And so it Begins

[Colleen Thomas]

WASHINGTON - Democratic chairman Howard Dean mischaracterized his party's platform on gay rights in an interview courting evangelicals, then set the record straight Thursday when an advocacy group called him on it.

Dean told Christian Broadcasting Network News that the 2004 Democratic platform declares "marriage is between a man and a woman" — just one of the points he made in reaching out to religious conservatives who are largely hostile to the party.

But the platform does not define marriage that way, and his remarks prompted the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force to return a $5,000 donation from the Democratic National Committee.

Dean later acknowledged his misstatement, but the group sent back the money anyway. "We need for Governor Dean to demonstrate real leadership on our issues," executive director Matt Foreman said in an interview, "not to equivocate depending on the audience."

Dean sought to establish common ground with religious conservatives in the interview on Pat Robertson's network, a tall order considering their opposition to the Democratic Party's positions on abortion rights, gay rights and some other social issues.

Dean said that "one of the misconceptions about the Democratic Party is that we're godless and that we don't have any values."

He went on: "The truth is, we have an enormous amount in common with the Christian community, and particularly with the evangelical Christian community. And one of the biggest things that Democrats worry about is the materialism of our country, what's on television that our kids are seeing, and the lack of spirituality."

With Republicans embracing the traditional definition of marriage in 2004, Democrats sought to appeal to such traditionalists without giving up their support for gay rights.

The result: a platform plank that left the central question about what defines marriage to the states, and specifically rejected President Bush's support for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.

It asserted: "We support full inclusion of gay and lesbian families in the life of our nation and seek equal responsibilities, benefits, and protections for these families."

Dean stated in the interview: "The Democratic Party platform from 2004 says that marriage is between a man and a woman. That's what it says."

He added that the party differs with some religious leaders in believing "everybody deserves to live with dignity and respect, and that equal rights under the law are important."

After the gay rights group went public with its complaints about his remarks, Dean acknowledged: "I misstated the Democratic Party's platform, which does not say marriage should be limited to a man and a woman," and reasserted the party's commitment to equal protection for all.

Foreman said Dean should be persuading Democrats to fight against ballot initiatives seeking to ban gay marriage, but instead has misrepresented the party's "important and affirming plank" several times.

"There has been a disturbing lack of clarity from Governor Dean about where we fit into the party and the country," he said after Dean corrected himself.

Foreman said the $5,000 was for sponsorship of the group's leadership awards dinner in Washington last week, and will be missed

 

[Huckleman2000]

Sorry Colly. (on behalf of my political leadership, such as it is...) If it's any consolation, Dean has a history of mis-speaking from time to time.

On the plus side, Sen. Feingold (D-WI) came out in support of gay marriage recently, despite Wisconsin having an anti-gay marriage referendum on the next ballot. A friend of mine from HS in Wisconsin is on the staff of Tammy Baldwin, WI Congresswoman representing Madison and much of the southern part of the state. She is, I think, the only openly lesbian member of Congress, and also very popular in her district. WI is kind of bipolar, I think. The people aren't all knee-jerk haters-for-no-good-reason, though, and I think a broader sort of 'live and let live' attitude will take hold there. Madison has a large lesbian population, and many of them are daughters of people from more rural areas fo the state. And family ties are important, so I think lots of people have gay relatives or know people who have gay relatives, and in their heart of hearts in the ballot booth, their decency will prevail. My niece there has a girlfriend (I think) who is Native American, and my parents who will turn 80 this summer really like her. I don't know if they realize the situation or not - I think they might suspect it, but realize that it's none of their business and their position is just to love their granddaughter for who she is.

I'm sorry if this comes across like "some of my best friends are lesbians!", but I really mean it to say that, despite evidence to the contrary, heartland attitudes might be starting to come around.

 

[BlackShanglan]

I just hate their "tailor message to audience" approach. Fucking stand for something. Damned near anything. I'd respect you.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

I just hate their "tailor message to audience" approach. Fucking stand for something. Damned near anything. I'd respect you.

I totally agree with that, but I think there is a more subtle message here.


The religious right has catapulted the GOP into a commanding position politically. And the Dems, in dribs and drabs, in small concessions here and there, are begining to court them.

