What kind of people are "real" Democrats to you? Do you believe that we

[saracat]

really are a party of a "Big Tent" or do you think that all Democrats should subscribe to a very narrow ideology? After a particularly rough week defending myself on DU I thought I would throw out this question to the ethernet.

I consider myself a "liberal Democrat". I am against the War, have participated in many Anti-War Marches going all the way back to Vietnam , including the current debacle. I am fervently pro-choice. I support Gay Rights. I support Organized Labor and stem cell research, as well as Universal Health care and raising the minimum wage. I support a comprehensive overhaul of the immigration program. My candidate of choice is John Edwards in the Presidential Primary.

This week I was informed by some who consider themselves "holier than thou" that because I did not approve of Code Pink's method of demonstrating during the Petreaus Hearing,and I do not support Cindy Sheehan against Nancy Pelosi,and I agree with Elizabeth Edwards that Moveon's criticism of Petreaus was acceptable, but the "name calling" was not, that I, as a "partisan Dem," am not as welcome in the "Big Tent". I was wrong to support our elected Dems against those who would challenge them and wrong to support my Party. In fact, I was called a "traitor bot".I was also accused of not "tolerating diverse opinion".I was definitely not considered a "liberal"!

I object to these characterizations of myself or any other Duer. I do not view those who support other candidates, or other viewpoints as "traitors" or less appropriate to the Democratic Party. I believe the Democratic Party IS a "Big Tent" and there is room for all of us to have our say. I believe that those who would force their opinions on others, progressive or not, do not understand the beauty of the Democratic Party. We are Democrats because we do not "have" to view everything from exactly the same perspective. I am entitled to my perspective and others are entitled to theirs.We are not Republicans.We do not march in lockstep on any side of our base.

I truly believe in the Democratic Party of the "big tent".I believe that diverse opinions on how to accomplish our "Democratic goals " are what makes us great! Do you?

[Warpy]

1. Democrats are people who vote for the party

Some of them have wrong ideas.

Good people get to be wrong.

Even me.

[saracat]

2. Thank you! Great definition. And I get to be wrong too! LOL!

[Xipe Totec]

3. Kind of like locusts

Harmless in small groups, and with a bias towards going off in their own direction.

But when properly motivated they swarm together in mighty clouds and can devour elephants.

:hide:

[saracat]

4. That is hilarious! Great comment!

[On the Road]

5. Individual Democrats Do Not Have the Right to Tell You

that you do not belong in the party. It is not a high-school clique. I agree with Warpy that people who consistently vote Democratic should be considered Democrats.

[saracat]

6. My point is. different viewpoint are "welcome" !

[ShortnFiery]

44. I respectfully disagree - Traditional Democratic Values (= Pro-Working Americans vice Corporatism)

not lock-step "party loyalty" is what made the Democratic Party great.

I regret that the DLC and Third Way have hijacked the Democratic Party I knew and loved. Every time the cable TV democratic strategists disrespect "the left" yet SWEAR that they are "liberals" all I can think is "what blatant hypocrisy."

IMO one can't boldly proclaim to be "a liberal" yet on the other side of their mouth, disrespect "the left." It makes ZERO sense to me. :shrug:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

7. A Democrat Is Somebody That Votes Democratic

If somebody tells you something else, screw em...

[DangerDave921]

8. Emo Phillips

He did a great bit many years ago highlighting the fact that even the tiniest little divergence of opinion on a totally miniscule matter can mean life or death to some people.

Many people suffer the delusion that they have all of the right answers on every issue out there, and if you don't agree with every one of them, then you are somehow less worthy. I think that it is a wise man/woman who recognizes the limits of their own knowledge and can openly consider alternative points of view. Sad to say, many "open-minded" liberals can be as dogmatic and unyielding as the most fervent rightwinger.

