Democrats change platform to add God, Jerusalem

[choie]

Source: AP

CHARLOTTE, N.C. (AP) — Democrats have changed their convention platform to add a mention of God and declare that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.

The move came after criticism from Republicans.

Many in the audience booed after the convention chairman, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, ruled that the amendments had been approved despite the fact that a large group of delegates objected.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/democrats-change-platform-add-god-jerusalem-211928130--election.html

---

The last time I looked Tel Aviv was the capital of Israel...

[gateley]

1. I hate that we blinked.

[choie]

2. Its truly disheartening..

it shows cowardice and capitulation.

[gateley]

6. I thought it was pretty ballsy in the first place, although politically not smart. But they

Should have stood their ground.

I heard the vote when I was in the kitchen -- didn't know what it was for. The first vote sounded kind of even, the second definitely had a majority of "nays". Who made the final call?

[SoapBox]

9. Ditto, ditto, ditto...

Soooo, what was that I heard last evening in the speeches?

Dems...GROW A FREAK'N BACKBONE!

Sign me,
Disgusted

[meow2u3]

23. I think this move is to show respect to the Religious Left

I don't think it's cowardice. Democrats don't use God's name as a business model to run scams, unlike Republicans.

It's a chance to show the public that Dems are in favor of mainstream religion, not fundamentalist extremism.

[alarimer]

78. religion has NO PLACE in politics.

NONE. It is pandering at best. I am an atheist and I couldn't even get elected to anything so all the god-bothering just pisses me off.

Note to religious people: take your religion and stuff it. Keep it out of politics, schools, the military, etc. Keep it to yourself.

[loli phabay]

81. unfortunatley this is a pipedream peoples religious beliefs colours their votes. whether you like it

or not, its as much a part of the peoples world outlook as their membership of a union or subscriber to certain magazines. Individual beliefs will always have to be part of the political realm as its what gets you votes.

[Chan790]

84. We're the party of inclusion.

That includes people like me who are not in favor of mainstream religion and think it does not belong in the DNC platform.

Also, I think we should be completely withdrawing from involvement in Israel on any side. It's not our problem.

[newspeak]

151. well, some of us on the religious left

do not care about mixing politics and religion. I think it was pacifying the religious right.

[Old Union Guy]

184. The Republicans are "better" at it but ...

... no politician ever mentions God except to put one over on the rubes.

[PassingFair]

192. I think that someone figured out the main attack that will be used against Democrats this year...

will be that we are "godless" and that the Republicans are the party of God.

I have HEARD it from the dumbasses that surround me. Even in Michigan.

I am a "godless liberal" myself. It disgusts me that they backdoored this crap, but
if it means we can point to it when the dumbasses start spouting off about how dark-sided we are, and they will...
we can say, "No we aren't."

[humblebum]

161. I guess that would depend on what side of the issue you happen to be on.nt

[Freddie Stubbs]

130. Doing the right thing is not blinking

[GeorgeGist]

134. Emphasis on RIGHT ...

no doubt.

[Ken Burch]

173. Endorsing the Likudnik, anti-peace position on Jerusalem

is not "the right thing".

Neither is inserting another word in the platform whose insertion implies that you're not a "real American" unless you're religious.

[humbled_opinion]

3. Not Good

Already being played up as Mitt forces Democrats to reconsider God and Israel...

with Mitt pointing at the empty chair...

and pundits asking why Obama kow-tows to republican agenda items....

Nuts, Nuts, Nuts

[Philomena]

32. Agree...

especially since Cardinal Dolan was invited to pray to GOD at the closing which makes all of this chaos mute. Next they'll have an empty chair sitting at the bottom of a Crucifix.

[McCamy Taylor]

4. Necessary if GOP keeps insisting Obama is Muslim.

[Ken Burch]

8. The Jerusalem thing is necessary?

Do you realize that we now have a platform that our presidential candidate himself is opposing in practice on a day-to-day basis?

We could just have said that Jerusalem is the "effective administrative center" and left it at that. Netanyahu apologists aren't going to vote Democratic even with this.

[bhikkhu]

63. I guess there is some nutjob perspective that says its necessary

What business is of ours anyway, or why should the location of the capitol of a foreign country be an important part of a US political party's platform?

[newspeak]

153. the jerusalem "thing" is dangerous

I thought Tel Aviv is the capital of israel. Jerusalem is a sacred city for more than one religion.

[oldsarge54]

194. Counterproductive

Actually, declaring the capital of Israel Jerusalem counters Obama's position on the middle east peace process, using the pre-six day war borders as a starting point for peace negotiations, by taking Jerusalem off the table it weakens our efforts to play the honest broker by conceding one demand before we can get the various sides to the table. Obama has the right idea, the party lost it here.

[Did I Just Type This]

5. WTF???

Who gives a crap what the republicans want...and yes, Tel Aviv is the capital of Israel.

[24601]

72. It's up the Irsaelis, not the Dems or Reps. Israel says that it's Jerusalem.

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/1990_1999/1999/3/The%20Status%20of%20Jerusalem

[CrispyQ]

7. Ugh.

Last edited Wed Sep 5, 2012, 06:25 PM - Edit history (1)

on edit: I keep coming back to this. I'm so pissed off about this I can't believe it. First that odious priest & now this. Are we going to capitulate on choice, too, when the religious wackos accuse us of not being Godly enough?

I want to support this party, but fuck this!

[Faygo Kid]

10. To quote Gov. Patrick, "Grow a backbone."

This certainly isn't it.

[Freddie Stubbs]

131. They did. They stood up to platform committee

[mike_c]

11. yet another reason that the dems don't represent me any longer....

I'm an atheist and I support the Palestinians.

[byeya]

21. Agree. The majority of Dems are part of the problem on many, if not most, issues.

[cpwm17]

35. I'm also an atheist and I support the Palestinians.

I guess if you don't believe in a god, or believe in the wrong god, Democrats don't represent you. At least some Democrats tried to do the right thing, but the bad guys won.