This represents a major victory for the religious right. The head of the DNC adopting thier position. Even if he retracts it later. If there was any question left, I think this is a signal that they have arrived as political force. And since their overwhelming drive is theorcracy, and the Dems represent the main people blocking that, I think it's a sad day for all left, right and center.

 

[Huckleman2000]

I just hate their "tailor message to audience" approach. Fucking stand for something. Damned near anything. I'd respect you.

Amen to that!

(BTW, I just want to draw your attention to my AV, which features the Horsehead Nebula in a fleeting glimpse! I spent a lot of time on that last Saturday, I'll have you know. Stumbling on the animation was sort of serendipitous, but making an AV out of it was quite the ordeal.)

 

[BlackShanglan]

Amen to that!

(BTW, I just want to draw your attention to my AV, which features the Horsehead Nebula in a fleeting glimpse! I spent a lot of time on that last Saturday, I'll have you know. Stumbling on the animation was sort of serendipitous, but making an AV out of it was quite the ordeal.)

And it's wonderful.

 

[BlackShanglan]

I totally agree with that, but I think there is a more subtle message here.


The religious right has catapulted the GOP into a commanding position politically. And the Dems, in dribs and drabs, in small concessions here and there, are begining to court them.

This represents a major victory for the religious right. The head of the DNC adopting thier position. Even if he retracts it later. If there was any question left, I think this is a signal that they have arrived as political force. And since their overwhelming drive is theorcracy, and the Dems represent the main people blocking that, I think it's a sad day for all left, right and center.

The good news is that it's them and everyone else that the elected are selling themselves to. The more of them there are, the less any of it means. Or so one hopes.

*Note: Horse has had a fair few glasses of some lovely vintages. If it makes no sense, please ignore it.

 

[AngeloMichael]

I totally agree with that, but I think there is a more subtle message here.


The religious right has catapulted the GOP into a commanding position politically. And the Dems, in dribs and drabs, in small concessions here and there, are begining to court them.

This represents a major victory for the religious right. The head of the DNC adopting thier position. Even if he retracts it later. If there was any question left, I think this is a signal that they have arrived as political force. And since their overwhelming drive is theorcracy, and the Dems represent the main people blocking that, I think it's a sad day for all left, right and center.

And it's incredibly stupid. What religious right constituant would vote republican-lite when they can vote republican?

So basically we have the party of no direction against the party going in the wrong direction. We seriously need a viable third party. And while I'm at it, I might as well wish for a million dollars for each of us too, we'd be just as likely to get that.

 

[cantdog]

The integrity of these people is tissue paper.

Dems especially, becuause they are going to betray you and screw you every bit as much as the GOP, but at least the GOP tells you right up front that they don't care for gays and poor people, and won't lift a finger for 'em. The dems talk the good game, sometimes, but they don't follow through for shit, if there's a lobbyist with the right quid-pro-quo in his hand.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

And it's incredibly stupid. What religious right constituant would vote republican-lite when they can vote republican?

So basically we have the party of no direction against the party going in the wrong direction. We seriously need a viable third party. And while I'm at it, I might as well wish for a million dollars for each of us too, we'd be just as likely to get that.

I don't expect a viable third party.

And I expected the Dems to move towards center. In fact,I advocated it several times coming up to and after the election.

The difference is, I expected prudent moves to ally the fears of moderate christians, not wholesale abdication of the platform.

I think you may have hit the nail right on the head. A party of no direction vs. a party headed all out in the wrong the direction.

The slow local to nowhere, or the fast freight to hell... some choice.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Amen to that!

(BTW, I just want to draw your attention to my AV, which features the Horsehead Nebula in a fleeting glimpse! I spent a lot of time on that last Saturday, I'll have you know. Stumbling on the animation was sort of serendipitous, but making an AV out of it was quite the ordeal.)

I love the av

 

[Huckleman2000]

I don't expect a viable third party.

And I expected the Dems to move towards center. In fact,I advocated it several times coming up to and after the election.

The difference is, I expected prudent moves to ally the fears of moderate christians, not wholesale abdication of the platform.

I think you may have hit the nail right on the head. A party of no direction vs. a party headed all out in the wrong the direction.

The slow local to nowhere, or the fast freight to hell... some choice.