Growth as a person comes from open and honest debate, not shutting out alternative points of view. On global warming, for example, I'll watch Glen Beck and see what he has to say. Or that "reformed" greenpeace guy (blond Danish guy whose name escapes me). I think the science and politics of it is very interesting.

[saracat]

9. O My Gawd! You actually "listen"to the "other side" ? That means you might learn

how to respond to them!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. It's Called "The narcissism of small differences"

He did a great bit many years ago highlighting the fact that even the tiniest little divergence of opinion on a totally miniscule matter can mean life or death to some people.

http://maggiesfarm.anotherdotcom.com/archives/2514-The-Narcissism-of-Small-Differences.html

[DangerDave921]

50. Thanks for the link

That joke in the link is very close to the Emo Phillips bit. Thanks for the link.

[TwilightZone]

11. Definitely a big tent.

The Democratic base has a much wider ideological variation than many people would like to admit. As well it should, because it's a practical necessity. There's no such thing as a "typical" Democrat.

Regional variations are significant. Democrats in the upper Midwest (ones that get elected there, anyway) tend to be very moderate. Ben Nelson and Tim Johnson are good examples. As I think we all know, Ben Nelson isn't going to get elected to Congress in San Francisco or the Northeast. But, he's been very popular in Nebraska and has often been one of the highest rated members of Congress. That's pretty impressive considering that NE is 70% Republican. Obviously, moderate sells in Nebraska.

On the flip side, Democrats in places like the Northeast and the west coast tend to be more liberal, as are their constituencies. John Kerry does well in the Northeast, but he would have a very difficult time getting elected in South Dakota or Nebraska. Difficult meaning impossible.

There seem to be a lot of people who don't really understand that these variations exist and that they are necessary. They seem to believe that "Democrat" should mean "just like me and my friends" and anyone outside of that narrow scope isn't really a Democrat. You gave several examples in your OP, and there is certainly plenty of that going around DU.

Personally, I think the variation is fine and that it's necessary for our survival as a party. We can't maintain our presence as a national party if we limit ourselves to a egocentric view of what the party should be, based on our own personal views.

Edit: typo

[martymar64]

12. In my eyes, you're a real democrat

As someone who has disagreed with you before, your position on issues is democrat right down the line.
As far as my disagreements with you go, it primarily over tactics to achieve our ends. I see you as a democrat with a strong sense of courtesy and decorum, believing in the power of being considerate of your opponents, whether in the same party or in the opposing party. Under normal circumstances, that is the way to go. However, my view is that the courteous approach isn't working with either the Bush Admin, the Republican party, or even our own leadership. We collectively written letters to the editors, marched in rallies, lobbied our representatives, etc, only to be given the proverbial back of the hand by Pelosi and Reid, by Bush and Cheney, by Hillary and Mitt. It seems the only way we can get their attention is by getting in their faces. Otherwise, they just don't listen to us, they only listen to the lobbyists. And people get angrier when they perceive their concerns as being ignored by those in power. That's how revolutions and civil wars are started. I appreciate your dedication to decorum, but I think the time for talking nice is drawing to a close and it may have to get ugly in order for things to change.

[saracat]

13. Thank you but actually I have wriiten several rants regarding Dems being too"polite".

I do not have a problem with getting in peoples faces and taking a stand. But I think we should do it so we look "serious'" and not "silly".

[martymar64]

18. People will express their outrage in different ways

Some will take the Code Pink or the Sheehan approach, some will take the silent vigil or the hunger strike approach. Others will take the arming and training for possible conflict approach. Some will work within the regular channels, others will not.
In our big tent, I think all approaches are equally valid, the proverbial "by any means necessary".
The dire situation this country is in is becoming more and more apparent, even to the apolitical and the fencesitters. If decent people aren't outraged by now, they're not paying attention. For that reason, I don't dismiss any approaches because they may "hurt our cause" or "make us look bad", short of terrorism.
The ones that think we look bad usually already think that, they're called conservatives and republicans. They are the ones that got us in this whole mess. At this point, who cares what they think?