[Psephos]

88. There are lots of Palestinians who would, umm, not think highly of your atheism.

Just a thought.

[Violet_Crumble]

94. And lots of Israelis and lots of Americans. What's yr point? n/t

[Psephos]

105. Your strawman-fu is weak, young Jedi.

Try this.

http://www.iheu.org/iheu-protests-palestinian-atheist-persecution

My point was that the deference shown by the O.P. might well not be reciprocated, given his/her atheism.

[alarimer]

80. Me neither.

Mostly it's because they are spineless weasels, Obama most of all. He caves before negotiations even begin. He thinks it's a good thing to do that.

[joshcryer]

110. The Dems did not vote to pass it.

Some crony just ignored their desire.

Watch the video down thread.

[kestrel91316]

12. Shameful pandering to the fundie RW, who will NEVER vote for Dems anyway.

[Politicalboi]

13. Disgusting

The Repukes cry, and we listen. Fuck them and their "god".

[jimlup]

14. This is bad...

We always make mistakes when we try to correct Republican criticisms. I'm now worried for the first time since the convention started. Not only do I strongly disagree with the amendments - I think it shows significant weakness and vulnerability. Just sayn' it's a Big mistake to try this and even worse right now.

[alp227]

15. I KNOW! Isn't all the caving on health care, jobs bills, etc. bad enough?

In this country I want a major secular political party that doesn't buy into this God and Israel as the chosen land nonsense.

[truedelphi]

33. You probably won't be pleased to know that

HR 4133 passed last spring. It states that Israel can look to the USA as the check book for anything they need related to their security. Only person in Congress who had a backbone to shout his anger abut this was Ron Paul.

For more:
http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2012/05/16/house-passes-stealth-legislation/

Of course, we were basically doing this anyway. Just look at how we offered up some 55 to 85 billions of dollars for weaponry to the UAE states and Israel in the thirteen months from late summer 2010 to October 2011. This bill just makes that sort of thing official.

[alp227]

36. So the 12th Commandment really is "Thou shalt not speak ill of Israel"

(modeled after Reagan's 11th commandment, replacing "fellow Republican" with "Israel&quot

[truedelphi]

43. Well, I am not speaking ill of Israel - I am speaking ill of the fact that far

Too many in office are more concerned about how Jewish people perceive them to be, in terms of support for Israel, than care about people here.

Just think if we had taken that 55 to 85 billions of dollars and invested it here in states with high deficits, rather than in weaponry.

[loli phabay]

59. you know a lot of those "jewish people" you talk about are US Citizens who do vote and fundraise

i can see why the want or need to keep any block of voters happy, and either way your gonna piss someone of.

[jimlup]

77. What is morally right isn't a matter of "politics"

And avowing Jerusalem as Israel's capital isn't morally justified given the controversy inherent in the obvious ramifications of a such a declaration.

I have a real problem with this. Yeah they pissed me off and there may well be consequences. This isn't just: "you're gonna make someone mad". It is a matter of false principles and false democracy and I don't like seeing it in the political party which I support and from whom my elected officials are generally chosen.

I suddenly have real troubles with my level of support for the ticket. Yeah I'll vote for Barrack and even like him as my president but at some point I have to draw a line and the party's platform has now crossed that line.

I regret that I will be unable to donate to the democratic campaign this season and I will also be unavailable for canvasing.

[loli phabay]

79. well its pretty much up to the israelis if they want it as their capital which it has been for 60 yr

i agree with overruling the floor vote is kinda bad democracy but i understand why they did it, the fear of losing a voting block that is pro Israel.

[Violet_Crumble]

96. Do you know that East Jerusalem is occupied territory and not part of Israel?

So, it's no more 'pretty much up to the israelis' than it'd be up to Australians if they occupied half of Washington DC and declared it the capital of Australia.

[joshcryer]

113. I wouldn't be upset if it passed for real but they totally passed it without the 2/3rd majority.

It's ridiculous! Political cronyism is the worst. Especially when it's so blatant.

[KamaAina]

16. They might as well change their symbol while they're at it

from this:



to this:

[Redford]

17. What? are we pro-life too????

Sheezus on a cracker have some backbone!!

[sakabatou]

18. Gah, cowardess

Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.

[limpyhobbler]

19. Typical. Republicans complain, Dems roll over.

[valerief]

25. I guess that backbone Deval spoke of is made of cooked spaghetti. nt

[limpyhobbler]

29. Apparently so. This strikes me as extremely irresponsible. nt

[limpyhobbler]

20. It's a good start on peace prevention.

[valerief]

22. Um, they're doing this crap to please the Republicans?????

Can anyone explain this to me? And, man, what's up with ignoring Tel Aviv? Are Dems going to diss evolution next?

[harun]

24. Cavers and Cowards

[otohara]

26. Swear to Gawd, The Dems

are so wimpy sometimes.

[Stryder]

27. Thank you sir, may I have another?

WTF?

[eqfan592]

28. Oh give me a damn break.

What happened to growing a backbone?????????

[truedelphi]

48. i guess God didn't

Bother to give the Dem leadership one. (Not even one!) Though he seems to have handed out plenty to the Republicans.

[Solly Mack]

30. Damn

My talents didn't come from some god.

[Blue_Tires]

31. I wonder if this bullshit faux outrage would have snowballed

if the convention was in a northern city...

[OkieLib41]

34. New member here...

I wish I could've introduced myself on a much more friendly rant, but my damn head is about to explode!!
I've been reading DU for a few years and to be honest, I've been to lazy to register. However, after the DNC caved on this issue, I had to join!! Man, I don't even know were to start with the frustration I'm feeling right now!! Why was this necessary?! Because the GOP cried foul? I mean we just had an opening night that EVERYONE was on board and fired up...Then you piss right down our backs. Did the DNC bitch and moan about the RNC platform? Yes. Did the RNC care? FUCK NO!!! Just when I thought we where showing some backbone we CAVE on OUR damn platform!!! That's exactly why the GOP gets away with their bullshit....Dems act like spineless nerdy kids and the GOP is the bully on the playground. The GOP threaten to take their ball home unless we agree to play by their rules and we let them get away with it.

