Home » Blog » Beaucoup Blues: Preparing to Turn Louisiana Blue
You must be logged in to complete this action
Blog for America
Beaucoup Blues: Preparing to Turn Louisiana Blue
Monisha Sujan, Deborah Langhoff, Gabe Bordenave, Andrew Doss, Seung Hong and Damon Lombard were the organizers/moderators at the Beaucoup Blues grassroots advocacy summit.On Thursday and Friday, July 21-22, 2005, Democracy for America Chair, Jim Dean, gathered with Democrats from cities across Louisiana—Monroe, Lafayette, Lake Charles, Baton Rouge, New Orleans and the Houma—in a downtown New Orleans Hilton for Beaucoup Blues: Democrats for a Blue Louisiana. Louisiana's first Democratic grassroots advocacy summit brought together local, state and national Democratic leaders, statewide grassroots activists and political novices for two days of cooperative community building. The enthusiasm and energy created by this event initiates a Democratic "comeback in Louisiana" and launches a conversation focused on Democratic core principles.
The heat and humidity of July, weekday work obligations, the forced postponement caused by Hurricane Dennis and Jim Dean's late arrival caused by a three and a half hour standstill on LaGuardia's tarmac did not deter the approximately 150 people who participated in Beaucoup Blues.
Crowds braved the heat, humidity and hurricane
postponement to attend the Beaucoup Blues Summit
Jim Dean brought his wealth of experience in organizing state conventions to Beaucoup Blues. His keynote speech clarified for all participants that effecting progress "is not an instant-gratification game" and motivated everyone to engage in unrelenting efforts which he promised would net results in the long-term. Despite participating in 25 state conventions, Jim was excited by the quality and innovativeness of the Beaucoup Blues Panels. He was able to participate in our first panel, "African-Americans in Louisiana Politics," and promised he would encourage such panels exclusively devoted to African-American politics at future state conventions.
Jim Dean at the Beaucoup Blues Summit
All four panels—"African-Americans in Louisiana Politics," "The Heart of the Party," "Taking the Streets" and "Media and Message"—were didactic and fun. All the panels, endowed with wise panelists, intelligent moderators and passionate audience, taught Democratic grassroots leaders how to restore real democracy at the local, state, and federal levels.
"African-Americans in Louisiana Politics" focused on the future of African American candidates in Louisiana's Political Landscape. The panel was moderated by Gabriel Bordenave and was gifted with State Senator Don Cravins, Political Consultant Jacques Morial, and long-time activist Catherine Flowers as panelists.
African-Americans in Louisiana Politics Panel
Mr. Cravins spoke about the obstacles African American candidates face when running in multi-county and state-wide elections and believes persistent grassroots efforts can overcome this problem. Mr. Morial shared his belief that the Democratic Party needs to do more to mentor young African Americans to become involved in the electoral process, especially African American males as they face more resistance in obtaining state-wide office than African American females. Ms. Flowers has fought for the improvement of Louisiana's education system most of her life and she strongly believes that changes in school curriculums, especially improved civics lessons, would encourage more African Americans to devote their lives to public service.
"The Heart of the Party: Why We are Democrats," moderated by Andrew Doss, sought to define the diverse spokes of the Democratic umbrella. The four panelists, Sybil Holt, an expert on labor, Willie Fontenot, an environment activists, Mike Robichaux, a doctor and former state senator, and Stephen Handwerk, a GLBT activist, brought so much clear and impassioned vision for what our shared core values are and how these values are failing to be defined and understood by the Party at large. The panelists advocated that the Party re-ignite its identity as the party of the working class, the party for the poor, the underprivileged, the oppressed, the elderly, children, the party for education and healthcare and the environment, the party that believes in an "XYZ" economic model rather than a trickle down model (as one panelist put it), and above all the party not simply of tolerance but of courageous equal rights.
"Taking the Streets," moderated by Damon Lombard, focused on energizing and mobilizing the base to elect more Democrats and turn Louisiana Blue. The panelists included John St. Julien and Mike Stagg, who together recently won a bond issue to provide fiber optic wire to homes and businesses, as well as former professional organizer Melissa Smith of Covington. Three best practices emerged from this panel—work locally to address basic issues of the people utilizing words or slogans that people can identify with, clearly define the focus of a project, and find dedicated people even in conservative areas.
"Media and Message," moderated by Seung Hong, explored how progressives can communicate strategically. Beaucoup Blue's panel of media professionals, media activists, and communications operatives explored how to communicate the progressive message and legacy of Franklin Roosevelt, that "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself" as well as issues of media democracy, civic responsibility, and strategic media thinking. The guest panelists, Renee Lapeyrolerie and Diane Newman, were remarkable, but media activist Vicki Lancaster and Andrew Koneschusky, the interim Executive Director of the Louisiana Democratic Party, excelled with their thoughtful analysis and infectious energy. Audience participation was amazingly high and the courageous spirit of the room would have made FDR proud as audience participants made it clear that their Democratic party was the party of Roosevelt driven by hope, courage, thoughtful dissent, moral principle, and great faith whose party virtues shined all the brighter in times of great challenge and fear.
Participants walked away with renewed energy and committed to engage in the hard work needed to turn Louisiana blue. A long-time Dean enthusiast, commented, "Beyond excellent. We need local voters to know about these stellar Louisiana people." A former Kerry activists agreed, "Excellent-thorough and timely." A former Kerry field organizer commented, "It was crucial to turn the corner from discouragement after last November to a new place of forward, hopeful thinking, of experiencing the force of community empowerment and taking it on with greater ownership and eagerness."
Deborak Langhoff, Jim Dean and Monisha Sujan
Organizers of Beaucoup Blues hope this movement can restore Louisiana to its blue status. While Louisiana voted in favor of Bush in 2000 and 2004, the electoral success of Bill Clinton, the numerous statewide offices held by Democrats and President Bush's destructive stance on Louisiana's coastal issues sets the stage for a color change from red to blue in Louisiana. The alliance behind Beaucoup Blues, which includes activists from the broad Democratic umbrella, grassroots individuals and Democratic officials, know this is the start to a organized effort to successfully reclaim Louisiana. To support this effort, please visit www.beaucoupblues.com.
Beaucoup Blues also received great coverage in The Times Picayune, New Orleans' newspaper.
—Monisha Sujan, Deborah Langhoff, Gabe Bordenave, Andrew Doss, Seung Hong and Damon Lombard
>>BSJinx wrote on July 27, 2005 08:45 AM:
ED KOLKER 415 0.17%<<
Cousin Ed didn't do too well. There goes my cushy government job in San Diego!
ED KOLKER 415 0.17%<<
Cousin Ed didn't do too well. There goes my cushy government job in San Diego!
More insanity and embarassment.........
Guardsmen under investigation
By SCOTT GOLD AND RONE TEMPEST, Los Angeles Times
A company of California Army National Guard soldiers has been put on restricted duty and their battalion plunged into disarray amid allegations of misconduct in Iraq.
The allegations include mistreatment of detainees and the apparent extortion of money from shopkeepers, according to military officials and members of the battalion.
Col. David Baldwin, a California state guard spokesman, confirmed Tuesday that investigations are under way into the allegations of mistreatment of prisoners by members of a Fullerton, Calif.-based unit of the 1st of the 184th Infantry Regiment known as Alpha Company.
The company, made up of about 130 soldiers, is currently deployed at Forward Operating Base Falcon, outside Baghdad, Iraq. It has been put on restricted duty while the Army reviews its performance, Baldwin said.
Baldwin also confirmed the existence of the investigation of the alleged extortion, which involves members of another company in the battalion.
The battalion's commander, Lt. Col. Patrick Frey, has been suspended while the investigation is conducted, Baldwin said.
Baldwin declined to discuss the allegations in detail or name the soldiers and officers involved. "National Guard cannot comment on an ongoing U.S. Army investigation," he said.
Capt. Daniel Markert, commander of the battalion's rear detachment at its Modesto, Calif., headquarters, said that word of the investigation has begun reaching soldiers' families in California.
"What we have been told," Markert said, "is that there is an investigation under way involving very serious violations of the Uniform Military Code."
Maj. Gen. William G. Webster Jr., the U.S. commander of military forces in Baghdad, is overseeing the investigation.
"In the eyes of the military these soldiers are innocent until proven guilty," Task Force Baghdad spokesman Lt. Col. Steve Boylan said in an interview from Baghdad.
Guardsmen under investigation
By SCOTT GOLD AND RONE TEMPEST, Los Angeles Times
A company of California Army National Guard soldiers has been put on restricted duty and their battalion plunged into disarray amid allegations of misconduct in Iraq.
The allegations include mistreatment of detainees and the apparent extortion of money from shopkeepers, according to military officials and members of the battalion.
Col. David Baldwin, a California state guard spokesman, confirmed Tuesday that investigations are under way into the allegations of mistreatment of prisoners by members of a Fullerton, Calif.-based unit of the 1st of the 184th Infantry Regiment known as Alpha Company.
The company, made up of about 130 soldiers, is currently deployed at Forward Operating Base Falcon, outside Baghdad, Iraq. It has been put on restricted duty while the Army reviews its performance, Baldwin said.
Baldwin also confirmed the existence of the investigation of the alleged extortion, which involves members of another company in the battalion.
The battalion's commander, Lt. Col. Patrick Frey, has been suspended while the investigation is conducted, Baldwin said.
Baldwin declined to discuss the allegations in detail or name the soldiers and officers involved. "National Guard cannot comment on an ongoing U.S. Army investigation," he said.
Capt. Daniel Markert, commander of the battalion's rear detachment at its Modesto, Calif., headquarters, said that word of the investigation has begun reaching soldiers' families in California.
"What we have been told," Markert said, "is that there is an investigation under way involving very serious violations of the Uniform Military Code."
Maj. Gen. William G. Webster Jr., the U.S. commander of military forces in Baghdad, is overseeing the investigation.
"In the eyes of the military these soldiers are innocent until proven guilty," Task Force Baghdad spokesman Lt. Col. Steve Boylan said in an interview from Baghdad.
So...
Hillary and the DLC are going to come up with an agenda for the Democrats to run on in 2006 and 2008.
Where have I heard that Idear before?
Folks, if we don't do it, they will.
DFA HQ, Jim Dean, let's become the force behind an agenda for 2006 and beyond.
Hillary and the DLC are going to come up with an agenda for the Democrats to run on in 2006 and 2008.
Where have I heard that Idear before?
Folks, if we don't do it, they will.
DFA HQ, Jim Dean, let's become the force behind an agenda for 2006 and beyond.
>>Mike*in*Raleigh*NC wrote on July 27, 2005 09:00 AM:
"In the eyes of the military these soldiers are innocent until proven guilty," Task Force Baghdad spokesman Lt. Col. Steve Boylan said in an interview from Baghdad.<<
Let's take the same view.