That said, keep up the good fight in your own way. Every bit helps! :patriot:

[saracat]

19. You too! And thank you!

:patriot: :patriot: :patriot:

[sailor65]

14. Hey, it could be worse...

you could be me!

"Conservative Democrats," {Now sniff, look down nose} as we are called, have always been accused of not being "Real." I want the war to end, but am solidly pro-military. I don't like Edwards or Obama because I think they're doing the Potomac two-step, but love Kucinich. I love the flag I have fought under and seeing it burned or desecrated makes me want to rip someone's head off, but the frredom that many of the men in my family have fought for requires me to concede the right to that protest.

I think our women are sacred and we should love, respect, honor, protect, and {GASP} hold the door open for them, regardless of how "Liberated" they are. I will never see good manners as somehow demeaning.

I hate abortion except in the "Special" cases. I think women who have been raped or otherwise abused need to be able to have one. I think women who are at risk deserve to have one. I think people who are simply getting rid of an "Inconvenience" are deplorable.

I hate war as do most soldiers, but realize that sometimes it is necessary. I also do not believe this one is serving America and needs to end.

I think "Code Pink," "PETA," and many like them go over the top too often, but hinting at that in here paints a bullseye on your back.

I will never believe that two politicians who ripped each other apart in the "Primaries" can properly serve America as a team after the election.

I do think our healthcare is badly broken, but I do not believe the government has the talent to successfully pick its nose, much less run a proper healthcare system. So the solution to that continues to elude. As much time as I spend in Canada, I know that its healthcare system is also highly flawed, and I want ours to be better.

I don't fear that Joe & Bob getting married will have the slightest effect on my marriage. I do think BOTH parties have used Gay Marriage as a marketing tool, from opposite directions. What draws the ire of my totally liberal acquaintances is that I think America has much bigger problems to solve right now.

I do believe that I am called upon to love and serve Joe & Bob equally to all others, and that Joe and Bob's "Rightness or Wrongness" is not for me to decide.

I believe that someone should stop predatory lenders, but I also think that if I buy a house that's twice what I can afford, nobody should be bailing me out.

I think Americans need to help each other at every opportunity, but I also think that every able person should work and contribute.

I hate drugs. Period.

I also think John Kerry is full of sh*t.

I think Al Gore should never run for President. He has found his calling and to run for, and likely become, President would be to abandon that calling.

I think the Democrats had the opportunity to really shine, but I think Princess Pelosi has completely sold us out.

I am first in line to welcome and serve those that knock on the front door, but I am also first in line to get rid of those who sneak in the back door and raid the fridge while holding up signs telling me how bad my house smells.

And I do not believe Evolution and Creation are mutually exclusive (Boy is that one popular!). I believe that evolution is simply a tool of our Creator. I also believe that both political sides have used this issue as a tool.

I think Bill Clinton deserved to be impeached, but for cramming NAFTA down our throats along with its devastating consequences, not for the cause du jour.

I think you know who should be impeached as well. And regardless of whether anyone can prove whether he lied or was just stupid about Iraq, the fact that he has totally, utterly failed to stop the uncontrolled flow across our borders, which he is tasked to protect, should have ALREADY been enough.

I do not believe that Pelosi & Co. will do it because they do not intend to be any better.

I think those who constantly equate Conservative with Republican and Liberal with Democrat are idiots.


The one thing I can say for sure is this; as vilified as people like me can sometimes be here, there are a lot more of us than you might think. Unfortunately we don't get to wear the shiny badge of "Real" Democrats.

See? Told you it could have been worse!

Edited for sleep-deprived spelling









:)

[saracat]

16. What a great post! I forgot to add I was also "vilified " for supporting the troops

It apparently was a "bad" thing not to support Iraqis killing them!Actually you don't sound that "conservative to me but what the heck do I know?I simply don't know how to draw the lines these days! You are both more "liberal than I on some issues and more conservative on others.Go figure. I think we all have value and enrich the Party!

