The DNC (Democratic National Convention)

[Worm of Despite]

Let's use this Tank thread as a center for commenting on and reviewing the DNC, which begins 7.00 PM EST in one of my neighboring states, North Carolina.

We'll comment on what we liked about each day, what speaker we enjoyed (or didn’t enjoy) and what is missing or lacking or what was done well or convincing in terms of the Democrats' message.

Me personally: I’m a conservative Independent but more than willing to listen, but it will take a hell of a message.

I just don't approve of the record deficits (about 5 trillion now I believe) and think Obama has been far too divisive and not the "triangulator" that Bill Clinton was. Universal health care, whether you like it or not, was the most controversial piece of legislation ever, and he passed that down the pipeline when he had control instead of focusing on Iraq/Afghanistan, Gitmo, or the Patriot Act, all of which (aside from Iraq) are still in place.

Sure; the 2010 Republican Congress has been divisive as well but sometimes you have to get work done. Both sides have passed stuff they knew the other wouldn’t agree with.

I am also heavily disappointed, perhaps more than anything; of the fact no Wall Street financier behind the precipitation of the housing bubble was indicted. Legislation by the Obama administration has been that of a Wall Street, status quo government. I don't advocate strict regulation of financial institutions but I would like a message sent to those who manipulate for short-term gain despite large-scale damage and the weakening of the middle-class.

So anyway. Those are my reserves; and I'd like to see them addressed.

I may be voting Gary Johnson.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

I may be voting Gary Johnson.

I second this. Perhaps you can convince a handful of people to vote for Mr. Johnson--the more votes he gets the better.

I neither watched nor paid much attention to the RNC; similarly, I will neither watch nor pay attention to the DNC.

[Obi-Wan Nihilo]

I'm probably voting for Johnson, though I am more supportive of the libertarian social agenda than their other policies.

[Worm of Despite]

Romney will of course be supporting big business. I support their prosperity as well--just not their lease to act morally reprehensible.

Both choices--Republican and Democrat--allow and leave the mechanisms for more housing bubbles and shrinkage of the middle-class. The middle-class was a fluke from WWII anyway and it would buck the trend of history (and the whims of those in power) if they stayed prosperous.

As far as I see it we are in a Pax Romana created by the Enlightenment, but progress could easily give way to darkness, government control and parochialism again, which has by and large been the order instead of scientific method or countries incubate such dialogues.

[Cail]

Interesting....

For more than three decades, Israelis, Palestinians, Arab leaders, and the rest of the world have looked to America to lead the effort to build the road to a secure and lasting peace. Our starting point must always be our special relationship with Israel, grounded in shared interests and shared values, and a clear, strong, fundamental commitment to the security of Israel, our strongest ally in the region and its only established democracy. That commitment, which requires us to ensure that Israel retains a qualitative edge for its national security and its right to self-defense, is all the more important as we contend with growing threats in the region–a strengthened Iran, a chaotic Iraq, the resurgence of Al Qaeda, the reinvigoration of Hamas and Hezbollah. We support the implementation of the memorandum of understanding that pledges $30 billion in assistance to Israel over the next decade to enhance and ensure its security.

It is in the best interests of all parties, including the United States, that we take an active role to help secure a lasting settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with a democratic, viable Palestinian state dedicated to living in peace and security side by side with the Jewish State of Israel. To do so, we must help Israel identify and strengthen those partners who are truly committed to peace, while isolating those who seek conflict and instability, and stand with Israel against those who seek its destruction. The United States and its Quartet partners should continue to isolate Hamas until it renounces terrorism, recognizes Israel's right to exist, and abides by past agreements. Sustained American leadership for peace and security will require patient efforts and the personal commitment of the President of the United States. The creation of a Palestinian state through final status negotiations, together with an international compensation mechanism, should resolve the issue of Palestinian refugees by allowing them to settle there, rather than in Israel. All understand that it is unrealistic to expect the outcome of final status negotiations to be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949. Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel. The parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths.

President Obama and the Democratic Party maintain an unshakable commitment to Israel’s security. A strong and secure Israel is vital to the United States not simply because we share strategic interests, but also because we share common values. For this reason, despite budgetary constraints, the President has worked with Congress to increase security assistance to Israel every single year since taking office, providing nearly $10 billion in the past three years. The administration has also worked to ensure Israel’s qualitative military edge in the region. And we have deepened defense cooperation – including funding the Iron Dome system – to help Israel address its most pressing threats, including the growing danger posed by rockets and missiles emanating from the Gaza Strip, Lebanon, Syria, and Iran. The President’s consistent support for Israel’s right to defend itself and his steadfast opposition to any attempt to delegitimize Israel on the world stage are further evidence of our enduring commitment to Israel’s security.

