« 45% of Bay Staters Say Kerry Should Quit The Senate | Home | Are You Kidding Me? »
Socialists For Kerry
By Matt Margolis | July 25, 2004
The Democratic Socialists of America Political Action Committee is officially urging its members to work for the election of John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election.
“Kerry was hardly the first choice of our members,” said Frank Llewellyn, national director of the DSA. “Most supported Dennis Kucinich or Howard Dean in the Democratic primary elections and would be very critical of Senator Kerry’s voting record on trade issues, as well as his support for the resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq; but the most important concern of our members now is to defeat Bush.”
I wonder if the Kerry campaign is going to have t-shirts made.
The Democratic Socialists of America’s chief organizing goal is to work within the Democratic Party and remove the stigma attached to “socialism” in the eyes of most Americans.
“Stress our Democratic Party strategy and electoral work,” explains an organizing document of the DSA. “The Democratic Party is something the public understands, and association with it takes the edge off. Stressing our Democratic Party work will establish some distance from the radical subculture and help integrate you to the milieu of the young liberals.”
Nevertheless, the goal of the Democratic Socialists of America has never been deeply hidden. Prior to the cleanup of its website in 1999, the DSA included a song list featuring “The Internationale,” the worldwide anthem of communism and socialism. Another song on the site was “Red Revolution” sung to the tune of “Red Robin.” The lyrics went: “When the Red Revolution brings its solution along, along, there’ll be no more lootin’ when we start shootin’ that Wall Street throng. …” Another song removed after WorldNetDaily’s expose was “Are You Sleeping, Bourgeoisie?” The lyrics went: “Are you sleeping? Are you sleeping? Bourgeoisie, Bourgeoisie. And when the revolution comes, We’ll kill you all with knives and guns, Bourgeoisie, Bourgeoisie.”
In the last three years, the Progressive Caucus has been careful to moderate its image for mainstream consumption.
I guess supporting Kerry can “moderate its image” a little.
Maybe not.
Topics: John Kerry Watch |
Related Posts:
July 25th, 2004 at 1:09 pm
DNC The Lineup
Who do I want to watch? Quoting in part from the schedule posted at WND, the incomplete schedule:Monday, July 26 ~ The Kerry-Edwards Plan for America’s Future [The Anybody but Bush Plan]
David Alston, Vietnam Swift Boat Crewmate of John Kerry [Sup…
July 25th, 2004 at 2:53 pm
Elect Kerry-Edwards to the white house and you’ll see just how glorious the Canadian or British healthcare system is, the beauty of the Netherland’s legalized prostitution, legalized drugs and same-sex marriage is. Do you want that? Really?
The socialist party in America is clearly the path to choose if you desire such a failed and miserable state for the citizens of this country.
I wrote a bit about this too: Now Socialists urge support of Kerry
July 25th, 2004 at 3:30 pm
Ok, and rightwing christian lunatics work with Bush.
Point?
July 25th, 2004 at 4:49 pm
Is being a Christian, a Conservative and one who tends to vote Republican considered “right-wing Christian lunatic”???
[b]Just how intolerant is that?[/b]
July 25th, 2004 at 5:22 pm
Wow, way to jump to assumptions there. I mean seriously, that took one hell of a leap to go from “fringe group nutjobs” to “every memeber of that religion ever”
I find this hilarious
“Elect Kerry-Edwards to the white house and you’ll see just how glorious the Canadian or British healthcare system is, the beauty of the Netherland’s legalized prostitution, legalized drugs and same-sex marriage is. Do you want that? Really?”
Name problems with legalized prostitution, same sex marrige, and legalized drugs.
If they’re so horrible, surely you can point out to me how they’ll destroy our country. Since, you know, they haven’t destroyed any other country yet.
…Oh, and you really shouldn’t have mentioned the same sex marrige one, because there’s nothing wrong with that at all, and I want you to tell me why you’re against it.
July 25th, 2004 at 7:57 pm
[i][b]Why am I against homosexuals marrying?[/b][/i]
I’m against same-sex marriage because God is against it. I’m a child of God and, although you are obviously running from God, yourself, you are His child, too.
Kyle, God has made it plain that it is an abomination in His eyes for a man to lay down with another man, or a woman to lay with another woman. God created marriage and defined the parameters a long time ago.
A majority of political parties in this country (ie: Communist Party, Democratic Party, Socialist Party and Green Party) approves of and is, in some way, pushing for such an abhorent practice as homosexual marriage.
