Seems this is fodder for a diary instead of mile long comment responses, so here's the setup:
via NightProwlKitty's excellent diary concerning Cindy Sheehan
I've noticed this slight oddity concerning the terms "attack" and "criticize" as well as a certain amount of zealousness to party, as opposed to values and ideals. Here's what followed...
Here's where this diary begins... in a comment response:
Well... I would ask that you consider...
what exactly is the divergence between attacks and criticism, because in my experience, the difference usually only resides in the perspective of the individual.
If you agree with what's said, it's criticism
If you don't, it's attacking
I know what the FAQ says, I know what Markos says, I know what at least half of this site espouses when it comes to the party, but here's the reality:
In all of society, there is a difference between what something is defined to be and what something ultimately becomes. Once Pandora's box is opened and the power is let loose, it takes on a life of it's own regardless of the wishes of the origination. It evolves as different pressures and currents shape it and as reality asserts itself.
This community is defined as a Democratic blog, focused upon electing Democrats. In a general sense, that's what it still is.
But any way you look at it, this little community has slipped it's bonds and has grown into a clearinghouse for all schools of thought to the left of Barry Goldwater, with a hefty bias towards the left.
So much the better, I would think. That fact does not take anything away from the goal of reforming the Democratic party, nor does any criticism of said party. In fact, I would argue that the more strident the "attack", the better for the party it is. It's an opportunity to see just where the party's stated positions, the reality of it's record on those positions, and how it is percieved by those that have serious problems with it.
In order to elicit the affiliation and loyalty of the widest segment of the American population as possible, those concerns must be addressed, not shouted down.
And where it continues...
Why is Cindy such a sacred cow?
I like this question! It's worth asking and considering carefully. But first, for the sake of thoroughness, consider flipping that question around a bit like this:
Why is the Democratic party itself, such a sacred cow?
Elsewhere I've heard things that have supposedly been stated by Cindy, for example: "The Democratic party is the party of slavery", and the subsequent roars of outrage ensue.
But read your history. Lincoln was a Republican. If I were alive 150 years ago at that time, I would've been one too, because at that time, they were the party standing on the right side of the most important moral issue of the time.
The values and ideas of both parties have shifted across the spectrum many times down through history. The Republican party of today, would call Eisenhower a communist and Lincoln a bleeding heart liberal where they in politics today.
Do we owe our absolute allegiance to the party, right or wrong, or to a common ideal, common values, common decency and sense regardless of label?
The party label and infrastructure is organizational, that's it. Any organization will change and just as the Republicans are learning at this point in history, your party can leave you just as easily as you can leave it. When it's values are compromised, when it strays off the path that had brought it's members to it, when the party as a structure abandons the very foundation that brought it preeminnence.
The cycle will play out again and the Democratic party will leave behind the values we treasure in it. Make no mistake, it will happen again, just as one day, the Republican party will shift and change to oppose it, someday, many of us here may find ourselves seeing it with new eyes. But maybe not.
Two parties to represent the diversity of thought in this nation is far too few. If nothing else, the ongoing debates within both those parties should be example enough of the far too limited scope of only having a bi-polar choice of political affiliation.
But with this far too limited duopoly of policial choice, we are left with only two options, despite neither representing the majority of people in this country fully, leaving far too many of us to hold our nose and pick the closest of only two viable options.
It's the embodiment of black and white thinking, absolutism which lumps all the shades of thought in between into one camp or the other. It confines the parameters of the debate to on or off, one or the other. When the true options, the real issues, are never so all or nothing.
Make no mistake, I vote Democrat, never Republican, but I have and will hold out hope and occasionally vote third party. When TOLD I only have two options, yes or no, my typical response will be "Fuck you! Maybe!", because this world is NOT black and white, but innumerable shades of gray, blue, red, yellow, green, purple, orange... and on.
I will refuse to be dogmatic about ANY organization that demands unwavering fealty and blind devotion, and I worry that that's what the nature of this site is at least in part, moving towards, when it comes to these debates.
We would never accept the axiom of "My country, right or wrong", why is it so many of us are ready to apply it to our party so readily? It's something we should all consider individually and thoughtfully. Nor should we shy away from the reality, the facts, and the history of this party, which has NOT always been on the side of the angels.
It's true our best chance resides on the blue side of the isle and I, personally am happy and very proud, to sit here with you all and with those such as Pelosi, Reid, Webb, Tester, and yes, even Clinton.
But... my loyalty lies to justice, the constitution, and truth, NOT any particular political party. So long as the Democratic party remains committed to those principle concerns, I will stand by them as well. Should they diverge towards selfish partisanship, the party will have left ME.
This is my thinking on the impeachment issue and the reasoning behind my support for the effort to pressure Pelosi through Cindy's independent candidacy. For a long time many know I counseled patience and sustained effort before an all out offensive for this administraions impeachment. Once it became clear to me that this administration would not even be contained and put back on the leash by even our new Democratic congress, it became clear to me that we had reached this point.
Now that I've come to that conclusion, I will carry it out and pursue it by whatever means are available and conform with my own loyalties, again, being justice, the constitution, and truth. If that requires me to support others outside of the party, then that is what I will do.
This is not about a party or person, this is about those three pillars and nothing else. We take what is given and do what we must in order to live up to what values we hold dearest. If this requires you to tag this with "troll diary", requires you to TR me into oblivion, whatever you feel you must, then do so. I will hold no anger nor malice towards you, so long as you listen to your better heart.
But I will not abide blind obsessive loyalty to party, president, country, or religon, not here, not anywhere, and so long as I have a voice here, I will say as much.