Having principles while accepting reality. What is so hard about it?

[TonyMontana]

Being a principled liberal means supporting a single payer, universal health care system.

Accepting reality means that it would've been impossible for Obama to accomplish such a thing, and that the health care reform bill that passed is monumentally better than anything a Republican president would've done.


Being a principled liberal means supporting 100% equality up to and including marriage and adoption rights for gay people across the land.

Accepting reality means recognizing that the vast majority of the American people are still quite homophobic, and that politicians may not be able to keep their jobs if they openly proclaim that they want gay marriage passed as the law of the land. Does that make them cowards? Yes. Does that mean you should let the Republicans take over again?


Being a principled liberal means supporting principled liberal politicians for office, regardless of whether they have a "D" next to their name.

Accepting reality means that these politicians have to be voted for in the PRIMARIES so that they can GET a "D" next to their name, and that a vote for them in a general election is no different than a vote for the Republicans.


I am a principled liberal. I want universal health care, an end to all wars, gay marriage, gun control, social justice, regulation of industry, and a green economy.

I am also aware of the fact that Obama and Congress can't get any of that done in two measly years, but that what they have done, while not nearly what I want, is BETTER than what the Republicans would've done, which would be to work as hard as possible (and probably succeeding) at doing the exact opposite of what I want.


The real difference between the so called "two camps" of liberals is one of maturity. Babies are the people who want what they want and if they don't get what they want, they throw temper tantrums. Adults realize that you can't always get what you want, at least not right away, and that you have to work hard and persevere and continue to strive for it.

So get out there are vote for the Democrat, no matter what his principles, no matter what his hypocrisy. Then get out there and vote for the principled liberal Democrat when the next primary comes around. And when he or she doesn't win, get out there and convince your friends, neighbors, coworkers, and families to vote for the principled liberal Democrat the next time the primaries come around. Accept that it will take time and that it will happen if you keep showing your friends, neighbors, coworkers, and families the facts, the valid reasoning, and most importantly, respect.

It's how black people and women got the vote, it's how social security passed, it's how the Vietnam war ended, it's how every major social and political change happened in the course of history. Somewhere along the line, a guy named Reagan reversed the progress that was being made since the dawn of the nation. He did it by using fear, lies, intimidation, and division.

Division. That's the key. The people have been divided, and no amount of belly aching about your principles is going to change that any time soon. REAL change can only occur with the PEOPLE. If you want real change, you have to convince the PEOPLE to put those principled liberal Democrats into power. People like Dennis Kucinich, Howard Dean, and Alan Grayson. Get more of THEM into Congress, and then you'll see how it goes.

But if you throw up your hands, if you don't accept reality, you get Christine O'Donnell and Sarah Palin into power. Then you'll see how THAT goes. Right now, it's the likes of THEM that run the place.

There's no dichotomy here. It is quite possible to have solid liberal principles while also accepting the fact that they won't be put into place with the current crop of politicians, and that you have to choose the lesser of the two evils in the meantime while YOU, yes YOU, work like crazy to convince EVERYONE AROUND YOU to put the right people into power. When that happens, this happens: French unions blockade fuel supplies to protest pension reforms

Got it?

[MineralMan]

1. Ooooh....you're gonna get it....

Recced.

[flvegan]

2. Gun control?

:popcorn:

[Still Sensible]

3. Well said. Extra butter for mine please.

:popcorn:

[DJ13]

4. Accepting reality means compromising your principles, doesnt it?

Why is it expected that liberals (or progressives) should compromise on their principles when no one expects the right to ever compromise on theirs?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

21. Depends on the principles.

If your principles are "do whatever will lead to the best outcome" then no.

If your principles are "never support anyone who doesn't agree with you on everything" then yes.

[Radical Activist]

25. "you have to work hard and persevere and continue to strive for it."

No, I don't think that's true, and it doesn't sound like the OP was arguing for people to compromise their principles at all.

[jaxx]

5. K&R for the common sense.

We move forward one step at a time.

[TexasObserver]

6. Everyone left of me is too idealistic. Everyone right of me is a sell out.

Unfortunately, the same is true for everyone else.

It's like George Carlin's old routine where he said that people who drive slower than him are idiots and people who drive faster than him are morons. Wherever we are looks reasonable to us.

[Radical Activist]

27. hah

That's a good way of putting it.