[alp227]

37. I agree totally. WELCOME TO DU!!!!

[truedelphi]

44. Hey there - welcome to DU.

Sorry it was on a topic relating to the cowardice of the supposed ruling party. And at their own convention.

[RanWiz]

198. My First Post TOO !!

I resigned from the Dem Party yesterday over this. So bad on so many levels:
<1> Letting the GOP goad Dems into taking action - spineless as has been pointed out.
<2> The SHAM voice vote - and that damning photo of the teleprompter instructing National Convention Chairman Antonio Villaraigosa (mayor of Los Angeles, CA) that the vote was AFFIRMED even before it was decided!! The party 'uppers' just layed it out on the 'people'.
<3> The whitewash in the media - this was an accusation of conservative news outlets, and it's quite true - this debacle has NOT been widely carried after the fact.
<4> WRONG HEADED on the "GOD" part - we seem to never be able to get any real separation between church and state here in the US of god. We have some freedom of religion, but no freedom FROM it. And if you claim that talents are "God Given" then you must not believe in evolution - that makes the Dem's sound more like Repubs in my book.
<5> Jerusalem as Capital of Israel: this is a very tricky one. Personally I support Israel. I think the US should continue to do so for many reasons (none religious). Note that the Israeli's have the Knessit there (their legislature) and other parts of government ... they want it to be their capital and claim it as such. However some of that land [East Jerusalem] was grabbed in the 1967 7-day war (which I remember well). The UN (for which most Americans do not have enough respect) has several resolutions [#476 & 478 - see Wikipedia "Positions on Jerusalem" for lots of background if you are not up to speed ] which resolutions prohibit the use of this land for Israel's Capital, etc. The rest of the world respects this standard from 1980, except the USA. However, we have conformed with the rest of the world by placing our embassy in Tel-Aviv.
Saying that we support Jerusalem as the capital is CODE for saying that we will support Israel in their possession of this 'stolen' land. I support the idea from about the middle of 1950's of making this contested city into a UN PROTECTORATE...not within any country whatever. This idea, supported by many at that time (including Albert Einstein who was frustrated with the Israeli treatment of his support for Israel University in Jerusalem). There is a good precedent for placing a city outside the borders of states in conflict....that's want we call Washington, DC !!
BOTTOM LINE ON THIS ONE: is the next sentence in the DEM's Platform: "The parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations." The point is {OBVIOUSLY} not settled yet. Why don't we just leave it at that??

[Tx4obama]

38. AP source: Obama personally intervened to change Democrat platform language on Jerusalem, God

Breaking News ?@BreakingNews

AP source: Obama personally intervened to change Democrat platform language on Jerusalem, God

https://twitter.com/BreakingNews/status/243475797212549120

[Nihil]

133. Twitter?

There again, if true then it just shows that the corruption reaches right to the top.


(And I suppose that it explains the arrival of @AIPAC on the thread ...)

[Kolesar]

186. "Democrat" is a noun, "Democratic" is an adjective

and "Democrat platform" is a dead giveaway.
I'm supposed to believe a "tweet"?
Not gonna

[YOHABLO]

39. Example of a more Center Right Dem Party

So I guess that leaves anyone who questions the existence of God, atheist, agnostic, out of the picture. All due to the enormous religiosity suffocating this country. And let me remind you, there is nothing in the Constitution that mentions God. It does require a separation of church and state .. that the religious right completely ignores. I am sure I am out-numbered on this issue. Religion will destroy this country .. already has. Oh and we have to cater to AIPAC .. don't want to piss off the Zionists.

[CrispyQ]

40. This thread needs recs to get it to the top.

Maybe someone at the convention will see it & realize that they've pissed a whole lot of people off. I know lots of religious people who are not happy with the right wing infusion of religion into government.

It was also a huge PR mistake after such a rock star night. Talk about dashing enthusiasm. I'm thinking of sending my $25 to FFRF this week.

[azurnoir]

92. DNC 2012: Platform amendments over God, Jerusalem draw delegates' boos

Many in the audience booed after the convention chairman, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, ruled that the amendments had been approved despite the fact that a large group of delegates objected. He called for a vote three times before ruling.

The party reinstated language from the 2008 platform that said "we need a government that stands up for the hopes, values and interests of working people and gives everyone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of their God-given potential."

The language on Jerusalem states "it is and will remain the capital of Israel. The parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths."

The switch on Jerusalem puts it in line with what advisers said was the president's personal view, if not the policy of his administration. The administration has long said determining Jerusalem's status was an issue that should be decided by Israelis and Palestinians in peace talks, but has been careful not to state that Jerusalem is Israel's capital.

http://www.wcnc.com/news/dnc-charlotte-2012/Democrats-change-platform-to-add-God-Jerusalem--168681096.html

[Scuba]

41. Unfortunate.

[Angry Dragon]

42. Just listened on the radio to the voice vote on the god issue

and the noes had the vote ........... what a farce

[truedelphi]

46. I don't know if I should laugh or cry.

Apparently The Democratic "Leadership" (and I use that word loosely) has never met a Republican principle that they won't embrace.

[Redford]

49. I heard majority NAYS as well.

Is there nothing that can be done about this? What a farce! Why even ask them to vote if they were not going to accept the true vote. GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

[limpyhobbler]

56. Found video this on youtube, supposedly it's that vote...

I searched for DNC god vote and sorted by date.

[joshcryer]

112. Pure political cronyism. Ignoring the desires of the delegates.

This is total bullshit. I hope it goes viral and they fix it (even if silently).

[limpyhobbler]

145. it's a clusterfuck.

It's bad policy IMO. And the undemocratic way it was jammed thru on national TV makes it bad politics also.

It all goes back to one thing - big money has too much control over our politics and government.

What a shitty interjection into a otherwise pleasant political commercial.

[progressoid]

82. Right.

Sadly, this happens a lot.

I was a delegate (only at the local level) and there is a lot of crap that happens behind the scenes that ain't all that democratic.

