Is the Democratic Party committed to protecting a woman's right to choose? Do we have a set of foundational principles and commitments to certain core constituent voter blocks? I believe we do and we should. But we need to remind ourselves of what these principles are and why we should be more strongly committed to our core Democratic beliefs.
Last night, in jpol's diary supporting Chuck Pennacchio, an apparent pro-Casey comment caught my eye.
it's like you really want Casey to lose so that you can be self-righteous like the other pro-abortion fanatics on this board to talk about "the message" that no one cared about
We've heard things like this before. But, what was new for me last night, was to hear the additional charges that those of us who are Chuck Pennacchio supporters were selfish, extremist, marginal, fringe or single issue pro-abortion fanatics whom have tried to single handedly re-define what the word progressive means and impose it on the rest of the Democratic party.
What is the Real Cause The Growing Anti-Bob Casey Backlash From Progressives?
This type of anti-progressive language and attitude has been significantly reduced in the last three months, but continues unchallenged by other Casey supporters despite polite requests for moderation. Leading some progressive and pro-choice woman to wonder to what extent this is a more widely endorsed viewpoint.
Every time I have seen this minority of the pro-Casey supporters start attacking progressives and PA pro-choice voters for possibly sitting out the November election, they also quickly blame these voters for any possible loss by Casey in November. And they attack these voter's loyalty and intelligence for enabling the GOP to retain control of the House and Senate.
Let's be clear. If the GOP retains control of the House and Senate because progressive, pro-choice and other former Democratic voters abandon the party, and we fail to attract the independent voters who have been planning to vote against Santorum for six years, because we offend them and convince them our party has no principles except the lust for power, the fault will not lie with these voters, but with the pro-Casey supporters who have been inflaming them with these unwarranted attacks. And, probably also, with the DSCC and DLC leaders and consultants who have betrayed out parties core principles, and walked so many others right of the cliffs of opportunistic triangulation, instead of remaining loyal to our base voters and principles.
Supporters of The Constitutional Foundation Principles of The Democratic Party Are Not Single Issue Voters.
Some in our party seem to have either forgotten or abandoned our Party's core foundation pillars and commitments and are espousing strategies that betray our core most loyal voting blocs and our party's political philosophy.
More specifically, the 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th, 10th, and 14th Constitutional Amendments have special meaning for the Democratic Party.
The Democratic and Republican parties have been locked and a five decades long battle between what rights are sacrosanct to the individual -- and what powers can be exercised by the state.
And what is the role of the Government in protecting individual rights and the common good?
Although, the Republicans like to espouse great commitment to individual and states rights, a good deal of their opposition to "big government," has been motivated by the strategy of preventing the government from protecting actual individual rights against corporate or state backed concentrations of power that diminish the common good.
Economic theorist have no trouble understanding that a purely free market system is unable to correctly function when "externalities" are not included in individual decision making. The destruction of our common collectively owned and needed environmental assets would be damaged if we did not have the government acting in agency to protect our collective interest and common good.
Also, Democrats believe that the use of the national guard to protect minority voting rights in the south, against the "former" George Wallace Democrats, as well as our protection of those with minority religious or ethnic status were effective and principled uses of government powers to protect individual rigths. And the net benefit outweighed any negatives.
Core Democratic Principles
The Democratic party has staked out the moral high ground in our commitments to the constitutionally based principles of the separation of church and state, the rights to privacy, protection against unreasonable search and seizure, and the principles of full equality and protections of individual rights.
Few people favor abortion, however, that is not the issue. The issue is who gets to decide and why. That's why Democrats call this issue pro-choice, and the Republicans call it pro-abortion.
The majority of Americans and our Supreme Court do support the constitutional principle of the right of privacy that was one of the foundations for the Roe verus Wade decision that protects an individual woman's right to make that decision for herself. The constitution leaves to the individuall all rights not specifically enumerated as powers of the state.
A woman therefore has the right to control here own body.
Up until recently the Democratic party has agreed with the SCOTUS that government may not infringe on this individual liberty of a woman to control her own body.