"In the eyes of the military these soldiers are innocent until proven guilty," Task Force Baghdad spokesman Lt. Col. Steve Boylan said in an interview from Baghdad.<<
Let's take the same view.
rich^kolker wrote on July 27, 2005 09:01 AM:
So...
Hillary and the DLC are going to come up with an agenda for the Democrats to run on in 2006 and 2008.
--------------------------------------------------
Which is why myself and a growing number out there will probably vote Green....we have had enough of the Democrats shenanigans......I capitulated this last election....no more.
So...
Hillary and the DLC are going to come up with an agenda for the Democrats to run on in 2006 and 2008.
--------------------------------------------------
Which is why myself and a growing number out there will probably vote Green....we have had enough of the Democrats shenanigans......I capitulated this last election....no more.
Mike*in*Raleigh*NC wrote quoted from an article by Scott Gold and Rone Tempest in the LA Times that:
"A company of California Army National Guard soldiers has been put on restricted duty and their battalion plunged into disarray amid allegations of misconduct in Iraq."
While I find this point well taken, I feel it necessary to point out that the article also mentions that the U.S. commander of military forces in Baghdad, Maj. Gen. William G. Webster Jr., is overseeing an investigation said to involve "very serious violations of the Uniform Military Code."
I don't know if this is to be a thorough investigation or a whitewash, but I think it's significant that the military appears to take such incidents of misconduct seriously.
rich^kolker wrote on July 27, 2005 09:09 AM:
>>Mike*in*Raleigh*NC wrote on July 27, 2005 09:00 AM:
"In the eyes of the military these soldiers are innocent until proven guilty," Task Force Baghdad spokesman Lt. Col. Steve Boylan said in an interview from Baghdad.<<
Let's take the same view.
--------------------------------------------------
Agreed........but our track record is not so great..still, lets see........
Side note...I wonder how the regular Army and Marines feel about fighting alongside the National Guard? Ive heard rumors that they look down on them and dont associate them with being professional soldiers....this i dont know, just occasional heresay.........
>>Mike*in*Raleigh*NC wrote on July 27, 2005 09:00 AM:
"In the eyes of the military these soldiers are innocent until proven guilty," Task Force Baghdad spokesman Lt. Col. Steve Boylan said in an interview from Baghdad.<<
Let's take the same view.
--------------------------------------------------
Agreed........but our track record is not so great..still, lets see........
Side note...I wonder how the regular Army and Marines feel about fighting alongside the National Guard? Ive heard rumors that they look down on them and dont associate them with being professional soldiers....this i dont know, just occasional heresay.........
I don't know if this is to be a thorough investigation or a whitewash, but I think it's significant that the military appears to take such incidents of misconduct seriously.
--------------------------------------------------
Tom,
I should hope so.....if they dont then I think its safe to say that we just dont care what we do over there and to whom.....and if thats the case, our efforts are going to prove futile in the long run and in the end.
--------------------------------------------------
Tom,
I should hope so.....if they dont then I think its safe to say that we just dont care what we do over there and to whom.....and if thats the case, our efforts are going to prove futile in the long run and in the end.
>>Mike*in*Raleigh*NC wrote on July 27, 2005 09:14 AM:
Side note...I wonder how the regular Army and Marines feel about fighting alongside the National Guard? <<
From the little bit of evidence I have, it depends on the unit and the individual. There probably is a preconceived notion that Guard and Reserve troops are well less trained and less capable, but from the little I have heard from people there -- some are and some are not. If they prove themselves (one place I have heard this specifically was with Air Force Police Units put in combat situations) they are respected.
Another problem which I haven't seen in the MSM but heard informally are people coming to Iraq to "punch their ticket" in a combat zone. This was a huge problem in Vietnam (and if MASH is to be believed, even in Korea). These people are give command based on their rank that their experience (or recent experience) doesn't merit, resulting in putting troops in danger.
Any reporters lurking? Here's one to look into.
Side note...I wonder how the regular Army and Marines feel about fighting alongside the National Guard? <<
From the little bit of evidence I have, it depends on the unit and the individual. There probably is a preconceived notion that Guard and Reserve troops are well less trained and less capable, but from the little I have heard from people there -- some are and some are not. If they prove themselves (one place I have heard this specifically was with Air Force Police Units put in combat situations) they are respected.
Another problem which I haven't seen in the MSM but heard informally are people coming to Iraq to "punch their ticket" in a combat zone. This was a huge problem in Vietnam (and if MASH is to be believed, even in Korea). These people are give command based on their rank that their experience (or recent experience) doesn't merit, resulting in putting troops in danger.
Any reporters lurking? Here's one to look into.
These days, the professional military does take their professionalism seriously, and most if not all of the "incidents" in Iraq have become public because the military found them and people are being investigated and charged.
Are there bad people in the military? Sure. There are bad people in any large organization. That doesn't justify painting the organization with a broad brush.
Are there bad people in the military? Sure. There are bad people in any large organization. That doesn't justify painting the organization with a broad brush.
Rich wrote "DFA HQ, Jim Dean, let's become the force behind an agenda for 2006 and beyond."
If I recall correctly, Rich developed a list of priority policy positions before for the DFA community to rally around that would probably be a good foil for the pablum oozing out of the DLC. If I'm correct, I wonder if it can be posted again.
rich^kolker wrote on July 27, 2005 09:25 AM
Don't think that's quite correct. We only hear about the allegations that the military investigates. Others, many of which have been reported by unembeded journalists are categorically dismissed as unreliable or not creditable. If the military doesn't believe it, it didn't happen.
Also, and I just discovered that recently, journalists embeded with military units are subject to the UCMJ and are prohibited from covering classified information. Which is one reason we are not hearing about the giant bases being built. Just like we didn't hear about al Udeid until it was a done deal and our military assets were ready to be moved from Saudi.
Don't think that's quite correct. We only hear about the allegations that the military investigates. Others, many of which have been reported by unembeded journalists are categorically dismissed as unreliable or not creditable. If the military doesn't believe it, it didn't happen.
Also, and I just discovered that recently, journalists embeded with military units are subject to the UCMJ and are prohibited from covering classified information. Which is one reason we are not hearing about the giant bases being built. Just like we didn't hear about al Udeid until it was a done deal and our military assets were ready to be moved from Saudi.
The DLC is inconsequential as long as the Democratic Party stays pure and it supporters stay with THE party to keep it strong. And that is where we are now. The DLC are just some hypocritical Elitist Democrats that are trying to conform to their preferences. THE PEOPLE have spoken and told them we do NOT LIKE WHAT effect they had on OUR party.
We choose NOT to have the DLC try to influence the party of the people. Long live the DNC!!! Power to the people.
We choose NOT to have the DLC try to influence the party of the people. Long live the DNC!!! Power to the people.
I am in full support of the American Compact Rich has outlined. I urge DFA to adopt this policy agenda and promulgate it as a progressive alternative to the DLC's agenda designed, as always, to co-opt core values of the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party.
Now, OT
The Ragin Cajin are turning Louisiana BLUE.
Power to the People. The Democratic Party is strengthening and is forming one large blue wave.
The Ragin Cajin are turning Louisiana BLUE.
Power to the People. The Democratic Party is strengthening and is forming one large blue wave.
We're looking stupid again...
The Democrats have had the opportunity for months to propose a timetable for getting troops out of Iraq and have hidden and run. So, this morning, Rummy is talking about removing significant numbers of troops beginning as soon as next spring.
Does it mean anything? In real terms probably not, there are enough modifiers to drive a Humvee through, but politically it means the Bush Administration is talking about withdrawal and the Democrats aren't. Now if we do, we're back to "I'd do what Bush is, only better."
No wonder we lose.
The Democrats have had the opportunity for months to propose a timetable for getting troops out of Iraq and have hidden and run. So, this morning, Rummy is talking about removing significant numbers of troops beginning as soon as next spring.
Does it mean anything? In real terms probably not, there are enough modifiers to drive a Humvee through, but politically it means the Bush Administration is talking about withdrawal and the Democrats aren't. Now if we do, we're back to "I'd do what Bush is, only better."
No wonder we lose.
repost from end of last thread
Look who calls the tea kettle black.
"Clinton Angers Left With Call for Unity"
and the DLC does a smear campaign on the DNC and it's supporters and grassroots, right on their website.
However, after many complaints the past couple of days on their hypocrisy and derogatory remarks against grassroots activists and the DNC Chair, they have changed their website. FINALLY.
Look who calls the tea kettle black.
"Clinton Angers Left With Call for Unity"
and the DLC does a smear campaign on the DNC and it's supporters and grassroots, right on their website.
However, after many complaints the past couple of days on their hypocrisy and derogatory remarks against grassroots activists and the DNC Chair, they have changed their website. FINALLY.
Free Education.
End Corporate Welfare
End War Profiteering
Repeal Taft Hartley
Encourage Global Labor Standards
Comply with And Move Beyond Kyoto
An "Appolo Project" on Energy
Encourage Scientific Research
Promote Americorps/Peace Corps
National Medicaid
There's my 10 though not in any order.
End Corporate Welfare
End War Profiteering
Repeal Taft Hartley
Encourage Global Labor Standards
Comply with And Move Beyond Kyoto
An "Appolo Project" on Energy
Encourage Scientific Research
Promote Americorps/Peace Corps
National Medicaid
There's my 10 though not in any order.
Linda*in*Cincinnati wrote on July 27, 2005 09:58 AM:
repost from end of last thread
Look who calls the tea kettle black.
"Clinton Angers Left With Call for Unity"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I just came on here to post this and see I am a day late and a dollar short.
It is time for liberals to start the Draft Gore/Dean program.
repost from end of last thread
Look who calls the tea kettle black.
"Clinton Angers Left With Call for Unity"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I just came on here to post this and see I am a day late and a dollar short.
It is time for liberals to start the Draft Gore/Dean program.
rich^kolker wrote on July 27, 2005 09:21 AM:
--------------------------------------------------
Good post and I too, endorse your compact, domestically speaking..........
Anything foreign policy wise?
--------------------------------------------------
Good post and I too, endorse your compact, domestically speaking..........
Anything foreign policy wise?
It is time for liberals to start the Draft Gore/Dean program.
ABSOLUTELY. Al Gore just had his FIRST Family Dinner Event in Tennessee on July 23. Maybe that's the first step.
One can hope!
ABSOLUTELY. Al Gore just had his FIRST Family Dinner Event in Tennessee on July 23. Maybe that's the first step.
One can hope!
I can smell that Harkin Virtual Steak Fry all the way from here.
Subway, did you see that ignorant and reckless statement Jean Schmidt made at the debate last night in reference to the Iraq War?
""I support the president in his mission to make sure the enemies of freedom stay on their shores and not on ours,"' Schmidt said. "We have to keep our eye on the ball or the ball will come back to harm us.""
That is WHY you cannot send the WRONG person to Congress. AND Jean Schmidt couldn't be any more WRONG.(and dangerous)
""I support the president in his mission to make sure the enemies of freedom stay on their shores and not on ours,"' Schmidt said. "We have to keep our eye on the ball or the ball will come back to harm us.""