[letterwriter]

7. Reality changed my life

Reality change my life. It can change yours too! Are you right with reality? If it wasn't for Reality I wouldn't be here. I was created by Reality. I'm just trying to understand my creator like everyone else.

[damntexdem]

8. Well, there are two really hard parts to it:

1) having principles;
2) accepting reality.

Other than that,it's a piece of cake. ;-)

[proteus_lives]

9. On-board until you said gun control.

Real liberals don't restrict rights.

Unrec.

[jgraz]

15. Real liberals don't spout dogma

:eyes:

[proteus_lives]

22. I stand by my statement.

It's not dogma.

Real liberals aren't authoritarians.

[jgraz]

32. I'm going to die of not surprise.

[proteus_lives]

40. And I'm not surprised by your authoritarian streak.

I've seen it before, many times.

[jgraz]

42. Save it for the gungeon.

Out here in the real world, nobody's buying what you're selling.

[proteus_lives]

53. Actually. the real world backs me up.

Gun control has failed utterly.

Look at the stats. Hell, check out the progress:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x345545

Step by step, you and the Brady Bunch are rolled back.

Sorry if your creed doesn't match-up with what the people want.

[jgraz]

58. Really, the "real world" thinks anyone who isn't a 2nd Amendment fundamentalist

is an "authoritarian"? Are you sure that's the position you want to defend?

[proteus_lives]

59. Calling me a fundamentalist?

You bailing that water out quick enough?

[jgraz]

60. Real liberals aren't fundamentalists.

And calling someone an "authoritarian" because they don't share your extreme views certainly qualifies.

[proteus_lives]

61. No, I'm calling you a authoritarian based on past exchanges.

There plenty of folks whom I disagree with on this issue that I have no problem with.

They're the ones who disagree with gun-ownership but limit it to themselves and don't support restricting the rights of others because of their personal choices.

"Real liberals aren't fundamentalists."

Define fundamentalist, since you brought it up.

[jgraz]

62. Bored now.

:boring:

[proteus_lives]

63. And the boat has sunk.

[Radical Activist]

52. Hey now.

We have Communists and others on the authoritarian left who may take offense to that statement. Then they'll go back to arguing that Obama has the power to force Congress to do anything he wants and any bill that fails to pass Congress is all his fault!
:banghead:

[Hannah Bell]

10. not accepting corporate-enforced "reality" is the only thing that changes it.

i've heard the same bullshit argument for 50 years, & things mostly keep getting worse.

you'll wait til they throw you in your grave if you wait on "reality".

[Lord Magus]

19. Sorry, but you can't just pretend that Congress has a liberal supermajority.

The fact is, there were enough right-wing Republicans and DLC corporatists to prevent the superior healthcare reform that most Americans wanted. Obama had to deal with the Congress that exists, not the one that should exist.

[TheKentuckian]

11. I think you are the "baby" for blind allegiance to a bunch of fairy tales and big ol wishes.

I was not demanding single payer or a NHS but I was at minimum, expecting a serious effort at a market based reform and to take even that babystep you probably need competition and rules that dictate competition and we failed miserably. We maintained state regulation, failed to create a national pool, and have far too few people able to join the exchange (even projecting out 20 years) to do anything about the present overall clusterfuck. Hell, we couldn't even take the puny step of removing the industry's anti-trust exemption which means we the people have zero leverage here. After all, the only real stick is admittance to the exchanges and if the industry works as a unit as current law allows then they will get away with anything. You can't kick them all out or there will be no one to provide services and you can't pick on them randomly to try and force better practices.

The whole thing depends on the insurance cartel being good corporate citizens.

Obama continues to erode essential civil liberties, has failed to disband junior Bush's unconstitutional Army of the Executive (in fact is stepping up the usage in Iraq), he fucking fought to hobble the audit of the FED, he opposed ending too big to fail, he cut a deal with pharma that actually made the greedy pigs of the insurance cartel jealous, he has not lifted a finger to end the ban on WPA style programs that are desperately needed, Wall Street gets no strings attached deals and wags of the fingers while union workers are forced to sacrifice, he fought for a tax on benefits, he filled his cabinet and top level adviser positions with corporate cronies, he has and still covers for corporate felon BP and their criminal industry, and that's just some bullet points.

You ain't fighting for shit except the status quo and corporate rule. Grow up and wipe the sleep from your eyes. Both parties are corporate and conservative.

