BS: Obit: the Democratic Party

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 07:47 PM

Bobert and Blues...

Actually, I was dead serious when I said that people "change their moral positions as often as they change their socks", but I cannot give you a 30-second sound bite that will explain what I mean. I would need to sit down with you in a cafe for a good half hour and talk about it calmly to explain it.

I was in no way indicting people or judging them when I said that. I include myself and virtually all other people in the statement.

The only possible exceptions to my statement are purblind fanatics who have memorized "Mein Kampf" or the Bible or the Quran or some other authoritative piece of writing like that...and don't make a move without following a specific instruction from THE BOOK. And you know what? Even those books themselves are full of unintended contradictions...as is the behaviour of the people who claim to follow them (specially when they're under stress).

I do not mean that people CONSCIOUSLY change their moral positions. Not at all. I mean that they rationalize, depending on the situation, and unconsciously change their moral positions...then explain it away afterward if anyone points it out to them.

These are normal, well-intentioned people who mean no harm. Count on it. People just like you and me.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: kendall
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 05:07 PM

The right to a fair trial? who? how?

Doug, if you could put your party loyalty aside for just a minute, you would have to admit that what they both lied ABOUT is what's important.

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: DougR
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 04:29 PM

Don: good post at 2:15.

Blues: I wouldn't mind seeing the Clinton lying issue fade away myself, (along with Bush stole the election, etc.)but the most interesting thing to me about that whole situation is how readily some people believe that lying is not a serious offence. "Everyone does it," so it's okay. To me, lying under oath is a serious offence. The courts must think so too, because if you are caught, you are punished for it.

Clinton's lie was especially heinous, in my opinion, because it could have denied a citizen one of their basic civil rights. The right to a fair trial in a lawsuit. For so many people here on the Mudcat that consider themselves the champion of civil rights, to look the other way when a fellow citizen's rights are trampled on by a witness in a law suit that lies about his behaviour seems ludicrous to me.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Blues=Life
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 03:47 PM

You know, I might just feel like y'all ignoring me! LOL I'm the one that brought up Clinton, and now I'm sorry I did. But I'll type this real slow, so you can't possibly make a straw man out of it AGAIN!

The Question was, when did the party die?

My answer was, when the PARTY LEADERSHIP acted like lying to the American public was OK!

It was wrong when Reagan did it. It was wrong when Clinton did it.

You break trust with the American people, and they don't forget it that easily. Dick and Tom LOOKED bad when they said it was OK to act like Clinton. From that moment on, they embodied my party, and I didn't like it. Obviously, neither did the voters.


Little Hawk, I am not a person who "change their moral positions as often as they change their socks," and have given you no reason to think that. I am a lifelong, active, member of the Democratic Party.
I also taught ethics at the university level for a number of years, and have put a lot of thought into my personal code of ethics. I will repeat my original premise, and please argue it, and not your distorted version of it:

"The rest (party leadership) missed the fact that if I can't trust you to tell me the truth, THEN I CAN'T TRUST YOU. This is a lesson I teach my kids, why is it that my party leadership doesn't know this?"

I don't expect much from my politicians, but I do hold them to the same standard as coworkers, employers, customers, and others I deal with on a daily basis. Don't break my trust. It doesn't grow back.

Gov. Tom Vilsack, D-Iowa, for President, 2004
Blues

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 03:43 PM

Thank you for clarifying that you were responding as if I had personally pushed your hot buttons. When we post, it is impossible to know the hot buttons of the many people who might read our words.

I understand your apology wasn't meant to include me, but I do appreciate the clarification nonetheless.

I once met Percy Sutton, who told a very interesting story about his early days of trying to find advertisers for his Inner City Broadcasting radio station, WLIB. One of the corporations he approached with his "big sell" campaign was Dannon yogurt. After several attempts to meet with their representatives, who consistently refused to meet with him, he was finally able to get in touch with someone who was willing to tell him why he was having such difficulty arranging a meeting with them. Their reason for not meeting with him was simple: black people didn't eat yogurt.

If you are more comfortable with anecdotes rather than facts (I don't do statistics), I hope this helps you understand that you and truly are saying the same thing. Perhaps the barrier to our understanding one another is simply a matter of style.

Best wishes to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Don Firth
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 03:34 PM

Forum Lurker, I was not suggesting that contacting the party and the candidates is all one should do. Unless one already participated actively, the first butt one should kick is one's own. I thought that was obvious.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: GUEST,Forum Lurker
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 02:53 PM

It is not enough to simply contact the party and the candidates and tell them how you feel. Politics is not limited to career politicians. Any citizen over 25 can run for congress. Anyone at all can actively help in campaigns.
I was offered a chance to work in Wellstone's campaign, and I will always regret my refusal. Letting the party know how you feel is all well and good, but sometimes you need to do more.