[joshcryer]

111. We need to make this go viral so they fix their clear error.

[Angry Dragon]

122. Too late

[liberallibral]

45. Stupid, Spineless Move....

Now THIS will be the focus of the talking heads, and blah blah blah....... So stupid...

[Kali]

47. sadly recc'ing

I was so fired up after last night.

[Sky Masterson]

50. In the end it's all just noise.

It will probably save more votes than it sheds. Shake it off people.
It's pillow talk.

[mikki35]

51. OMG

This was one seriously bone-headed stupid mistake. The whole thing could have been played as a very much needed nod to separation of church and state - publicly stated as such. Then include all the religiosity needed during the convention or elsewhere. This just plain looks like a cave to Rep criticism - STUPID STUPID MOVE.

[LoisB]

52. Just when I thought Dems had grown a spine. What a farce! I don't care what the capital

of Israel is and I would prefer to keep God out of politics.

[Great Caesars Ghost]

87. I guess the backbone speech didn't include specifications.

So they just show there backbones made of jelly.

[revolution breeze]

53. Kick! n/t

[FBaggins]

54. Stupid... and badly mismanaged.

They had to know what the spin would be on "taking god out" and "changing the capital of Israel". If they wanted to avoid the fight then they didn't have to send us down this road in the first place... or they could have been ready to defend the decision.

But to make the change and then back down from the change under pressure in a way that makes clear that the delegates opposed the move... just leaves the party open to attacks on both sides - with no ground left to defend.

[DonCoquixote]

55. here is what happened

Disclaimers:

1) Not all Jews are Zionists.

2) Many Jews, especially liberal Jews, HATE what is being done by Israel, and have been loud, clear vocies against it, such as Noam Chomsky, Naomi Klein, and for that matter, many posters here on DU.

Not that any of these disclaimers will keep me from being called an anti-semite.

The fact is, Jews have been some of the heaviest donors and supporters of the Democrats. From John Stewart to Rah Emmanuel, their influence is in the party. Well, people like Sheldon Addison of the GOP have been trying to use Israel as a wedge, because if the Jews left the democrats, they would be hurting for funds.

For a wonderful example look here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/09/05/wasserman-schultz-denies-comment-on-israeli-ambassador-audio-tells-different-story/

Here we have the GOP using the conflict to their own glory. Let us not forget also when Hillary threatned to "obliterate Iran." Or the times Clinton said he would fight and die for Israel.

and let's take a look at supposed liberal and big name Allan Dershowitz:
http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/04/liberal-harvard-professor-finds-democratic-platform-omissions-on-israel-deeply-troubling/

“I think one shouldn’t give too much weight to platform pronouncements, but in this case, I think the omissions are troubling — particularly the omission about the Palestinian refugee issue and Hamas are, I think, deeply troubling,

and this where he demands they stop attacking Sheldon addison

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/08/Dershowitz-to-Fellow-Democrats-Stop-Attacking-Sheldon-Adleson

Now, again, I realize that the people causing the problem are a kinority of Jews, many of whom are driven to headaches as much as any Palestinian over this crap, however, the fear of thin piocketbooks was put into the Democrats, which is why they caved here.

[newspeak]

149. I'm with you, not all jews are zionists

there are jews who actually care about peace and the well being of their palestinian neighbors.

Also, I don't know what the right wing zealots are screaming about. I heard Michelle Obama state at the end of her speech "god bless america." So, what in the hell are they whining about now.

If they want to live in a theocratic state, then maybe the zealots can move to SA or iran. Because it was not the intention of most of our forefathers, especially the unitarians, to turn this country into a damn corporate theocracy!!!!

This "holier" bullshite, is just bullshite. The repugs feed it to their constituents; but most show by their acts, it's all about the moolah and power. "by their acts you shall know them." And, if you need proof what they think about their followers, all you got to do is google reed's letter-how he was supposed to influence his followers to vote on gambling-not for morality, but for business interest!!! A bunch of fekkin hypocrites!!!!

[former9thward]

57. "The last time I looked Tel Aviv was the capital of Israel..."

You should look harder. Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. It has been since Israel was created in 1948.

[loli phabay]

60. I think it was 1950 that Jerusalem became the capital, i may be wrong but it always has been

Tel Aviv is considered the capital by other countries who dont recognise that Jerusalem is the choice of the Israeli State. Kinda confusing and i dont blame people for not knowing as i didnt until i went there and was put straight.

[former9thward]

71. No, other countries do not say Tel Aviv is the capital.

That would be like Russia declaring Chicago is the capital of the U.S. Other countries, not wanting to anger Arab countries, have put their embassies in Tel Aviv. But they don't declare that city is the capital. Most of those countries, including the U.S., have "consulate generals" in Jerusalem.

[loli phabay]

75. in the end jerusalem is the capital then.

[Violet_Crumble]

93. No, it's not n/t

[loli phabay]

101. well if the israelis say its their capital then it pretty much is unless you believe that people

cant chose what city is their capital city.

[Violet_Crumble]

103. No, they can't make something that's not part of Israel their capital...

East Jerusalem has never been part of Israel and still isn't. What makes you think that it would have been okay for the Indonesians to declare part of East Timor the Indonesian capital when it occupied East Timor? It wouldn't have been acceptable, just like it's not acceptable for Israel to violate international law and make all of Jerusalem its capital. And I bet you anything Israel wouldn't be interested in making just West Jerusalem its capital, because that extremist RW govt wants the entire thing...

[Selatius]

132. Israel is free to have Jerusalem as their national capital, at this point.

The Democratic and Republican Parties have laid the issue to rest, and in the end, what the United States does is final with respect to Israel. Both parties are now on record as supporting Israel's claim to the city of Jerusalem, and this is a big victory for Israeli nationalists.

It isn't any more acceptable than having China annex Tibet, but nobody is seriously going to stop China anymore than anybody is willing to stop the United States on this matter.

Israel's leaders are free to take all of Jerusalem at this point or at least begin to cover over East Jerusalem in illegal colonial settlements, but if they're smart, they'll leave the eastern portion to Palestinians.