I'm voting Democratic as well but pitching it as anything more than a desperate attempt to tread water is clearly bullshit and I appreciate that at least you aren't trying to paint it as much more than that.

I will take some issue with your "remedy" though. Its hard to convince when the walk doesn't match the talk and it is equally bad that so many on the ground level have been made liars by leadership and the administration. Your sales pitch is fucking impossible to pull off to non-partisans and right leaners looking for a different SOP.

Those people are lost, probably forever on the alter of beltnotching. We are fucking failing to deliver anything other than pre-2000 Republican policy.

My progress bar is way lower than the measure most born again "sensible centrist" ever espoused over the past couple of cycles and it isn't being cleared. Instead we are in a bogus environment that requires we reargue birthright citizenship and direct voting for Senate when we are still finding a way to maintain a bunch of insane tax cuts from a drown the pigger.

[ibegurpard]

17. yup

[jp11]

20. +1

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

12. Sorry. Reality isn't defined by your understanding of things.

[MineralMan]

13. Nor by yours.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

26. Yeah, but with me you have a fighting chance of approximating it

Things like knowledge,, creativity, personal integrity and intellectual honesty do not make perfect objectivity possible but they do let us see the shadows cast inside the circus tent and even peek under the canvas at times.

It's a step up from finding thoughts that make one feel a certain way emotionally and then following any mental path that allows the illusion of a rational process in support of them.

[MineralMan]

36. Uh-huh...whatever you say, there...

[HughMoran]

39. ummm

Never mind!

:rofl:

[Individualist]

14. DLC's "reality" is not my reality.

[BzaDem]

46. That's the beauty of reality as a measure though, right? In reality there is just one reality.

You could either accept it, or be in perpetual denial, but there isn't really a third option.

For example, people who think Single Payer was possible are living on another planet. This has nothing to do with the DLC's reality or your reality -- it has to do with THE reality. Reality doesn't change just because you are in denial about a reality that you don't like. It also has nothing to do with whether you WANT single payer -- most people would like nothing more, but also acknowledge the reality that it was not possible.

[jgraz]

16. The best part is all the political success that Obama's pragmatism is creating.

Oh wait...

[Catherina]

18. There's nothing to get from your party rant, zilch, nada, nothing.

Your last paragraph is totally unsupported by the preceding, faulty, ones.

The reason the French are out in the streets is because they refuse to give even an inch. They don't need to work like crazy to convince each other to get out in the streets, those starry-eyed dreamers just do it the minute the government even tries something. How very sad for America that so many are sitting around waiting for a pragmatist to tell them when to get out in the streets.

[donco6]

24. +1

[leftstreet]

23. Single payer was NOT impossible

Obama had enough politcal capital he could have gone on tv and asked Americans to swarm their congressional offices until single payer was a reality

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

28. Nonsense. Possibility is determined backward from Obama's limitations.

[leftstreet]

29. Oh, I forgot that

lol nice turn of phrase by the way

[Radical Activist]

31. But not by the people? Sorry, that outlook is too authoritarian for me.

When Obama ran he said change comes from the bottom-up, not top-down. I have long agreed with that perspective. I don't accept authoritarian models of change that depend on a speech or clout of a President. That's the kind of change that can easily be reversed by the next President in office.

The truth is that single-payer will happen when those of us on the left convince more of the public to support it. Most people don't even know what the term "single-payer" means and that's a failure of the left. It's OUR job to build more support for progressive policies. Expecting Obama to do your job for you is a lazy, authoritarian cop-out.

And frankly, to think Obama could have convinced DLC members of the Senate to support single-payer, when they wouldn't even support a public option is completely disconnected from planet earth. Would you like to explain why Ben Nelson, Blanch Lincoln, and Lieberman would have EVER voted for single-payer under any circumstances? Put the pipe down.

[Radical Activist]

33. He did go on TV and ask people to swarm their Congressional offices.

He even had OFA going door to door. He gave two speeches to Congress and dozens of TV appearances. And that STILL couldn't get him the bill with a public option that he originally asked for. Sorry, but you have unrealistic expectations of the Presidents power or you underestimate how much Democrats like Nelson, Lieberman, and Lincoln are in the pockets of special interests. NOTHING was going to make them vote for single-payer, which means it has zero chance until we get a better Senate.

[leftstreet]

35. Wow.. Do you have a link to him saying single payer, medicare for all?

Damn I missed that

:popcorn:

[Radical Activist]

37. What would that have to do with my point?

Read my comment again.

