John Nichols: Dem platform gets a touch of muscle

[no name no slogan]

http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/index.php?ntid=6753&ntpid=1

Once again John Nichols (columnist for the Nation and writer) tells it like it is:

<snip>

Kerry adviser Rand Beers said, "We think we've come to an agreement with the Kucinich people that we think represents what has always been John Kerry's position."

If that is the case, then it should be noted that Kucinich's campaign, not Kerry's, made the platform more precisely reflective of the prospective nominee's stance. More significantly, the willingness of the platform writers to make the change garnered praise - and a pledge of unity - from one of the two Kucinich backers on the committee. Minnesotan John Sherman drew a standing ovation when he told the rest of the committee Saturday that the compromise language was "a message I can bring back to folks that we will end this madness and elect John Kerry."

"I came here expecting nothing," Sherman explained. "This language isn't what I want. I want us out (of Iraq) yesterday. But it is so much better than where we were."

</snip>

It's amazing that it's STILL Dennis Kucinich and his supporters that are giving Kerry's campaign a backbone, even though he has less than 100 delegates to Boston.

[zulchzulu]

1. John is a good man and a great writer

I have to fortune to run into him now and then and he's very down to earth and a kind, gentlemanly wonk.

[no name no slogan]

3. Yeah, Nichols is pretty good at what he does

Nichols has a very good eye for politics, and was one of the few journalists (mainstream or 'liberal') who bothered to acknowledge Kucinich and his positions during the primaries. I hope he's around for a loooong time!

[sandnsea]

2. Whatever it takes

If the Kucinich people are happy and finally ready to come on board, I'd have stood up on my chair and clapped and hollered too.

[no name no slogan]

4. Most of us are already on board

we just want to be able to vote FOR Kerry instead of just voting AGAINST Bush.

Here's the language adopted by the platform committee:

To win over allies we must share responsibility with other nations that answer our call and treat them with respect. We must lead but we must also listen. The rewards of respect are enormous. We must communicate with NATO to take on a more significant role and contribute additional military forces as other nations, including Islamic nations, contribute troops, the US will be able to reduce its military presence in Iraq. We intend to do this when appropriate, so that the military support needed by a sovereign Iraqi government will no longer be seen as the direct continuation of an American military presence.

It's fairly tame language, really. It says nothing about immediate withdrawal of the troops, ceding control of the rebuilding process to the Iraqis, or an end to a permanent military presence in Iraq. Although most of us are happy with the compromise, there's been quite a lot of discussion by many Kucitizens that the compromise resolution is still too tame, considering what came up on the state platforms during the convention process.

Yeah, I'm going to help Kerry win. But I'll be one of many who'll be in his face about Iraq and a slew of other issues come November 3!

[goodhue]

5. the language is tame but it importantly notes troop reduction

which was a pretty big concession to get out of the Kerry folks despite their spin that nothing changed. They did not want any language about bringing troops home.

Tim Carpenter, Deputy National Campaign Manager, explains how the language was finally shown by Kerry folks after six meetings, but Kucinich folks didn't get a hard copy of the language at that time:

http://www.kucinich.us/misc/platform_tim.php

Then the door opened after six meetings with the Kerry folks out in the hallway when they showed us the managers’ amendment. John Sherman (one of our Platform Committee members), Charles and I read that it had, "the reduce troop language." I felt ******-over when they delayed giving us the language typed in the context of the platform until after lunch. Hearing Laura and other folks talking at that moment I felt it important to rally the supporters to make the case why we did what we did. I think Charles did a wonderful speech at that moment to help hold it together. If I had it to do over again, I would have waited until we had the typed version like we read at the 5:30 pm gathering. It was clear to me after reading the typed version with supporters and Dennis' call we did the right thing. We pushed hard to get "withdrawal" language, and they finally gave us "reduction" language.

[Lefty Pragmatist]

8. To be honest,

that language is vacant. I could even see Bush adopt it without too much of a twinge.

I would have much preferred it if the Democratic Platform simply read, "We fucked up. We trusted Bush. Sorry. Won't happen again."

[DrFunkenstein]

6. Nichols Has Been A Prick

He has been covering the elections for months now, and has never had a good word to say for Kerry. In fact, he has actively spun things against him. I've known Nichols writing for years now, and I know that he knows better when he conveniently forgets positive points for Kerry.