That is WHY you cannot send the WRONG person to Congress. AND Jean Schmidt couldn't be any more WRONG.(and dangerous)
BS Jinx! ~
Wow, that's the most useful Firsties!
What WONDERFUL news!!! Denise must be flying high today!
&hearts: DONNA FRYE! ♥ DONNA FRYE! &heartrs; DONNA FRYE! ♥
Wow, that's the most useful Firsties!
What WONDERFUL news!!! Denise must be flying high today!
&hearts: DONNA FRYE! ♥ DONNA FRYE! &heartrs; DONNA FRYE! ♥
Oops! That last post was for *this* thread!
(Guess it's just so hard to imagine myself On Topic! LOL)
Here's the one for the last thread:
listener wrote on July 27, 2005 10:11 AM:
Amanda! ♥
I was going to say:
Keep reaching for the stars,
they're not that far away
...but the truth is
you're one of them!
Thank you so much for coming to Burlington
and enriching DFA!!!
Come by and blog ANY time! ♥
(Guess it's just so hard to imagine myself On Topic! LOL)
Here's the one for the last thread:
listener wrote on July 27, 2005 10:11 AM:
Amanda! ♥
I was going to say:
Keep reaching for the stars,
they're not that far away
...but the truth is
you're one of them!
Thank you so much for coming to Burlington
and enriching DFA!!!
Come by and blog ANY time! ♥
Linda, I didn't see the debate, what did Paul say in response?
Mike,
The Homeland Security and National Defense actions certainly touch on foreign policy, but it is rare when foreign policy is the primary motivator for voters. Also, as this was originally drafted as a 2006 Congressional election tool, the Congress has a lot less control over foreign policy than domestic.
Any position one may want to consider on foreign policy needs to be "immune" to changes in situation. Anything we said about Iraq, for example, could be easily overcome by events.
There is probably something (beyond the Homeland Security and Defense actions) that could be said about the "war on terrorism", but in the present environment, phrasing it in such a way that we'd gain more than we lost would be very hard. So, perhaps something like the "American Compact" is not where we discuss that. It doesn't mean it isn't discussed (it's crucial we get away from the idea that the tools of war are the right tools for battling terrorism in most cases), but it's tough to put in one sentence that is "intuitively obvious" to a majority of Americans.
This politics stuff is hard!
The Homeland Security and National Defense actions certainly touch on foreign policy, but it is rare when foreign policy is the primary motivator for voters. Also, as this was originally drafted as a 2006 Congressional election tool, the Congress has a lot less control over foreign policy than domestic.
Any position one may want to consider on foreign policy needs to be "immune" to changes in situation. Anything we said about Iraq, for example, could be easily overcome by events.
There is probably something (beyond the Homeland Security and Defense actions) that could be said about the "war on terrorism", but in the present environment, phrasing it in such a way that we'd gain more than we lost would be very hard. So, perhaps something like the "American Compact" is not where we discuss that. It doesn't mean it isn't discussed (it's crucial we get away from the idea that the tools of war are the right tools for battling terrorism in most cases), but it's tough to put in one sentence that is "intuitively obvious" to a majority of Americans.
This politics stuff is hard!
Regarding what Tom Bearse wrote on July 27, 2005 10:17 AM:
I hear you, Tom.
To tell you the truth,
I would prefer someone who isn't so stuck on being President
that they *HAVE* to be president.
(Especially, as we have seen, someone who will go
out of their way to make it happen by any means. Y'know?)
I'd rather have someone the people rallied for.
I hear you, Tom.
To tell you the truth,
I would prefer someone who isn't so stuck on being President
that they *HAVE* to be president.
(Especially, as we have seen, someone who will go
out of their way to make it happen by any means. Y'know?)
I'd rather have someone the people rallied for.
Subway, I had posted the article about the debate, but this was Paul Hacketts response.
"Hackett, who served seven months with a Marine civil affairs unit, said the reality on the ground is not what the Bush administration paints it to be.
"It's not pretty over there, it's not Hollywood, and we are not spreading democracy," Hackett said.
Candidate George W. Bush said in the 2000 presidential campaign that he would not engage America in nation-building, Hackett said.
"Guess what, folks?" he said. "We're nation-building.""
"Hackett, who served seven months with a Marine civil affairs unit, said the reality on the ground is not what the Bush administration paints it to be.
"It's not pretty over there, it's not Hollywood, and we are not spreading democracy," Hackett said.
Candidate George W. Bush said in the 2000 presidential campaign that he would not engage America in nation-building, Hackett said.
"Guess what, folks?" he said. "We're nation-building.""
Jim Dean has said on the blog that "DFA is a people, not a policy organization."
Is it time to try to change Jim's mind about that?
Is it time to try to change Jim's mind about that?
Renee!
Prayers ensuing!
Every parent's nightmare!
My heart goes out to them,
and where my heart goes
my prayers are.
Any word on what her mother knows?
Prayers ensuing!
Every parent's nightmare!
My heart goes out to them,
and where my heart goes
my prayers are.
Any word on what her mother knows?
Tom,
Then perhaps Hillary is already a back room done deal. Dean is right, let's get to 06.
I live in Staten Island where Vito Fossela is our republican rep in Congress. I believe that his opponent got over 40% of the vote in the last election.
Tracy and I talked about this briefly at the NNBNB but I think we can turn Staten Island Blue next year. Mr . Barbaro has not yet decided to try another run. Over the next few days I'll talk with Tracy and see what we can do.
Then perhaps Hillary is already a back room done deal. Dean is right, let's get to 06.
I live in Staten Island where Vito Fossela is our republican rep in Congress. I believe that his opponent got over 40% of the vote in the last election.
Tracy and I talked about this briefly at the NNBNB but I think we can turn Staten Island Blue next year. Mr . Barbaro has not yet decided to try another run. Over the next few days I'll talk with Tracy and see what we can do.
rich^kolker wrote on July 27, 2005 09:57 AM:
I think most of us are getting discourage with the Dem leadership.
I do like your idea of coming up with an agenda.
If you could get 5 DFA blogers to agree, I would be willing to participate in a forum that comes up with a DFA agenda.
I think most of us are getting discourage with the Dem leadership.
I do like your idea of coming up with an agenda.
If you could get 5 DFA blogers to agree, I would be willing to participate in a forum that comes up with a DFA agenda.
Tom Bearse, Thankfully I' sure Al Gore didn't EXPECT the American people to wake up and reclaim their Party and COUNTRY. So, he may not have a choise but to do the unexpected. lol
He is too valuable to continue sitting on the side of our politics. His family has such a great legacy and I hope he will continue it.
He is too valuable to continue sitting on the side of our politics. His family has such a great legacy and I hope he will continue it.
This politics stuff is hard!
-------------------------------------------------
Agreed rich and Im no politician..I know that.
I guess my fear has always been social decay and the country falling apart from within and not from without......there will always be people who dont like us for whatever reason, but if we continue to let the country erode domestically, thats a bigger problem in my book........and Im fairly conservative.............
-------------------------------------------------
Agreed rich and Im no politician..I know that.
I guess my fear has always been social decay and the country falling apart from within and not from without......there will always be people who dont like us for whatever reason, but if we continue to let the country erode domestically, thats a bigger problem in my book........and Im fairly conservative.............
...brought to us by Rich Kolker
The American Compact
An agreement with the American People
Free public education pre-K through post-12, reflecting that a high school diploma alone is no longer the ticket to the middle class
National standards for fair federal elections including a common ballot design and common 24 hour election day (10pm EST the first Monday in November to 10pm EST the first Tuesday in November, worldwide)
Nonpartisan congressional redistricting (and at the state level, nonpartisan legislative redistricting)
Fair and Simple progressive no-deductions income and payroll tax
Fair Social Security funding (lift the income limit, add progressivity) to guarantee solvency and meet our moral obligation
Health care for every child as a step to health care for every American
Expanding, retraining and reequipping the National Guard as our "first line of defense" for Homeland Security. Return the militia to its role of protecting its community.
"For the Troops" - Spend tax dollars on the military prioritized to support the soldiers, sailors and airmen, not enrich the defense contractors
Pass legislation to enforce equal protection under the laws for all Americans as guaranteed by the Constitution
Progress toward energy independence by applying American technology for common-sense conservation and the use of government grants and incentives to encourage purchase and installation of home and community based sources of solar, wind and other inexhaustible, renewable energy.
We need to be more than against the "other guys". We need to provide a clear set of actions we will take if elected, actions that Americans can look at and easily say, "Yes, I support that." That is the goal of The American Compact.
Now, Rich, I endorse your compact 100 percent. And, so most here from what I see. So, how about making this the REAL compact of the People and start the petition to Congress, SIGNED by the PEOPLE.
I'll let you be first, but can I be second?
The American Compact
An agreement with the American People
Free public education pre-K through post-12, reflecting that a high school diploma alone is no longer the ticket to the middle class
National standards for fair federal elections including a common ballot design and common 24 hour election day (10pm EST the first Monday in November to 10pm EST the first Tuesday in November, worldwide)
Nonpartisan congressional redistricting (and at the state level, nonpartisan legislative redistricting)
Fair and Simple progressive no-deductions income and payroll tax
Fair Social Security funding (lift the income limit, add progressivity) to guarantee solvency and meet our moral obligation
Health care for every child as a step to health care for every American
Expanding, retraining and reequipping the National Guard as our "first line of defense" for Homeland Security. Return the militia to its role of protecting its community.
"For the Troops" - Spend tax dollars on the military prioritized to support the soldiers, sailors and airmen, not enrich the defense contractors
Pass legislation to enforce equal protection under the laws for all Americans as guaranteed by the Constitution
Progress toward energy independence by applying American technology for common-sense conservation and the use of government grants and incentives to encourage purchase and installation of home and community based sources of solar, wind and other inexhaustible, renewable energy.
We need to be more than against the "other guys". We need to provide a clear set of actions we will take if elected, actions that Americans can look at and easily say, "Yes, I support that." That is the goal of The American Compact.
Now, Rich, I endorse your compact 100 percent. And, so most here from what I see. So, how about making this the REAL compact of the People and start the petition to Congress, SIGNED by the PEOPLE.
I'll let you be first, but can I be second?
Subway Serenade 2.1 wrote on July 27, 2005 10:13 AM:
Gore/Dean
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What it shoulda been in 2004.
Gore could have fed Dean all kinds of foreign policy shenanigans and helped set the record straight.
On the other hand, trying to clean up the mess George the Lesser had created was a no-win situation. Maybe better to let him stew in his own juices. The insurrection was already so far along that in any event it was going to take a couple of years to disengage.
Reminds me---been meaning to look for that new draft constitution for Iraq.
Gore/Dean
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What it shoulda been in 2004.
Gore could have fed Dean all kinds of foreign policy shenanigans and helped set the record straight.