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Tinker
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 02:46 PM

To my fellow Mudcatters, I apologize. I rarely post to political threads, but I did let this guest push some personal buttons. I'm sorry.

As Big Mick eloquently said another thread," in politics perception is reality." As long as we can use statistics without questions……Is the universe complete? Only elected or inclusive of appointed officials? Have key figures been left out simply to provoke further debate or set traps??? Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics…… a dangerous game to play...

Many of our country's leaders now run the economic engine rather than the ship of state. Do they affect our lives? Absolutely.   If we look to effect change in everyday lives we must not let the differences defined by the media blind us to the similarities we share. This country shies away from discussions of class, but yet we "celebrate" diversity. My point and the only one I hope to make is that labeling by race or gender often divides potential political power rather than fueling growth.

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Bobert
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 02:25 PM

Doug: The "Under Oath" crap just don't cut it with me. Most of the best lies are told under oath. There's just something about oath's that bring out the worst in ordinarially honest folks. Don't believe me? Spend a morning in your local traffic court and listen to 'em. One after another, ordinary honest citizens step up, take the oath and lie thru their teeth.

Now, I know ya' gotta repeat the company line because you're a loyal and good hearted Repub. but when ya' strip away the PR facade, the idea that Clinton's lie under *oath* about sex, and RR's lie about guns which were used to... ahhh, you know...kill folks, is in itself another Repub lie in its own right...

But you have my permission, not that you need it, to keep telling it with as much righteous indignation as you can muster up. Might of fact the more you can muster up the funnier it is to some of us when we hear it being told.

Yeah, one day I hope we'll all be able to look back with humor on Bush's lies but right now they're not too funny 'cause it looks like they're gonna lead to gettin' a lot of folks killed.

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Don Firth
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 02:15 PM

The fact that the country got into such a tizzy over Clinton's little peccadilloes is more of a commentary on those who brought the matter up in the first place, the news media that spread the gossip, and the electorate who gleefully gobbled it up than it is on Clinton as President. The whole thing reflected the mentality of the kind of people who watch The Jerry Springer Show. And the same holds for the people who keep bringing it up. Shame on you!!

There is no doubt that Clinton was very wrong when he lied under oath. What he should have said is, "I refuse to answer this question because first, it is a blatant attempt to undercut me personally as President; second, it appeals only to the prurient interest of small minds; third, it is completely irrelevant to matters of governing the country; and forth, the details of my private life are nobody's business but my own." That would have pointed out the real reason for bringing the matter up in the first place. And his response should have been essentially the same as Pete Seeger's when he was called to testify before the House Un-American Activities Committee during the Fifties: "You have no right to even ask this question."

As Doug says, "In this past election only a day old, the Democrats did not offer voters an ALTERNATIVE! They spent millions of dollars trashing their Republican opponents, but offered no programs that people could grab on to. Get some new leadership, identify goals that people can identify with, and you will again become competitive."

The programs and goals are there, but it appears that, for the most part, the Democratic Party has forgotten how to articulate them. There were some, such as Sen. Patty Murray and Rep. Jim McDermott who were very outspoken, stating these programs and goals quite explicitly. A few other Democratic candidates did also, but one would have known nothing about it had not been for their political ads. The news media basically ignored them. For the most part, most Democrats, especially incumbents, talk out of both sides of their mouths and spend a great deal of time saying, "Me, too! Me, too!" Disgusting!

No, the Democratic Party is not dead. Yet. It is up to the likes of thee and me to contact the Democratic Party, both local and national, with phone calls, letters, and when possible in person and voice our displeasure at the ineptness with which they handled this campaign. Also contact candidates individually, both winners and losers. Express your appreciation for those who did speak out articulately and your disappointment with those who did not. Kick some butt!

Are we up to the task? Or are we going to just sit around and whine?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 02:00 PM

"Prejudice not being founded on reason cannot be removed by argument. -- Samuel Johnson (1709-1784)

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: DougR
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 01:50 PM

I will not defend RR for lying about the Iran Contra situation. That was wrong. Why was it more wrong for Clinton? Because he lied UNDER OATH!

That might be a big deal to you, Kendall, and obviously it is not to others, but it is to me.

