Howard Dean new Democrat party chairman

[Admiral]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
I'd LOVE to see the Democratic Party turn pro-life, but its not going to happen. The best they can and should do is stop being so vocally and rabidly pro-choice. Support stuff like the partial birth abortion ban, stop wearing shirts that say "I had an abortion", maybe soften support for roe v. wade on a state's rights stance, and still firmly push for legal abortions at the state level.

Abortion is obviously a contentious issue, and it is obviously hard to argue, from a strict moral stance, for allowing it in all cases. But, many mistakenly believe that moving to the center on that issue would "save" the democratic party. But there is not really any chance of compromise. Republicans will not say, Ok, we've passed the partial birth abortion ban (incidentally, that is a Republican frame. Simply calling them late-term abortions would be a neutral term, without the connotations evoked by PBA), now we won't do anything more on the abortion front. What the Republicans are trying to do is establish a precedent for banning abortion outright, and they will not stop. By starting out pushing for a ban on late term abortions, which almost never occur, and as such are basically a nonissue, they establish a basis for support, and then can start to push forward the limits on abortion.

On the other hand, if the Democratic party were to become entirely anti-choice, the establishing of a wedge issue by the Republicans would be meaningless. But, this basically is the same position as the abandonment of freedom of marriage. We could stop supporting that completely, and come out against it, so that in no way could we be tied to that position. But, at that point, what would be the point of the party?

As I see it, one of the foundations of the Democratic party is to provide a voice to those without power. Gays are without power, with the majority of the ruling party (or, perhaps, the dominant vocal minority) considering them inherently immoral. Bear in mind how Bush ignored the Log Cabin Republicans. Proponents of choice are similarly on the far end of the power spectrum. In the current environment, it is much more acceptable to be rabidly anti-abortion, to the point of supporting in principle direct harrassment of people seeking abortion (Fallwell, and other types being the most guilty here), than it is to be pro-abortion.

But, the term "pro-abortion" is an unrealistic term. Almost no-one is pro-abortion. Having an abortion is, by most accounts, an extremely trying emotional process, and one that few people would engage in if they just didn't want to buy the requisite clothing, or something. It is the position of the Democratic party that people should be able to choose to have an abortion if they really cannot possibly have a child in their current situation. And once we take away that option, we will drive people to desperation.

If you'll allow me to draw a false parallel: organized crime in America was essentially created by prohibition. After prohibition ended, it had to find new venues, but before prohibition began, there was essentially no organized crime (other than the KKK, and others). The abandonment of the pro-choice position by the Democrats could very well have a similar effect.

[Kidlicious]

But there are lots of pro-choice people who don't even vote on that issue, and I imagine that there are gays who don't even vote on the issue of gay marriage. Well, actually I know there is.

[OzzyKP]

You can't say that all Republicans just want to ban all abortion. Many do, but many would be quite willing to compromise were one put forward. I don't think the Republican Party will put foward a good compromise on abortion, the Dems might be the only ones capable of it.

Hillary Clinton at least paid lip service to the idea for finding a compromise on the issue, but her actual ideas toward that end don't really do much. I do think that the politician, of whatever party, that can find a truly acceptable compromise on abortion will find any elected office in the land open to them.

Whether a truly acceptable compromise on the issue is possible or not... I dunno. I do think we should start looking, cause neither side is going to just capitulate in the long run.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by The Emperor Fabulous
I do think we should use the term "progressive" more often though...it'd very hard to demonize that word.

Don't you dare! Progressive is our word, not you dirty stinkin' liberals'.

[Lincoln]

"Liberal' is OK. It has become a dirty word already. Think of all the time we would have to waste demonizing a new word from scratch.

All this reminds me of the time I worked in a prison and they opened up a new wing. A friend of mine asked me what I thought of the way they were planning on running the new unit? I said it was a liberal progressive experiment. He said. "Oh I see, three strikes and they are out."

[ixnay]

Well it's official.

Remarks by Governor Howard Dean Accepting the Chairmanship of the Democratic National Committee
I. INTRODUCTION/ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

If you told me one year ago that I'd be standing here today, as your choice for Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, I wouldn't have believed you. And neither would have a lot of other people.

But let me say that standing here with the opportunity to lead this Party, is a great honor.

I am thankful.

I am humbled.

And I'm ready to get to work.

This was the first race for DNC chairman truly driven by the grassroots of this Party. And so, I want you to know this is not my chairmanship, this is our chairmanship.

You have given me an enormous responsibility. But it is a responsibility we share.

We can change this Party… but only by working together and competing in all 50 states. We can change this Party… but only by working together and becoming a national party again. We can change this Party… but only by working together at thelocal level.

If we want to win nationally, we have to win locally.

With your help, I am certain that today will not mark the end of the process of selecting a DNC chair. Today will be the beginning of the reemergence of the Democratic Party.

