More On Which Way the Dems Should Go

Not only that, the President was about to be impeached too.

 

Good point. I'm glad there are people who understand the real issues around here, not just people who throw around political accusations on topics they are not familiar with. I refer to the latter as rookies.

 

you may be right...but i'm not posting conservatives espousing this viewpoint...this is ed koch saying that...we've seen it from other democrats too

Oh yeah -- I didn't mean to reference you doing it. The whole nation is - both parties, news people, commentators, everyine. I just think everyone's just overreacting a bit, and I think it's because it's fun to think a party might be dying or coming apart. Much better headlines than just saying the Democrats lost.

 

Pelosi's politics may not be what everyone wants, but I thought the Republicans loved to sing about not basing policy on a poll.

Also democrats in Pelosi's state were one of the few bright spots for the democratic party this past election.

Pelosi has great connections, knows how to win, and get things done.

As far as running against the Republicans for having them be the party of 'Big Business' it could work. The democrats only half-heartedly even tried to tag them that way. The nation is very upset by the corporate scandals, some of which really hurt the 'common man's' 401K's. Enron is the worst of the bunch, and they definitely have ties to more republicans than democrats, and there has only been one person in any real trouble yet from Enron.

The democrats need to drill the point home that while in office Clinton's SEC head honcho, tried to pass legislation that would have prevented many of the practices that Enron got away with. The only problem is that both Democrats and Republicans blocked the legislation in congress. The dem's don't exactly have clean hands in the issue. Though they would be better confessing their own big business crimes, and then start calling on Republicans to do the same, all the while leaking facts about Cheney and Haliburton, etc. George Bush flying on Ken Lay's private jet, and all the other goods that the Republicans are guilty of.

Many of the things that Bush did as a business man, are now illegal. These points are hardly ever brought up. Maybe it's because the Democrats are scared about their own big business dealings. Again that's why they need to come clean, and challenge the Republicans to do the same.

 

James Carville sure isn't proud of the Democrats performance in the midterm elections....

 

having said that, it seems pretty clear they better come up with a consistent message...and what i'm finding interesting is the choice posed between moving to a more moderate stance or a more liberal stance. i don't know what the right answer, but i tend to think moving to the moderate stance would most help the democrats the way it did when clinton ran on middle-class tax cuts in 92 (tax cuts we never saw, of course).

I tend to agree that moving to the middle is the way to appeal to a larger audience. However, what I think happened in this election is that the Democrats did appeal to the middle. The problem was that they alienated the left a bit and those people didn't vote. With only like 30-40% voter turnout, I think they might be thinking that the key isn't getting the maximum support, but getting people really excited about the party so that they go and vote. If they move to the left, all the far left people will be excited and vote. It would re-energize the grassroots efforts that primarily come from the extreme left & right. Thus, they wouldn't appeal to as many Americans, but they'd appeal to more actual voters.

Not sure if the strategy has merit, but it makes sense to some extent. If they focus on the middle, they have to win those people over. If they focus on the left, they just have to get them to come out and vote. They lost a massive number of races by ~2-3%. If they could have improved voter turnout by a few % points, they win these elections convincingly.

Personally, I'd rather they move to the middle because I'm very much a moderate Democrat.

 

Training terroists is a good thing? Hmmmm.

Constructing a poll question would be too easy:

Should the US gov sponser a school for terrorism with US dollars on US soil?

I bet that poll result would damn near unanimous. It just makes sense if we are going to fight a war on terrorism, we might as well start at home.

Even though most people do not know what the SOA is, it is a red hot issue with the progressives (the damn liberals). If the Dems pushed this issue, they could lock in the progressive/green voters next Presidential election cycle (which no doubt cost them Florida and the White House last time around).

 

I also think the Presidency and Congress are two very different things. The Presidency has a bit of a condundrum that you have to be far left/right to win the primary, but centrist to win overall. Its too easy to paint a candidate as a kook if they are far left/right when there's so much air time and so much focus on just one race.

 

I'm worried about the long range future of the Republican Party. I think that Bush will be too conservative for a long term run. I think that they should encourage Jeffries to come back to the Republican Party and should have him replace Bush for the 2004 presidential ticket.

I stay awake at night worrying that the Republicans might be getting too conservative for the average American.


Got to love it when the conservatives want to win for their positions, whether the Republicans or Democrats win. However, they'll then complain that there is no difference between the two parties.