If God calls the practice of homosexuality an abomination, how can I be in favor of same-sex marriage? By whose authority do you say there’s nothing wrong with same-sex marriage…at all?
July 25th, 2004 at 9:56 pm
There are several people you need to vote for in the fall. First Bush and Cheney. Second, you Republican senator if you have a senatatorial election. And third, you guessed it - you’re Republican congressman. Oh, Governor and equivalent legistlative positions in the states also. Alo0ng with you mayor, town or city council, and sheriff.
July 26th, 2004 at 4:35 am
Hey, guess what? I don’t CARE what religion you are. Neither does this country. The United States isn’t a religious nation, and it most DEFINATLY isn’t a christian one.
Read article 11 of the Treaty of Tipoli.
QED, bitch
Try comming up with a better reason to ban it, though. I’ll be waiting.
July 28th, 2004 at 5:48 am
What’s that? Silence?
Thank you
July 28th, 2004 at 8:50 pm
Kyle, since I don’t respond to misquotes and mistatements without having my factual “ducks” in a row, I thought I’d take a bit to script my reply.
You are right, that this nation doesn’t care what religion you belong to and that you don’t either. I don’t take issue with that. I, too, don’t care what religion one belongs to, as long as the doctrines and tenets of their religion don’t require their adherents to violate our local, state or federal laws or those of the Constitution of the United States. What I do take issue with is your incorrect notion and your falsely assumed premise that:
From the Treaty of Tripoli, Art. 11, the first clause states,
That’s what your argument is, right? Am I reading you correctly? Well, guess what, Kyle. I agree with that statement one hundred percent. What you’re not understanding is, the true meaning of that is as plain as reading words on a page.
Recall that while the Founders themselves, on many occasions, openly described America as a Christian nation, they did include a constitutional prohibition against a federal establishment; religion was a matter left solely to the individual States. Therefore, if the article is read as a declaration that the federal government of the United States was not in any sense founded on the Christian religion, such a statement is, in no way, a repudiation of the fact that America was considered a Christian nation.
Reading the clause of the treaty in its entirety also fails to weaken this fact. Article XI simply distinguished America from those historical strains of European Christianity which held an inherent hatred of Muslims; it simply assured the Muslims that the United States was not a Christian nation like those of previous centuries (with whose practices the Muslims were very familiar) and thus would not undertake a religious holy war against them. This is supported by the attitude prevalent among numerous American leaders. The Christianity practiced in America was described by John Jay as “enlightened,” by John Quincy Adams as “civilized,” and by John Adams as “rational.” A clear distinction was drawn between American Christianity and that of Europe in earlier centuries.
Also, the numerous documents surrounding the Barbary Powers Conflict confirm that historically it was always viewed as a conflict between Christian America and Muslim nations. Those documents completely disprove the notion that any founding President, especially Washington or John Adams (under whose Presidency the Treaty was ratified), ever declared that America was not a Christian nation or people.
I would suggest you re-read, carefully, your history and keep the context of Article XI true to what it was originally intended to mean.
July 29th, 2004 at 3:03 am
Ah, but you seem to draw on that the United States is a religious nation still. Why is that?
And…**laughs** Founding fathers? Christian?
“I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth.”
-Jefferson
“Where do we find a precept in the Bible for Creeds, Confessions, Doctrines and Oaths, and whole carloads of other trumpery that we find religion encumbered with in these days?”
-Adams
“I would not dare to so dishonor my Creator God by attaching His name to that book (the Bible).
Among the most detestable villains in history, you could not find one worse than Moses. Here is an order, attributed to ‘God’ to butcher the boys, to massacre the mothers and to debauch and rape the daughters. I would not dare so dishonor my Creator’s name by (attaching) it to this filthy book (the Bible).
It is the duty of every true Deist to vindicate the moral justice of God against the evils of the Bible.
Accustom a people to believe that priests and clergy can forgive sins…and you will have sins in abundance.
The Christian church has set up a religion of pomp and revenue in pretended imitation of a person (Jesus) who lived a life of poverty.”
-Paine
“What influence in fact have Christian ecclesiastical establishments had on civil society? In many instances they have been upholding the thrones of political tyranny. In no instance have they been seen as the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wished to subvert the public liberty have found in the clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate liberty, does not need the clergy.”
-Maddison
“Religious controversies are always productive of more acrimony and irreconcilable hatreds than those which spring from any other cause. I had hoped that liberal and enlightened thought would have reconciled the Christians so that their (not our?) religious fights would not endanger the peace of Society.”
-Washington
How about you show me how the United States IS a christian nation?