We have a lot of work to do.

But we have a bright future… exemplified by the other candidates who joined me in this race. They are all great Democrats.

I want to thank Terry McAuliffe. He has given this party so much. Not to mention every waking day of the past four years as our Chairman.

He has also given us something else — a Party in strong financial shape, with the infrastructure to meet the challenges of the future. That is no small gift. Thank you, Terry McAuliffe.

I also want to thank my family. I wouldn't be here without their support, or their belief in a more fair and just America.

I especially want to thank my wife, Judy, for her patience and her love. She's here with me today.

We all know that we're the party of the big tent and new ideas.

We know that we're the party for young Americans looking for a government that speaks to them… we know that we're the party for working Americans desperate for a government that looks out for them… and we know that we're the party for older Americans and veterans and members of the Armed Services expecting and deserving a government that honors them.

And we know that no matter where you live or who you are, what you look like or how you worship, ours is the diverse party that welcomes you.

But right now, as important as all of that is… it is not enough. We have to move forward. We cannot win if all we are is against the current President.

Republicans wandered around in the political wilderness for 40 years before they took back Congress. But the reason we lost control is that we forgot why we were entrusted with control to begin with.

The American people can't afford to wait for 40 years for us to put Washington back to work for them.

It can't take us that long.

And it won't take us that long… not if we stand up for what we believe in… organize at the local level… and recognize that this Party's strength doesn't come from the consultants down, it comes from grassroots up.
II. STANDING UP FOR WHAT WE BELIEVE IN

The first thing we have to do is stand up for what we believe in.

This week, the Republicans introduced a $2.5 trillion budget that deliberately conceals the cost of their fiscal recklessness.

Their budget doesn't account for the cost of the war in Iraq, or privatizing Social Security. It cuts education, children's health, veterans benefits, and community policing.

As far as I'm concerned, this budget does only two things:

It brings Enron-style accounting to our nation's capital.

And it demonstrates what Americans are beginning to see: Republicans cannot be trusted with your money.

The Republicans know the America they want… and they are not afraid to use any means to get there.

But there is something that this Administration and the Republican Party are very afraid of. It is that we may actually begin fighting for what we believe — the fiscally responsible, socially progressive values for which Democrats have always stood and fought.

Because we are what we believe.

We Democrats believe in fiscal responsibility and we're the only ones who have delivered it.

The first time our nation balanced its budget, it was Andrew Jackson, father of the Democratic Party, who did it. The last time our nation balanced its budget, it was Bill Clinton who did it. Democratic governors do it every single year.

Not one Republican President has balanced the budget in almost 40 years. Borrow and spend. Borrow and spend. Borrow and spend. Americans cannot trust the Republicans with their money.

Americans want a strong and smart national security.

It was Democrats who pushed to create a Department of Homeland Security. It was Democrats who pushed to make our airlinessafer. It is Democrats who are now working to make sure we close the remaining gaps in our security. It was Democrats who demanded reform of the intelligence community.

And it is Democrats who are pushing for a foreign policy that honestly deals with the threats of today, and the threats of tomorrow — like securing the nuclear materials around the world.

Republicans had to be dragged kicking and screaming to our side on all of these issues. There is no reason for Democrats to be defensive on national defense.

We believe that a good job is the foundation of a strong family, a strong community, and a strong country. We're going towork to create good high-paying jobs here in America, and we're going to keep good high paying jobs here in America.

And there is no reason for us to apologize for being willing to stand up for our belief that Americans who get up and go to work everyday have the right to join a union.

We believe every American should have access to affordable health care. It is wrong that we remain the only industrialized nation in the world that does not assure health care for all of its citizens, particularly our children

We believe the path to a better future goes directly through our public schools.

We believe that every single American has a voice and that it should be heard in the halls of power every day. And most importantly, it ought to be heard by guaranteeing an open and fair vote on Election Day.

And finally, we believe that a lifetime of work earns you a retirement of dignity. We won't let that be put at risk by leaders who continually invent false crises to justify policies that don't work… in this case, borrowing from our children and shredding our country's social safety net in the process.

The President's plan for Social Security does nothing to guarantee Social Security's future. But it will cut benefits andcost an estimated 2 trillion dollars. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, we will have to borrow 4.5 trillion dollars to finance the privatization of Social Security in the first 20 years alone.

Let me give you a sense of how much money that is. There are 118 million people under the age of 30 in America today. That means borrowing nearly $45,000 in each of their names.

That's a legacy of debt our children don't deserve.

Social Security is one of the proudest achievements of the Democratic Party, and we don't intend to let it fall victim toa dishonest scheme that only serves to heap greater debt on America's young people.

We need to set the agenda. And we're going to work with Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and our Democratic governors and local elected officials to do just that.