I much prefer David Corn. He is also critical of Kerry, but at least he is fair about it. Plus, I think he's pretty much the best journalist in the business. If I were to site anyone that most closely represented my views, it'd be David Corn (although Katrina is pretty close).

[CWebster]

7. Of course, Funkenstein, you are a Kerry partisan

"Did Dennis Kucinich Sell Out Anti-War Democrats?"

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0714-12.htm

Despite what a nightmare Iraq is on so many level, Kerry still claims it wasn't a mistake? He seems to claim that the Invasion itself wasn't wrong, rather Bush's handling of it. He promised to be the first to speak up and he did not. And when it was more than apparent that it was a runaway train and Kennedy and Byrd wanted to draw up a second resolution to corect the earlier hasty blank check, they appealed to Kerry to come aboard and he declined.

[DrFunkenstein]

9. You Are Changing The Issue

Listen, you and I know that I would have had him vote differently. But that doesn't change the fact that Nichols refuses to do anything but bash Kerry. Sure, nail him for his vote, but give credit when it is due, as well.

[no name no slogan]

10. It's not Nichols' job to defend Kerry

It's his job to present his opinion on political issues. So he doesn't like Kerry-- big deal, a lot of people don't. But there's also a lot of people who DO like Kerry, and who are printing positive things about him.

Nichols has done a good job of covering the opinions of various progressive Democrats throughout the campaign season. He has been critical of all the candidates (including his favorite Dean) and of Kerry and Kucinich.

Just because he refuses to drink the Kerry Kool-Aid doesn't make him any less a columnist.

[CWebster]

14. Okay, but you know Nichols supports Kucinich

Whatcan you expect?

[goodhue]

11. morning kick n/t

[NewYorkerfromMass]

12. Kucinich is giving Kerry's campaign a backbone?

Whatever.

[LWolf]

13. I like what Dennis had to say about compromise:

http://www.kucinich.us/misc/platform_dennis.php

Dennis: Platform shows progress, but the dialogue has only just begun
July 12, 2004
In January of 2002, a full year before I became a candidate for President, I began to publicly challenge the basis for the Administration’s upcoming war in Iraq: that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, with Al Qaeda’s role in 9/11, or with the anthrax attack. I went out front early and often, in the face of great criticism. In many ways, my Presidential campaign emerged from my leadership in challenging the war. Now, almost two and a half years later, each and every observation I made about Iraq has proven to be true. But being right about something does not necessarily equate, in a timely manner, to votes.

It is telling that our campaign did better towards the end of the presidential primary and caucus season, as a greater awareness began to take hold about the true nature of the Iraq war. However, the majority of delegates were chosen early, and those delegates went to Sen. Kerry. We have worked mightily during the platform-drafting process to influence committee members, delegates, and the leadership of the Party, while making every effort not to create a split which could cost Democrats the White House.

The result was a compromise over Iraq language at the Platform Committee meetings in Miami. Media reports, including the New York Times, pointed out that the Democrats escaped divisions like the ones that occurred in 1948 over civil rights and in 1968 over Vietnam. Working inside the party is not always convenient. We made a responsible choice to push as far as we could, with all the resources we had, to get as much as we could, without tearing the party apart.

Strong differences still exist within our party over Iraq. I will continue to advocate a U.S. withdrawal, just as we advocated at the Platform Committee. In the end, we had to decide whether to come to some kind of an agreement, or stand apart from the proceedings, detach ourselves from further engagement, and create such a disruption at the Platform Committee and the Convention that we put the election itself at risk.

Our party, though deficient it is, cannot fracture and open up the possibility of four more years of lies, four more years of war, four more years of the destruction of the democratic process. We must shore up the party and continue to work within it to influence the American public towards change. We can do this through unifying across all the ideological perspectives within our party.

We must continue to work to get out of Iraq. We need new leadership which is open to this position. We can’t get there with the present Administration. We can’t get there through division within our own ranks. The essence of the advocacy of a Department of Peace is a practice of nonviolence in conflict resolution. It doesn’t follow that you necessarily get your way; but you keep the conversation open towards influencing it in your direction.

Our representatives to the Democratic Platform Committee hearings in Miami over the weekend did an outstanding job of extracting a concession in language from a majority of Democrats who achieved their delegate status under conditions where people knew full well their candidate's support for the war.