On the other hand, trying to clean up the mess George the Lesser had created was a no-win situation. Maybe better to let him stew in his own juices. The insurrection was already so far along that in any event it was going to take a couple of years to disengage.
Reminds me---been meaning to look for that new draft constitution for Iraq.
Tim,
I think we could find more than five DFA bloggers to participate in such a discussion, the question is will DFA get behind it? That's why I ask the question of Jim above...is it time for DFA to become a POLICY and people organization?
I think we could find more than five DFA bloggers to participate in such a discussion, the question is will DFA get behind it? That's why I ask the question of Jim above...is it time for DFA to become a POLICY and people organization?
Subway wrote “[P]erhaps Hillary is already a back room done deal. Dean is right, let's get to 06.”
After the results of the general election in 2004 had been reported, I was convinced that Dean was ideally positioned to become the Democrats’ leading candidate in 2008. As the story is told, Bush’s campaign was born in the early days following Dole’s defeat in 1996. The model seemed appropriate.
However, because of the change in the course of events precipitated by Dean’s campaign for and election to the DNC chairmanship, I am really casting around for a suitable candidate for the party at this juncture. I would regard Feingold or Clark as preferable alternatives to Clinton for now, but the field is much more open than I could have predicted earlier. I think we will have to wait until after 2006 to see who is viable, but I would agree that Hillary is a prohibitive favorite at this point.
Linda*in*Cincinnati wrote:
“I'm sure Al Gore didn't EXPECT the American people to wake up and reclaim their Party and COUNTRY. So, he may not have a choice but to do the unexpected. lol
“He is too valuable to continue sitting on the side of our politics. His family has such a great legacy and I hope he will continue it.”
If there’s any chance you are correct about this, I’m ready to throw my unqualified support to his candidacy.
Some pull 'Doonesbury' over Rove moniker
Wednesday, July 27, 2005; Posted: 10:25 a.m. EDT (14:25 GMT)
"Doonesbury" made reference to a slightly off-color nickname for presidential adviser Karl Rove.
KANSAS CITY, Missouri (AP) -- It may be President Bush's nickname for key political adviser Karl Rove, but some editors don't think it belongs in their newspapers.
About a dozen papers objected to Tuesday's and Wednesday's "Doonesbury" comic strips, and some either pulled or edited them.
The strips refer to Rove, the White House deputy chief of staff, as "Turd Blossom."
I would say these newspapers have NO right in pulling this. Unless they are trying to say that our President uses to many off color remarks that are not even fit for reprint!!!!
Wednesday, July 27, 2005; Posted: 10:25 a.m. EDT (14:25 GMT)
"Doonesbury" made reference to a slightly off-color nickname for presidential adviser Karl Rove.
KANSAS CITY, Missouri (AP) -- It may be President Bush's nickname for key political adviser Karl Rove, but some editors don't think it belongs in their newspapers.
About a dozen papers objected to Tuesday's and Wednesday's "Doonesbury" comic strips, and some either pulled or edited them.
The strips refer to Rove, the White House deputy chief of staff, as "Turd Blossom."
I would say these newspapers have NO right in pulling this. Unless they are trying to say that our President uses to many off color remarks that are not even fit for reprint!!!!
Well I think we should do some work, present it to them, and see what they say. I would love to see us work on the energy policy, fiscal policy, Health Care
Linda,
Thanks for your support. A couple of points.
I don't think online petitions do much if anything. I've explained why many times here, so I'd be the LAST person to put forward the Compact as an online petition.
Second, I drafted this as a set of actions on which candidates would run in 2006 as a way to "nationalize" the 2006 Congressional elections and make it a referendum on the direction of the country. If the petition were to be aimed anywhere, it should be aimed at the Democratic Party and its candidates.
So, we could try to sell it to the Chairman of the DNC. We should have some pull with him :). The problem is, he's left most of the "policy" up to the House and Senate Democratic leadership. We might be able to get him to make this a special case, but it's a long shot.
So. What do we do to move forward? The backing of a well known organization like DFA would help, which is why I am asking them to make this a priority. But maybe what we need to do is start a bottom up movement of Democratic committees to demand the Compact be adopted by the candidates in their districts.
I'm more than willing to hear other ideas. A petition probably wouldn't work on Congress, but could it work at the DNC or local Democratic Committees?
Maybe.
Thanks for your support. A couple of points.
I don't think online petitions do much if anything. I've explained why many times here, so I'd be the LAST person to put forward the Compact as an online petition.
Second, I drafted this as a set of actions on which candidates would run in 2006 as a way to "nationalize" the 2006 Congressional elections and make it a referendum on the direction of the country. If the petition were to be aimed anywhere, it should be aimed at the Democratic Party and its candidates.
So, we could try to sell it to the Chairman of the DNC. We should have some pull with him :). The problem is, he's left most of the "policy" up to the House and Senate Democratic leadership. We might be able to get him to make this a special case, but it's a long shot.
So. What do we do to move forward? The backing of a well known organization like DFA would help, which is why I am asking them to make this a priority. But maybe what we need to do is start a bottom up movement of Democratic committees to demand the Compact be adopted by the candidates in their districts.
I'm more than willing to hear other ideas. A petition probably wouldn't work on Congress, but could it work at the DNC or local Democratic Committees?
Maybe.
rich^kolker wrote on July 27, 2005 10:50 AM:
Wait, wait, wait. You've pretty much called it here.
I understand your feelings about a "petition", but this isn't really a "petition", it's a "ACTION", they just haven't called the online sites, "petition" or "action" online, yet. It's a matter of interpretation. You are using the format to move forward a band aide for our country. And the Dems can take the lead when we take the house in 06.
Use the online format for your ACTION online item, for us to sign and then you arrange a meeting with the Democratic House Leader Pelosi and Senate Leader Reid and hopefully Chairman Dean will be able to join.
Seriously, think of what you can do. The online "petition site" has many avenues.
Just DO IT!:)
Excuse me, Goveror Dean. I understand that is his preference.
If there’s any chance you are correct about this, I’m ready to throw my unqualified support to his candidacy.
***
Count me in.
***
Count me in.
rich^kolker wrote on July 27, 2005 10:55 AM:
Now Rich, you did notice where "our man" said ACTION? hmmmm.
btw, that was from Dean for America, to be fair.
Now Rich, you did notice where "our man" said ACTION? hmmmm.
btw, that was from Dean for America, to be fair.
rich^kolker wrote on July 27, 2005 09:57 AM:
Rich, I don't blame for being disillusioned - there is very little to cheer about. BTW, I applaud your recent posts on energy policy, but our so-called leaders are determined to pursue short-sided and stupid policies. To wit, the House-Senate conference committee just approved the ridiculous Bush energy bill that is designed to increase dependency on fossil fuels and give 11.6 billion in tax breaks to the oil companies. You would think record profits would suffice for these companies, but I guess not. Sadly, the American people seem blissfully ignorant of the long-term ramifications of the situation.
Rich, I don't blame for being disillusioned - there is very little to cheer about. BTW, I applaud your recent posts on energy policy, but our so-called leaders are determined to pursue short-sided and stupid policies. To wit, the House-Senate conference committee just approved the ridiculous Bush energy bill that is designed to increase dependency on fossil fuels and give 11.6 billion in tax breaks to the oil companies. You would think record profits would suffice for these companies, but I guess not. Sadly, the American people seem blissfully ignorant of the long-term ramifications of the situation.
Linda*in*Cincinnati wrote on July 27, 2005 10:16 AM:
Subway, did you see that ignorant and reckless statement Jean Schmidt made at the debate last night in reference to the Iraq War?
""I support the president in his mission to make sure the enemies of freedom stay on their shores and not on ours,"' Schmidt said. "We have to keep our eye on the ball or the ball will come back to harm us.""
That is WHY you cannot send the WRONG person to Congress. AND Jean Schmidt couldn't be any more WRONG.(and dangerous)
***
I loved it when Paul called her a "Rubber Stamp" 12 times.
Subway, did you see that ignorant and reckless statement Jean Schmidt made at the debate last night in reference to the Iraq War?
""I support the president in his mission to make sure the enemies of freedom stay on their shores and not on ours,"' Schmidt said. "We have to keep our eye on the ball or the ball will come back to harm us.""
That is WHY you cannot send the WRONG person to Congress. AND Jean Schmidt couldn't be any more WRONG.(and dangerous)
***
I loved it when Paul called her a "Rubber Stamp" 12 times.
Subway Serenade 2.1 wrote on July 27, 2005 11:12 AM:
NO!!!
I guess we'll get some poll numbers on Tuesday. lol
NO!!!
I guess we'll get some poll numbers on Tuesday. lol
oh Subway, before I go do so much needed work (volunteer stuff), a story of irony.
I have one Paul Hackett sign to deliver for a yard, the person it's going to whose last name is Schmidt. Seriously.
I have one Paul Hackett sign to deliver for a yard, the person it's going to whose last name is Schmidt. Seriously.
We should all send Sen. Clinton a note that she should start her search for a positive policy agenda for the Democratic Party with the "The Heart of the Party: Why We are Democrats," panel moderated by Andrew Doss, at the Beaucoup Blues: Democrats for a Blue Louisiana, July 21-22, 2005.
The four panelists, Sybil Holt, an expert on labor, Willie Fontenot, an environment activists, Mike Robichaux, a doctor and former state senator, and Stephen Handwerk, a GLBT activist, proposed the Party re-ignite its identity as the party of the working class, the party for the poor, the underprivileged, the oppressed, the elderly, children, the party for education and healthcare and the environment, the party that believes in an "XYZ" economic model rather than a trickle down model (as one panelist put it), and above all the party not simply of tolerance but of courageous equal rights.
Her campaign web site is http://www.hillaryclinton.com and campaign e-mail is: info@friendsofhillary.com
The four panelists, Sybil Holt, an expert on labor, Willie Fontenot, an environment activists, Mike Robichaux, a doctor and former state senator, and Stephen Handwerk, a GLBT activist, proposed the Party re-ignite its identity as the party of the working class, the party for the poor, the underprivileged, the oppressed, the elderly, children, the party for education and healthcare and the environment, the party that believes in an "XYZ" economic model rather than a trickle down model (as one panelist put it), and above all the party not simply of tolerance but of courageous equal rights.
Her campaign web site is http://www.hillaryclinton.com and campaign e-mail is: info@friendsofhillary.com
Drop by posting to thank Renee for the information upthread.
(Sure seems to me it would make more sense to assume a kidnapping until proven otherwise,
but of course we don't give our police enough resources because we're using our resources in Iraq.)
I sure hope they find her
well
and soon.
♥
(Sure seems to me it would make more sense to assume a kidnapping until proven otherwise,
but of course we don't give our police enough resources because we're using our resources in Iraq.)
I sure hope they find her
well
and soon.
♥
"I would say these newspapers have NO right in pulling this. Unless they are trying to say that our President uses to many off color remarks that are not even fit for reprint!!!!"