Democratic Party Relegitimizes Rick Santorum Disgraceful and Stupid Comments Denying Our Rights To Privacy In Electorial Blunder Of The Decade
Based on and in support of this same constitutional right right of privacy, in Lawrence verus Texas (2002 or 2004?) the Supreme Court of the US struck down all remaining state laws banning sodomy that were the basis of making homosexuality illegal in many states.
In a tragic and poignant irony, it was Pennsylvania's own Senator Rick Santorum, who embarrassed himself by declaring in his ridiculous book "It Takes A Family" that no such right of privacy exists. (At the same time he made his famouw "Man on Dog" comments.)
I've been waiting for years to attack Rick Santorum with an article I wrote last year on this. Now, in an incredible strategic blunder, our Democratic party appears ready to give away this campaign issue by putting forth Bob Casey who does not support the right to privacy either. Relegitimizing Rick Santorum. How incredibly.....sad.
This is the meaning of "pro-choice." Democrats have defined the issue in favor of the individual woman, her doctor, religious and others advisors as opposed to the Republicans who favor this decision being made by the government.
Republicans, (and now the new Democrats), use the term "pro-life" and refer to those favoring a woman's right to choose as "abortionists" or "pro-abortion fanatics" to intentionally blur this distinction
Many Democrats are strongly and even religiously opposed to abortion at a personaly level. But the Democratic party has gone to the mat to defend the Constitutional principle, that when it comes to the laws of the land this decision belongs to the individual woman to control her body in whatever consultation she wishes to make with her doctor, family, and religious advisors.
Which, is why the use of the words "pro-abortion fanatics" and "abortionists", the code words of the right wing, provide a potential clue that many of these purported pro-Casey supporters may not Democrats at all.
What concerns me is that so many have shed five decades of blood, sweat and tears to defend the proposition that honors the determination that our Constitution prescribes certain unalienable rights to the individual. And the underlying membership and coalition of our current Democratic party around such principles as separation of church and state, rights to privacy, protection against unreasonable search and seizure, full equality and civil and individual rights for all Americans are not single issues or voluntary commitments that can be supported or not as this were some smorgasbord of constitutional principals.
Let's see, today I think we'll have a little of the civil rigths, and protections for religious minorities, but please hold the rights of privacy for our PA voters, and maybe we should make a little exception on the seperation of church and state thing over there in Arkansas. And, oh yes, lets "super-size" the religious freedom for our New York voters. And could we, please, get this all wrapped to go, in case we change our mind?
NOT!
This is not going to work folks. Before TV they used to do politics like this, but not anymore.
The Rule of Law Not Of Men Verus Right Makes Right
And just a reminder, while we are talking about the core principles of our Democratic philosopy verus those of the GOP, which also seem to be fuzzy for a lot of folks. Many noted scholars are asking in the prestigious journals this month if Progressive should have some principles. And if we were going to make some up, what should they be? We already have excellent principles, some of us have just seemed to have forgotten what they are.
So, perhaps, it may be worth reminding people of some other principles where we progressive Democrats depart from the Republicans (and apparently many other Democrats.)
And important one is the respect for the rule of law both at home and abroad. And just about the exact opposite of all the basic principles of the Neocons, who were explictly trying to lead our nation away from our relatively successful and traditional Demcoratic foreign policy positions as advocated by John Kennedy, Jimmy Carter, Gary Hart, Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Wesley Clark, and John Kerry.
The rule of law not men.
So our respect for our signatures on the Geneva Conventions, and the 1945 United Nations Charter should not require "focus groups" or poll approvals for support for most Democrats.
The Neocon's led the Republicans over the same cliffs of short term political opportunism, by advocating unilateral projection of US Imperial Military power as a first choice in opposition to the Demoratic principle of respect for international law, multi-lateralism, Just War theory which allows intiating war only as a last resort, and negotiation among regional powers to settle disputes.
Which makes Bob Casey's reported support for President Bush's preemptive war theory and support for a potential first strike tactical nuclear attack on Iran in violation of both Just War Theory as well as international law problematic for of us "progressive" PA voters.
But again, if you mention this, on dkos comments streams in a pro-Pennacchio diary you are likely to be attacked as a sigle issue's extremist. Well, the point is folks, these are not seperable single issues positions. There are part of a coherent inseperable systemic Democratic philosophy.