 

It being the School of the Americas (renamed to the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation, WHISC).

http://www.soaw.org/new/

"The US Army School of Americas (SOA), based in Fort Benning, Georgia, trains Latin American soldiers in combat, counter-insurgency, and counter-narcotics. Graduates of the SOA are responsible for some of the worst human rights abuses in Latin America. Among the SOA's nearly 60,000 graduates are notorious dictators Manuel Noriega and Omar Torrijos of Panama, Leopoldo Galtieri and Roberto Viola of Argentina, Juan Velasco Alvarado of Peru, Guillermo Rodriguez of Ecuador, and Hugo Banzer Suarez of Bolivia. Lower-level SOA graduates have participated in human rights abuses that include the assassination of Archbishop Oscar Romero and the El Mozote Massacre of 900 civilians. "

So basically the US trains the people who are responsible for the gov sponser terrorism in Central and South America. Damn, makes me proud to be an American.

Getting rid of SOA would be off of most people's radar, but would be a great win for the progressives.

 

What a crock. I would be interested to see you name something objectionable the school has done in the post Cold War world.

Hmmm. You are right. Constructing a poll question WOULD be too easy:

Should the US government sponsor a school to teach third world military officers the advantages of civilian rule over military power?

Or

Should the US government sponser a school to teach third world military officers the American view of the role the military should play in governance?

I bet that poll result would be damn near unanimous. It just makes sense if you are dealing with third world countries that you would want the military to stay out of governance, rather than serving as 'kingmakers' and rather than leading coup de tat's.

First, I am glad to see you acknowledge that 'most people do not know what the SOA is.' Therefore it would be silly to make that a plank on a Democratic version of the Contract for America. Second, I'm sorry but what the Democrats need NOT to do is CONCENTRATE on the greens. Try capturing some of those they lost to the Republicans. Third, what they need to do is agree with the Republicans on strong defense and strong foreign policy and CONCENTRATE on the differences in domestic policy.

"Through principally military to military contacts, the School promotes democracy, to include civilian control of the military, mutual cooperation, military professionalism, and respect for human rights. The School has undergone significant change since the end of the Cold War. With the change in the National Security Strategy from Containment to Engagement and Enlargement, the School's curriculum has shifted and now includes courses in civil-military operations, peace operations, counterdrug operations, resource management, border observation, democratic sustainment, humanitarian demining, medical assistance, and human rights train-the-trainer."

Less than 1% of the 60,000 graduates of the SOA have EVER been linked to human rights abuses.

To balance out the view on the SOA, here is a good article. You also find RECENT Congressional testimony and the actual website for the school on the web...

Atlanta Journal-Constitution

U.S. Army's School of the Americas excels in human rights instruction

Amelia Simpson - Special
Friday, November 17, 2000

As the protest movement to close the U.S. Army School of the Americas at Fort Benning prepares its followers for their annual demonstration at the base Saturday, organizers and participants should reflect on the many people in the military who are dedicated human rights advocates.

The terrible slaughter in November 1989 of six Jesuit priests and their servants by members of the armed forces of El Salvador is the touchstone for the protest movement. Yet it was a U.S. Army major, Eric Buckland, who exposed the truth about the massacre, after he learned about it from contacts in the Salvadoran military.

The evidence today is overwhelming that USARSA is not only squeaky clean, and a model of transparency and accountability, but also provides the best human rights instruction for the military in the nation. I attended human rights training at SOA for two years as an observer. The Army school has developed a curriculum that is matched nowhere else in the country.

It is true that USARSA is a hierarchical, undemocratic, male-dominated organization of mostly politically conservative folks. But the school welcomed me, an outspoken feminist, socialist, Latin American activist, because when it comes to human rights, we are on the same side.

The School of the Americas does not teach human rights with a wink and a nod, as was my husband's experience back in 1977 during his basic training at Fort Jackson, S.C. There, to his horror, soldiers were marched to and from their sole lecture on the laws of war to a cadence with the enthusiastic refrain, "Because Napalm sticks to kids!"

USARSA's curriculum, in contrast, takes human rights seriously. The training is extensive, reinforced during field exercises, and is mandatory. Guest speakers include helicopter pilot Hugh Thompson and his crew member Larry Colburn, who interrupted the 1968 massacre of civilians by U.S. troops at My Lai, during the Vietnam War.