I met with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid this past week, and we are looking forward to standing together in the battles ahead.

We're all going to need to be united. And we're going to need to be organized.

Really organized.
III. ORGANIZE

That means we frame the issues; Republicans will not tell America what our agenda is. We will do that.

Organizing means raising money not only from big donors but small contributors, not only through dinners and telephone solicitations and direct mail, but also through the Internet and person-to-person outreach.

Organizing means transforming us into a Party that can communicate with its supporters and with all Americans.

Politics is at its best when we create and inspire a sense of community. The tools that were in part pioneered in my campaign — like blogs and Meetups and most importantly, community building — are just a start.

We are going to use all of the power and potential of technology as part of an aggressive outreach to meet and include voters, to work with your state parties, and to get our message out.

We cannot run 18 state presidential campaigns and expect to win.

You all know we have a strategy for every state and territory. It's very simple. Show up.

People will vote for Democratic candidates in Texas, and Utah, and West Virginia if we knock on their door, introduce ourselves and tell them what we believe. That's what organization allows us to do.
IV. GRASSROOTS

But all of the ideas and organization in the world won't matter if people don't see our ideas as relevant to them, or thepolitical process as connected to them.

So, third, we are going to recognize that our strength lies at the grassroots.

If we are to take our country back for everyday working Americans, Democrats will have to match or exceed the Republicansability to motivate voters.

You might find this hard to believe… but I'm not much of a zen person. But I've found that the path to power, oddly enough, is to trust others with it. That means putting the power where the voters are.

That is something Republicans will never understand.

But we do.
V. CONCLUSION

Standing up for our beliefs… organizing… and transforming our party into a grassroots organization that can win in all 50 states: That's how we will rebuild the Democratic Party.

We will rebuild our Party because only we are the party of reform. Republicans can stop progress, but only Democrats can start it again.

And we will rebuild our Party because our greatest strength is something the Republicans can and will never match — the diversity represented in this room.

Look around — we look like America. We are America. Republicans stop progress, but only Democrats start it.

It's going to take a lot of work. And I'm going to be asking a lot of all of you. It is not my chairmanship; it is ours.

Election by election… State by state… Precinct by precinct… Door by door… Vote by vote…

We're going to take this country back for the people who built it.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by The Emperor Fabulous
Centrism is wrong. It makes no stands, only compromises.

Stands don't work.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Admiral
Abortion is obviously a contentious issue, and it is obviously hard to argue, from a strict moral stance, for allowing it in all cases. But, many mistakenly believe that moving to the center on that issue would "save" the democratic party. But there is not really any chance of compromise. Republicans will not say, Ok, we've passed the partial birth abortion ban (incidentally, that is a Republican frame. Simply calling them late-term abortions would be a neutral term, without the connotations evoked by PBA), now we won't do anything more on the abortion front. What the Republicans are trying to do is establish a precedent for banning abortion outright, and they will not stop. By starting out pushing for a ban on late term abortions, which almost never occur, and as such are basically a nonissue, they establish a basis for support, and then can start to push forward the limits on abortion.

Yay for the slippery slope fallacy!

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Stands don't work.

Yep, Goldwater's stand sure failed . . . oh wait.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


Stands don't work.

Not taking a stand can keep you a live for the time being, but you can never win a battle until you take a stand.

[Kuciwalker]

Yes you can. You may not get your way ENTIRELY, but odds are you'll get a lot MORE of what you want by compromising than by not compromising.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Yep, Goldwater's stand sure failed . . . oh wait.

McGovern would be the more apt comparison for this instance I think.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Kidicious


I think there is a lot of voters like you. I wish the Dems would turn anti-abortion and go more for the religious people who support more liberal economic programs, and less war. That leave room for the feminists and others for a left wing party.

abortion is about the only thing I am proreblican on

of course, I voted all democrat last time because the rebuplicans were messing everything else up (and wouldn't do anything about abortion anyway)

Jon miller
(most people are in favor of restrictions on abortion, it is just that they think it is the difference between abortions for all, or abortions for nobody)

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
I'd LOVE to see the Democratic Party turn pro-life, but its not going to happen. The best they can and should do is stop being so vocally and rabidly pro-choice. Support stuff like the partial birth abortion ban, stop wearing shirts that say "I had an abortion", maybe soften support for roe v. wade on a state's rights stance, and still firmly push for legal abortions at the state level.

there are republicans who are prochoice

there are no democrats who are prochoice

the democrats need to just make it less of a deciding line

Jon mliler

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Yes you can. You may not get your way ENTIRELY, but odds are you'll get a lot MORE of what you want by compromising than by not compromising.

I'm not against compromise per se, but compromising all the time it stupid. You said stands don't work. Never fight a battle you can't win, but when you can win you shouldn't compromise.