Oh, For A Stand Up Party

Here's something from Liberal Oasis that pretty much tells the story. It's part of what makes it hard for me to be a "proud" Democrat.

"......Ever since GOP leaders in Congress inserted themselves into Schiavo familys personal business, Dem leaders largely retreated into accommodationist mode, clearly unnerved with the intensity of the Culture-Of-Lifers.
With no organized activism on the side of respecting Terris wishes and the Florida courts, with no survey data to tell them it would be OK to speak up, Dem leaders were flying blind on where to stand and what to say.
Of course, it is pathetic that Dems would be so dependent on such crutches of public opinion.
.............there is probably no area where Dems are more gun-shy and more unsure about their principles than on hot-button social issues.
Which is a problem.
Americans clearly would have liked to see an organized effort to defend the right of families to make difficult personal decisions without our government intruding on them. But Dems would not oblige.
Mind you, there may be times when Dems would go on gut instinct and not be in the majority.
That would be OK too. As long as they were clearly acting on principles and not on crass politics, they would earn respect from most voters.
But what this ABC poll hopefully reminds Dems is that just because the right-wing tried to spin the 2004 election to make Dems think the GOP had a stranglehold on moral values, it doesn't mean they actually do.
Dems do not, should not, have to assume that they are chronically in the minority when it comes to social issues, and do not need to second-guess their every move.
Until Dems overcome this self-confidence problem, they wont be able to connect with the public and show them what principles drive the party.
Fortunately, its a safe bet that this wont be the last time the GOP Congress abuses its power, and in turn, wont be the last opportunity for Dems to stand up for individual rights.

To much politics and not enough of just being real. I must say however that I did watch much of the debate in the house and there certainly were a number of Democrats that did get the big picture and stood up for individual rights. I saw no Rethuglicans that did. Chris Shayes was once again one of the few that held to principal.

This Republican Party of Lincoln has become a party of theocracy," Mr. Shays said. "There are going to be repercussions from this vote. There are a number of people who feel that the government is getting involved in their personal lives in a way that scares them."

So while I am not very proud of the Democrats here there's, once again, more of them saying what needs to be said than on the other side. I guess it's why I choose to do my infighting in this party. At least I can find a few like minded individuals.
What gets to me about this is the damned liberal media coverage of the debate. That's the national debate. The whole thing is shown as a moral debate and not one on what is the law and why is it that way. It's all about the wonderful loving people trying to keep this person alive and the evil people that want to kill her. Very limited other viewpoints or just "what is the issue here" discussions are done. Why is that?