If they are not, then they condemn Israel to eternal struggle and strife. There will be no peace, and there will be no two-state solution. No Palestinian leader will accept a nation without Jerusalem, but as we see, none of the two major parties inside the United States really cares.

[Kolesar]

187. That's a decent summary in very terse prose

Although I wish there was a way to back out of the situation that the Democrats just wrought.

[eyl]

141. So is it your contention

That Israel doesn't have a capital? After all, Tel Aviv performs almost none of a capital's functions - the Supreme Court, The legislature and most of the Ministries are all in (West) Jerusalem.

It would be more logical for the world to consider West Jerusalem as Israel's capital while not recognozing it's annexation of East Jerusalem - at least that would be more in line with reality than the current approach.

[choie]

67. I believe Jerusalem is not

recognized as being the capital of Israel by the international community.

[former9thward]

73. In what world do you live in that a country can't desinate what its capital is???

Simply because they are Jewish you are going to deny them that fundamental right?? What if Russia declares Chicago the capital of the U.S.? Are you going to accept that?

BTW I guess the U.S. is not part of the "international community" in your world since the mid-90s. It has been the position of the U.S. that the capital of Israel is Jerusalem by Presidents and Congress'of both parties.

[Violet_Crumble]

99. That'd be the world that believes in international law. East Jerusalem is occupied...

No country should be allowed to make anywhere that's not part of the country its capital. East Jerusalem never has been and still isn't part of Israel, no matter how much Israel wants to pretend it is.

[former9thward]

154. Why do you post on DU?

Your position is not the position of either the Democratic Party or President Obama (or any other Democratic president).

[azurnoir]

104. and how many countries have their embassies in Jerusalem? Is the US embassy in Jerusalem?

Israel unilaterally annexed Jerusalem in 1980 the UNSC declared that null and void

[former9thward]

155. Where countries have their embassy does not determine what their capital is.

If Russia moved its embassy to Chicago would that city now be the capital of the U.S.? It has been the bipartisan position of Congress the embassy should be in Jerusalem since the mid 90s although the president is allowed a waiver. The U.S. and most other countries have what they call a 'consulate general' in Jerusalem and the offices in Tel Aviv are 'embassies' in name only.

[azurnoir]

156. why does no country have its embassy in Jerusalem? you avoided an answer by providing a strawman

but a useful one thanks, Israel unilaterally declaring Jerusalem its capital is much like Russia declaring Chicago its capital in that Chicago is no more on Russian territory than East Jerusalem is on Israeli, unless of course you believe that might makes right

[former9thward]

159. Jerusalem was a spoil of war.

The Israelis never would have been in East Jerusalem if the Arab nations surrounding them had not attacked them in violation of UN resolutions which you are so fond of -- of course when they are against Israel. Countries don't have their official embassies in Jerusalem because they are afraid of offending the Arab nations. Why do you post in DU? The Democratic party and President Obama --and other Democratic leaders since the 90s are on record saying Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.

[azurnoir]

166. first off both Clinton and Obama have deferred the the Jerusalem embassy act which apparently you

support and was passed by a Republican controlled house in an attempt to undercut Oslo which then POTUS Clinton had a hand in arranging

The reason this has been deferred repeatedly by every POTUS since its signing is because East Jerusalem is indeed disputed territory and the spoils of war claims to territory are illegal

[former9thward]

168. You can pretend this is a GOP thing but reality must intrude.

The vote in the Senate was 93-5 and the House was 374-37. It had overwhelming Democratic support. Clinton signed it. If he didn't agree with it he could have vetoed it. It would have been overridden but if he was in disagreement he could have made the point. He didn't, he signed it.

The waiver has been used not because of YOUR supposed reason. It has been waived because presidents have objected that this law intrudes on the constitutional presidential power to direct foreign affairs. No president has offered up the excuse YOU are making.

[azurnoir]

169. Reality Clinton deferred it as did Obama

and Bush for that matter excuse lol East Jerusalem is disputed territory period and your excuse was Bushes reason the US State department agrees it is disputed territory as to Obama what you claim is his personal belief not governmental policy

[former9thward]

170. Fine, I'm sure you will link to Clinton, Bush, Obama giving that as the reason.

[azurnoir]

171. you seem confused

as I just stated Obama's additions are his personal beliefs NOT US policy but do keep trying

[former9thward]

172. Your post:

and Bush for that matter excuse lol East Jerusalem is disputed territory period and your excuse was Bushes reason the US State department agrees it is disputed territory as to Obama what you claim is his personal belief not governmental policy

Despite your post being grammatically challenged you seem to think Clinton, etc used the waiver because U.S. policy is that E. Jerusalem is disputed territory. Please back that up.

[azurnoir]

175. okay

United States
Greater Jerusalem, May 2006. CIA remote sensing map showing what they regard as settlements, plus refugee camps, fences, walls, etc.

United States The United States views as desirable the establishing of an international regime for the city.[32] Its final status must be resolved through negotiations[33] and it does not recognise Jerusalem as Israel's capital.[34]

United States policy on Jerusalem refers specifically to the geographic boundaries of the "City of Jerusalem" based on the UN's corpus separatum proposal. De jure, Jerusalem is part of the Palestine Mandate and has not been under sovereignty of any country since.[35][36] President Bush (1989–1993) stated that the United States does not believe new settlements should be built in East Jerusalem[37] and that it does not want to see Jerusalem "divided". In a speech in June 2008, then-presidential-candidate Barack Obama said "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided."[38] The Obama administration has condemned expansion of Gilo and Ramat Shlomo as well as evictions and house demolitions affecting Palestinians living in East Jerusalem.[39][40][41]

