative impact on our party.

He is a former president. For him to say it is better to be strong and wrong than to appear weak....is just indefensible.

[MaryBear]

7. Clinton's point is that we need to be strong,

his point is not that we need to be wrong! Duh!

Strong and right,as opposed to weak and right.

[madfloridian]

10. It is not so much what he meant, it is the effect on the party.

This fear of being painted as weak has colored decisions made by Democrats way too much. They use that "we must appear strong" against activists who were right when they were wrong.

[MaryBear]

14. He said what he meant. That is what is important.

Linking Clinton to a demoralized party is not logical in terms of strategics. Clinton is the best we have had in this area. And he is worth paying attention to. Regardless of one's preferred candidate at this time.

[madfloridian]

15. We are in Iraq partly because he chose not to speak out about it.

It is part of the National Security thing with the Democrats and that wing I spoke of. If he and others who knew Iraq was not an immediate threat had spoken out before the vote....they could have had great influence.

He was a good president, but his "strong and wrong" philosophy has hurt our country.

I don't care enough about this election to argue over candidates. I do care about troops dying and innocent Iraqis dying because our Democrats needed to appear "strong".

Clinton approved of this war. He could have stopped it, he didn't.

[MaryBear]

17. Wow, madfloridian.

We truly disagree about Clinton. I just do not see his philosophy as "strong and wrong." That seems to be a misinterpretation.

I cannot say whether Clinton approved of this war,nor whether he could have stopped it. However, I doubt both counts.

We do agree about unnecessary deaths in Iraq, though, madfloridian.

However, this election is important. I hope you start caring and supporting one or more candidates.

[madfloridian]

18. You keep misreading.

He is not "advocating" "strong and wrong", but rather not appearing weak....and in the process it comes across to the National Security Dems that it should be their philosphy. If you tell someone not to appear weak, they will try to be strong perhaps when they should not be.

Clinton said himself that he often defended Bush from the left on this issue...the war. He did say he approved. I have written about it, so have others.

Hubby and I are supporting Edwards, but we are realistic that there will be one nominee and that is Hillary. It is just being realistic.

I am not passionate this year. I think I made it pretty clear above.

[MaryBear]

19. Oh.

Could you point me to where Clinton said this stuff?

I, too, am an Edwards supporter, but like Hillary and think she is electable more than he.

Overall I think we have some good candidates to choose from.

Peace.

MB

[madfloridian]

23. Here:

Dec. 2002 from the post above in his speech to the DLC in 2002
http://www.ppionline.org/ndol/print.cfm?contentid=251085

"We also ought to do more on weapons of mass destruction. I approve of what's being done in Iraq now and the way it's being done, but it's not enough."

And here from 2004 at CNN

"(CNN) -- Former President Clinton has revealed that he continues to support President Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq but chastised the administration over the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison.

"I have repeatedly defended President Bush against the left on Iraq, even though I think he should have waited until the U.N. inspections were over," Clinton said in a Time magazine interview that will hit newsstands Monday, a day before the publication of his book "My Life."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/06/19/clinton.iraq/

[flpoljunkie]

9. If Democrats, like Feingold, had stood up against IWR, Dems would have been "strong and right."

Feingold is a true patriot with the courage to stand up for what is right. We need more Feingolds in Congress, and fewer corporatist Democrats who sell us out for lobbyists' bundled campaign contributions.

[illinoisprogressive]

2. nice declaration. and affirmation. i just told a friend today,

that for all the retoric, most people, left or right want alot of the same things. jobs, a home, a nice community and good schools. It is the fringe that is hateful. and the right has veered to the fringe edge that they all became infected.
my friend is a republican, or former one. bush, of course. many started leaving in his first term and thought him awful way back. she is now a dem.

[madfloridian]

3. My family are Republicans, and coming around.

They honestly did not realize what was happening, and it has been stunning to see their awakening. It is going slowly, though. I have an intelligent educated family who all think they are more right than anyone else and hate to admit they are wrong.