[sailor65]

20. Thanks for that!

I did not expect the first response to that to be so positive!

I understand about drawing the lines. I think the "Lines" have been given more importance than they deserve and that they are stopping us from getting anywhere.

I know I fall somewhere in between the endpoints, but that in itself seems to be anathema here. You and I seem to be thinking along most of the same lines.

[Solon]

15. Interesting responses so far, according to some, I would be a Democrat, even though I'm not...

I've voted Democratic since I was old enough to vote, which would be about 11 years ago now. I voted for Clinton, figuring that he would change some of his previous position and hopefully fix NAFTA as well. At the time I was probably moderately liberal, mostly a Civil Libertarian(Gay Rights). When I first registered, I registered Independent, wanted to maintain my independence. Anyways, so I regretted that vote, but I still held on, got some experience in the "real world", and continued voting Democratic despite Bill Clinton.

2000 was a bitter year, Gore won that election, yet wasn't inaugurated, I realized just how unprincipled the Republican party was, winning at any cost, even the cost of democracy itself, they didn't care. By this time, I became a Socialist in political philosophy. Never did get around to registering as a Democrat, and for that I'm glad, now, but then in 2004, voted for Kerry, and he should have won that, but again the Repukes showed themselves as unprincipled. I held great promise for 2006, I really did, even though only one of my candidates won that election(Clair McCaskill).

Up till this year, my voting philosophy was basically anyone but a Republican. Now I'm just apathetic, burned out, whatever. I've been drifting ever leftward as the Democratic party tries to out-Repuke the Republicans, and I wonder whether I made a terrible mistake. I know that people, especially in power, are corruptible, I was just hoping that the Democrats were less corrupt than Repukes, I was wrong.

[Milo_Bloom]

17. You are what you want to be.

D's and R's and I's are silly distinctions based on nothing.

If you blindly vote for the D, you are as crazy as someone who blindly votes for the R.

Even when Michael Bloomberg was a R, he sounded more like a D. Zell Miller was a D, who was basically a R and Lincoln Chafee was a R, but should have been a D.

Southern D's are different than northern D's and some northern R's are more D than Southern D's

Dennis Kucinich was a D even when his stand on choice was very R. Bush I was more D than R on choice, until he sold his soul to be all R.

[NastyRiffraff]

21. I call myself a liberal Democrat

For much the same reasons as the OP. I am against the Iraq debacle, support Gay Rights, am pro-choice, and am a strong supporter of organized labor. Right now I'm leaning Edwards for president.

However (and you knew this was coming, didn't you?) I don't support Code Pink's current and some past demonstrations, and I most definitely don't support Sheehan's challenge against Pelosi. I don't support these things, not because they're "impolite," but because they make us look stupid.

As Joe Biden said recently (I think at the Iowa Steak Fry) that the issues before us are "as serious as a heart attack." It's not the time for theater in Senate chambers (although there is a place for theater; just not there). If we want to be taken seriously, we need to act seriously, and demand of our representatives that they stand up to this corrupt regime. Yes, I know it's frustrating; I know some simply don't listen, for a variety of reasons. But Code Pink/Sheehan ain't getting it done, either.

Yes, we're a big tent. We're schoolteachers, doctors, nurses, janitors, lawyers, call center reps, stay a home moms and dads, gay, straight, in between. We have a whole slew of different posiitons, and quite often disagree with each other. And that's okay...in fact, don't believe the hype that we need to "stay on message" in all things. Our strength is in our diversity of culture, economic class, race, views, and most of all, our empathy for our fellow human beings. Yes, even when they disagree with us as individuals.

We need to fight, and fight hard, against the people who are trying to destroy our Constitution, and our country. That's the bottom line. Not fighting each other over what are, comparatively, trivial differences, compared to that.

