November 16, 2004
Me, too
from - smijer
I'm a reform Democrat, too...
Matter of fact, my half of this blog is a reform blog.
Too bad we as a nation have endorsed the radical tack that Bush and friends have put the Republican party on. Between the two, it was them that needed reform the more badly. It's the propaganda war that the Democrats are losing, but the real loss is to American civilization, that it has come to this.
::Posted by smijer at November 16, 2004 09:57 AM
You'll have to define "reform Democrat" for me. It seems to me that there is not much room for "reform" unless you just want to call yourselves "Republicans" and be done with it. Maybe there is some truth in the terms "Republicrats" or "Demolicans"
Is it just my eyesight or are things blurry for anybody else?
|
Posted by Buck on November 16, 2004 02:04 PM Link to comment |
I would say that reform means becoming less like Republicans. I think it would mean backing up to square one and reframing the party platform in the language of traditional democratic principals, throwing out only those planks that no longer represent those prinicipals or that can be replaced by a position that fulfills those principals better. The principals are basically economic justice (equal opportunity, and reduction of unnecessary poverty), social justice (equal rights, civil rights protected), and, of course, a foreign policy that is consistent with those same values.
|
|
Posted by smijer on November 16, 2004 02:32 PM Link to comment |
throwing out only those planks that no longer represent those prinicipals or that can be replaced by a position that fulfills those principals better.Would you care to elaborate?
|
|
Posted by Buck on November 16, 2004 11:11 PM Link to comment |
Wasn't NAFTA one of ours? Just for instance... Another one that could possibly use some re-thinking is the anti-gun plank. Reading Say Uncle as often as I do, I can't help but think that Democratic support for "the" assault weapons ban is misguided, though I'm not saying that I interpret the second amendment to mean that private citizens are entitled to arm themselves in just any old way. If we find someone hiding a nuke in their basement, I'd like to have the authority to arrest them. Likewise, there should be some military style restrictions on any weapon with military style killing power. I really don't want gang-members, terrorists, or crazies to be capable of opening fire into a crowd with an Uzi (which yes... I understand is banned even without "the" assault weapons ban). So anyway, the Democrats do seem to use gun control in some ways similar to how republicans use partial birth abortion bans... and I think it is time that we re-thought that viewpoint.
|
|
Posted by smijer on November 17, 2004 06:55 AM Link to comment |
I can’t remember if NAFTA was yours or theirs. That goes back to my inability to distinguish one from the other. It does seem logical to me that free trade would not require thousands of pages of legalese.
I am sure that you and I would disagree more than we agree on the gun issue. I have always felt that if we are going to involve the government in everything then it should be required of the government to supply at least the head of every household with the exact same military issue equipment supplied to the standard foot soldier. They should also provide training in how to use it.
An armed society is a safe society. Sure it can get ugly if your nation is invaded and occupied (a la Iraq) but at least you can defend yourself. The other option is to be like the Palestinians and throw rocks.
|
|
Posted by Buck on November 17, 2004 10:29 AM Link to comment |