The United States voted for the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine in November 1947 and United Nations General Assembly Resolution 194 in December 1948 following the 1948 Arab-Israeli War but voted against Resolution 303 in December 1949 that reaffirmed that Jerusalem be established a corpus separatum under a special international regime to be administered by the United Nations because the U.S. regarded the plan as no longer feasible after both Israel and Jordan had established a political presence in the city.[42] The U.S. opposed Israel's moving its capital from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem following Israel's declaration of Jerusalem as its capital in 1949 and opposed Jordan's plan to make Jerusalem its second capital announced in 1950.[42] The U.S. opposed Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem after the 1967 war.[42] The United States maintains a consulate in Jerusalem that deals primarily with the Palestinian Authority, while relations with the Israeli government are handled from the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv. The U.S. consulate is not accredited to the Israeli government.[43] The United States has proposed that the future of Jerusalem should be the subject of a negotiated settlement.[42] Subsequent administrations have maintained the same policy that Jerusalem's future not be the subject of unilateral actions that could prejudice negotiations such as moving the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.[42] In 2002, Congress passed legislation that said that American citizens born in Jerusalem may list "Israel" as their country of birth, although Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama have not allowed it.[44] The US maintains six buildings in Jerusalem with a staff of 471. In 2010 it had a budget of $96
million[45]

oh and thanks for critiquing my syntax always a sign of a winning argument

This page was last modified on 6 September 2012 at 05:14.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positions_on_Jerusalem#United_States

[eyl]

165. You're missing one thing

In this case, Russia moved all of its governmental apapratus to Chicago.

In what way is Tel Aviv Israel's capital?

[azurnoir]

167. so because Israel moved its government to East Jerusalem that makes it official

well maybe for Israel but it would seem the rest of the isn't quite in agreement

[eyl]

180. There are no government offices

in East Jerusalem, AFAIK (certainly not top-level ones - the Supreme Court and Knesset are in West Jerusalem, and AFAIK all the Ministries* are in the "Government City" which is also in West Jerusalem)

*I don't remember if the Ministry of Defense is in Jerusalem or in the Kirya in Tel Aviv

[davidpdx]

58. Instead of putting God in

They should have put in "we affirm and support the rights of all religious beliefs".

[LAGC]

135. There was already a huge section on supporting "Faith" in general.

The "God" reference was completely unnecessary and should have been kept out.

[BlueMTexpat]

61. I personally am dismayed by this cowardly capitulation to RW zealots of both parties.

But I am realistic enough to realize that it would otherwise be a distraction.

At least, that is what I hope.

If not, once President Obama is re-elected, I will remind him of the UN position, strongly and forcefully.

Because a Mitt Romney alternative is MUCH worse.

Dems really DO need to grow a backbone. Deval Patrick was right. But there are also times to choose our battles.

[tonekat]

62. Nooooo! Don't flip on this...too late!

Not good. Because of criticism from the most evil entity on the planet?? Dems, you'd better find some guts fast.

[Scairp]

64. This is not good

Democrats allowing repuke griping to dictate changes in the platform? No, not very good at all.

[yellerpup]

65. I was watching when the vote was taken.

The NO vote really won. The soldiers stood up but the management caved. Why the F do we vote up or down or any way at all on what the capitol is of a foreign country? The votes weren't separate, the issues were explained only once and voted down by voice three times. To me it looked obvious that they decided to change the platform behind the scenes and had counted on it to breeze through. The actual vote didn't go as planned.

[Gman]

66. Who TF cares?

If it wins votes then BFD.

[trailmonkee]

68. like the God part....

[hack89]

69. Not according to the Israelis. nt

[DURHAM D]

74. Seriously? This is what the screaming is all about?

"Also restored from the 2008 platform was language calling for a government that "gives everyone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of their God-given potential."

I am a fucking agnostic and this doesn't bother me.

I watched last night and today as various Dems were asked about the fact this was left out this year and frankly no one could respond in any way that made sense. They were tongue-tied. Is was just dumb to leave it out in the first place.

[alarimer]

76. Political posturing at its worst.

Democrats are a bunch of spineless weasels.

[Cynicus Emeritus]

86. As an Independent this is why I vote candidate

and not as a Party hack that is led around by his/her nose. It is why I rarely post on partisan websites.

I was so impressed with all the Democratic speakers last night and then today the party leadership makes this manipulative fraudulent cave-in only to appease their sponsors, and not Americans or supporters. This is not a subjective opinion as it was on youtube. It was obviously a deal made in advance (the voice vote was not even close to a tie, and definitely not 2/3 for). This was just as the Republican elites shafted their independent supporters by taking the states out of the delegate appointment process. If Americans accept this they are lemmings because it has repercussions for all.

[Pterodactyl]

83. Good! God and Jerusalem should have been in there.

[limpyhobbler]

90. Why does that Jerusalem thing belong in there?

[Pterodactyl]

102. Because Jerusalem in the capital of Israel. They need to know we support our friends.

And it was there before.

[Humanist_Activist]

107. Don't really care about the Jerusalem thing, but why should any God be mentioned?

Shouldn't we at least have one secular political party?

[Pterodactyl]

108. Good luck with that. The secular party is not going to be the Dem party.

All of our recent candidates have been Christians, including Obama. It shouldn't be a surprise that we have a strong Christian foundation.

[Humanist_Activist]

116. So not only non-Secular, but sectarian as well?

Can you please describe this "Christian Foundation".

Oh, and do non-Christians belong in the party or not?

[Pterodactyl]

118. Of course non-Christians are welcome!

Joe Lieberman is Jewish and he was the VP nominee just a few years ago.


And as for the Christian foundation, take a look:
Obama - Christian
Kerry - Christian
Gore - Christian
Clinton - Christian

Not to mention Biden, Pelosi, etc.

And if any atheists want to come along, that would be super duper.

[pewpface]

121. wait, what?

can't tell if satire...

[Pterodactyl]

137. : )

[Humanist_Activist]

123. That fails to describe a Christian foundation...

you listed some major members(Presidents or Candidates for President) who identify as Christian. All that shows is that that most of the population(and hence party members) identify as Christian. It would be like saying that the party has a "straight foundation" because most party members are straight(like most of the population at large).

[Pterodactyl]

136. Most Democrats are Christian and that informs their outlook.

[dmallind]

139. Most of them are straight, and white too

Want to try putting those into your vile statements so you can (I hope) see where the problem is?