It is precisely because of this commitment that President Obama and the Democratic Party seek peace between Israelis and Palestinians. A just and lasting Israeli-Palestinian accord, producing two states for two peoples, would contribute to regional stability and help sustain Israel’s identity as a Jewish and democratic state. At the same time, the President has made clear that there will be no lasting peace unless Israel’s security concerns are met. President Obama will continue to press Arab states to reach out to Israel. We will continue to support Israel’s peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan, which have been pillars of peace and stability in the region for many years. And even as the President and the Democratic Party continue to encourage all parties to be resolute in the pursuit of peace, we will insist that any Palestinian partner must recognize Israel’s right to exist, reject violence, and adhere to existing agreements.

Elsewhere in the region, President Obama is committed to maintaining robust security cooperation with Gulf Cooperation Council states and our other partners aimed at deterring aggression, checking Iran’s destabilizing activities, ensuring the free flow of commerce essential to the global economy, and building a regional security architecture to counter terrorism, proliferation, ballistic missiles, piracy, and other common threats.

Note that in 2008, Jerusalem was specifically mentioned as Israel's capital, and that both Hezbollah and Hamas were specifically mentioned as threats to Israel.

[I'm Murrin]

Well they do still refer to the rockets and missiles Hezbollah & Hamas fire, but it seems like they're deliberately conflating the source of the missiles with the nations they're being fired from rather than specifying the organisations.

[Cybrweez]

I saw that Bishop Dolan will be giving closing prayer at DNC. One of the guys leading the "war against women" is praying at Dems' request.

[wayfriend]

Charlotte, North Carolina (CNN) - Democrats will update their party's platform Wednesday evening at their convention to include a reference to Jerusalem being the capital of Israel, which was not included in their platform this year but was in previous platforms, Democratic sources told CNN. [link]

[Cail]

Good to see they came to their senses. Wonder how much that'll hurt them with the Jewish vote.

[Cail]

From the arch-conservative mouthpiece that is Mother Jones...

Democrats Retreat on Civil Liberties in 2012 Platform

What a difference four years makes.

In 2008, Democrats were eager to draw a contrast with what they then portrayed as Republican excesses in the fight against Al Qaeda. Since then, the Obama administration has in many cases continued the national security policies of its predecessor—and the Democratic Party's 2012 platform highlights this reversal, abandoning much of the substance and all of the bombast of the 2008 platform. Here are a few places where the differences are most glaring:

Indefinite Detention

2008: "To build a freer and safer world, we will lead in ways that reflect the decency and aspirations of the American people. We will not ship away prisoners in the dead of night to be tortured in far-off countries, or detain without trial or charge prisoners who can and should be brought to justice for their crimes, or maintain a network of secret prisons to jail people beyond the reach of the law. We will respect the time-honored principle of habeas corpus, the seven century-old right of individuals to challenge the terms of their own detention that was recently reaffirmed by our Supreme Court."

2012: Nothing. The Obama administration has maintained the practice of indefinitely detaining certain suspected terrorists. It has also made use of "proxy detention," by which foreign countries detain US citizens under questionable conditions, although the administration did do away with the Bush-era "black sites."

Warrantless Surveillance/PATRIOT Act

2008: "We support constitutional protections and judicial oversight on any surveillance program involving Americans. We will review the current Administration's warrantless wiretapping program. We reject illegal wiretapping of American citizens, wherever they live. We reject the use of national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime. We reject the tracking of citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war…We will revisit the Patriot Act and overturn unconstitutional executive decisions issued during the past eight years."

2012: The platform is silent on this issue. This isn't surprising since, at the urging of the Obama administration, congressional Democrats passed up the opportunity to reform the PATRIOT Act when they had a majority in both houses of Congress.

Gitmo

2008: "We will close the detention camp in Guantanamo Bay, the location of so many of the worst constitutional abuses in recent years. With these necessary changes, the attention of the world will be directed where it belongs: on what terrorists have done to us, not on how we treat suspects."

2012: "[W]e are substantially reducing the population at Guantánamo Bay without adding to it. And we remain committed to working with all branches of government to close the prison altogether because it is inconsistent with our national security interests and our values." In 2009, most Democrats voted against funding to close Gitmo, and there were substantial internal battles within the administration over doing so.