To call those of us who remember and understand this bigger picture "single issue" extremists is incorrect. If anyone is out of the Democratic mainstream it is not progressives, who know exactly what we believe and why.
And it is yet another example of how tragically misquided and sad it is that those who advanced Bob Casey obviously do not understand this. And have jeapordized this election, just at a time when Repubican and independent voters have realized the error of their ways, and are now open mindedly rushing back to the center, we put forth a canditate who seems unware and out of touch with our centrist and correct positions.
And who neutralizes our advantages on these issues, just when Rick Santorum was crumbling. This is one reason Santorum's numbers are strengthening now, in my opinion.
As voters learn more about Casey's opinions they are saying, "hey wait a minute? This is not any different. Except for the (D)? If this is what the Democrats mean as their substantative alternative--another right wing wanna-be--we'd rather have the real thing. Who is a three term incumbant already in power.
Nominating Casey will delegitimize virtually every principled issue we've attacked Santorum on. Please PA voters, vote for the true, vastly more electable candidate Chuck Pennacchio. True, he has low name recognition now, but once PA voters get to know him, he has the potential to win far higher vote scores in November.
The DSCC, and DLC should have funded this already, but even now should poor money in a last ditch effort to perserve our ideals and improve our chances of winning this critical PA seat. And those responsible for putting us in this position should be held accountable.
The Battle For the Heart And Soul Of the Democratic Party
This tragic PA senate election stratic blunder and fiasco, raises the question, what choices and positions make one a Democrat? Do we have any litmus test issues? Or would we nominate Dick Cheney for our 2008 Presidental Candidate under the presumption that we could hive off all the voters to the right of John McCain with this strategy? What would we win?
No, committments to progresive principles is a good thing, and should be a pre-requisite for candidate we support and organization we give money and other support too. Which is one reason the DSCC and DLC need to clarify and explain whatever role they have had in PA. And exactly how much if any financial resources they have channeled to Casey and withheld from Pennacchio and Sandals.
The Imperative of Full Support for 14th Amendment Rights of full Equality and Individual Rights For All Americans
I think most might agree that full support for civil rights and equality for woman and people of color is a such a party committment. And a fortunate one, although we paid a big price in the short term for driving the George Wallace "Democrats" out of the party.
But does our unqualified support of the 14th amendment rights of equal protection extend to full equality and rights for the gay, lesbian, and transgendered community with regard to marriage equality and civil unions? I believe it should, but Mark Warner supporters apparently do not.
Mark Warner opposes both civil unions and marriage equality for gays, lesbians, and the transgendered. And has been much to silent, not opposing the regressive anti-GLBT family protection act in his home state of Virginia. Unless he changes this position I believe he is not only unsuitable as a Presidential or Vice Presidential candidates but probably the only candidate Democrats could field that would likely turn New York State into a red state as Rudy Giuliani, George Patacki, or John McCain would pull away the GLBT vote with their superior track record and positions.
The only good aspect I see in this PA fiasco is that it should wake up and warn the Democratic Party not to repeat this blunder at a much larger scale with the GLBT communities and other supporters of full 14th amendment protection such as woman and minorities communities in our 2008 Presidential campaigns. Someone please explain this to the 2% to 4% of Democrats who keep voting for Mark Warner in straw polls. This is an additional insult to progressive voters and an additional source of anti-Democratic backlash among the swelling ranks of independent voters.
But again, when challenged on this, defenders raise the issue of "single issue politics" and the "big tent" question. But I believe support for the 14th amendment which protects the full equality and civil liberties of all Americans is a legitimate litmus test issue from now on for all Democrats. And I will fight for this belief and encourage all the dissaffected former Democrats who are now independents to return and help us.
This is our party. The others should form a third party if they wnat to. But 5 Decades of blood, sweet, and tears on the full equality individual rights for All Americans issue should not be thrown out without a fight. Remember the words and inspiration of Martin Luther King Jr, as Al Gore just reminded us of on King's birthday.
By the way, please notice that Al Gore embodies and espouses the most noble progressive ideals on every single issue without exception. And can anyone doubt that his passionate committment is authentic and sincere. He does not need to check with polls to see what his speech and positions tomorrow will be. I am praying he will run again and lead us to this brighter future.