On the money, Linda in Cincinnati. The hypocrisy boggles the mind.
On the money, Linda in Cincinnati. The hypocrisy boggles the mind.
Charlie wrote:
"I did hear Howard Dean state that '[the president and his right-wing Supreme Court think it is "okay" to have the government take your house if they feel like putting a hotel where your house is.'
"However - in describing the decision as having come from the 'liberal' faction on the court - you have 'been framed.'
"What do I mean by this? First of all - 'liberal' being used in this context is meaningless rhetoric. There is no underlying, unifying principle being applied.
"Yes - the DISSENTING votes - tend to be the strong Republican PARTY faction.
"But those in the majority are hardly the LEFT or even DEMOCRATIC."
I can't very well take any issue with the premise that the majority decision was joined by an ersatz "liberal" faction of the Court, which is why I chose to put the term in quotes. My concern was more towards the fact that Dean said the opinion represented the viewpoint of the President and "his right-wing Supreme Court" when, in fact, O'Connor's dissent was joined by the Court's most conservative axis: Rhenquist, Scalia, and Thomas. This description of the decision creates some real cognitive dissonance.
Trying to catch up on what's being said on the blog. The American Compact outlined above is good in most ways, but, in my mind, it has some problems. First, its title sounds very reminiscent of Newt Gingrich's Contract with America and would confuse Americans who are not political junkies as we are. Also, creating a more progressive tax system is good, but you will never get voters to agree to the no deductions part because it takes out the mortgage deduction that makes it possible for millions of Americans to become homeowners. Voters would never support that. Also, it penalizes those with many children. I'm for getting rid of tax loopholes, but these things are not "loopholes."
Something as serious as a compact or list of beliefs needs to be debated and worked out very carefully over a period of time and with many groups represented in the final draft. That's my $.02.
As for the DLC, who appointed them as "leaders" of the Democratic Party? I would call them the Democratic Losers Council. If Hillary wants unity, she should campaign for the end of the DLC who, I believe, are one of the important reasons for the decline of the Democratic Party. These DLC'ers don't know if they want to be Democrats or Republicans, and as Truman once said, if given the choice between a real Republican and a cheap imitation, voters will always go for the real thing. We need to be the party of FDR and the average American, not the corporate wing represented by the DLC.
Something as serious as a compact or list of beliefs needs to be debated and worked out very carefully over a period of time and with many groups represented in the final draft. That's my $.02.
As for the DLC, who appointed them as "leaders" of the Democratic Party? I would call them the Democratic Losers Council. If Hillary wants unity, she should campaign for the end of the DLC who, I believe, are one of the important reasons for the decline of the Democratic Party. These DLC'ers don't know if they want to be Democrats or Republicans, and as Truman once said, if given the choice between a real Republican and a cheap imitation, voters will always go for the real thing. We need to be the party of FDR and the average American, not the corporate wing represented by the DLC.
Jim*W wrote on July 27, 2005 11:32 AM:
We should all send Sen. Clinton a note that she should start her search for a positive policy agenda for the Democratic Party with the "The Heart of the Party: Why We are Democrats," panel moderated by Andrew Doss, at the Beaucoup Blues: Democrats for a Blue Louisiana, July 21-22, 2005.
The four panelists, Sybil Holt, an expert on labor, Willie Fontenot, an environment activists, Mike Robichaux, a doctor and former state senator, and Stephen Handwerk, a GLBT activist, proposed the Party re-ignite its identity as the party of the working class, the party for the poor, the underprivileged, the oppressed, the elderly, children, the party for education and healthcare and the environment, the party that believes in an "XYZ" economic model rather than a trickle down model (as one panelist put it), and above all the party not simply of tolerance but of courageous equal rights.
----------------
Good Post. Thanks for the email address.
However, on the equal rights issue, the biggest neglect has been for helping low income/single women with children. "It takes a village" but right now we don't have a one. Since welfare reform and parental leave, we have done very little, if anything, to help with child development, especially post-partem. Every developed country in the world does more than we do for children and their mothers for the first year of life. Welfare reform needs to be revisited. Our current policy encourages abortion. For too many women, it is not a choice.
Fred
We should all send Sen. Clinton a note that she should start her search for a positive policy agenda for the Democratic Party with the "The Heart of the Party: Why We are Democrats," panel moderated by Andrew Doss, at the Beaucoup Blues: Democrats for a Blue Louisiana, July 21-22, 2005.
The four panelists, Sybil Holt, an expert on labor, Willie Fontenot, an environment activists, Mike Robichaux, a doctor and former state senator, and Stephen Handwerk, a GLBT activist, proposed the Party re-ignite its identity as the party of the working class, the party for the poor, the underprivileged, the oppressed, the elderly, children, the party for education and healthcare and the environment, the party that believes in an "XYZ" economic model rather than a trickle down model (as one panelist put it), and above all the party not simply of tolerance but of courageous equal rights.
----------------
Good Post. Thanks for the email address.
However, on the equal rights issue, the biggest neglect has been for helping low income/single women with children. "It takes a village" but right now we don't have a one. Since welfare reform and parental leave, we have done very little, if anything, to help with child development, especially post-partem. Every developed country in the world does more than we do for children and their mothers for the first year of life. Welfare reform needs to be revisited. Our current policy encourages abortion. For too many women, it is not a choice.
Fred
BTW, I think it is really GREAT and testament to the support for Elliot Spitzer and the Democrats that Governor Pataki has chosen NOT to seek Re Elction in 06.
They're trying to say because he may seek the White House in 08, but the only truth to that statement is it wouldn't go over to well if he LOST his Governorship in 06, in which would probably happen, especially because his numbers are TANKING already!
Yeah, Elliot Spitzer, Governor of New York '06
They're trying to say because he may seek the White House in 08, but the only truth to that statement is it wouldn't go over to well if he LOST his Governorship in 06, in which would probably happen, especially because his numbers are TANKING already!
Yeah, Elliot Spitzer, Governor of New York '06
If Howard Dean really made the statement attributed to him about the rightwing Supreme Court decision, it is again evidence of the fact that Democrats are generally not as careful about their public statements as Republicans seem to be. If someone is going to be quoted, misquoted, and exploited by the media, then they have to be more careful about what they say. Doesn't the Democratic Party have anyone there whose job it is to brief the head of the party on all important news and to warn him that accuracy in what one says is EXTREMELY IMPORTANT? Careless politics loses elections. I dearly love and respect Howard Dean, but I need him to be loved by others as well, and that won't happen if the public perceives him to be inaccurate. He also needs to be careful in making sweeping statements that can easily be twisted to mean something he didn't say. We all make mistakes and that's understandable. But Howard should now be getting some professional and excellent advice. Is he?
Regarding that Supreme Court decision, what were those guys smoking when they came up with that mistake? Are these the best legal minds in America? I never thought, in my wildest dreams, that I could ever be on the same side as Scalia on anything. This should have been a unanimous decision supporting the eminent domain clause of the Constitution that clearly states that private property can only be taken for "public" use, which doesn't mean private profit.
Regarding that Supreme Court decision, what were those guys smoking when they came up with that mistake? Are these the best legal minds in America? I never thought, in my wildest dreams, that I could ever be on the same side as Scalia on anything. This should have been a unanimous decision supporting the eminent domain clause of the Constitution that clearly states that private property can only be taken for "public" use, which doesn't mean private profit.
just got back from our florida vacation. we stayed to see the shuttle lift off. it was awesome!!!!!!! made my day.
I will post later with more details but I have just one observation and joan in Florida, don't get mad, I left your tel no at home, sorry I didn't call.
But.... I have to say I have never had the inopportunity to meet so many rude people. In the store, at restaurants. I have to say, Jeb needs to give these people some person to person training.
And the book store in Deland on Rt17/92, had to be the worst. I was trying to find the new Time mag with "turd blossom" on the cover. Well evidently, no current news mags or newspapers are allowed withing the city limits of Deland Florida.
I went in to the book store- asked for a time magazine. it was wednesday. well they don't get their time mags til thursday or friday (what??) asked for a current newspaper (we don't carry no newspapers). asked if they had the current Bill Moyers book, out in paperback? the owner of the store said "who is he?". I said he is on PBS. well she told me she don't watch that stuff. I said well since you have a bookstore, do you have his book? no. we don't carry that "stuff".
I have to say, while the houseboat was nice, I can see why they vote for bush, they have his brain size.
I will post later with more details but I have just one observation and joan in Florida, don't get mad, I left your tel no at home, sorry I didn't call.
But.... I have to say I have never had the inopportunity to meet so many rude people. In the store, at restaurants. I have to say, Jeb needs to give these people some person to person training.
And the book store in Deland on Rt17/92, had to be the worst. I was trying to find the new Time mag with "turd blossom" on the cover. Well evidently, no current news mags or newspapers are allowed withing the city limits of Deland Florida.
I went in to the book store- asked for a time magazine. it was wednesday. well they don't get their time mags til thursday or friday (what??) asked for a current newspaper (we don't carry no newspapers). asked if they had the current Bill Moyers book, out in paperback? the owner of the store said "who is he?". I said he is on PBS. well she told me she don't watch that stuff. I said well since you have a bookstore, do you have his book? no. we don't carry that "stuff".
I have to say, while the houseboat was nice, I can see why they vote for bush, they have his brain size.
Florida Dean Democrat wrote on July 27, 2005 12:12 PM:
----------
If we want to start winning elections, we better start realizing the it is possible to be pro-life, even in the extreme sense, and be a Democrat too.
We are not a one-issue party, and those who have sought to hi-jack the party in that regard are partly responsible for the miserable failures of the last 30 years.
Fred
----------
If we want to start winning elections, we better start realizing the it is possible to be pro-life, even in the extreme sense, and be a Democrat too.
We are not a one-issue party, and those who have sought to hi-jack the party in that regard are partly responsible for the miserable failures of the last 30 years.
Fred
lindab wrote on July 27, 2005 12:14 PM:
Yes, unfortunately Florida is the appendix of the United States. Lots of people who couldn't make it anywhere else end up there. Old-time Floridians keep fantasising about closing the borders, but it's always been the same.
Tried living there for sixteen years and finally had to give up. The east coast around Miami is a bit more civilized, but north Florida sucks. Georgia actually proved to be a step up.
Yes, unfortunately Florida is the appendix of the United States. Lots of people who couldn't make it anywhere else end up there. Old-time Floridians keep fantasising about closing the borders, but it's always been the same.
Tried living there for sixteen years and finally had to give up. The east coast around Miami is a bit more civilized, but north Florida sucks. Georgia actually proved to be a step up.
Welcome home linda,
Yup we have some very rude people here. That bookstore you spoke of is the epitamy of rudeness - never go there anymore with those two old bi tches who run it and their walled-off porno section is a disgrace. The students from Stetson, however, are great and I love being working out with them at the local "Y." I imagine fishing was awful with the rain.
