West Virginia Blue
The Best Blogging Community in West Virginia
Democratic politics, progressive policies, the good life and free living in Wild, Wonderful West Virginia.
Big Daddy Sen. Robert C. Byrd

What it means to be a Democrat

by: Clem Guttata

Sun Nov 29, 2009 at 20:18:32 PM EST


By Clem Guttata

In response to the Republican purity test, Devilstowers proposes a checklist for Democrats:

Still, the purity test does provide a convenient check list. You too can be accepted as a Republican if you promise to hate gays, poor people, immigrants, and the environment (which, come to think of it, has been the Republican standard for decades). Out of pure bullet-point envy, I propose that Democrats must also have their own list. Ten litmus tests which every potential Democratic candidate should  be able to ace before they ever hope to put (D) after their names. In fact, I'll go so far as to be more pure than the Republicans. If you can't pass every one of these tests, don't bother to sign on.

(1) We support the rights extended to Americans extended under the Constitution. All the rights. For all Americans.

(2) We support thoughtful, pragmatic solutions that protect American lives, American standards, and American pocketbooks. This includes finding solutions that don't require bombing anyone.

(3) We support an America that has diversity in race, thought, background, and religion not out of some hazy idealism, but because it is our nation's greatest strength.

(4) We oppose torture in any form, in any place, at any time, for any reason.

(5) We support American business, and recognize that an unregulated market is an unfair market, an unstable market, and a market doomed to failure.

(6) We support American workers, and know that when workers are allowed to organize they make their jobs, their companies, and their nation stronger.

(7) We believe that the reputation of our nation is valuable and must be zealously guarded against those who place expediency ahead of law.

(8) We believe in spreading democracy and human rights to the rest of the world by vigorously upholding those ideals here at home.

(9) We believe that access to our government is not for sale. Not in the courthouse, not in the White House, and not in the legislature.

(10) We believe that the health of our planet is not a zero-sum game, not a game of "you go first," and not a game.

Not a particularly detailed set of positions, I know. But then it's not supposed to be. Unlike the GOP, we aren't short of ideas, and unlike Newt, we don't have to dream up a batch of legislation with cute names. We already have real legislation out there that meet these goals. Bills like the Employee Free Choice Act, the Clean Water Protection Act, the American Clean Energy and Security Act, the Affordable Health Care for America Act and many others.

It's not a perfect list, but I'd say that's a pretty darn good one. In the way they meant them, I was 0 for 10 on the Republican list (some are too vague to say for sure). This one I'm 10 for 10 in agreement with.

Clem Guttata :: What it means to be a Democrat
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Yeah, I agree. (4.00 / 1)


When a man embarks upon a crime, he is morally guilty of any other crime which may spring from it. Sherlock Holmes.

yeah!! (0.00 / 1)
and with respect to number 10 willing to lie and decieve

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/com...


steve (4.00 / 2)
Found those Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq yet? I didn't think so.

When a man embarks upon a crime, he is morally guilty of any other crime which may spring from it. Sherlock Holmes.

[ Parent ]
we already covered that (4.00 / 1)
You're a little bit late to the party.

I remember now, you only access the Internet when you're working. I posted this comment last Thursday morning that covers the hacked emails in detail.

On a potentially related topic... have you ever noticed how people who post with the intent of disrupting conversation (a.k.a. trolls) always seem to do so during normal business hours and then disappear during holidays and weekends? It's almost like they're paid to be trolls and just aren't interested enough to show up after they've clocked out.


[ Parent ]
I can supply the recipe for the shoo fly pie (0.00 / 0)
We had for one at Thanksgiving. Pie--always the correct answer. It was as good as I remember my grandmother's.

NFTT: Support My Team or I Will Dance

[ Parent ]
Stevewvu's post reveals more about him (4.00 / 1)
than it does either the Democratic party or climate change.

Regarding the basis of the article to which he linked, the Union of Concerned Scientists completely debunked that tired old hockey stick theory publicly years ago.

So it turns out that stevewvu's post refers to a bogus OP/ ED piece slanted for the sole purpose of sensationalism. Due to his earlier "sciencey" op-eds, stevewvu's author Christopher Booker became known throughout the U.K. for having infamously insisted that asbestos is "chemically identical to talcum powder". He's repeatedly relied upon the so-called "scientific expertise" of John Bridle, who claimed himself to be "the world's foremost authority on asbestos science", but was exposed as an industrial tool when he was convicted under the UK's Trade Descriptions Act for making false claims about his qualifications.

I wouldn't be surprised if Stevewvu's pal Don Blankenship had both Brindle and Booker lined up as "expert" asbestos witnesses when he attempted to mitigate the amount of damages Donny was forced to fork over in that Massey Energy/ Johns-Mansville asbestos lawsuit filed back in 2007.