Had RR been under oath when he lied, he would have been just as guilty as Clinton. I note that RR was not impeached for lying, Clinton was. Anyway, as somebody said once, "two wrongs do not make a right."

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: bob schwarer
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 01:24 PM

Someone early in this thread quoted H.L.Mencken. He also said "Some politicians, if their constituents were cannibals, would promise them missionaries for dinner."

Also for your amusement:

Political Quotes

Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is always a
virtue. Fleas are interested in dogs.
P.J. O'Rourke

~When I die, I want to be buried in Chicago so I can still be
active in politics.
~Representative Charlie Rangel

Politics is not a bad profession. If you succeed there are many
rewards, if you disgrace yourself you can always write a book
~Ronald Reagan

Politics ain't worrying this country one-tenth as much as where to
find a parking space.
~Will Rogers

I have wondered at times what the Ten Commandments would have
looked like if Moses had run them through the US congress.
~Ronald Reagan

When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know
whether to answer "Present" or "Not guilty."
~Theodore Roosevelt

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: kendall
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 01:10 PM

Doug, did you hear Peg? Do you really think that Clinton's blowjob, and his lying about it, is more serious than Reagan being involved in an immoral and ILLEGAL coverup? Which did the country more damage? Come on now, fess up. That "under oath" is splitting hairs.

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: GUEST,Commy
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 12:59 PM

The real problem in USA is you don't think further than the next MacMuffin. Democracy is almost a foreign concept. It would require a degree of thought, some knowledge of history, and the realisation that your current system hangs by a chad before things improve. God may bless America but I would bet serious folding money that he has his doubts about Bush.

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Bobert
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 12:30 PM

Well, danged, LH! You won't find no blatant prejudgin' comin' out of me! No, sir. Blatant biases? Well, sure. And, I hope, you were speakin' tongue-in-cheek about folks changing their morals about as often as their socks 'cause I don't think that describes you, me, Nicole, Peg, Larry, et al here in the Catbox who are purdy danged consistent in and comfortable with our pro-human, pro-earth values. But I'm sure you're were jus funnin'.

As fir safe, prosperous and happy? Where do I sign up?

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 12:06 PM

That's because Doug liked Reagan, Peg. :-)

One can always forgive little flaws and errors in those one likes...

People should stop pretending to be so righteous, and just admit that they are blatantly prejudiced and that they change their moral positions as often as they change their socks!

If we could all admit it, then decide what we would like to be, have, and do in Life...maybe we could get somewhere. I think we would all like to be safe, prosperous, and happy...and do things that are interesting, exciting, and fulfilling. Am I right?

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Peg
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 08:50 AM

I am still waiting to hear why it was okay for Reagan to lie to the American people about something highly illegal and immoral...but somehow lying about his sex life makes Clinton responsible for the disintegration of the Democratic Partty.
Doug? This has been asked of you directly (explain why it was different for Reagan to lie the way he did) more than once and you keep ignoring it.

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: harpgirl
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 08:48 AM

Here in Leon County, host to the Governor's mansion and Florida state government, McBride 60,749 to Bush 32,540. Votes at the FAMU grandballroom precinct (flagship black school in Tally) were Bush 7 McBride 284 and Bush 10 McBride 705. Other black precincts reported include Jake Gaither: Bush 18 McBride 789, Bethel AME Church Bush 13 McBride 383, and so on in every predominantly black precinct. Only the richest white precincts had votes in favor of Bush over McBride. The African American leaders in this southern county are still voting democratic. They've seen Bush's handiwork in State Government employment and they know exactly what he stands for.

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 08:16 AM

Tinker, may I politely ask what it is you seem to be disagreeing about in my posts? Or are we going round with one of those "I think I'll argue for the sake of arguing" situations here?

I'm just asking because in the first post of mine you responded to, I was saying that African Americans who supported Clinton were largely (not solely, as you seem to be trying to suggest) middle class, increasingly self-identifying as conservatives, and often opposed to gun control.

Your response seemed to suggest I was stereotyping blacks, because "many" were Republican leaders (not true, as I have pointed out) and college educated. Well, duh! Then, once I countered showing that there were not many African American Republican leaders at all, you come back with "you said BET". Again--well, duh!

What is up with you anyway? Got an ax to grind, or what?

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 01:52 AM

A pharacudical is a drug that's manufactured by a barracuda. We learned all about that in med school. Back in the days of President [we needed a Lincoln but they gave us a] Ford.

Look, in good times people are going to vote for whoever is in power; in bad times people are going to vote for whoever makes them feel good. Republicans were selling war and patriotism and "strength", Democrats were selling fear. No surprise.