[saracat]

22. Wonderful post! Thank you NastyRiffraff!

[sampsonblk]

23. Real Democrats believe in principles more than in winning

In my mind, you certainly qualify.

[saracat]

25. Thank you but I have to say, I also do believe in winning as well!

I think we can have principled "wins" !

[TwilightZone]

33. Ah, but there's part of the issue. Whose principles?

Principles are, in part, a matter of opinion.

One person may believe that a principled position should allow for a woman's right to choose.

Another may believe that a principled position should restrict a woman's right to choose.

Both, more than likely, believe that they are correct and that their position is the principled one.

Both could also be Democrats.

Edit: clarification

[saracat]

34. Very good. Food for thought!

[sampsonblk]

42. No value judgment here

I didn't intend to use the term as a value judgment. Some may fight hard because they are pro-choice. Some may fight hard because they not. Our tent is big enough for all that stuff.

But winning, by itself, is not a principle.

[rucky]

24. there's a few of us here who wield opinions like a blunt instrument

and act surprised when they don't get the "you're right, I'm wrong" reaction they expect. imagine that!

[saracat]

26. The thing is that "blunt instrument " cuts two ways! And both "cuts" are equally valid!

edited for typo!

[rucky]

27. now you're mixing metaphors on me.

:P

[saracat]

28. Yup! Maybe should be "blunt instrument cudgels or slams both ways" ?

Just trying to make the metaphor fit and doing a lousy job of it! LOL!

[sampsonblk]

43. Yeah, I've gotten that too

But its still better to personally believe in something than to believe in nothing at all.

Haven't you talked to anyone here who just thinks winning the very next election is more important than anything else in the world?

(No, I don't support beating people over the head with one's own opinions.)

[saracat]

59. Yup and I ask them "why" do they want to win? What is the purpose?

[TwilightZone]

29. kick

:)

[LittleClarkie]

30. K&R

:)

[MonkeyFunk]

31. Don't worry about it

there'll always be the purity-police, but they're a small minority.

I get regularly attacked and my motives questioned here on democraticunderground because I.... *gasp* defend DEMOCRATS regularly.

[saracat]

32. Thank you for that MonkeyFunk!

I think it is not a bad thing to defend Democrats!

[ShortnFiery]

45. IMO, the true "purity police" are some party members behavior of trashing "the left" and

IMO, disingenuously DEMAND to be considered "a liberal." Those attitudes are IMO, NOT liberal.

How nice it is for the DLC democrats, Third Way, Blue Dog and pseudo-outraged *etiquette POLICE* to demand that Code Pink and MoveOn.org figuratively salute and say to The Unitary Executive, "Thank you sir, may I have another?"

Truth is that who you claim to despise the most, those of us on the liberal left, have the activists who SPEAK OUT OF TURN, STAND UP IN NONVIOLENT CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE are The People who glean the gutless leader's attention and, at the very least *do something* to shine a light on government corruption.

But when time comes to vote for your "republican lite" democratic candidates who claim to be LIBERAL :rofl:, it's one "guilt trip" for Party Purity.

IMO, those who trash "the left" can't have it both ways. And no, IMO, I strongly believe that "You are NOT exposing LIBERAL views of tolerance ... no it's those who trash "the left" who most mirror "the purity police." :thumbsdown:

[MonkeyFunk]

48. "real" Democrats

don't pull your non-stop bullshit.

[TwilightZone]

52. Not all liberals are Democrats, and not all Democrats are liberals.

Not all Democrats claim to be liberals, either.

IMO, those who trash "the left" can't have it both ways.

But, you can? How convenient for you. Funny that you're complaining about tolerance, while showing little yourself.

[saracat]

55. It is not "trashing ".to disagree with "tactics"used to achieve a goal.

It appears that some consider it "trashing the left " whenever one does not 100% approve of whatever methods used to make a point.I disapprove of certain tactics.Big deal.That is my right to do so as it is your right not to agree.And though I may disagree with the Blue Dog Dems , and the DLC and the Third Way Dems, and some methods they may employ, they have every bit as much a right to exist in the Big Tent as anyone else.