But, you know, we had the same impression of the people in New Hampshire while there. Vermonters, on the other hand were generally very polite and helpful people, yet only a few miles apart from NH.
I also witnessed the space launch while tied up in traffic on Hwy 17 on the way to DeLand. I've seen many of them before but this one was perfect.
Gore/Dean 2008
Yup we have some very rude people here. That bookstore you spoke of is the epitamy of rudeness - never go there anymore with those two old bi tches who run it and their walled-off porno section is a disgrace. The students from Stetson, however, are great and I love being working out with them at the local "Y." I imagine fishing was awful with the rain.
But, you know, we had the same impression of the people in New Hampshire while there. Vermonters, on the other hand were generally very polite and helpful people, yet only a few miles apart from NH.
I also witnessed the space launch while tied up in traffic on Hwy 17 on the way to DeLand. I've seen many of them before but this one was perfect.
Gore/Dean 2008
fred from Or wrote on July 27, 2005 12:21 PM:
If we want to start winning elections, we better start realizing the it is possible to be pro-life, even in the extreme sense, and be a Democrat too.
~~~~~~~~~~
Well-said fred.
I don't know why my spouse and I are very gun-ho on Gore running in 2008. He could simply say, "I told you so" and win many Dems back to our side. He is the top of the line next to Dean in our book and already won a prez election.
If we want to start winning elections, we better start realizing the it is possible to be pro-life, even in the extreme sense, and be a Democrat too.
~~~~~~~~~~
Well-said fred.
I don't know why my spouse and I are very gun-ho on Gore running in 2008. He could simply say, "I told you so" and win many Dems back to our side. He is the top of the line next to Dean in our book and already won a prez election.
Florida Dean Democrat wrote on July 27, 2005 12:12 PM:
anybody can call himself a democrat. doesn't mean he is one.
As far as the vote on the "taking" issue is concerned, let me suggest that the "conservative" judges took a political vote. Since this matter has been established law for a very long time, those who voted against it were not being honest. They were setting up their liberal colleagues to take a fall on a hot-button issue. It's so easy to be against something that you know is going to pass, regardless.
Has any Republican come out to criticise this decision? Not likely, since it's one with which they all agree.
anybody can call himself a democrat. doesn't mean he is one.
As far as the vote on the "taking" issue is concerned, let me suggest that the "conservative" judges took a political vote. Since this matter has been established law for a very long time, those who voted against it were not being honest. They were setting up their liberal colleagues to take a fall on a hot-button issue. It's so easy to be against something that you know is going to pass, regardless.
Has any Republican come out to criticise this decision? Not likely, since it's one with which they all agree.
trinite,
The name American Compact is deliberately different but echoing of the Contract with America, which as you may remember, got the GOP control of both Houses of Congress.
On taxes, either we have no loopholes or the door is wide open. We can't say, "we're in favor of loopholes we like, but against the other guy's loopholes." The home mortgage deduction is the biggest deduction I get by far, so I'd be giving it up, but if we got a fair, progressive tax system I'd live with that. Shoot, my taxes may even end up lower. More than anything, the American people want to be treated fairly by their government. A progressive, no-deductions tax code does that.
The name American Compact is deliberately different but echoing of the Contract with America, which as you may remember, got the GOP control of both Houses of Congress.
On taxes, either we have no loopholes or the door is wide open. We can't say, "we're in favor of loopholes we like, but against the other guy's loopholes." The home mortgage deduction is the biggest deduction I get by far, so I'd be giving it up, but if we got a fair, progressive tax system I'd live with that. Shoot, my taxes may even end up lower. More than anything, the American people want to be treated fairly by their government. A progressive, no-deductions tax code does that.
"We are not a one-issue party, and those who have sought to hi-jack the party in that regard are partly responsible for the miserable failures of the last 30 years.
Fred"
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hey, Fred, a group which supported Bush rather than Kerry in times like this does not deserve my consideration. Read the diary.
The Democratic Party IS the party of pro-choice.
Fred"
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hey, Fred, a group which supported Bush rather than Kerry in times like this does not deserve my consideration. Read the diary.
The Democratic Party IS the party of pro-choice.
MonicaSmith wrote on July 27, 2005 12:23 PM:
I have lived in South and Central Florida since 1954 and I have to throughly disagree with your assessment of the state as a whole.
Central Florida is exceptionally nice with cool crystal clear springs, forests, and so-far very accessible clean beaches.
The fight to keep things from getting out of hand has been going on for many years but, it seems people just love coming here and staying to mess up the place even more, take up room and build their skyscrapers on the beaches. The majority of those seem to be from New England.
I have lived in South and Central Florida since 1954 and I have to throughly disagree with your assessment of the state as a whole.
Central Florida is exceptionally nice with cool crystal clear springs, forests, and so-far very accessible clean beaches.
The fight to keep things from getting out of hand has been going on for many years but, it seems people just love coming here and staying to mess up the place even more, take up room and build their skyscrapers on the beaches. The majority of those seem to be from New England.
fred,
I usually stay out of this discussion, but it touches on one of my hot buttons (not abortion).
The problem with the pro-life position, and why I have real problems supporting candidates who support it, is whereas I as a "pro-choice" person am not imposing my decision on the abortion question on a pro-life person, leaving that person free to have an abortion or not, depending on their belief system and desires, the pro-life person would restrict a pro-choice person's ability to make a decision, by precluding some of their options based on the pro-life position.
Restricting other's rights in a free society is a restriction on liberty that I have a very hard time supporting in any case, no matter the underlying issue.
To me, the issue is not abortion, it is freedom.
I usually stay out of this discussion, but it touches on one of my hot buttons (not abortion).
The problem with the pro-life position, and why I have real problems supporting candidates who support it, is whereas I as a "pro-choice" person am not imposing my decision on the abortion question on a pro-life person, leaving that person free to have an abortion or not, depending on their belief system and desires, the pro-life person would restrict a pro-choice person's ability to make a decision, by precluding some of their options based on the pro-life position.
Restricting other's rights in a free society is a restriction on liberty that I have a very hard time supporting in any case, no matter the underlying issue.
To me, the issue is not abortion, it is freedom.
BSJinx wrote on July 27, 2005 08:45 AM:
721 of 721 precincts – 100.0 percent
DONNA FRYE 104872 43.32%
JERRY SANDERS 65399 27.01%
STEVE FRANCIS 56887 23.50%
PAT SHEA 5720 2.36%
RICHARD RIDER 3756 1.55%
MYKE SHELBY 3533 1.46%
SHAWN A. MC MILLAN 561 0.23%
JIM BELL 473 0.20%
ED KOLKER 415 0.17%
JEREMY LEDFORD 378 0.16%
THOMAS KNAPP 98 0.04%
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If ever there was a strong case for instant runoffs, this is it.
721 of 721 precincts – 100.0 percent
DONNA FRYE 104872 43.32%
JERRY SANDERS 65399 27.01%
STEVE FRANCIS 56887 23.50%
PAT SHEA 5720 2.36%
RICHARD RIDER 3756 1.55%
MYKE SHELBY 3533 1.46%
SHAWN A. MC MILLAN 561 0.23%
JIM BELL 473 0.20%
ED KOLKER 415 0.17%
JEREMY LEDFORD 378 0.16%
THOMAS KNAPP 98 0.04%
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If ever there was a strong case for instant runoffs, this is it.
rich^kolker wrote on July 27, 2005 12:38 PM:
fred,
I usually stay out of this discussion, but it touches on one of my hot buttons (not abortion).
--------
Fine rich, and I respect that. And I think it should be legal too, at the least until "quickening" time.
But the party cannot excommunicate people who are Democrat to the core, often for generations, just because they don't share that view. I don't believe you can equate an unnatural, invasive surgery with civil rights of a racial nature. It simply does not warrant that kind of sactimony.
Fred
fred,
I usually stay out of this discussion, but it touches on one of my hot buttons (not abortion).
--------
Fine rich, and I respect that. And I think it should be legal too, at the least until "quickening" time.
But the party cannot excommunicate people who are Democrat to the core, often for generations, just because they don't share that view. I don't believe you can equate an unnatural, invasive surgery with civil rights of a racial nature. It simply does not warrant that kind of sactimony.
Fred
If we want to start winning elections, we better start realizing the it is possible to be pro-life, even in the extreme sense, and be a Democrat too.
~~~~~~~~~~
First of all, I don't know anyone who is NOT pro-life. I think what you are referring to is 'anti-abortion'. And yes, I agree that you can be 'anti-abortion' and a Democrat.
But I am NEVER going to agree that the subject of choice is the governments business (federal or state). That is what drives the wedge in on this issue for me.
I can deal with the fact that some people are anti-abortion, I just wish that we could agree that this is a personal issue that the government should stay out of.
~~~~~~~~~~
First of all, I don't know anyone who is NOT pro-life. I think what you are referring to is 'anti-abortion'. And yes, I agree that you can be 'anti-abortion' and a Democrat.
But I am NEVER going to agree that the subject of choice is the governments business (federal or state). That is what drives the wedge in on this issue for me.
I can deal with the fact that some people are anti-abortion, I just wish that we could agree that this is a personal issue that the government should stay out of.
And rich, there is still the question (philosophical opinion) of whether the fetus is human and as such has right, even though dependent on the mother for life.
It is a two-sided issue. On one side, you have "freedom" as you call it. On the other side you have the question of whether the fetus has "human rights" as being human.
Right now the fetus has rights only insofar as the mother wants it. It has no right of its own.
Fred
It is a two-sided issue. On one side, you have "freedom" as you call it. On the other side you have the question of whether the fetus has "human rights" as being human.
Right now the fetus has rights only insofar as the mother wants it. It has no right of its own.
Fred
re: lindab wrote on July 27, 2005 12:14 PM
Unfortunately, you run across idiots like that everywhere... we have sum here in Michigan.
Well, I'm going out to enjoy the *frigid* awesome, can breathe again, 70 degree temperature before it's starts climbing back up.
Unfortunately, you run across idiots like that everywhere... we have sum here in Michigan.
Well, I'm going out to enjoy the *frigid* awesome, can breathe again, 70 degree temperature before it's starts climbing back up.
Since it came up above, here's some of the support language from americancompact.com on Fair and Simple progressive no-deductions income and payroll tax:
Expecting something for nothing is the most popular form of hope.
-- Arnold Glasow
You can’t get something for nothing.
In the context of government, this translates as: we can’t ask government for services unless we are willing to pay for those services through taxes. Surveys, letters to the editor and to legislators by citizens claim we want better services: education second to none, transportation infrastructure and mass transit sufficient to avoid traffic backups, police and firefighters to protect us against both the normal problems of society and the new potential of terrorism in our back yards. Yet, when faced with the cost of those services, we vote in favor of candidates and positions best described by that old shibboleth, “Don’t tax you, don’t tax me, tax that guy behind the tree.”