Wow! I find myself in the heretofore unknown position of Hopeful Optimist! Either the therapy or the drugs must be working. Or, as with the esteemed Equus, maybe it's just the wine, spo-dee-o-dee.

If the left-leaning blogosphere is any indication, there is a pretty serious brouhaha bubbling up over the Hillary-wing of the Dems, ie, the DLC. As AngeloMichael pointed out, Repub-lite isn't necessarily a viable option. The suspicion is that anyone that might be brought into the Dems by these overtures to the Christian Right is more likely to just stay home, and so the appeal should be more tailored to moderates, who are more tolerant than they are given credit for. As the pendulum is swung further right, the middle swerves more left to compensate for the more ugly views that they could be associated with.

Hope springs eternal.

 

[Huckleman2000]

I love the av

and I love you, Colly!
I'm a lush, and I had a good therapy session today, and I just want everyone to love each other! I want our government to stay out of our business, I want our troops to come home, I want the Iraqis to find their own way, I want the government to talk to Iran and Russia and China and North Korea, not because I agree with those people, but just because I think it's harder to bomb people you're talking to. That goes both ways, for terrorists and for governments.

Peace, love, and wine!

 

[Colleen Thomas]

and I love you, Colly!
I'm a lush, and I had a good therapy session today, and I just want everyone to love each other! I want our government to stay out of our business, I want our troops to come home, I want the Iraqis to find their own way, I want the government to talk to Iran and Russia and China and North Korea, not because I agree with those people, but just because I think it's harder to bomb people you're talking to. That goes both ways, for terrorists and for governments.

Peace, love, and wine!

I don't really think you can do much with Iran. After reading some excerpts of their leader's letter to W, I am struck by his simplicity of mind.

Honestly, it reminds me very much of an episode few Americans have ever even heard of. In later 1942/early 1943 Ambassador Nomura of Japan and his special envoy Kukarusra and their staffs were exachned for Mr. Grew and his staff. At a party in their honor, Hideki Tojo took Kuska aside, and with Siurymara (Chief of staf of the Army) present, Aksed Kuskasura to end the war quickly.

The man could only reply, it was easier to start a war than end one.

The Iranian leader demonstarates that same simplicity of mind. The only way we are going to keep Iran from having nukes is to bomb the facilities wehre they are enriching uranium. The other is a nuclear armed Iran, with a man of tojo's limited intelligence at the controls of the civil government and An ayatolla as the power behind the throne. And if they get nukes, it won't be long before they are passing them out to the terrorists they sponsor. But because the honestly are simplistic enough to believe if Hezbollah detonated a nuclear device in tel Aviv that no one will blame them.

Tojo honestly believed that the US would capitualte after Pearl Harbor and the string of Japanese Victories that opened the war. And the Japanese man in the street did too. He honestly couldn't understand why anyone would be mad at Japan for beinging the enlightedned rule of the emperor and all it's benefits to them.

Now W, he's pretty simplistic too. And his outlook isn't much more sophisticated, but at least with W he's surrounded by folks who should know better.

For all of us, John Q. publics, I'm afraid we are headed down the road Suzuki-san was in 1938. Except our Control Clique is big bussiness not the military and our religions faction is the fundy right wing rather than shinto/ancestor worship with the emperor as head of both state and church.

 

[Huckleman2000]

I don't really think you can do much with Iran. After reading some excerpts of their leader's letter to W, I am struck by his simplicity of mind.

Honestly, it reminds me very much of an episode few Americans have ever even heard of. In later 1942/early 1943 Ambassador Nomura of Japan and his special envoy Kukarusra and their staffs were exachned for Mr. Grew and his staff. At a party in their honor, Hideki Tojo took Kuska aside, and with Siurymara (Chief of staf of the Army) present, Aksed Kuskasura to end the war quickly.

The man could only reply, it was easier to start a war than end one.

The Iranian leader demonstarates that same simplicity of mind. The only way we are going to keep Iran from having nukes is to bomb the facilities wehre they are enriching uranium. The other is a nuclear armed Iran, with a man of tojo's limited intelligence at the controls of the civil government and An ayatolla as the power behind the throne. And if they get nukes, it won't be long before they are passing them out to the terrorists they sponsor. But because the honestly are simplistic enough to believe if Hezbollah detonated a nuclear device in tel Aviv that no one will blame them.