[SomeGuyInEagan]

157. This!!!!! Wish I could rec your reply. n/t

[Pterodactyl]

176. I don't get your point. What's wrong with being white?

I have lots of white friends and they are really nice people.

[Humanist_Activist]

179. Nothing, just telling you how helpful describing someone by behaviorially non-descriptive terms is.

Not helpful at all, in case you don't get it.

[Pterodactyl]

181. No, I don't get. Would you please please please explain?

[Humanist_Activist]

182. Ok, let me elaborate, you call someone a Christian, all that means to me is that this is someone...

who believes that Jesus Christ is the Messiah and God(and rose from the dead). That's it, their personal values, political beliefs, level of altruism, etc. aren't generally informed by this belief, so isn't directly related to it.

[Pterodactyl]

183. Really? You need to meet more Christians.

Jesus had a lot of stuff to say while he was here. We're still working on following up on his instructions.

Your ignorance of the moral guidance of Christianity is stunning. Imagine if I said that humanists like humans and that's all there is to it.

[Humanist_Activist]

188. Jesus was, at best, a mixed bag...

not really the most moral being ever to have lived on this planet, and I was raised Christian, so there's that too. I also lived my entire life in the United States, so I'm quite familiar with Christians of all stripes. Indeed, it is from this observation that I can state that Christianity has little bearing on people's actions.

As far as your summation of humanism, well its inadequate but more or less accurate. It could be elaborated on quite a bit though.

The problem is with the Jesus character himself, as portrayed in the Bible, is, as I said, a mixed bag. One one hand, he said "Love thy neighbor as thyself." On another he also said you should abandon your families to follow him, brought in the concept of hell for non-believers and "sinners", and was that he came not to bring peace but a sword.

[Pterodactyl]

189. Yes, Jesus is hard to follow.

Yes, what he expects of us is not easy to understand or implement. We never said it would be easy. Lots of folks turned away, even in his time.

[Humanist_Activist]

190. I wouldn't say he was hard to follow.

Getting a consistent picture from the Gospels is impossible. You can ask 10 different Christians about who Jesus is and you will get 10 different answers. Generally the Jesus people follow is a reflection of their preexisting values.

[Pterodactyl]

191. Luckily he founded a church through Peter to help us know.

[Humanist_Activist]

193. LOL.

Wait? Are you serious? Let me laugh even harder.

[Pterodactyl]

195. Yes, I am. And you laughing at my beliefs is intolerant.

[Humanist_Activist]

196. Actually I'm laughing at your statement, which, given the sheer number of denominations that...

exist within Christianity, not to mention the varieties of beliefs that exist within each of those denominations, makes me think you haven't really thought your statement through.

In addition, I'm not afraid of being called intolerant of beliefs I find foolish or inaccurate.

[Humanist_Activist]

160. Again, not a description, please elaborate. n/t

[w4rma]

85. Required a 2/3's vote. The NOs had it. The Chair, Villaraigosa, bold face lied after THREE votes.

[limpyhobbler]

89. I felt bad for him having to do that.

[joshcryer]

114. Did you hear that women just tell him "do it" or something like that?

What the actual fuck!

[defacto7]

124. She said....

"ya gotta let them do what their gonna do."

[Psephos]

91. You are absolutely correct.

Thanks for posting the vid.

[joshcryer]

109. That's total bullshit. They need to fix that shit.

Fucking cronyism. Fix it. Admit you were wrong to pass it when clearly there wasn't a 2 third majority.

[hugo_from_TN]

152. Difficult to complain about election fraud when the DNC cares nothing about actual vote counts.

What a farce. I guess the delegates now realize they are just props in the production, not true members of the party.

[SomeGuyInEagan]

158. Wow, way to ignore the vote. Fucking lying POS Villarigosa.

Could been a man, but he chose to be a POS. His choice.

[U4ikLefty]

95. WTF?!? Jerusalem is NOT the capital of Israel.

Absolutely disgusting.

How can America expect others to respect international law if we do not?

[tova]

138. Jerusalem

Last edited Thu Sep 6, 2012, 02:39 PM - Edit history (1)

Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. The majority of Jews have always voted democratic. We are not all anti Israel as stated in one of the above posts. You will lose much of the Jewish vote if you refuse to acknowledge that Jerusalem is the capital. It does stink to high heaven of anti-semitism. This is one great way the republicans could tear apart the democratic party before the elections (divide and conquer).

[cpwm17]

140. No, it's racist to declare Jerusalem the capital of Israel

East Jerusalem belongs to the Palestinians. Apartheid Israel is in the process of ethnically cleansing East Jerusalem, and is making all of Jerusalem its capital. The Democratic leadership just sucked up to the racists.

[Nihil]

143. Another "great" way ...

> This is one great way the republicans could tear apart the democratic party
> before the elections (divide and conquer).

... is to activate your sleeper trolls & sock-puppets to throw around the classic
old "anti-semitism" slurs at the drop of a hat (or a policy).


"Jerusalem": Truly a word to inspire passions of all kinds amongst the widest
variety of people for a whole host of reasons.

[tova]

163. Seriously

No need to start screaming troll every time someone does not agree with you! I have only voted Democratic and have been a member of this site for years. Clearly this has always been a hot issue on democratic underground. I have had anti-semitism used directly against me in the past (not on the Internet). So how about stepping down from your high horse.

[Proles]

97. It is all pretty silly, but I honestly think the worse thing to do at this point

would be to make a deal of it.

I mean, you read Huffington Post's front page, and they talk about how the Democrats folded and are feeding material for ads. Well, they may be right, but making a big deal about it will only bring more attention to that fact in my opinion.

If it were up to me, I'd tell the republicans to take their religion+politics and shove it. There's separation of church and state. I'd also say Israel is its own country, and should make its own decisions about its political boundaries.

But at the end of the day, these additions to the platform are superficial. Tokens of pandering that don't really mean much in the end... so I think it'd be better to keep the Democrat's energy focused on other matters at this point.