[leftstreet]

41. Uh...you mean your point that ignored my point?

Read my comment again

[Radical Activist]

43. I'll break it down.

1) Obama already did the things you suggested.
2) He did them for his original plan, which included the public option.
3) The public option is less controversial and easier to pass than single-payer.
4) If the tactics you recommend weren't enough to pass just the public option, then how on earth could they have gotten us single-payer?

Does not compute. Logic fail.

[leftstreet]

50. Single payer was never on the table, so we won't know til it is

Single payer is nothing but inevitable

The Democrats just better hope it doesn't pass under Republican majorities

[Radical Activist]

51. Repeating the "never on the table" cliche doesn't change the fact

that the tactics you're suggesting for single payer would not have gotten it through the Senate. Obama could have pounded his fist and demanded people storm Congress until he was blue in the face. It didn't even get us the public option and it sure as hell wasn't going to get us single-payer with "Democrats" like Nelson, Lincoln and Lieberman blocking the way.
The benefit of living in the real world is that you know who your enemies are. In this case, the Senate is our biggest problem.

And if single-payer isn't on the table THEN PUT IT THERE! Whining that the President didn't put it on the table for you is weak and passive.

[leftstreet]

56. So you're saying the mandate to purchase for-profit insurance is our fault?

Because we were weak and passive and we whined too much and we didn't know who are enemies were?

[BzaDem]

45. Single payer was laughably impossible, and Americans would have told Obama to shove it.

It might have gotten 10 votes in the Senate, but that's being pretty generous. A more likely result would be something like a 91-9 vote against it.

80%+ of Americans are perfectly fine with their insurance, because most of that group is healthy and doesn't need to use it. Until THAT number changes, Single Payer is completely impossible, notwithstanding you being in denial.

[jgraz]

47. Well, except for the 60-ish percent of Americans who favor single payer.

Google is your friend.

http://www.healthcare-now.org/another-poll-shows-majority-support-for-single-payer/

[BzaDem]

48. Yeah, let me know when these 60 percent of Americans decide to elect even a double digit number of

Senators that supports the policy they purportedly favor.

Despite me having seen many other polls (especially during the healthcare debate) that shows it losing 2-1, let's assume you are completely right, and that 60% of Americans support single payer. Responding affirmatively in a poll question is very different than doing what is necessary to elect people to get the policy enacted.

If people have supported single payer since Truman proposed it, yet the last 30 Congresses failed to even consider the proposal, then the people do not sufficiently support it to do what is necessary to get it enacted. It's that simple, and that's why it won't get enacted. Large percentages of people who say in a poll they might support it then go ahead and vote for a Republican (or conservadem in a primary) who's position against it is freely available on their website.

People are unfortunately happy with their private insurance because they never actually have to use it, since healthy people vastly outnumber sick people with bad insurance. Until people start to become dissatisfied with their private insurance (as opposed to huge supermajorities who are satisfied), nothing will change. Anyone who thinks we will magically be able to enact single payer while most people are satisfied with private insurance needs to wait until prop 19 passes before they continue smoking.

[jgraz]

49. Yeah, Congressional action is the true barometer of public opinion

What country do you live in again?

[BzaDem]

64. A country whose Congress is elected by the people? n/t

[druidity33]

67. but owned by the Corporations. nt.

[HuckleB]

30. K & R.

[Morning Dew]

34. Divisive hit and run.

Unrec.

[HughMoran]

38. Of course people are complicated

Those who say you're either one or the other are simply trying to stir shit up to perpetuate the ongoing war here.





(edit - typo)

[BzaDem]

44. Big K & R. n/t

[JNelson6563]

54. K&R Damn the swarm is thick on this one!

Lots of nasty replies. Such productive dialog!

Julie

[TBF]

55. The french workers are not on the street because

they have "the right people in power". That is completely backwards. The French are on the streets because they understand solidarity, and it doesn't mean sitting around playing "you're a mover, i'm an actor".

In fact, it's not about you at all.

[fishwax]

57. lol n/t

[meow mix]

65. accepting reality = accepting republican control. no thanks

sick of spineless dems

[LAGC]

66. Ever since the OP's Hit-and-Run "I Found God" Post, I'm Convinced He is a Troll

I wonder if he'll be back in this thread? Somehow I doubt it. He just likes to drop divisive bombs and watch the chaos ensue.