Either you support full equality and civil rights for all Americans or you do not. If you do, you are a progressive Democrats. If you do not, you are either a Republican or someone else.
Grandfather Tolerance For Those of The Past?
But have we not tolerated exceptions, for a few pre-WW II Senators whom have tainted civil rights pasts, and other dubious positions out, of alignment with our commitments to core Democratic principles. Yes, out of respect for their decades past service or incumbency. And as realistic recognition of the slow evolution of social values.
As have the Republicans. As long as they remain silent in areas of past transgressions.
But even in the Republican party, former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott was forced to resign after making unacceptable comments about the good old days before civil rigthts at Strom Thursmands birthday party. Lott is still a Senator, but will never be an acceptable candidate for the office of the President, even in the GOP.
Such is the nature of progress. And the positive evolution of our social values.
We apply higher standards to the election of high office for future candidates as we should.
I do not know who is responsible for the PA Bob Casey imbroglio. If Chuck Schummer, or representatives of the DSCC, or DLC want to come forward and explain any role they may or may not have had in this, I think it would be helpful.
And if any committee of true Democrats with reputations as respectable of Senator Chuck Schummer wants to say, the "buck stops here" I would want to show equal nobility by putting any comments or criticism I might have, in the context of A "lessons learned" discussion for a future more effective Democratic party.
My hope is, that if Democrats quickly show a recommitment to our principles and loyal core voting blocks of the past, such as pro-choice voters, we will have more credibillity when we ask discouraged voters not to sit out the November election. Or leave our great party.
If Casey should win on May 16, please vote with us against Santorum in November. And my promise to you, is that I will fight to restore the commitment of our Democratic party to our core principles. And I believe many others will join me. Please come help us restore our progressive principles to the Democratic party where they belong.
Do not sit the November election out.
True Progressives and other Democrats Need To Reunite And Defend Our Principles
In fact all the progressives who have fought and struggled for woman's rights, civil rights, rights for the GLBT communities, the insistence of respect for religious and ethnic minorities need to remember that we need to "hang together or we will certainly hang separately."
If the Democratic party is going to start treating loyalty to our foundational commitments as sort an optional Constitutional smorgasbord no one can feel safe. If we stand by, without protest, as one minority group after another is thrown overboard in the "triangulation theory of the day," it will only be a matter time, before we have lost every victory we have fought so hard and consistently to achieve over the last 5 decades.
For example, about 15% of people in the extensive polling I've done here on the subject of marriage equality and full civil right for all American including the GLBT communities, have indicated that they would happily throw the GLBT communities overboard if it seemed electorally convenient. This is not only a shame but is politically stupid.
And even though this is a progressive site, about 15% consistently praise the great virtues of Mark Warner, who is the only Democratic candidate and one of only even half the GOP candidates for the 2008 Presidential nomination who strongly opposes BOTH civil unions AND marriage equality. And has been much too silent and maybe even totally absent from opposition to his home State VA regressive family protection act.
Even John McCain scores three levels higher than Mark Warner on the last GLBT support overview of the 2008 candidate I conducted.
And about 20% of dkos respondents indicated they would like to see the 2004 Democratic party platform "water down" or reduce the language of support for GLBT issues. And, when John Edward, whom I had previously listed as a strong supporter of the GLBT communities, updated his latest website upgrade, he reportedly took out his previously strong support statements for the GLBT.
So, the deeper issue is what is the Democratic Party's level of real commitment to the First, Forth, Fifth, Ninth, Tenth, Fourteenth Amendments?
An for that matter, what about support for the entire Constitution and Bill of Rights? As well as support for the international rule of law, Geneva Conventions, 1945 U.N. Charter, Just War Theory, and opposition of the Neocon philosophy of pre-emptive first strike, including the use of tactical nuclear weapons against Muslim populations?
The principles of separation of church and state, the right of privacy, protection against warrantless search and seizure, support for full equality (equal protection under the law) and support full individual rights for all citizens are no longer optional for Democrats.
And supporters of of this indivisable set of core Democratic principles and this holistic and integrated politcal philosphy are not examples of single issue extremists, as has been represented by some in the pro-Casey, Joe Lieberman, and Mark Warner camps.