Nobody likes to pay taxes, but taxes are the price of civilization. We can choose to be a very low tax nation of low tax states, but only should do so with the understanding that the result will be poor and deteriorating schools, insufficient and unrepaired roads, understaffed and underequipped police and fire departments, and state colleges and universities which either charge tuition as high as private institutions or don’t provide the level of excellence we expect.
We must demand a fair tax system, where taxes paid and services provided are balanced across regions, where those least able to pay are not saddled with spending the highest percentage of their income on taxes: payroll, income and sales, and where individuals and business each pay their fair share.
The two main complaints about the tax system in this country by the average America are that they are unfair (the “fat cats” know how to get all the breaks) and in the case of the federal income tax, difficult to understand and time and effort consuming to file. The American Compact calls for a tax system that has these three tenets:
* Is progressive across the entire breadth of the tax structure: payroll taxes, income taxes, sales taxes…
* Is simple for taxpayers to pay
* Is loophole-free, clear and simple to understand
This is a major reform of our tax system. If we are going to comply with these three tenets, the result will be a system where many well-loved “tax breaks” (for example the home mortgage deduction) will have to go. The details of implementing these three tenets will be different at the federal, state and local levels. The people, businesses and industries that get special treatment in our current system will complain mightily. But in the long run, if the system is seen as fair, is easy to pay and the impression is that everyone is treated equally, it will have the support of the American people.
Expecting something for nothing is the most popular form of hope.
-- Arnold Glasow
You can’t get something for nothing.
In the context of government, this translates as: we can’t ask government for services unless we are willing to pay for those services through taxes. Surveys, letters to the editor and to legislators by citizens claim we want better services: education second to none, transportation infrastructure and mass transit sufficient to avoid traffic backups, police and firefighters to protect us against both the normal problems of society and the new potential of terrorism in our back yards. Yet, when faced with the cost of those services, we vote in favor of candidates and positions best described by that old shibboleth, “Don’t tax you, don’t tax me, tax that guy behind the tree.”
Nobody likes to pay taxes, but taxes are the price of civilization. We can choose to be a very low tax nation of low tax states, but only should do so with the understanding that the result will be poor and deteriorating schools, insufficient and unrepaired roads, understaffed and underequipped police and fire departments, and state colleges and universities which either charge tuition as high as private institutions or don’t provide the level of excellence we expect.
We must demand a fair tax system, where taxes paid and services provided are balanced across regions, where those least able to pay are not saddled with spending the highest percentage of their income on taxes: payroll, income and sales, and where individuals and business each pay their fair share.
The two main complaints about the tax system in this country by the average America are that they are unfair (the “fat cats” know how to get all the breaks) and in the case of the federal income tax, difficult to understand and time and effort consuming to file. The American Compact calls for a tax system that has these three tenets:
* Is progressive across the entire breadth of the tax structure: payroll taxes, income taxes, sales taxes…
* Is simple for taxpayers to pay
* Is loophole-free, clear and simple to understand
This is a major reform of our tax system. If we are going to comply with these three tenets, the result will be a system where many well-loved “tax breaks” (for example the home mortgage deduction) will have to go. The details of implementing these three tenets will be different at the federal, state and local levels. The people, businesses and industries that get special treatment in our current system will complain mightily. But in the long run, if the system is seen as fair, is easy to pay and the impression is that everyone is treated equally, it will have the support of the American people.
Lynn in Cincinnati wrote on July 27, 2005 12:51 PM:
But I am NEVER going to agree that the subject of choice is the governments business (federal or state). That is what drives the wedge in on this issue for me.
--------
we don't have choice on drug abuse and child abuse
Fred
But I am NEVER going to agree that the subject of choice is the governments business (federal or state). That is what drives the wedge in on this issue for me.
--------
we don't have choice on drug abuse and child abuse
Fred
When I was very young, abortion was against the laws. I already had two children by my first marriage and definitely was not inclined to have any more then. (I later had two more during second marriage.)
It was a very scary matter for all of my young mother frieds and their families to know that with only one slip-up, they could be saddled with additional unplanned children. I don't believe that anyone who hasn't been there, done that, can have any great concept of what that was like. Birth control pills were like a gift from heaven.
Unfortunately, I don't hear much from mothers/grandmothers or fathers/grandfathers who have been there and could be spreading their stories wide and far to those who don't seem to "get it" and kind of take a middle-or-the-road attitude.
It was a very scary matter for all of my young mother frieds and their families to know that with only one slip-up, they could be saddled with additional unplanned children. I don't believe that anyone who hasn't been there, done that, can have any great concept of what that was like. Birth control pills were like a gift from heaven.
Unfortunately, I don't hear much from mothers/grandmothers or fathers/grandfathers who have been there and could be spreading their stories wide and far to those who don't seem to "get it" and kind of take a middle-or-the-road attitude.
(2)
fred,
So you will impose your view of whether a fetus is human life on me, rather than letting this philosophical opinion, as you called it, be mine.
This is where I have a problem.
fred,
So you will impose your view of whether a fetus is human life on me, rather than letting this philosophical opinion, as you called it, be mine.
This is where I have a problem.
I would support Dean for VP nominee, but please not Gore the Bore at the top of the ticket. Been there, done that.
I suggest Bill from UW Madison.
I suggest Bill from UW Madison.
Fred:
Your takes a Village reference is excellent. We should all send Sen. Clinton a note that she should start her search for a positive policy agenda for the Democratic Party with our favorite issue. Using the prepackaged set as I suggested is easier. You own words are better. Your reference to "It takes a village" even better.
The big thing is to write. If Sen. Clinton gets lots of mail saying that the Party should rally around Democratic ideas, she may decide to run as a Democrat. I dream of the day DLC decides to join with the Democratic wing of the party and support winning Democratic candidates.
Her campaign web site is http://www.hillaryclinton.com and campaign e-mail is: info@friendsofhillary.com
Your takes a Village reference is excellent. We should all send Sen. Clinton a note that she should start her search for a positive policy agenda for the Democratic Party with our favorite issue. Using the prepackaged set as I suggested is easier. You own words are better. Your reference to "It takes a village" even better.
The big thing is to write. If Sen. Clinton gets lots of mail saying that the Party should rally around Democratic ideas, she may decide to run as a Democrat. I dream of the day DLC decides to join with the Democratic wing of the party and support winning Democratic candidates.
Her campaign web site is http://www.hillaryclinton.com and campaign e-mail is: info@friendsofhillary.com
rich^kolker wrote on July 27, 2005 12:54 PM:
But in the long run, if the system is seen as fair, is easy to pay and the impression is that everyone is treated equally, it will have the support of the American people.
==================================================
But you don't really plan to treat everyone fairly. You want to penalize the successful and the hardworking for the benefit of the indolent.
But in the long run, if the system is seen as fair, is easy to pay and the impression is that everyone is treated equally, it will have the support of the American people.
==================================================
But you don't really plan to treat everyone fairly. You want to penalize the successful and the hardworking for the benefit of the indolent.
rich^kolker wrote on July 27, 2005 12:57 PM:
(2)
fred,
So you will impose your view of whether a fetus is human life on me, rather than letting this philosophical opinion, as you called it, be mine.
This is where I have a problem
--------
Rich, Joan, I am just stating opinions and beliefs, not imposing anything.
By denying respect to pro-lifer who want to be Democrats (because they agree with Democrats on all other issues,) you are inadvertantly "imposing your belief" that a fetus is not human and we have an unmitigate right to kill it under any circumstances.
Like I say, reasonable people can think it a question of a "right" or "choice" but when it comes to membership in the party, I cannot see it as tantamount to "equal rights" between people of different races. Both women and men are equally against abortion.
Fred
(2)
fred,
So you will impose your view of whether a fetus is human life on me, rather than letting this philosophical opinion, as you called it, be mine.
This is where I have a problem
--------
Rich, Joan, I am just stating opinions and beliefs, not imposing anything.
By denying respect to pro-lifer who want to be Democrats (because they agree with Democrats on all other issues,) you are inadvertantly "imposing your belief" that a fetus is not human and we have an unmitigate right to kill it under any circumstances.
Like I say, reasonable people can think it a question of a "right" or "choice" but when it comes to membership in the party, I cannot see it as tantamount to "equal rights" between people of different races. Both women and men are equally against abortion.
Fred
1 in 63 million wrote:
"I would support Dean for VP nominee, but please not Gore the Bore at the top of the ticket. Been there, done that."
Well, to be accurate, you would have done that, but Gore was prevented from assuming office by judicial fiat. The bigger bore has been the superseder, Bush, who has run up the deficit, presided over a shriveling economy with a balooning trade deficit, and sacrificed American lives on a military gambit waged under false pretenses. Five years later, the results of his policies are as predictable as a summer rerun.
rich^kolker @ 12:31 P.M.
Sorry, but I can't agree with the notion that our beliefs are "deliberately different, but echoing" those of Newt Gingrich. Gingrich and the Republicans got control of both houses of Congress for many reasons, including latent racism in the South, social issues, and Clinton's philandering that got out the morality police to vote Republican. Also, Clinton was not brave enough to stick with his health insurance for all Americans ideas and became somewhat of a Republican clone, which didn't help. Since then, Gingrich has been discredited and forced to resign. I just wouldn't try to use or copy his tactics. When you copy, you flatter the one being copied and lessen your own stature as an independent and, above all, confident leader. I respect your opinions highly, but don't happen to agree on this. I also can't agree on the no-deduction tax. Until we can get rid of the lobbyists, etc., etc., giving up the mortgage deduction would make Republicans very happy and anxious to restore their "needed" loopholes, which I'm confident they would do, all the while laughing at our willingness to hurt our most loyal constituency. We can't do that and win. We need to support those who vote for us and cutting out the mortgage deduction would lose us votes for generations to come. Who would be left to vote Democratic? You and me and a few other political junkies? We can't win with that agenda. By the way, Republicans have already cut the capital gains tax in half and are working on eliminating it entirely. The tax code is something susceptible to constant manipulation. We can't give up something that helps working Americans and expect Republicans to be willing to give up their loopholes forever. What they say, is that they have to change these tax laws for the economy and to create jobs, and they get away with it because they control the media, the press, the schools, and the average American brain while they play on racial, gay, religious, immigration fears. Taxes are something every society needs to sustain itself. What is most important in deciding how they should be collected, is to determine which economic group should pay the largest share, and if it should be based on ability to pay. Republicans will never agree to a system that is really progressive and that is based on the belief that there should be a relationship between what one takes out of the economic pie and what one puts back into it. They want a flat tax with no deductions that dumps on the poor and is regressive, not progressive. I'm really afraid that eliminating deductions would be the first step on the path to that regressive system. These guys know how to get their big feet in every door.
