Sunday, June 25, 2006

Is the race for Arizona CD 8's seat in the House really a LOCAL one?

Arizona CD 8.  It would be nice to think that this is a local race, but it isn't.  The DLC is involved in a big way in this race. The DLC isn't part of the National Democratic Party, I'm not sure it is democratic in any way, and it sure as heck isn't part of any traditional Arizona with which I am familiar.  My feeling is that the real race is being fought now--in the primary contest for the Democratic slot on the November ballot.  What is happening here is microcosm of the battle being waged all across the country for  Democratic Party. 

Do yourself a favor and read Lindy Baumann's




What You Need To Know About The DLC
.  Giffords has been DLC from day one, well, at least day one since she switched to the Democratic Party a couple years ago.  (Remind me, if you would, I need to write another piece on party switching and voting fraud in Pima County.)
This in and of itself should give you reason to carefully re-evaluate each candidate in this race.  

Personally I am fed up with corporations and wealthy families who buy elections through the purchase of high visibility, carefully tailored, and well orchestrated media and marketing campaigns.  Make no mistake, Giffords is from a wealthy family.  Nothing wrong with that in and of itself.  What can be wrong is an elitist or classist perspective.  Look at the presentation of her perspective by the DLC in 2003 about how to deal with the growing low income sector of the population.   "
A

big

part

of

the

solution,

she

says,

is

to

improve

the

state's

education

system

and

to

educate

workers

in

skills

that

will

allow

them

to

enter

higher

income

and

technologically

oriented

career

paths."   Hmmm.  Look closely at the phrasing "educate workers."  Not educate the population, not educate our children... educate our workers.  Workers as opposed to whom?  The ruling class?  Those who don't have to work?  Language is very telling.  It shows the structures upon which we base our choices and actions.  And I know, we all say things that are less than perfectly phrased, but, and this is a BIG but, the DLC and presumably Gabby approved this presentation.  They didn't see any problem with the language choice or what it implied because that is the mindset from which they work.  I don't know about you but I think of our education system as educating our children, specifically my kid, and not "workers."  Elitist. 

The next problem I have with the DLC is how it went along with the lockstep
"me too,  me too, I'm a patriot, I support the troops because I support the war" mentality and actions that failed to examine and simply rubber stamped" the duplicitous and in fact treasonous lies that justified Cheney and Rumsfeld's personal corporate war.   Giffords went out of her way to get our kids killed.  Just look at this from the DLC's own propaganda: 
"
In

January [2003],

Giffords

introduced

legislation

to

commission

a

legislative

study

on

Junior

ROTC

programs

for

high

school

students

in

Arizona.
"  Maybe educating the working class isn't enough, maybe snagging 'em younger so we can send a few more of them off to fight and die in corporate wars will also help manage the growing size of the underclass.

Her DLC funded positions are not unique.  Many Dems are politicians first and representatives of the people second, third or fourth.  If necessary I will hold my nose like a naive Jimmy Stewart doing a bird call for the press in Mr Smith Goes to Washington and vote for her, but I'm sure hoping I don't have to. 

And while I'm on this tangent I might as well let off steam about what I feel is AZ List's and Emily's List betrayal of the premise upon which they were founded.  Maybe I'm mistaken, but I thought these organizations were founded to encourage political races and policies that would challenge campaigns and legislation that worked against women's liberty and autonomy.   I thought they were supposed to support candidates that would strengthen women's status, influence and power.  I cannot support the undermining of true progressive candidates by knee jerk sexism.  If these groups really wanted to support a woman progressive they should have thrown their support behind Francine Schacter.  I will never support a candidate or vote for a person just because of his or her sex, gender, or party affiliation.  I will always either vote for the best person (as my father taught me to do) or platform (as my experience has taught me to do.)  Yes, I've broken ranks and voted for non-Democrats even though I've been a life-long registered Democrat.  That is exactly why I hope the real Democrats are listening to folks like me.  No one and no party automatically has my vote-- the only certain fact  in my book is my vote against fascism.

Rise up Democrats!  The DLC is not part of the Democratic Party.  The heart and soul of the Democratic Party is and always has been progressive, liberal, and worker -based  (ooh, there is that word again -- note I didn't say Labor with a big L.)  Maybe we should repeal the 17th amendment then at least entire state legislatures would have to have their votes purchased and our generally and unfortunately uninformed populace couldn't be swayed to vote against their own interests by slick commercial campaigns. 

2 comments:

Jim Nelson said...

Having been a Dean volunteer in 2004, I'm no fan of the DLC. However, in CD 8 I'm in favor of Giffords because she can win. It seems more crucial to me to put this seat back in the Dem column than to feel self-righteous about supporting a more progressive candidate who will be obliterated in the general election. This includes Francine and Jeff Lattas. It is the nature of politics that one can't get everything one wants. At a point in the Clinon years when I was very disappointed with Bill Clinton's compromises, a friend pointed out how much worse it would be if a Republican instead of Clinton was in the White House at that time. Now, of course, we know. The DLC was instrumental in getting our current governor elected. Would you rather have had her Republican opponent win?

Anonymous said...

Jim, your argument is a circular teutology. To accept your premise that Giffords is the only one who can win this race is ludicrous. Patty Weiss or Jeff Latas would both do well in the Nov. election. At the very best, Giffords is an opportunist, and may well be a Republican shill. The Republicans are on record as switching registration in certain districts in order to control the Democratic primary. Imagine how much simpler it is to have a Manchurian candidate- that way, only one person has to change affiliation.

Sorry, but I think the time to compromise has long passed. It is compromising our principles that has led to the present sad state of affairs. I want my country back. I want democracy back in the Democratic party. Your argument sounds a lot like some of the staements made by some of the Polish Jews as they rationalized moving into the ghetto.

Live free or die! or Damn the torpedoes- full speed ahead! These are the words of patriots, not well, maybe we can compromise or take half-a-loaf.

Noah Vail