How "Republican" of us!

[Atticus]

This post will likely piss off a few people on each side of the simmering schism that currently divides DU. It should be obvious to everyone that there are folks on both sides---some very my-party-come-what-may and Pro-Obama and some very my-party-but-sometimes-we-suck and anti-Obama---who are as unwilling to consider compromise as the current crop of Congressional Republicans.

But, these groups are not monolithic. Some on each side behave and post as though everyone on the "other side" is the same. But, not everyone at BOG is unwilling to criticize the President or the Blue Dogs and not everyone who criticizes the President or conservative Democrats is actively contemplating staying home or supporting a third party "protest" candidate in 2012.

Some here are very quick to tell others to "go elsewhere" if they don't toe the "party line" as they interpret it. And, some have been quick to write off the entire Democratic Party because of a few loud and consistent critics of any post that wouldn't earn huzzahs and handsprings at BOG.

If you were to pull a few of my past posts and compare them, some of you might think me wishy-washy or a hypocrite. I have posted in defense of President Obama and I have sometimes been pretty disgusted with him. Which is "how I really feel"?

BOTH are.

Where is it written that we must choose one extreme or the other and lock into that mindset for life? Is it our side that demands that "You're either with us or against us"? Isn't that rigid Bushian nonsense?

I don't believe I am alone when I say: I am a lifelong Democrat; I am a lifelong liberal; I worked hard to elect this President and I want him to succeed, BUT---some things have greatly disappointed me so far in this administration.

My point here is not to get into a serious discussion of whether my disappointment is warranted or whether those who think I should "go elsewhere" are justified. My point is to suggest that the "middle" 90+ per cent of us SHOULD BE discussing our views with the goal of discovering where we agree, where we can reasonably compromise and how we can elect Democrats who, quite simply, will consistently and reliably work to implement the planks that have been in nearly all Democratic platforms in my lifetime.

Democrats support labor---period.

Democrats support a woman's right control her own body.

Democrats support equal rights for everyone without exception. This is without regard to race, religion, sexual orientation, gender, age, wealth or lack of it.

And, absolutely, Democrats know that corporations are not people, should not be considered "citizens", and should never be afforded preference over flesh-and-blood Americans.

I may be a fool, but I believe that the large majority on both sides of this pissing contest believe the above. That should be enough to enable us to---DE-E-E-EP BREATH!---work together for the good of our nation, our party, our communities and our family and friends.

[endless october]

1. i hope to be a lifelong learner.

my views right now are decidedly different than they were ten years ago. this is because of data that i have recorded internally that did not support my previous views.

i expect that in ten years, my views will have changed somewhat; reflecting additional data that i have collected. if they do not, then i have failed to correctly interpret that data and apply the conclusions derived from it. and that would be a shame.

[stray cat]

2. We do a disservice to ourselves when we sound like the worst of free republic

just with different targets of blind hatred and virulence

[YOY]

3. Amen,

n.t.

[jaxx]

4. Do I read the word 'respect' inbetween the lines?

Well said. I'm anything but a duck in a row.

[tnlefty]

5. I stopped reading at the anti-Obama point.

I can criticize a President of my party and not be anti the President.

I resented the hell out of being verbally hit with being anti-Bush** when it was his very atrocious policies that I objected to. My criticism of President Obama is from looking around for pitfalls that he will/would get slammed for, and genuinely wanting better for the nation.

[Atticus]

6. "I can criticize a President of my party and not be anti the President."

Since that was exactly the point of the OP, it's a shame you stopped reading.

[tnlefty]

11. I just don't play along with that line of thinking and reject

it.

Kinda like seeing where mistakes were being made being turned into blaming the President for the fuck up of BP; expecting him to be aquaman and plug the leak himself...I have little patience for those arguments, and if you wanted your entire post to be read, perhaps you shouldn't have set the post up in that way.

Peace, but I won't read it.

[Atticus]

13. OK---Peace to you, too. nt

[tblue37]

7. What is "BOG"? nt

[Luminous Animal]

9. Barack Obama Group

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=388

[Luminous Animal]

8. From the other side of the chasm...

Democrats support labor---period.
Some don't. In and out of government. They may support people who work but they are weak on unions and openly admit it.
Democrats support a woman's right control her own body.
Some don't. In fact, some very powerful Dems in Congress don't. And yet they are elected as Democrats, hold office as Democrats, and influence legislation.
Democrats support equal rights for everyone without exception.
Even Republicans claim that they support equal rights. But if the "without exception" is to have any meaning, Dems would be on board with marriage equality. Most are not.
Democrats know that corporations are not people, should not be considered "citizens". The general public knows that... left, right, and in-between, but over the decades, there has been zero leadership from the vast majority of Democrats in government addressing corporate personhood. Even the "liberals" on the Supreme Court categorically dismissed addressing corporate personhood in their dissent.

[Atticus]

10. We see things differently. I maintain, for example, that Democrats support labor---period.

You respond that "Some don't".

And my reply is: "Then they are not Democrats".

Simplistic? Naive? I'm aware those are things some will say, but saying only "some" Democrats support labor is akin to saying "some" fish live in water.

Too many who "are elected as Democrats, hold office as Democrats", nonetheless don't deserve the compliment of being identified as a Democrat.

If someone refuses to sign on to the majority of our party's platform, what is it that makes them a Democrat? Does "being a Democrat" have any meaning or is anyone who finds it convenient to tack a "D" after their name a Democrat?

I totally agree with you about marriage equality. Should be a done deal by now. All "Democrats" (my definition) think so.

[Luminous Animal]

12. There are "Right to Work" Dems within the leadership

Tim Kaine, chairman of the DNC is a "Right to Work" Dem. You can't simply dismiss my points when very powerful people and leaders, those who control the purse strings to fund campaigns, within the Democratic Party work against that which you define as Democrats. If our leaders work against the platform, what is the rank & file to do?

[DCBob]

14. Not that simple.. the definition of a "Democrat" slides as you move across the country..

In many conservative districts a large percent of Democrats would not at all fit your hard defintions but they would be much more "liberal" than the typical Republican in that same district. I guess that's what makes them a Democrat.