Living in a "Red" state, I'm often asked, "Why are you a Democrat?" or "Wouldn't it be easier to win if you were a Republican?" For me the answer is easy. I'm a Democrat because I believe in "we," not "me."
Our founding fathers started the Constitution with the word "We" for a purpose. Our individual liberty rests upon how justly we treat those around us. As Martin Luther King said in his Letter from the Birmingham Jail, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
(Glen checks back in with a report from the committee hearing. - promoted by Karl-Thomas Musselman)
COMMITTEE HEARING:
Well, I sat up till 10 pm to try to hear the rational for this bill. Leo Berman didn't give ANY. He just laid it out and told that it instituted a closed primary.
The only verbal testimoy for the bill was by a former national RNC member who now runs the Texas Home School Coalition.
Green Party and Libertarian Party oppose unless we use the registration as the basis for them to get ballot access instead of having to petition.
AFL-CIO and League of Women Voters sign in against.
No position by the Texas Democratic Party or the Texas Republican Party.
In other words, there was no real discussion.
=================================
Back in the old days (when most of the writers of BOR weren't yet born), one of the reforms dreamed about by progressive Democrats was voter registration by party affiliation. Additionally, once you declare your affiliation as a Democrat or Republican, that's the only primary or convention in which you could participate.
So now its 2007 and Rep. Leo Berman, chair of the House Elections Committee, and a very partisan Republican has filed HB 3118. It's scheduled for hearing on Wednesday in his committee.
It requires party affiliation for the 2008 primaries.
Some postings I have offered on Blogs the last several days have engendered intense discussion and debate. Some of the discussion and debate has concerned how best to judge the credibility of candidates and campaigns.
The best answer to the question is one that hardly any of the comments touched upon. That is, the people themselves, acting democratically through the ballot box, are always the best judge. The people themselves acting through the ballot box are in fact the only legitimate judge. We all do still believe in democracy, don't we?
Many of you received my friend Barbara Radnofsky's Internet newsletter describing the meeting that took place on January 21 between the Texas Democratic Party Chair and some of his staff and advisors, and five of the 2006 statewide candidates, including myself.
With all due respect to my honorable colleague Barbara, her newsletter did not objectively or accurately describe the meeting. To be fair, her description may be subjectively sincere. But it conveys an inaccurate picture.
Every general election cycle, small groups of Insiders secretly handpick which Democratic Nominees who won the Democratic Primaries are worthy of Texas Democratic Party support and which aren't. This practice, euphemistically called "targeting", is profoundly disrespectful to all the Democratic Primary voters who selected the Nominees in the Democratic Primaries. It is the ugliest little secret in Texas politics. If the mass of ordinary-citizen Texas Democrats knew about it they would not put up with it for a moment. They would probably march on Austin and tear the Party office down.
(I'm thinking about setting up a Democratic Reunion event for BOR readers to get together and discuss the future of this blog. Would y'all be interested? - promoted by Phillip Martin)
Author's note: I'm posting this everywhere because it's a 50-State kind of thing! I hope Texans come out strong, ever since working in the 28th I have a special place in my heart for Texas Dems!
Mark your calendars:July 29th we all take a huge leap forward.
Last year we took the first step. On November 15th we held the National Organizing Kick-off. Across the country Democrats gathered together and starting putting the pieces together to organize in every state, district and precinct. Then in April we held the Neighbor-to-Neighbor National Organizing Day. It was an unprecedented effort. Six months before an election, holding a 50-State Canvass, and together we talked to over a million voters.
After last week’s debates over the Iraq war in Congress, it’s obvious that Democrats don’t have a cohesive message. The Republicans (with their White House and Pentagon-provided talking points) hammered their message home repeatedly — making for soundbites and quotes that invariably included denigrating Democrats as “cut and runners.” It is necessary for Democrats to come up with a defense policy, and stick to it together. Otherwise, I worry that they (we) will face a rough couple of years or more.
There is a dire need for the Democrats to issue a coherent defense policy — in general and specifically in regards to Iraq and Afghanistan. This diary is an attempt at formulating the beginnings of such a policy. Comments, suggestions, criticisms, et cetera are all welcome.
[I should note that the Center for American Progress has issued two documents outlining a “strategic redeployment” of U.S. troops in the Middle East. I’m currently reading the second version of this report (issued last month), but the earlier one (issued six months earlier) wasn’t particularly insightful or helpful.]
First, a timetable must be set. Yes, a timetable. Our standards for success should be appropriate, communicable and measurable. “As they stand up, we will stand down” may serve as a starting point for fleshing out such standards.