[Hollow Shells]

35. Name calling....

-"In fact, I was called a "traitor bot".I was also accused of not "tolerating diverse opinion".I was definitely not considered a "liberal"!"-

People call you, or any of us, names or use the Almighty "don't you DARE...", because they have no logical argument to make. Unfortunately, many of us here on DU have a phobia of logical debate and evidence. I find this disappointing.

[Pushed To The Left]

36. I think you are a real Democrat, even though you and some others doubted my liberalism

back in 2004 when I admitted to dating a right wing Republican! :) My one and only flamewar with half of DU, and the woman I defended ended up dumping me by telephone after 7 years together! My life is weird.

Back on topic: I am a very liberal Democrat, but I believe that the right wing and the Republicans are the opponents who we all need to band together to defeat. That being said, I would like to see the Democratic Congress get a little bit more aggressive against the Bush Administration and their policies.

[saracat]

39. I don't remember that but I apologize.I am sorry she "dumped" you

after you devoted 7 years to the relationship.That is tough to bear.And by phone yet.I agree absolutely with the second half of your post BTW!

[LWolf]

37. Well, you asked.

What kind of people are "REAL" Democrats to me?

"REAL" Democrats are democratic. They honor and uphold democratic principles. THEY DON'T COMPROMISE OR CORRUPT THOSE PRINCIPLES, EVER.

They stand up for, support, defend, and work for the "have nots," the goal being to give them TRUE equal representation, equal voice, equal opportunity.

They make sure that every vote has equal influence.

They make sure that votes, that legislation, that influence and power can't be bought, but must be earned by working for the people.

They are the champions of social and economic justice, of labor, of the environment, of education.

They value life enough to support it with affordable housing, a living wage, a healthy planet, equal access to education, equal employment opportunities, and equally accessible high-quality health care.

They value life enough not to spend it waging wars for empire across the globe.

They value life enough to invest in domestic infrastructure, in clean water, sustainable energy, food, and fiber production, and safe communities.

Those are the "REAL" Democrats, in my book. Since you asked.

[robinlynne]

41. That is how I would also define a Democrat.

[midlife_mo_Jo]

58. I would agree with your definition

However, if we disagree on the details, the most left leaning tend to accuse anyone else of not being democrat enough.

For instance, on the subject of equal pay, which you didn't explicitly mention, but did mention implicitly and is the first thing that came to mind: I support a higher minimum wage, and equal pay for the same work. I don't support pay equity, where the government determines which jobs are equal to other jobs, and sets a pay scale. Imo, the government sets a minimum wage, makes laws to protect all workers, and afer that, the market (in conjunction with unions) determines the payscale.

I'm sure there are others here who believe in pay equity. Who determines what's democratic enough when you start debating the details?

[LWolf]

72. Those are good points for discussion.

On the subject of pay, I would say that a day's work should earn a living wage. Enough money to pay for safe shelter, utilities, food, transportation, and clothing, with enough left to provide a safety net.

People who work hard all day long doing the jobs that our entire society depends on should make a decent living.

That's democratic enough for me. I'd like to say that I think that people who build, maintain, repair, teach, etc. should make as much money as people who bounce or bat or toss or kick balls around for a living, but I'm willing to stop with the "decent living" part.

[pstans]

38. Real Democrats are open minded and that is where the big tent comes in

Because real Democrats are open minded, we consider other viewpoints, but we must stick to the core principles that define the party.

[ShortnFiery]

46. Right, and sticking to core principles means that we hesitate to TRASH our fellows on "the left"

even if their tactics are "a little more flaky or extreme" than what we personally are comfortable with doing.