[Forkboy]

6. Welcome to the fringe left!

:D

[madfloridian]

13. Yep...that is about how it plays out.

:-)

[ellisonz]

25. I feel your pain.

I think most of DU does (excepting those in denial as a matter of course):( :banghead:

[Nimrod2005]

8. k

[madfloridian]

11. Tancredo's words yesterday gave me a chill..he said "the people have spoken"

The issue has come to fruition," Tancredo said by cell phone after the vote. "The people of the country really have spoken. It's a really good indicator of just how much closer to the people the House is than the Senate is."

This was referring to the bill about the government withholding emergency response from cities who give sanctuary. This is getting very close to the idea of criminalizing city officials and clergy.

Here is a little more on it:
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_5587755,00.html

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The U.S. House of Representatives this morning voted to withhold federal emergency services funding for "sanctuary cities" that protect illegal immigrants.
Anti-illegal immigration champion Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., sponsored the measure, which he says would apply to cities such as Denver and Boulder. He was elated by its passage, which stunned critics and supporters alike.

Tancredo is right. 50 House Democrats voted for it. Since we control the House, that means our party is for such a bill. I have seen it spun here, but that is the bottom line.

The House under Democrats appears to be very much like a very extreme Republican.

That is the kind of thing I meant in the OP. If this truly is what our party believes, then why should I continue to fight so hard for it?

Here are the votes, the yes votes are overwhelmingly Blue Dogs or New Dems, with a few names I don't know. I am making a list, but it is taking a while.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll485.xml

The names that stood out at once are Altmire, Boswell, Boyday, Cohen (assume they mean TN...guess he has to be careful cause he's got a huge primary coming up next time with the same lady he beat before)...also Cuellar, Giffords, Gillibrand, Klein (FL), Lampson (TX), Mahoney (FL), Patrick Murphy who got a lot of activist help, Obey, Sestak, Shuler, Space, and many more.

By this vote the House which is controlled by Democrats told me what I needed to know.

They stand with someone like Tancredo on issues affecting whole cities.

[roody]

20. federal emergency services money

You mean these cities would not get help like New Orleans got help? BFD.

[riona]

12. It does seem that the political spectrum has been pulled to the right

To me, the present day liberals are not members of a small a fringe group. We are just the average people who still believe in the basic principles of the Democratic Party. It is time for our representatives in Washington to stop enabling the press and right wing pundits who use "liberal" synonymously with "unpatriotic", "weak", "big spenders" etc. And, because the president is going to veto a bill, there is no excuse to vote in a manner contrary to the majority of your electorate. The fastest way to lose respect in Washington and at home, is for our Democratic representatives to continue on the present course of forgetting what it is to be a true Democrat. Don't put a "D" next to your name unless you act like one and are proud of it.

[madfloridian]

16. The fringe stuff started several years ago. It is just part of our party now.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/62

They have done this marginalizing of the Democratic base so long that they have defined us.

[demoleft]

21. To some political leaders, activists are useful when...

...they work for equal law and justice in their community;
they talk to people trying to convince them to vote progressive;
they work fro free during the campaigns;
they vote for representatives and President;
they keep democratic and liberal blogs like this alive;
they rally against war or for women rights and other progressive topics;
they get the party card;
they accuse the opponents.

Activists are generally not useful to some political leaders

on the TVs;
in public debates with politicians;
on the radio on air programs;
when they come to criticize the Party;
when the Party goes the other way instead of keeping the promises;
when someone in the Party aims to a political career;
when a Party leader starts attributing to himself supernatural powers while being so simply and miserably a common human being like anyone;
when a Party leader thinks he knows what's good for the country while millions among his Party's supporters don't know.

So sad, so true, everywhere. Does any politician remember politics is service?

[madfloridian]

22. Good points.

We are really nuisances to them more often than not. We are like little gnats they brush away for being annoying.

The extent of the phenomenon called the netroots/nutroots is fairly recent with the rise of the internet. It fuels outrage at injustices that once went unnoticed and uncommented on overall.

[inthebrain]

24. Long time no talk

Good post.

I do have some criticisms though.

Primarily I am much more socialistic in my thinking. I Think that Wal-Mart should be given over to the workers as well as many other corporations that have become just way to abusive. Given that the drug companies like Pfizer and Merck have become these off the wall animals I think the state should take over them so we can manufacture cures for diseases that are much more focused on what society needs. Not to mention have these bozos waste our tax dollars on ads. In my view we've paid for these bums ten times over and then some.