Aloha,
Mark

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: GUEST,Boab
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 01:20 AM

I think Bobert has been listening to one of the Presidential speeches. I think he probably picked up the Bush word for "Pharmaceuticals".
The Global concern re. the U.S. elections was evident in the wide coverage found in the press worldwide. The concern is justified; we havejust been witness to a Global calamity. To an outsider observing the recent politics in the USA, the Democratic Party was its own executioner. What difference does it make which party an American votes for if they both appear to support proposed global mayhem? Or is Georgie just clever enough to know that the public eyes are so easily "glamoured" by a circus?

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: NicoleC
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 01:08 AM

Doug, you are SO right. The Dems failed miserably in 2000 when they should have won that election in a cakewalk, and they failed again in 2002 for lack of ideas. The tired argument, "but we're the Democrats" doesn't work when an electorate is totally disillusioned by both parties.

Die hard Dems voted, die hard Repubs voted, but the fence sitters stayed home, and elections don't get won unless you give them a reason to vote.

This country is ripe -- overripe -- for strong Democratic leadership. If it appears, I predict a trouncing in 2004. If it doesn't -- yep, 4 more years of Bush. Darned if I know where it might come from, but I'd be happy to see it.

I'd be happier yet with two or three great candidates with great skills and great ideas that could stir up some political interest.

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: DougR
Date: 07 Nov 02 - 12:48 AM

Harp Girl: this is the second thread where you have volunteered to kiss my ass. Now I find nothing wrong with that, but for goodness sake, couldn't you handle that in a PM or something? Why publicize your secret desires? :>)

Now, my good friends so happy to forgive Bill Clinton for his transgressions based on the fact that other politicians, including RR, or any other politician for that matter lied. Did they lie in court? Were they under oath when they lied? So what you are saying is: Bill Clinton lied, so it's okay? Is that what you tell you kids?

Nobody has invited me to comment on the needs of the Democratic party if they want to become revelant again but what the hey. In this past election only a day old, the Democrats did not offer voters an ALTERNATIVE! They spent millions of dollars trashing their Republican opponents, but offered no programs that people could grab on to. Get some new leadership, identify goals that people can identify with, and you will again become competitive. Othewise, get use to saying "President Bush" for four more years.

Personally I think Bobert had the right idea when he urged everybody to vote Green though.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Tinker
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 09:12 PM

Tweed and Nichole, I've got to agree with you both. Clinton's ability to emote with the average man is probably what set him up to be a search and destroy target. Nothing is scarier to the status quo than empowered change. And although Clinton played the system he did make people feel things could change. That is always dangerous.

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: NicoleC
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 08:57 PM

There was also always this attitude (back to classism) that Clinton was just a stupid white southerner and didn't belong in a position of authority. The vast majority of elected officials that make it to the top ranks come from wealthy or political families.

Not that Clinton particularly came from a disadvantaged or underprivileged background, but he's the closest thing in decades to the idea that any, normal, everyday citizen can rise to power in a democracy. After all, even plumbers can dream of being the leader of the free world.

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Tinker
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 08:49 PM

We may move in different worlds, but the folks I've met at Alvin Ally galas,who end their summer on the Vineyard, and go to Jack and Jill meetings write checks to pave thier way with both parties, and are no easier to catagorise than the power broker whites of the same social class. Increasingly their mouths may belong to one party and their checks to another. These are not middle class folks. They are power brokers, who happen to be African American.

Class and race are separate issues which the parties, as well as the country will eventually have to come to grips.

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Tweed
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 08:44 PM

Boberdz, Do you know why the folks at the bottom of the ladder love him? It's because he got the minimum wage raised above absolute starvation figures, and he helped people to get the hell off their asses and be proud to go out and make some money for themselves. That's what that was about, not to dump on them but to give them some f*cking self respect, and they did, and they respect him as a man for doin' it. That is the mark of a real President of these United States.
Dammit, I can't shake this rant....sorry it's just pourin' outta me.

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 08:35 PM

Yo Tweezer! I just left a cold six of Iron City in the beer box in the shack. Chill, bro. Man, I hate to see ya get worked up like this. Danged...

Well, I think I mighta started this mess with my comments about "welfare reform" which I stand behind. The point I was trying to make is that Clinton bent over backwards trying get stuff done and was an artist at compromise. Unfortunately, like "welfare reform" some of, but not all, the things he did hurt the folks at the bottom end of the economic ladder, yet these folks seemed the most forgiving since Clinton understood how to talk with folks. Clinton was also wise enough to listen to Greenspan and soak up a lot of stuff that allowed thre economy to recover from Bush, Sr. and expand. Bush choose to bully Greenspan into tax cuts, which Greenspan originally was against but under relentless pressure from Bush, capitulated.