We are the mainstream of the hard core progressive Democrats. And we are going to reunite in vigorous and loud support for the 5 decades long coalition that has succesfully got us here today and advanced our society in the right direction on what are now considered modern American mainstream values.
Regressives, fundementalists, and others who dissagree are Republicns or something else. We can have them as friends, but not as elected leaders of high political office representing our party.
Recommitting Ourselves To Our Moral High Ground
Many of us are becoming concerned that an alarming number of "Democrats" do not seem to understand the history of our last 50 years and the incredible struggle and price our party paid to take the moral high ground on these issues.
We fought and won on these issues and changed the definition of our party by remembering the advice of our founders "We either hang together or hang separately."
My young son, believes, as many of you here appear to as well, that this expression is just a self evident tautology about who you going to spend Friday night with in the mall.
But for woman, people of color, gays, lesbians, the bisexual, transgendered, religious and ethnic minorities who were inspired by the great words of Martin Luther King Jr. solidarity around these issues in the face of oppression became a matter of survival. And our winning formula and strategy for almost five decades for winning elections.
These principles and associated politcal philosophies define what it means to be a Democrat and what our party stands for. There are self evident, noble, and still inspire the aspirations of people around the world.
There is no going back now.
Republicans are the party of the past. Their hateful, selfish, and backwards looking vision do not inspire the aspiration of others around the world yearning for freedom, equality, and democracy.
It is the progressive principled Democrats who represent the ideals and hopes of the future. Because we committed ourselves to pricipled stands on the 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th, 10th, and 14th amendments and did the right thing. Now the rest of society is catching up with us.
Perhaps, there is a lesson here? When in doubt, going with the wonderful Constitution of the United States of America is our safest bet. But now after an incredible, noble, painful, bloody, and expensive battle, and bet on the future, we got rigth. It would outragiously unwise and tragically sad, to throw out our hard won badges of honor. And an insult the the memories of the many who like Martin Luther King Jr., actually died and paid with their lives to put us where we are today.
We stand on the shoulders of giants.
Whom we need to continue to respect and honor. By guarding these hard won rights and the credibility to lead our society into the next century. A future filled with the promises of the dream for constitution protections of equality, the rights to privacy, indivitual liberties, rights, and freedom guareenteed for all the people of the world.
We should be proud and honored that our Democratic Party has taken such noble, courageous, and principled stands on these challenging issues.
But we must not become frightened our distracted and return our gaze the the past. But need to keeping facing forward.
Let us continue to lead the way to a brighter future for ALL Americans. Many whom have still not tasted the fruits of Martin Luther King's inspiring dream.
Conclusion
So is the Democratic Party committed to protecting a woman's right to choose? We should be.
And we should renew and review our committments to the other powerful and noble progressive principles and political philosophy that distinquishes us from the Republicans.
The right to choose is one of set of interconnect and indivisable foundational principles that has recognize and uphold the sanctity of the individual as the cornerstone of American society. And has successfully united a broad colalition of voting blocks to gain power against the Republicans.
If the Republican party collapses over the next two election cycles, as seems likely, because they placed their bets on the wrong side of history, so to will the "let's unite for any reason" rationale for an incorrectly defined Democratic party.
We must reject this backwards looking and negative referential way of defining the meaning of our Party as whatever it may appear to take to beat Republicans in this particular district or issue. This approach trivilizes and undermines the power of our noble heritage.
Only by basing our party definition on real progressive principles and standing on the shoulders of our founding mothers and fathers and all the great visionary leaders supporting the sanctaty and primacy of individual rigthts
and our voluntary social contract to use government to affect our common good will we continue to build a powerful party for the future.
And by re-committing ourselves to our noble Democratic traditions we have the staying power to revitalize and sustain our great and historic party into this next century.
And this is the correct and Democratic alternative the the Republican Neocon approach to how to spread true democracy around the world.
So the good news for those asking what are the core principals of our Democratic Party is that these principles have already been chosen and are well known, noble, and correct.
We just have to turn our heads from the past, and remove them from the dark places, and look forward into the light. And recommit ourselves to understand our progressie principles and require that our leaders understand and remain committed to them as well.