What those who tout, "I'm liberal but code pink and MoveOn. are not polite enough for me" don't realize that in TRASHING them, they give the republican noise machine AMMUNITION to add it to their echo chamber.

Hell, you're welcome (It's your right -) to trash those of us on "the liberal left" but don't PRETEND, IMO, that you yourself are liberal NOR that you would *ever* care to claim us as part of *YOUR* - "I can complain when I want to!" - PSEUDO - Big Tent Democratic Party. :thumbsdown:

Again, you can't have it both ways: You can't trash the democratic activists in ONE breath, then DEMAND our vote with the other ... all in the name of "party purity" ... and to add insult to injury all the while claiming, "But really I'm a liberal, like really." :eyes: :shrug:

[saracat]

56. I do not have to "pretend ".to be anything..I am a Democrat.

[TwilightZone]

61. "My way or the highway" is a pretty small tent.

[saracat]

62. Indeed it is.

[Chulanowa]

40. Two core ideals make a "real" democrat, to me

The first, civil and human rights. A democrat must soundly believe that all people, regardless of race, nationality, religion, language, sexuality, gender, or physical condition are equally human and equally deserving of the rights and advantages presented to human beings of other stripes. Furthermore that to deny these rights is a criminal act of the worst sort, because it is the act of denying the inherent humanity of a person.

The second, labor rights. The Democrat must be accepting of the fact that the least among us support the greatest, and that advantages and protections granted to the workers of the nation - the world, even - benefit those who skim the cream off. The democrat must understand that economic freedom is what grants true exercise of legal rights, and that contrary to the beliefs of many in the beltway, "free trade" does not lead to economic freedom, any more than "sharecropping" was different from slavery. To this end the democrat must favor union power, safe working conditions, job security, and unemployment insurance. He does not have to be against the bosses - they have a right to work, make a wage, and eat just as much as anyone else - but he must be for the workers, because without them, there would be nothing, just a topheavy house of cards waiting for a breeze.

Everything else is just fluff, basically.

[cleveramerican]

47. Grow thicker skin, but keep speaking out.

You can't get 3 democrats to agree that the sky is blue.
And that goes double in an election year.
Same as it ever was.
Don't give up! speak your mind, don't back down!
Your voice is as important as anyone's

Like Micheal Corleone said" it's not personal, it's business"

[DemocratSinceBirth]

49. Joe Kennedy Taught His Children The Rich Could Take Care Of Themselves. The Poor Needed Some Help

To me that's what makes a Democrat...


We all have different ideas of what that help is... Bobby Kennedy said what most folks wants is a good job and some hope...

[DangerDave921]

51. Southern Dems

I come from a long line of rural West Virginia Dems. And believe me, these people were die-hard Dems because they thought Dems helped the working man. But it's interesting because these very same people have some very un-dem ideas. They are openly racist, even using the N-word at the dinner table sometimes. They don't want Mexicans invading our country (a lot of these folks now live in Florida in their older years). They don't care about affirmative action, and they certainly don't care about gay or transgender rights. I have an uncle who still proudly wears his confederate flag belt buckle that's as big as a coffee-mug. In other words, they are not leftists; they're just your average mom and pop old-school dems.

And I wonder sometimes if the party gives enough attention to these older, southern dems. Based on some of the comments I've seen on here, most people seeing my uncle would assume he was some bush-loving redneck. Is the south gone for good?

[saracat]

57. I think more attention needs to be given to these folks and we need to find some common ground.

Dr.Dean is making the effort with the 50 state strategy and if it is implemented correctly, we should be able to reach out to them.

[OHdem10]

53. Real Democrat is one who stands on the side of

citizen and looks out for their needs. I question those
who will cast their votes in favor of Business over
the American Citizen.

Yes, we must help Business but with fairness.

The GOP is the party of business. Some in our Party are
GOP -Lite. When in a crunch and they must choose--they
choose business interests.

[sniffa]

54. Let it go

it's consuming you.