I also think we need to change our thinking on borders and labor. The debate in that area has become so archaic I feel like I'm at a fucking clan rally half the time fighting through all the Bullshit. I believe that when laborers are restricted in where they can go and what rights are extended to them, we all as laborers get the shaft. Especially when wealthy corporations are paid more repect has humans and laborers are treated more like contraband.

In many respects my views are considered "going to far". In the Democratic party my voice carries no wieght.

I think that all wars are retarded and if we working folk saw them as a detriment to our well being we would have avoided a lot of shit. Primarily WWII when all laborers should have been boycotting and striking fascist friendly corporations. Afterall, the fascists were able to build such a huge damn war machine because of the influx of money from foreign investors into their abusive system.

We, as a people, just don't seem capable of getting our shit together. We are so caught up in scapegoating Immigrants, Welfare Mothers and Gays that we have lost site of our humanity. We have forgotten what it is to see eachother has human beings with the same needs. We all must learn to see to it that having food, clothing, housing and healthcare as an unalienable right for ALL human beings. Whether they live in the United States, Mexico, Afghanistan or Iraq.

This is just a sampeling of my views. Perhaps my career as a nurse has some effect on this.

I know people look at the Republican party as a successful political model that we should emulate. I say that's crap. The problems in worrying about being seen as too extreme is the same as what they did in forcing themselves to far right.

They cornered themselve into a box they couldn't get out of. If your worried about being seen as too far to the left and really want the moderate label then perhaps they've done the same to you.

I suggest you allow your ideas to be free and organic in nature. Politics is a journey and should be about growth as a people as well as an individual. Your political ideas and views should never be stagnant. That's the problem with the right wing and has always been their problem. No matter how much they put lipstick on that pig it's still a pig.

We should learn to be brutally honest with eachother and keep the door open. Not to mention learn how to seperate constructive criticism from bullshit. The right wing with their media empire have done a wonderful job of that.

Not to mention the 9/11 truthers that are being led by the nose by the same right wing idealogues. What those guys offer is nothing more than Hitlers version of the Reichstag fire but replaced it with 9/11. Their biggest accomplishment "Loose Change" is loaded with press clippings from a neo nazi rag called the American Free Press. These guys are just right wing pigs in drag (They pretend to be liberals meanwhile scapegoating is about as Aliberal as George Bush SS giveway to Wall Street).

We need to remind ourselve not to cower from brutal honesty. Drag the bigots out on the mat!!! These days it's gotten completely out of control and too many folks worry about right wing crys of "race cards" and "race baiting". If we as the left don't stand in the face of overwhelming odds on these issues we will never build a movement that stands a chance of lasting even 5 years from now.




Well, that's my rant.

[ellisonz]

26. Excellent Rant.

"Not to mention the 9/11 truthers that are being led by the nose by the same right wing idealogues. What those guys offer is nothing more than Hitlers version of the Reichstag fire but replaced it with 9/11. Their biggest accomplishment "Loose Change" is loaded with press clippings from a neo nazi rag called the American Free Press. These guys are just right wing pigs in drag (They pretend to be liberals meanwhile scapegoating is about as Aliberal as George Bush SS giveway to Wall Street)."

Thank You For Saying That, It Takes Guts!

:patriot:

[inthebrain]

27. I appreciate that but....

It doesn't take a lot of guts to post that on the internet.

As a matter of fact, one might arrgue it takes a lot of cowardice. Which leads me to my final point. Most of those folks are cowards when you explain to them you know what they are up to. I've had these guys threaten me every single time I've called them on this bullshit.

I respond by offering them my name, phone# and address. To this date not one of them has shown up on my doorstep. Not a one of them has even called me.

[madfloridian]

28. I don't think you understood my use of the word moderate...

And I don't know how to explain it to you. I have been on a constant journey in politics since 2002....but I am basically pretty much in middle of most things. I don't apologize for using the word moderate.

It is how I describe myself if asked in a poll. Note the OP where the "moderates" were left out of the poll. 40 and 42% were not mentioned.

Oops sorry, this OP...forgot the link.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3323119&mesg_id=3323119

[inthebrain]

29. I wasn't trying to argue semantics. nt