But anyway, Tweezer, sorry pal to get my ol' (well not old) blues buddy all worked up...

Hey, wanta toll free number to join the Green Party? Jus' funnin' with ya.

Go play your guitar for an hour and you'll be just fine.

Bobertz

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 08:34 PM

Tinker, they sure as shit line up that way in the US Congress.

Republicans have never been the party that gave jobs to African Americans. Following the Compromise of 1876, in which Republican Rutherford B. Hayes won a contested presidential election by agreeing to no longer protect the former slaves, African-American participation in the Republican Party decreased.

But the real shift of African Americans from the Republican party that freed them under Lincoln, to the Dems, was the Great Depression. Only 23% of African Americans voted for FDR, but by 1948, 70% of the African American vote went to Truman, who worked for several major civil rights initiatives by supporting fair employment practices to combat job discrimination and issuing an executive order to desegregate the military.

African Americans were again squarely in the Democratic camp in 1964, after Johnson got the Civil Rights Act passed, and was rewarded with 94% of the African American vote. It was then that Democratic party which slowly began to open up the ranks to African Americans. The Democratic party championed Affirmative Action, not the Republicans. Black poverty and unemployment was at an historic low under Clinton.

Despite those facts, there is plenty of polling data to show that African Americans are becoming more conservative, even if they are remaining in the Democratic party. African American voters are quite capable of holding both liberal and conservative attitudes, depending on the issue. The fact that one-third of African Americans identify themselves as conservative does not mean they are conservative on all issues. In fact, a breakdown of the data indicates that, on most issues, even African Americans who identify themselves as conservatives are, in fact, still mostly liberal. attitudes don't automatically "translate into voting behavior.   An individual may identify himself as conservative, but vote for a liberal candidate. Obviously, one-third of blacks are not voting conservative, even though they say they are conservative to pollsters.

In recent times, in 1976, 83 percent of African Americans voted for Jimmy Carter over Gerald Ford; in 1980, 83 percent voted for Jimmy Carter over Ronald Reagan; in 1984, 91 percent voted for Walter Mondale over Ronald Reagan; in 1988, 89 percent voted for Michael Dukakis over George Bush; in 1992, 83 percent voted for Bill Clinton over George Bush, despite a concerted Republican Party campaign, led by then-Republican National Chairman Lee Atwater, to attract more African American voters; and, in 1996, 84 percent of African Americans voted for Clinton.

So much for African Americans going Republican, eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 08:15 PM

harpgirl - Here's one male who will agree heartily with you on that! Until men and women have equal authority at all levels we will continue repeating a very sorry social tradition founded on a primitive past.

Tweed - Agreed. Bill Clinton was personally immature in his conduct, but he was a good president. The Republicans just were on a vendetta, and were determined to press it forward upon any excuse whatsoever. What they really hated about Clinton was that he was successful, and was beating them at their own game. Clinton should have simply refused to discuss his sex life, which was nobody's business except his wife's, I should think. He made a poor judgement call in not doing so.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Tweed
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 08:01 PM

Gahhhhhh......!!!
What's all this beef about Bill Clinton? The guy turned deficits into surpluses, interest rates finally began to drop down, and cut unemployment figures dramatically. What the fuck else do you all want from a president? AND he's been outta office only two years, most nations of the world hate our guts now, people are jobless, and suddenly all the surplus is gone. Lay offa him. He did a good job and you all turned your backs on him when they cornered him with bullshit accusations. I don't give a sh*t if he lied under oath about sex with that gal and if you dig deep you guys would've done the same thing....okay...I'm done...gets me pissed when people insist on dragging Clinton's blow job out to poke around on. Lay the good things he did for us and the world on one side of a scale and the head job/lie under oath on the other. He was a good one and we sure haven't had much of a surplus of good presidents in the last twenty years or more. He gave a damn about the regular working human being.
Rant over,
Tweed (frustrated with the world today, gimme a couple weeks to settle down)

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Tinker
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 07:58 PM

So, sorry you referred to BET, not to elected officals. The Black leadership and money do not line up by party lines. The dollars follow the flow of business just like the white world.

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 07:54 PM

Tinker said:

"Many of the black leadership are Republicans"

Ahem.