[saracat]

60. Advice you should consider taking yourself!

[sniffa]

63. and i wouLd gLadLy take it

if i had such a seLf esteem probLem.

[saracat]

65. Perhaps you do as indicated by your attention getting use of capital Ls!

Okey Dokey. Whatever. Your entitled.

[LittleClarkie]

67. Let what go

the need to have a discussion on a discussion board?

[ozone_man]

64. The Democratic wing of the Democratic Party.

As Howard Dean would say. Not the Clinton DLC wing.

A real Democrat is one who is not afraid to stand up for Democratic principles. To vote against war, even when it is not popular to do so. To have a backbone. I think Mike Gravel is a real Democrat. Dennis Kucinich is a real Democrat. Patrick Leahy definitely. Bernie Sanders, he's not a Democrat, but he votes for Democratic principles and socialist principles. Looking back, I'd say FDR was a real Democrat. We will need that kind of leadership in the next eight years, becasue the economy is going to get much worse.

I would say Al Gore is a real Democrat. He really should run again.

[saracat]

66. I like it. And kudos to Howard for the 50 state strategy as well.Leave no state behind, even the

reddest!

[DangerDave921]

69. Disconnect

You say a real democrat is one who votes against war, but then you cite FDR as a real Democrat. Um, didn't WWII kind of happen while he was in office?

[ozone_man]

71. It was more justified than the Iraq war.

I think some wars are more justified than others. Certainly the Iraq war isn't justified, and voting for it was not naivity, but pure political decision making.

Japan may have been drawn into a war with the U.S. (on purpose) over unfair trade policies. In economic and social areas, FDR was certainly a real Democrat.

From another perspective, war is part of normal operations for the Military Industrial Complex, for example, as shown in the documentary "Why We Fight". Maybe a "real Democrat" is not always a good thing after all. But we need to change that. Take the good parts of the FDR legacy and change some of the bad ones.

[Generator]

68. Well

it's so many things. Everyone here throws around labels (me too!) when they get MAD. It's easy to do. I don't know if you or anyone else that post here is a real Democrat. I think most are. But, how can I know that for certain. I can't. The net is basically anonymous.

I think of that more of in terms of defining those that lead us-and yes, I don't think we have many "real" Democrats left. That's what I think. That's how I feel. It's personal. You don't have to agree and can keep on voting for them until the end of time-but if I feel betrayed-that's all I HAVE besides writing the letters and showing up at the speeches and getting tasered :) is to not vote for them. And that isn't a real answer, I know. It's like all we have is our barest disent.

And the reason your recent post makes people MAD is because they feel in some way all they have SPEAKING for them is Code Pink or Cindy Sheehan or whomever is the one doing the outrageous thing. I may not like everything those that are protesting do-but I will not criticize them (I'm not saying you can't!) but I won't- because it feels WRONG to me. Really really wrong. They feel like all we have. And they are the one doing something. Yes, doing something. Voting seems like doing nothing at this point. What they are doing actually seems like more.

And it's a matter of perspective-a Du'er that I like and respect criticized Olbermann because he said something sexist. And my perspective is HE'S ALL WE HAVE. (in the journalist on cable tv department and he's a treasure) He's going to have do something really really bad in my eyes before I criticize him.

We are feeling alone and abandoned here.

[saracat]

70. I really respect your answer but I find we have many Democrats, not all, it is true

that stand up for us.We have Ted Kennedy and John Kery .We have Pat Leahy and John Conyers.We Have Maxine Waters. We have Barabara Boxer.We have a lot more going for us the some credit.I guess the difference between us is I do not think Cindy,and Code Pink are "all we have".And I love Keith too but we also have Christiane Amnapour, the gal on the news who refused to do the Paris Hilton story.I cannot spell or prounounce her name! And Dan Rather still reports on cable.We also have Jon Stewart and Colbert.We are not alone!Even Anderson Cooper is usually fair.