[Seeking Serenity]

98. Excuse me for coming in late, but...

What is the big deal here? Why all the wailing and gnashing of teeth and rending of garments?

[U4ikLefty]

100. As an Angelino, I know Villaraigosa to be a two-faced POS.

His dealings with the homeless, the proposed football stadium, and Occupy LA show him to be a real scum-bucket. If he runs for state/national office, I will VOTE AGAINST HIM. Yes you heard me!!!

[blkmusclmachine]

106. Typical DEM capitulation:

The GOP has the DEM's on a very short leash. HUMILIATING. And typical. No wonder why so many people believe that there is only 1 Party, with 2 Faces. This bullsh!t maneuver is proof of it. HA!


Operation Northwoods

[ozone_man]

178. Precisely!

One party with two faces. I was hoping someone else would say that. It's true though isn't it?

[Alduin]

115. This is the dumbest thing the Democrats have ever done.

[slackmaster]

144. I don't believe it quite rises to the level of the failed Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba in 1962

[harmonicon]

117. I'll add my own boo: BOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (nt)

[defacto7]

119. Now I know why the entire house walked out on the invocation!

There was a Rabbi who gave the final invocation who made a strong almost blatant comment about Jerusalem being the capitol of Israel.

When he was done... the house was EMPTY! Now I get it.

[pewpface]

120. doubly dishonest hypocrisy

this undemocratic action so enraged me that i felt compelled to register here after years of casually surfing. what really irritates me -- and what hasn't been pointed out as of yet -- is the strategic packaging of the two platform issues into one vote to ensure the pro-god issue would pass muster (even though it obviously did not). had the issues been separated into two voice votes, i imagine that the pro-god vote might have failed, whilst the pro-israel wording might have passed, which would be a win-win for both sides (the "leaders" and the delegates). more importantly, it would show the democratic party of being, um, democratic. god forbid we would have transparent democracy on the world's biggest political stage...

this is such a ridiculously unnecessary finger in the eye of the agnostics and those who believe religion has no place in politics. as tone deaf as romney and his camp is, i couldn't think of a bigger self-inflicted distraction when the headlines should rather be focusing on the amazing speeches by mrs. obama and mr. clinton.

if this had happened at the RNC, we would have been laughing our collective asses off at their utter contempt for transparency, all the way to the re-election. i very much dislike the "much ado about nothing" comments, as if demanding democracy is a trivial matter.

thinking about it, had i been a delegate, neither one of those platform issues would have raised my ire (ok, maybe the god-loving pile of panderspeak). it's the way it was rammed through which is really reprehensible. ugh.

[Marrah_G]

125. puke

keep on giving in to the rw loonies...........

[David__77]

126. This is shameful.

Complete disregard for the rules of the convention, which has complete authority to revise, or not revise, the platform of this party. The problem for the bosses is that there are apparently too many progressives who have become delegates. Still it is time to take over this party once and for all.

[RandiFan1290]

127. They should have cleared it first.

They should have sent a copy of the platform to the republicans and Israel to make sure everything was OK before passing.

Could have saved a ton of trouble and embarrassment if they had asked for permission first.




They'll win one day!

[limpyhobbler]

147. LOL That would certainly be more efficient. I'm sure they will do that next time.

[Douglas Carpenter]

128. when I was a boy national conventions of both political parities were contentious events where fights

about platforms and candidates accompanied with heated arguments and much drama were considered the norm for political conventions.

These carefully choreographed coronations may be good politics in a limited and narrow sense - But this is NOT what democracy looks like.

[Freddie Stubbs]

129. If Tel Aviv is the capital of Israel, why does the Knesset meet in Jerusalem?

Where does the Israeli Supreme Court meet? Jerusalem.

Where is the Prime Minister of Israel's residence? Jerusalem.

[limpyhobbler]

146. Not internationally recognized.

[Freddie Stubbs]

150. Apparently it is now by Democrats

[nolabels]

148. Where does the U.S. Supreme Court meet?

In the corporate boardroom, or course

What some people fail to realize is that the bigger the tent, the harder at keeping the elephant trunk from sneaking under it

[slackmaster]

142. I love a good pie fight!

[KansDem]

162. Craven...

I'm sick and tired of living my entire life bowing to Israel...

[Green_Lantern]

164. who cares who cares...read the full article

It says" a declaration that Jerusalem "is and will remain the capital of Israel. The parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths."

That language was included in the platform four years ago when Obama ran for his first term, but was left out when Democrats on Tuesday approved their 2012 platform, which referred only to the nation's "unshakable commitment to Israel's security."


The people wanting Jerusalem left out were the ones wanting to make an unprecedented change to the platform and play right into the hands of Republicans saying "Look who is the leading Democrat when they decided to make the sudden change."

Making the change in the first place showed weakness,the weakness of looking like the empty chair at the RNC.

[ripcord]

174. Don't know if this how this will turn out for us

Coming out of the bushes for the first time, I don't know if this will turn out to be bad or good but I'm just pissed about how they carried it off. I honestly had to check the TV, I thought maybe I was watching the RNC.

[link:|

[lib2DaBone]

177. Wonder why they did this?

Is Mr. Obama still intent on arresting U.S. Citizens using our OWN MILITARY in U.S. Cities? NDAA?

All he has to say is that he "thinks" you may be an "Associate" of a muslim Cleric... and you will be sent away to a secret Military prison with no lawyer and no HOPE of ever getting out.

Is this Democracy? Is this what our founders had in mind? Do you think this is wrong?

[Kolesar]

185. Former Ohio Gov. Strickland introduced it and mentioned he was a Methodist minister

I caught the segment on Cspan by chance. It was pathetic.
Is he endorsing a platform based on the divine rights of kings?

[dflprincess]

197. This is why I would not waste my time or money going to a national convention

No way would I want to be "an extra" in the staged events they've become.

BTW - Jon Stewart did point out that they had the statement Villaraigosa made about the 2/3 vote on a teleprompter for him to read. Even the lie was scripted.