USARSA even stuck its neck out and invited my husband, Lawrence Rockwood, although he is a controversial figure in the military. He was a counterintelligence officer in Haiti during 1994's Operation Restore Democracy. When his command would not act to save the lives of prisoners held in Port-au-Prince's National Penitentiary, he jumped the wall of the Multinational Forces Compound and went alone to the prison, where he was able to witness conditions, including one ghastly cell where people were apparently being starved to death. Before he was able to take action, however, he was arrested by a major from the U.S. embassy, and was subsequently court-martialed. He is currently petitioning the secretary of the Army not to carry out his sentence of dismissal.

Common sense alone suggests that an institution so closely scrutinized, and so open to outsiders like me, could hardly conceal a collection of goons teaching torture down in the basement. It takes genuinely alarming leaps of faith and twists of reason to continue to label USARSA the "School of Assassins."

The solemn procession at Fort Benning of protestors carrying coffins to honor victims of violence committed by the military in Latin America is truly moving and important. However, it would be more sincere and to the point to invite soldiers to join that commemoration, since it is the Army school that today has taken the lead in working to improve the human rights record.

As USARSA stands poised to change its name to the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (if the House and Senate approve that provision in the Defense Department proposed budget), we should support the school. According to the official web site of the School of the Americas Watch protest movement, there will be enhanced opportunities at this year's demonstration to be arrested at Fort Benning. Devoted activists can put their energy to better use by pressuring other military training programs to adopt USARSA's human rights curriculum.

Amelia Simpson of La Jolla, Calif., is the author of two books on Latin America, and co-author with her husband, Lawrence Rockwood, of a forthcoming book on human rights and military ethics.

 

Trader Jorge:

You're obviously quite intelligent. You're obviously informed concerning economics. However, I don't understand how the unbridled contempt you express for your opponents (sometimes deserved, sometimes not) benefits you.

If you're interested in mental masturbation, then such expressions of contempt must enrich your BBS experience. However, for those of us who enjoy arguing the merits, it's a real turn-off.

Generally speaking, I try to pay attention to your posts on economic issues (though not so much w/political economy). However, I find myself biased against your posts after I read the epithets.

I do freely admit I've been guilty of the same offenses in the past...

but are you trying to persuade us? If not, why post?

 

No, in short. Thanks for such an unusually warm and personal attack that still manages to accomplish your main mission: self-flattery. I don't encourage your current course (fantasizing about me), because I cannot reciprocate your interest in the slightest. I can, however, make sure you don't receive any future responses from me, in either a timely or untimely fashion.

I would correct the misinformed details of your fantasy, but again, I don't want to encourage your behavior. Please go back to just thinking of yourself and whatever else your monolithic loyalty to the Republican party allows.

IGNORE LIST AUGMENTED

 

Ahem:

*That's* why he posts.

 

Closing the SOA is not an issue that is near and dear to me. The arguments that the progressives give is quite persuasive though. I am willing to concede their point.

The point that I was trying to make about including it in my list is that there are consensus issues throughtout the political spectrum that the Republicans (as well as the Democrats) do not support. By bending a little and supporting more consensus issues, the Democrats could win over the independent moderates and the far left progressives.

BTW the progressive vote in Florida went to Nader, costing the Dems the state and the White House. (As an aside, Gore should look no further than his home state to figure out why he lost.)

Now to the SOA discussion ...

If 1% of the gradutes went back home and joined their local death squads, this would be enough for me to want to sh*t can the entire SOA. I do not care if the other 99% were as pure as virgin snow.

The SOA watch states the following:

http://www.soaw.org/new/type.php?type=8
"Over its 56 years, the SOA has trained over 60,000 Latin American soldiers in counterinsurgency techniques, sniper training, commando and psychological warfare, military intelligence and interrogation tactics. These graduates have consistently used their skills to wage a war against their own people. Among those targeted by SOA graduates are educators, union organizers, religious workers, student leaders, and others who work for the rights of the poor. Hundreds of thousands of Latin Americans have been tortured, raped, assassinated, disappeared, massacred, and forced into refugee by those trained at the School of Assassins."

The military based governments in Central and South America use the military to keep their power. The SOA teaches their military how to do their job better. The SOA may also teach the students human rights, but the student will do as they are told when they get back to their countries.