The first black Republican elected to Congress was a fill in. In 1870 Hiram R. Revels was elected to fill U.S. Senate seat formerly held by Jefferson Davis. In the same year, Joseph H. Rainey, South Carolina, became the first African-American Congressman. In 1875, Blanche K. Bruce of Mississippi became the first African-American elected to a full term in US Senate.

So, aside from those historic landmark elections, where is the "many" in that claim from Tinker?

Well...

You have to wait a VEEEERRRY long time before any Republican African American senators or congressional representatives come along. Not until 1966 is there another African American on the US Congressional radar, and Edward R. Brooke, a Republican from Massachusetts, becomes the first African American to be elected to the US Senate by popular vote. The first African American (Republican or Democrat) to receive a judicial appointment in a US Judicial Court, was in 1975, when James Parsons is appointed to the bench. Then in 1998, U.S. House of Representatives elects J.C. Watts (R-OK) to be Chairman of the House Republican Conference, the first time a Republican African American ever held a Republican leadership position in the US Congress.

And of course, J.C. Watts resigned in July 2001, when he was routinely ignored and dissed by the Bush White House and the current Republican House leadership.

So much for "many" Republican African American elected officials being involved in the Republican leadership.











The ONLY black Republican in the US House of Representatives resigned because he was being dissed by the Republican leadership.

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: harpgirl
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 07:53 PM

the real problem with power differentials in the world is not between democrats and republicans but between men and women. All this other talk is a smokescreen...

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Blues=Life
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 07:50 PM

Good for you kendall. That's what I would have said if I had been in that position. The truth is, the Dems came out this election trying to play Prevent Defense. They needed to be on Offense. You need to say "Here is what I stand for!", not "The other guy is no good." We need leaders, and whatever else happens, I get the feeling that the Democratic Party leadership is a-changing fast. Best thing they could possibly do, is free up space for fresh blood, to figure out what they stand for, and then to stand up and deliver it to the people.
But will they?
Oh, and by the way, kendall, since you just agreed with my basic premise, does this mean that you have your "head up your ass!" too? LOL

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 07:47 PM

That's right, Kendall, and that's what he should have said. Jack Kennedy would have told them to go to hell. Of course, the media were not quite so shameless yet, in Kennedy's time as they have become since.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: kendall
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 07:36 PM

It's interesting how we take a politician (lower than used car salesman) put him/her in the catbird seat, and then expect him/her to be a paragon of virtue. Had I been in Bill's place, there is no way I would have admitted what happened, and I would not have lied. I would have said, "None of your business."

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 07:29 PM

Right on, Nicole! Classism it is. The fact is, a lot of people are just naturally suspicious of, and prejudiced toward people who are clearly from a "different class" of society. As a young, long-haired man, I experienced a great deal of classism in the 70's from cops and older people who were clearly unaware of my real nature (I'm utterly law-abiding and harmless). People in downtown Toronto are generally afraid of groups of young black men...not particularly because of their race...but because of a general impression about class and the incidence of violent crime and street gangs.

To call it racism is to miss the point...there's somethin' goin on here. People are scared. Why? And how much does that interfere with relaxing and accepting other people for who they really are?

An emotionally healthy person is less inclined to be scared of people who look different than to be interested in them, I would think.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Gareth
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 07:23 PM

And as a Limey election agent -
Don't weep - Organize for 2004

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: NicoleC
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 07:15 PM

I think there are some interesting comments here about class lines in America. While racism certainly still exists, much of what we blame on racism is really classism. The fact that many black people are poor helps hide this fact.

Anyone who has every walked into a backwoods restaurant wearing a nice suit and driving a BMW experiences the same feeling that a black man in jeans and a sweatshirt might experience on a high-priced golf course.

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 06:59 PM

Doug - Let me add to what kendall said. Not only did Clinton and Reagan lie. ALL politicians lie...sometimes. Their job requires them to. They all know things that they can't speak openly about, because it would cause utter havoc if they did...so they lie.

That's one reason they lie, at any rate. Another reason they lie on various occasions is because they figure that it is genuinely the BEST thing to do under the circumstances!

In that respect they are exactly like ALL the rest of us. Is there a single one of us who can claim that he has NEVER lied? Never???

I don't think so. We all lie under certain circumstances, for a huge variety of reasons, and we do it because, essentially, we are convinced that it is the wisest and the best thing to do, all things considered, at that time . We may even believe that it is in other people's interest that we lie TO THEM, for some very good reasons!

So, lying, like killing, is supposedly wrong...or is it? All depends on the circumstances.

The fact is, we don't believe a single one of our supposedly infallible moral notions....when specific conditions don't seem to justify them.