Racial Profiling in Fighting Terrorism

2008: "[W]e will ensure that law-abiding Americans of any origin, including Arab-Americans and Muslim-Americans, do not become the scapegoats of national security fears."

2012: Nothing. The Obama administration has in fact retained the FBI's Bush-era guidelines allowing race or religion to play some role in investigations.

Torture

2008: "We reject torture."

2012: "Advancing our interests may involve new actions and policies to confront threats like terrorism, but the President and the Democratic Party believe these practices must always be in line with our Constitution, preserve our people's privacy and civil liberties, and withstand the checks and balances that have served us so well. That is why the President banned torture without exception in his first week in office." Despite Obama's executive order banning torture, Americans who allege they have been detained abroad by foreign governments at the United States' request say they have been abused while in custody. It does not appear as though anyone will face charges over the Bush administration's torture program, including those who went beyond its legal guidelines.

The section of the 2012 Democratic platform titled "Staying True to our Values at Home" states, "We must always seek to uphold these values at home, not just when it is easy, but, more importantly, when it is hard." The distance between the 2008 and 2012 platform shows just how hard it has been, and starkly illustrates the extent to which the Democratic Party has given up on its 2008 promises to roll back the national security state that emerged and expanded in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

[Prebe]

Wassup with the toture? Israel has been using it for years, and they are still the good guys.

[Obi-Wan Nihilo]

Torture is just a word we throw up on the wall to revile when times are easy so we can feel civilized. When circumstances dictate its necessity, sanitized euphemisms will be produced as needed.

[Avatar]

Not even...you can reject it quite happily while you have rendition, because it's not you doing it.

Re Jerusalem...I guess that reporter got his answer on the position of the admin on the capital huh?

Back to civil liberties...no surprises really. Nobody readily gives up power, even if they opposed it in opposition hands. Afterall, it's much safer in their hands, isn't it?

--A

[sgt.null]

Charlotte, North Carolina (CNN) - Democrats will update their party's platform Wednesday evening at their convention to include a reference to Jerusalem being the capital of Israel, which was not included in their platform this year but was in previous platforms, Democratic sources told CNN. [link]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISvoPQ5jtzk

yeah, that went well...

[Cail]

Charlotte, North Carolina (CNN) - Democrats will update their party's platform Wednesday evening at their convention to include a reference to Jerusalem being the capital of Israel, which was not included in their platform this year but was in previous platforms, Democratic sources told CNN. [link]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISvoPQ5jtzk

yeah, that went well...

Wow.

So not only did they not vote for the amendment, they subverted their voting process to add it.


At least they're consistent.







Holy shit we're screwed.

[I'm Murrin]

Can't see the youtube vid from work (or the image in Cail's post?), but the gist given from the BBC article I read sounded like it was pretty sketchy, too. Apparently Obama personally requested the addition, and it was voted for in a very confusing ad-hoc show-of-hands-type poll?

[Cail]

The way they polled is consistent with the way things are done, but there's no damn way there was a clear 2/3 majority. There should have been individual ballots cast, but why bother doing things the right way?

[Zarathustra]

www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_em ... 7fTsF5BiSM

Worth watching, seriously. Freakin' Einsteins at the DNC think we should ban profits!

[Cybrweez]

They seemed to be confused about whether they want to mention God. Seems many at convention don't. At the same time, they showed a video that, among other things, talked about how we all belong to govt, the only thing we all belong too. Remove God, rely on govt. Sums up Dems.

And there's been a string of dems comparing pubs to Nazis recently. I remember Nazis downplaying God and trumping up German nationalism, or IOW, they all belonged to the govt.

I luv the video of the amendment to platform. Now that's democracy! Reminds me of OWS videos I saw.

EDIT: Z, your video was good too. I luv when people go into the conventions and interview people, its usually a mess. Of course, I know they don't bother keeping all the interviews where people make sense or even smack the interviewer around, b/c that's no fun. But regardless, they are fun to watch.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

Both major parties have now demonstrated for the world to see that they are not committed to representative democracy. The Republicans improperly take away delegate votes with a decision whose result was posted to the teleprompter before the speaker said the words--the decision had already been made. The Democrats vote until the decision is arbitrarily judged to mirror what was already changed--the decision had already been made.

I ask again: when are we going to turn our backs on these two disasters?