Tojo honestly believed that the US would capitualte after Pearl Harbor and the string of Japanese Victories that opened the war. And the Japanese man in the street did too. He honestly couldn't understand why anyone would be mad at Japan for beinging the enlightedned rule of the emperor and all it's benefits to them.

Now W, he's pretty simplistic too. And his outlook isn't much more sophisticated, but at least with W he's surrounded by folks who should know better.

For all of us, John Q. publics, I'm afraid we are headed down the road Suzuki-san was in 1938. Except our Control Clique is big bussiness not the military and our religions faction is the fundy right wing rather than shinto/ancestor worship with the emperor as head of both state and church.

Ouch. You're harshing my buzz, Colly.

So, do you think that our big-business control clique can overcome the fundy right?, or that the corporate interests will be conflated with the fundy interests in sort of a PR simultaneous orgasm that advances both agendas while respecting neither?

Regardless of your answer, I think the main point is that these upcoming Congressional elections are far more volitile than conventional wisdom suggests. I'm sure your POV will be thoughtful and valid, and there are other thoughtful and valid POVs, and that the six months until the election are a political eternity.

Thank god for cheap wine.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Ouch. You're harshing my buzz, Colly.

So, do you think that our big-business control clique can overcome the fundy right?, or that the corporate interests will be conflated with the fundy interests in sort of a PR simultaneous orgasm that advances both agendas while respecting neither?

Regardless of your answer, I think the main point is that these upcoming Congressional elections are far more volitile than conventional wisdom suggests. I'm sure your POV will be thoughtful and valid, and there are other thoughtful and valid POVs, and that the six months until the election are a political eternity.

Thank god for cheap wine.

You know huck, I'm not sure they have to overcome the fundy right. I'mnot convinced that the thing sthe fundy's are against constitute a major obstacle to big bussiness.

Carriedout to it's raical extreme, which is unlikely to happen, what bussiness would be affected? Abortion doctors, but they can still make money as bogyn specialists. Pornographers, but they are going to make their buck legally or illgally. And they can just relocate their servers outside the us and go along their merry way supply the jerk off needs of every country in the western world besides the us.

The fundy's aren't emicable to bussiness at all. If anytyhing, they are pretty anti-union, believers in ye olden judeo christian work ethic, and generally against federal spending on social programs. I see very few places where big business and the fundy right can't march in lock step.

But I am being a serious buzz killer and for that apologize profusely.

*HUGS*

 

[Huckleman2000]

You know huck, I'm not sure they have to overcome the fundy right. I'mnot convinced that the thing sthe fundy's are against constitute a major obstacle to big bussiness.

Carriedout to it's raical extreme, which is unlikely to happen, what bussiness would be affected? Abortion doctors, but they can still make money as bogyn specialists. Pornographers, but they are going to make their buck legally or illgally. And they can just relocate their servers outside the us and go along their merry way supply the jerk off needs of every country in the western world besides the us.

The fundy's aren't emicable to bussiness at all. If anytyhing, they are pretty anti-union, believers in ye olden judeo christian work ethic, and generally against federal spending on social programs. I see very few places where big business and the fundy right can't march in lock step.

But I am being a serious buzz killer and for that apologize profusely.

*HUGS*

OUCH! Thank you Ma'am, may I have another?

I admit, maybe I'm looking for silk in a sow's ear, but I remember when I was in elementary school in the mid-60's, my parents were quite active in the social Catholic church. We went out to migrant workers in the farms around our town, and did catechism lessons. In reality, they were as much English lessons couched in the guise of Bible readings. Still, I remember parishes sponsoring migrant families in the summer, and local families undergoing hardship in the winter. I've lost interest in the Church since then, so I don't know if that sort of thing is still the norm, but if it has been relegated to second-tier priority in favor of abortion or sex-politics, that's a serious loss to human rights.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

OUCH! Thank you Ma'am, may I have another?