Prosecuting a man for lying about his sex life under oath is silly, when his sex life has little or nothing to do with affecting the world in general. Prosecuting him for lying about arms sales is not silly, since that DOES have a serious effect on the world in general.

Now, in case you doubt my assertion that everybody lies when they think it's a good idea too...when they think it's JUSTIFIABLE UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES...here are some examples.

1. If you were ever once stopped at the US-Canada border and turned back (because you had long hair, for example)...and 20 years later a customs official asks you "Were you ever refused entry to the USA?" WHAT DO YOU TELL HIM? You tell him, "No sir." I submit that you would be an idiot to tell him the contrary, Doug, and that the only sensible thing on Earth to do in such a case is lie...if you want to get across that stupid border and avoid a very nasty and pointless incident which will be of no use to anyone.

2. How many people lie (in small ways) about their taxes? Are they bad people for doing so?

3. How many people lie to their children about various matters...in order to protect them or in order to bring some excitement and happiness into their lives?

4. How about when people lie to save the lives of innocent people? Wallenberg lied to the Nazis and saved many Jews.

And so it goes.

Now here's the deal. I'm sure that on an individual basis both Bill Clinton AND Ronald Reagan were sure, dead sure, that lying was the RIGHT thing to do under the circumstances when they lied.

In other words, they were behaving the same way other people do. We just have differences of opinion about how we evaluate the "right" circumstances.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Tinker
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 06:55 PM

Dear Guest,

Politicians are people regardless of color. Many of the black leadership are Republicans. Many are the 4th or 5th generation of college graduates in their families and feel no indentification at all to the constituents to whom you refer. The black community like the white has its intellegensia and its have nots; its swordsmen and its saints. Until we figure out how to connect across those class lines the rest is really all just academic.

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 04:37 PM

Right Bobert, during Clinton's very first campaign, he made no bones about announcing who his constituency was: the middle class. He said he was going after the welfare mothers, and the African American community supported him in huge numbers. It still does. In fact, if you listen to the talk shows on BET, you'll see they are sounding more Republican all the time, many of them saying the WASP establishment isn't the cause of all the problems in the African American community. They are also right about that.

The thing is, the entrenched African American Democratic leadership is also middle class. They are voting their class interests before their race interests, pure and simple. They feel no more need to address the problems of chronic poverty, or the face the fact that the homicide rate among African Americans by African Americans is actually an African American issue. No, no--they won't let you pry their guns out of their cold, dead hands any sooner than Charlton Heston will.

Kind of a disconnect there, I'd say.

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 04:22 PM

Yo, GUEST, yeah, I know that "Welfare Reform" was passed under Clinton's watch. Heck, that boy woke up every morning hopin' he could win one more Repub over with his capitulation. Actually, Bill Clinton was the best Repub President perhaps of thge 20th century. He goosestepped quite nicely, don't cha think. Yep, for the life of me I can't figure out why the Repubs were so mad at him? I mean, long before Monika Lewinski they were on him about all that other trumped up stuff and if it hadn't been for him lieing about the sex then they wouldn't have anything on him. Danged, imagine that? It should have never come down to something so personal and so much non of their business.

But back to welfare reform. It wasn't reform at all. It was an anti-human, mean spirited package that said to poor folks: "Screw you, we're giving you 'til sundown to get out of town." Real imaginative. All it has and will do is perpetuate poverty. If they wanted to reform the sysytem, there should have been a greater emphasis on training, education, child care and on meaningful employemnt that goes beyond, "Ya want fries with your burger?"

Yeah, I wish Clinton had really taken on "Welfare Reform" but started at the top where the bulk of it goes. But he didn't. Like the good Repubocrat that he was, he went after the poor. Hey, they ain't got no clout, no lobbiests, no PAC's. Easy win! Right?

Typical. Always blame the working class and the poor for the ills whilst the Enrons of the world *enron* over you poor butt.

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: harpgirl
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 04:07 PM

...all I can figure is that with this election we have proven that we haven't evolved beyond when we were lemmings...we are following them over the cliff...

...my health insurance premiums for my small group are going up from the $375.69 per month they had been last year, to $564+ a month. If Republicans can help me stay in business as an entrepreneur, they had better do something about health care premiums. I can't guarantee that I can make that much more next year so I have to adjust my coverage down. It would help if my son's father would carry him on his insurance, but he won't...even though he is a stockbroker and must be making good money! That's my biggest worry at the moment. I'll kiss DougR's ass if the Republicans do something about my health insurance premiums!