So reading beyond stevewvu's obvious attempt to obscure the problem that the rightwing has long had presenting bullshit as if it had the same weight as science, what we are left with is that some emails from University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (CRU) were hacked. Big deal.

Whether or not other forms of communication were used between scientists wasn't reported by Booker. Apparently he chose to cherry-pick only certain email communiques to make it look like there was an effort by global climate scientists to avoid publicly presenting disreputable ..er "conflicted" science. What gives Booker's article away at first read as pure hype is that Booker's reference to George Monbiot, the U.K.'s leading media proponent of the dire threat of climate change. The way he uses Monbiot in that piece is disingenuous to the point of misleading.  

So despite all the hoopla, we also know that the 2000s will easily be the hottest decade on record. Not to mention that that the planet keeps warming thanks to contrived efforts to obscure the facts by rightwing press, concerted by wingnut trolls like Stevewvu.


[ Parent ]
the con (0.00 / 0)
is unravelling

[ Parent ]
projection? (4.00 / 1)
The grand irony here is, you are right. The only conspiracy is among climate change denialists and it is unravelling.

I recommend you read Climate Cover Up.

Oh, that's right. You don't care about anything I write or link to. You've already gotten it all figured out there in the fantasy land of invisible pink unicorns.

Oh, God, how I wish it was all a con. It would be so much nicer for all of us if global climate change was not happening. Believe me, there's a thousand other causes I'd rather be advocating for than trying to save the planet from global greenhouse emissions.

I'd rather being spending even more time talking about equality, human rights, and economic justice. But, for the immediate moment the only planet I know how to live on has a fever and I'm not going to stop worrying about that just because you've decided to live out your days content with denying facts.


[ Parent ]
a vast conspiracy (4.00 / 1)
Matt Y. wonders about a conspiracy so vast (emphasis mine):

What I wonder for those, like Senator James Inhof and Cato Institute Vice President Roger Pilon, who seem to think these emails prove the existence of a nefarious conspiracy to defraud the public about the evidence for anthropogenic climate change is what's the purpose of this conspiracy?

[snip]

But what's the upside for Kerry in taking this issue up in the first place? Or Barbara Boxer or Henry Waxman? How is it that the government of China, which is clearly reluctant to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, doesn't seem to have any qualms with this science? Maybe political parties from across the spectrum in France endorse consensus climate science because they're under the influence of the nuclear energy industry, but why does this political consensus extend to the U.K. and all across continental Europe? Are David Cameron and Angela Merkel in the grips of growth-hating socialist ideology? And what about the scientists themselves? Where's the upside? Normally to posit a giant conspiracy you need some plausible account of the motives.

It shouldn't take a genius to note that opposition to the scientific consensus is extremely concentrated among political movements with strong ties to the coal and oil industry. You can easily see where the upside is for them in getting this wrong. But adopting the view that the IPCC is correct really is "inconvenient" from a political point of view.

Indeed, even political leaders who accept the basic outline of this climate consensus rarely actually argue in favor of reductions that are sufficiently sweeping to meet IPCC guidelines specifically because doing so is so politically problematic. This just isn't a "good issue" to take on. But it happens to be a real problem and so, reluctantly, leaders around the world are trying to take it on.

 

Premium Advertiser

blog advertising is good for you

Welcome!

( Home )
Menu

Click here to join!

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


About
- About WVaBlue.com
- Send us news at wvablue@gmail.com
-  Subscribe in a reader

Advertisers


Support WVaBlue

Active Users
Currently 0 user(s) logged on.

Search




Advanced Search


Current CO2 level in the atmosphere

Proudly displaying the West Virginia Red, White, Blue, Green and Orange.

Join me at http://www.350.org


WVa Democrats
  • Sen. Jay Rockefeller
  • Sen. Joe Manchin III
  • Joe Manchin for Senate (2010/2012)
  • Rep. Nick Rahall (WV-03)
  • Secretary of State Natalie Tennant
  • Auditor Glen Gainer
  • Treasurer John Perdue
  • Agriculture Commissioner Gus Douglass
  • Attorney General Darrell V. McGraw
  • Senate President Earl Ray Tomblin, acting as Gov.
  • Declared Candidates
  • Jeff Kessler
  • John Perdue
  • Natalie Tennant
  • Earl Ray Tomblin
  • Rick Thompson

  • Copyright 2011 West Virginia Blue
    Site content may be used for any purpose without explicit permission unless otherwise specified.
    This site exists thanks to financial support from BlogPAC, dedicated volunteers and participation by members of this community. The views expressed at West Virginia Blue belong solely to their respective authors.
    Powered by: SoapBlox