I admit, maybe I'm looking for silk in a sow's ear, but I remember when I was in elementary school in the mid-60's, my parents were quite active in the social Catholic church. We went out to migrant workers in the farms around our town, and did catechism lessons. In reality, they were as much English lessons couched in the guise of Bible readings. Still, I remember parishes sponsoring migrant families in the summer, and local families undergoing hardship in the winter. I've lost interest in the Church since then, so I don't know if that sort of thing is still the norm, but if it has been relegated to second-tier priority in favor of abortion or sex-politics, that's a serious loss to human rights.

You're mistaking the church, with the fundy's. Whole different critters.

The fundys are a hard core of political activists, couching their agenda in religious trappins. Not significant;y different from muslim extremistsgroups with a political gole, for example palestinain statehood, couching it in religious trappings.

Cathlic churches, Baptist churches, Methodists, Lutherins, even orthodox churhces who should be closer to the fundy ideals, have a huge range of goals, agendas and programs. Some of them of the highest sort, mixing both piety and social activism, concern, compasion and practical aide. To smear any of them with the Fundy brush, based on a cnservative religious outlook would be horribly unfair.

I don't think every Catholic is a fundy. I know for a fact every southern Baptist isn't. I don't think even most congregations are. They more often end up co opted into the "religious right"'s ranks because they tend to vote en bloc and the fundys have dicovered, bycarefully tailoring their message, they can deliver that bloc. Sometimes, even when the bloc is voting against it's best interests overall.

Unfortuneately, all too often, in our loathing of the hard core's agenda, we end up tarring all that vote that way with the same brush. A man who honestly believes abortion is murder, may end up voting with them. Notbecause he even has religion, but because they have cornered the market on leading that fight, one he finds to transcend politics as usual. A woman who really believes porn is demaning to women and explotive, may also vote with them, even though she thiks faith based inititives are unconstitional, because to her, that exlotiation and degredation are the important issue. They cast a very wide morality based net, and some portions of it probably appeal to most everyone on some level. I selieve those "true believers" who bought the whole happy meal are few and far between. The majority just wanted some french fries.

 

[rgraham666]

"And so it begins." One of my favourite lines from Babylon 5.

Another favourite scene.

Centauri Emperor: "How does it end?"

Kosh: "In fire."

 

[Selena_Kitt]

"And so it begins." One of my favourite lines from Babylon 5.

Another favourite scene.

Centauri Emperor: "How does it end?"

Kosh: "In fire."

I suppose it's better than ending in ice...

it's over quicker?

 

[rgraham666]

I suppose it's better than ending in ice...

it's over quicker?

I'll let you know.

 

[minsue]

I just hate their "tailor message to audience" approach. Fucking stand for something. Damned near anything. I'd respect you.

Indeed.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Sorry Colly. (on behalf of my political leadership, such as it is...) If it's any consolation, Dean has a history of mis-speaking from time to time.

On the plus side, Sen. Feingold (D-WI) came out in support of gay marriage recently, despite Wisconsin having an anti-gay marriage referendum on the next ballot. A friend of mine from HS in Wisconsin is on the staff of Tammy Baldwin, WI Congresswoman representing Madison and much of the southern part of the state. She is, I think, the only openly lesbian member of Congress, and also very popular in her district. WI is kind of bipolar, I think. The people aren't all knee-jerk haters-for-no-good-reason, though, and I think a broader sort of 'live and let live' attitude will take hold there. Madison has a large lesbian population, and many of them are daughters of people from more rural areas fo the state. And family ties are important, so I think lots of people have gay relatives or know people who have gay relatives, and in their heart of hearts in the ballot booth, their decency will prevail. My niece there has a girlfriend (I think) who is Native American, and my parents who will turn 80 this summer really like her. I don't know if they realize the situation or not - I think they might suspect it, but realize that it's none of their business and their position is just to love their granddaughter for who she is.

I'm sorry if this comes across like "some of my best friends are lesbians!", but I really mean it to say that, despite evidence to the contrary, heartland attitudes might be starting to come around.

Texas has already banned it, tragically. Maine, on the other hand, is moving toward more gay rights. Proof that sectionalism is alive and well.

And, Huck, it's okay to say that some of your best friends are lesbians, if you don't betray that friendship by making homophobic remarks and supporting homophobic policies. I know that several of my online friends are lesbians. And that's not counting gay men and bisexuals of both sexes. (And I'm bisexual myself.)