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Blues=Life
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 04:01 PM

I said,"I hate to say it, but for me, the Democratic Party died the moment the leadership of the party supported Clinton after he lied to the American people. I never had much problem with his having sex with some young groupie, as long as his wife didn't seem to mind. But I was deeply disturbed when he stated "I did not have sexual relations with that woman!" which was an out and out lie. I don't require my politicians to be sexually moral, but don't break your trust with ME. And then, the leadership acted like this was a fine thing, and no big deal."

Peg says "Mr. Clinton did lie..about something extremely personal that was NO ONE's BUSINESS BUT HIS OWN AND HIS WIFE's. Where he wants to put his dick is hardly a matter of national security. ...Please, just cut this crap about how he "lied to the American people." It's just uninformed self-righteous rhetoric."

Kendall says: "Peg, I'm with you. It is a measure of the mis placed morality of those like Blues, who are more upset by a president getting a blow job than the Actor, lying through his teeth about Iran-Contre and Arms for hostages. Talk about head up your ass!"

DougR says"I wish folks would put to rest the fable that Clinton was impeached because he got a blow job from a girl half his age. He was impeached because he lied UNDER OATH! Geeze."

Kendall says, "Doug, he lied. Ok, Reagan lied. Help me understand the REAL difference. And don't split hairs."

So let's try it again without the ad hominum attacks, the red herrings, and the straw men. The question was, when did the Party die? My position is that it came when the President broke trust with the American people, and the party leadership. Kendall, if you'll actually read what I said, I never said I was upset with Billy getting a blow job. I still think he would have been better off with one of two other responses:

a) "That's right, buddy, and she was GOOD too!" He would have been in trouble with Hilary, but not with most 50 year old men who can't get a 20 year old to drop to her knees in their office.

b) "I'm sorry, but that's none of your DAMN BUSINESS!" This is probably what he should have said right from the start.

As far as Reagan lying... That pissed me off too. I never trusted the hack before, and I sure didn't trust him later. The point is, WHEN DID MY PARTY DIE, AND HOW DO WE REBUILD IT? And again, my response, which you all chose to ignore, was to bring in fresh leadership with a vision of where we should be going. We didn't get it this time, and until we do, the only guy in town showing leadership is going to lead.

Blues
Gov. Vilsack for President, 2004

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 03:58 PM

Clinton is the president that pushed through reform Bobert. Republicans couldn't get it passed. Former voter is right in that sense. However, I disagreed with Former voter that any Democrats would use the racist coded language of Mary Garvey's, as I think that blatant language use by Democrats went the way of the Reagan Democrats, which is to say, over to the Republican party.

But I am opened to be corrected on that point. If there are Democratic party activists among us who are hearing that language being used by the under 30 Democrats, and can vouch for that right turn in the Democratic party, I will gladly stand to be corrected.

I know you won't hear that language on the progressive left. But does that mean that the non-partisan but Democrat aligned progressive left is guilty of demagoguery over the race issue? I think it is fertile ground for discussion, to be honest. Anyone who knows of the debacle of the US senate nomination by the Green Party of Minnesota convention last spring can vouch for that!

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Genie
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 03:40 PM

I heard one radio commentator today note that many of the Democrats who narrowly lost election or re-election to Congress were those who had "wrapped themselves in the mantle of Bush." He went on to remind us that Harry Truman once said "Given a choice between a Republican and a Republican, the voters will always choose a Republican."

Genie

Subject: RE: BS: Obit: the Democratic Party
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Nov 02 - 03:34 PM

GUEST, Forum Lurker: Good points but this administration ain't into learnin' any new material when it come to the "w" word. Repubs have beat the "welfare" horse since FDR. They just don't like sharing. Hey, doesn't matter that the infastructure of America was build by poor folks, in their minds they *own* it. Period. Discussion over.

In Little Hawk's world it won't be like that but we're gonna have to wait a tad for that world to evolve, but evolve it must or this little experiement called Earth will just burn itself out.

And I gotta agree with ya, LH, in your assessment of parties but until mankind gets to a higher level of cooperation, inclusion and caring, Iz gonna have to stick with my Green folk.

Speaking of which, Dougie, thanks fir the endorsement. Actually I have given thought to running for the House of Representatives after I get retired in 2 or 3 more years. I'm not a stranger to system and am currently involved in a number of community projects working, I hate to say it, predominantly with Repubs.

And GUEST: 4th request! You know the drill, my friend... A name? Is that too much to ask? Or even a number would be a step in the right direction.....

Bobert