Sorry, but I can't agree with the notion that our beliefs are "deliberately different, but echoing" those of Newt Gingrich. Gingrich and the Republicans got control of both houses of Congress for many reasons, including latent racism in the South, social issues, and Clinton's philandering that got out the morality police to vote Republican. Also, Clinton was not brave enough to stick with his health insurance for all Americans ideas and became somewhat of a Republican clone, which didn't help. Since then, Gingrich has been discredited and forced to resign. I just wouldn't try to use or copy his tactics. When you copy, you flatter the one being copied and lessen your own stature as an independent and, above all, confident leader. I respect your opinions highly, but don't happen to agree on this. I also can't agree on the no-deduction tax. Until we can get rid of the lobbyists, etc., etc., giving up the mortgage deduction would make Republicans very happy and anxious to restore their "needed" loopholes, which I'm confident they would do, all the while laughing at our willingness to hurt our most loyal constituency. We can't do that and win. We need to support those who vote for us and cutting out the mortgage deduction would lose us votes for generations to come. Who would be left to vote Democratic? You and me and a few other political junkies? We can't win with that agenda. By the way, Republicans have already cut the capital gains tax in half and are working on eliminating it entirely. The tax code is something susceptible to constant manipulation. We can't give up something that helps working Americans and expect Republicans to be willing to give up their loopholes forever. What they say, is that they have to change these tax laws for the economy and to create jobs, and they get away with it because they control the media, the press, the schools, and the average American brain while they play on racial, gay, religious, immigration fears. Taxes are something every society needs to sustain itself. What is most important in deciding how they should be collected, is to determine which economic group should pay the largest share, and if it should be based on ability to pay. Republicans will never agree to a system that is really progressive and that is based on the belief that there should be a relationship between what one takes out of the economic pie and what one puts back into it. They want a flat tax with no deductions that dumps on the poor and is regressive, not progressive. I'm really afraid that eliminating deductions would be the first step on the path to that regressive system. These guys know how to get their big feet in every door.
Jim*W wrote on July 27, 2005 01:08 PM:
Fred:
Your takes a Village reference is excellent. ...
The big thing is to write.
-----
I copied the email address into my computer and I intend to write, thank you. BTW this support for post-partem mothers and their children is one area where pro-life Democrats and pro-life organizations can be very useful, if mobilized.
Fred
Fred:
Your takes a Village reference is excellent. ...
The big thing is to write.
-----
I copied the email address into my computer and I intend to write, thank you. BTW this support for post-partem mothers and their children is one area where pro-life Democrats and pro-life organizations can be very useful, if mobilized.
Fred
There is a new thread. But, if anyone wants to linger here and present reasoned arguments supported by scientific facts as to whether or not a fetus is a human life I'd love to hear them. I won't follow this discussion into the new thread, though.
Tom Bearse wrote on July 27, 2005 01:12 PM:
1 in 63 million wrote:
"I would support Dean for VP nominee, but please not Gore the Bore at the top of the ticket. Been there, done that."
~~~~~~~~
Gore won the election of 2000, everyone in Florida knows that is a fact by the later recounts. So why would one not want to to there?
NEW THREAD
1 in 63 million wrote:
"I would support Dean for VP nominee, but please not Gore the Bore at the top of the ticket. Been there, done that."
~~~~~~~~
Gore won the election of 2000, everyone in Florida knows that is a fact by the later recounts. So why would one not want to to there?
NEW THREAD
STOP calling it pro-life and call it what it is - anti-abortion or anti-choice. indeed most of us are pro-life. we let the repubs beat us up with their 'slogans' every time and this has to STOP!
Wighing in on abortion:
Roe V. Wade was the compromise between those who felt that women had no rights once a fetus existed and those who felt women had the only rights. In the Roe decision, the supreme court decided that as the pregnancy progresses from fertilized egg toward full-term, the mother's rights must be balanced with those of the life she carries. However, the decision also posited that *the mother has a right to health and life for the entire term of the pregnancy,* and that those rights supercede the rights of the blastocyst/fetus/full-term baby.
While most people focus on the implied right to privacy in the decision, I believe these fundamental rights - health and life - are the true crux of the importance of the Roe v Wade decision.
Those who seek to end legal abortion would end these rights for women. If you note, nearly all legislation passed in an attempt to erode the rights established under Roe v. Wade exclude the health of the mother in any exceptions. When these cases reach the Supreme Court, they are generally struck down because of the lack of protection for the mother's health.
Casey was an exception to this trend, which is why it was not struck down by the Supreme Court.
In short, Roe v. Wade established the woman's right to health and life. These, to me are unassailable rights, and are ultimately the reason I will never vote for a candidate who does not support the Roe v. Wade decision.
There are additional social complexities that irk me, such as the imperiousness of the government daring to proclaim that women are not capable of making medical decisions appropriate to their own circumstances based on a set of religious beliefs that are not universally shared. But in the end, it's the knowledge that women have the rights to both health and life, and that those rights take precedence over those of a potential life, that make me such a fierce proponent of what many call "choice."
The rights to health and life are not negotiable.
Roe V. Wade was the compromise between those who felt that women had no rights once a fetus existed and those who felt women had the only rights. In the Roe decision, the supreme court decided that as the pregnancy progresses from fertilized egg toward full-term, the mother's rights must be balanced with those of the life she carries. However, the decision also posited that *the mother has a right to health and life for the entire term of the pregnancy,* and that those rights supercede the rights of the blastocyst/fetus/full-term baby.
While most people focus on the implied right to privacy in the decision, I believe these fundamental rights - health and life - are the true crux of the importance of the Roe v Wade decision.
Those who seek to end legal abortion would end these rights for women. If you note, nearly all legislation passed in an attempt to erode the rights established under Roe v. Wade exclude the health of the mother in any exceptions. When these cases reach the Supreme Court, they are generally struck down because of the lack of protection for the mother's health.
Casey was an exception to this trend, which is why it was not struck down by the Supreme Court.
In short, Roe v. Wade established the woman's right to health and life. These, to me are unassailable rights, and are ultimately the reason I will never vote for a candidate who does not support the Roe v. Wade decision.
There are additional social complexities that irk me, such as the imperiousness of the government daring to proclaim that women are not capable of making medical decisions appropriate to their own circumstances based on a set of religious beliefs that are not universally shared. But in the end, it's the knowledge that women have the rights to both health and life, and that those rights take precedence over those of a potential life, that make me such a fierce proponent of what many call "choice."
The rights to health and life are not negotiable.
"mataliandy wrote on July 27, 2005 01:43 PM:"
The difficulty with this issue is the "If X, then *everything*" positions people take up. One argument is that if a fetus is a human being then there can be *no* right to end it's life. Another is that if a woman has a right to privacy/autonomy/choice then there can be *no* restriction to that right. RvW is a compromise. But, like any compromise on this issue it is going to be hard fought to maintain against the extremes.
I think science and logic bear out that the result of human reproduction is a new human being - and that the only point where that human entity changes state from "non-being" to "being" is at conception. *Everything* after that is just development, growth and maturity - until the death of that organism. Does this mean that we can never kill that human being? No. There are situations where killing another human being is morally neutral. Sometimes you gotta kill people.
For me it comes down to weighing the rights of the mother against the rights of the new human being where they come into conflict. A woman (or anyone else) can *always* choose to save her own life at the cost of another's. That's simple self defense. Weighing health against health she is (in my moral calculation) also free to choose hers over the fetus'. Weighing rights that do not balance (life against health, of life against convenience) is another matter. *But*, I don't believe that anyone is qualified to do the risk assessment *for* any pregnant woman but her, with the guidance of her medical expert.
I think the way to reduce abortions is to make them less necessary thru education and by providing resources so that preventing pregnancies or carrying a pregnancy to term are more viable options. To me, Pro-Life has to embrace these goals. Otherwise, like someone said above, it's just anti-abortion.
The difficulty with this issue is the "If X, then *everything*" positions people take up. One argument is that if a fetus is a human being then there can be *no* right to end it's life. Another is that if a woman has a right to privacy/autonomy/choice then there can be *no* restriction to that right. RvW is a compromise. But, like any compromise on this issue it is going to be hard fought to maintain against the extremes.
I think science and logic bear out that the result of human reproduction is a new human being - and that the only point where that human entity changes state from "non-being" to "being" is at conception. *Everything* after that is just development, growth and maturity - until the death of that organism. Does this mean that we can never kill that human being? No. There are situations where killing another human being is morally neutral. Sometimes you gotta kill people.
For me it comes down to weighing the rights of the mother against the rights of the new human being where they come into conflict. A woman (or anyone else) can *always* choose to save her own life at the cost of another's. That's simple self defense. Weighing health against health she is (in my moral calculation) also free to choose hers over the fetus'. Weighing rights that do not balance (life against health, of life against convenience) is another matter. *But*, I don't believe that anyone is qualified to do the risk assessment *for* any pregnant woman but her, with the guidance of her medical expert.
I think the way to reduce abortions is to make them less necessary thru education and by providing resources so that preventing pregnancies or carrying a pregnancy to term are more viable options. To me, Pro-Life has to embrace these goals. Otherwise, like someone said above, it's just anti-abortion.
Add your comment
(to reply directly to a comment, click the reply icon for that comment)Post closed to commenting
Videos of some of the 64 House Healthcare Heroes standing strong for a public health insurance option
Congressman Emanuel Cleaver
Congressman Lloyd Dogget
Congressman Keith Ellison
Congressman Bob Filner
Congressman Phil Hare
Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey
Congresswoman Maxine Waters
Blog for America
-
1 Turncoat Senator vs. 410,649 Americans
By Mary R on Nov 19, 2009 3:06 PM EST -
Send a message they can't miss
By Mary R on Nov 17, 2009 12:00 PM EST -
Will the real Democrat please stand up?
By Mary R on Nov 11, 2009 2:03 PM EST -
3 Million and Counting
By Mary R on Nov 6, 2009 12:47 PM EST -
Is Sen. Nelson listening to Nebraska?
By Mary R on Nov 6, 2009 12:31 PM EST
Recent Blog Posts
-
Dreams wow gold
By wow gold w on Nov 22, 2009 3:17 AM EST -
the Psychobiology talk about the pc wow gold game
By wow gold w on Nov 21, 2009 11:39 PM EST -
Spring Trend 2009 Abercrombie & Fitch
By Abercrombie F on Nov 21, 2009 9:44 PM EST -
Vacationing?
By Phoenix V on Nov 21, 2009 2:07 PM EST -
Bags And Shoes Gucci or Louboutin
By Buy l on Nov 21, 2009 2:37 AM EST
-
By BSJinx on Jul 27, 2005 8:45 AM EDT721 of 721 precincts – 100.0 percent
DONNA FRYE 104872 43.32%
JERRY SANDERS 65399 27.01%
STEVE FRANCIS 56887 23.50%
PAT SHEA 5720 2.36%
RICHARD RIDER 3756 1.55%
MYKE SHELBY 3533 1.46%
SHAWN A. MC MILLAN 561 0.23%
JIM BELL 473 0.20%
ED KOLKER 415 0.17%
JEREMY LEDFORD 378 0.16%
THOMAS KNAPP 98 0.04%