Furthermore, there were religious organizations that were marrying together people of the same sex. So the religious argument doesn’t even work there.
Lastly, putting a ban on gay marrige is also known as “forcing your religious beliefs on others.” If a church allows two gay people to marry, why are you against it? After all, Catholicism teaches that only people who are Catholic can be married, yet they don’t try to push a non-Catholic marrige ban…
Oh, and I’m a child of God who’s running away? Damn right. I was a Christian for 17 years until I opened my eyes, took a good look at what I supposedly believed in, and left without once looking back.
July 30th, 2004 at 3:10 pm
The gay marriage amendment was election-year pandering to Bush’s base. Four years ago he said it should be left up to the states. Through his entire first 3 1/2 years he never mentioned gay marriage and NOW he gets all fired up about it?
You know, I don’t believe in gay marriage either. But give gays a civil union so they can make medical and legal decisions for each other. If there was a clause allowing that in the gay marriage amendment it would probably would have passed, but guys like Dewaun who Bush is pandering to won’t stand for that, so the amendment died.
Besides, the intolerant hicks who are always bashing gays are the kind of people who marry their sisters and have sex with farm animals.
August 1st, 2004 at 3:46 am
**crickets chirp**
August 14th, 2004 at 6:18 pm
Can you people be any more ridiculous on the gay marriage “issue?”
Leftists: It is not anti-gay to oppose the subversion of American culture. You know “Progressive” liberalism is about “subverting” the “status quo” — just fucking stand up for what you believe in rather than hiding behind this offensive, hyperbolic rhetoric.
Rightwingers: God does not exist. You look like fucking idiots when you base your argument on the edicts of an invisible man in the sky.
Idiots like you people have made it impossible for anyone to rationally discuss anything. From now on, if anyone so much as mentions gay marriage, for or against, I’m just going to punch that person in the fucking face.
September 4th, 2004 at 12:02 pm
President Bush did not determine the timing for the current debate on “gay marriage”. The Massachusetts Supreme Court did that by ordering the state to recognize homosexual unions as legitimate. The mayor of San Francisco added to the confusion by sponsoring pretend “gay marriages” in his city.
…
As Justin Bauman, God bless him, said, what we social conservatives are fighting is the subversion of American culture. In fact, before there America was a nation, even before Christianity was founded long ago, people knew that marriage was the union of a MAN and a WOMAN. What gives a few judges and a mayor the right to redesign our culture?
…
Maybe society can do something to help ease the loneliness and insecurity of gays (and other people who have the same problems), but there is no need to redefine the basic unit of society in order to do so.
September 4th, 2004 at 11:44 pm
Michael, I am just wondering if any of your friends have punched you in the face recently?
October 27th, 2004 at 11:09 pm
FOUR MORE YEARS?
Wake up America! If you want four more years of George W. Bush (based on his previous four years), here’s what you can expect:
Four more years of uncontrolled spending and trillion-dollar-plus deficits.
Four more years of shifting the burden of taxation from multi-millionaires to lower income earners.
Four more years of skyrocketing college tuition.
Four more years of price-gouging by the pharmaceutical and health care industries.
Four more years of raids on the treasury by Halliburton.
Four more years of unprecedented tax cuts for multi-millionaires during time of war.
Four more years of corporate tax loopholes, fraud and unbridled tax evasion.
Four more years of increases in local taxes to make up for federal tax cuts and loss of federal services.
Four more years of ignoring alternative sources of energy that would mitigate our dependence on oil.
Four more years of uncontrolled ‘pork-barrel’ domestic spending, spending which formerly was deemed by Republicans as the exclusive domain of Democrats. With a Republican President and a Republican majority in Congress, how can this be?
Four more years of the Administration’s ‘blessing’ on the exportation of hundreds of thousands of American jobs abroad.
Four more years of no taxes for those companies exporting jobs to other countries.
Four more years of failure to adequately secure our ports and borders against terrorists.
Four more years of a stagnant stock market.
Four more years of alienating most of our traditional allies, because of GWB’s ‘go it alone’ bravado.
Four more years of GWB’s failure to “Leave no Child Behind”.
Four more years for GWB to gain his objective of destroying Social Security and Medicare.
Four more years of perpetual wars.
Four more years of calling up the depleted National Guard to supplement our depleted regular armed forces. And, four more years of a deeply divided America.
PLEASE PASS THIS ON!
Paul G. Jaehnert
808 Bur Oak Ct.
Vadnais Hts, MN 55127
phone: (651) 407-0754
October 28th, 2004 at 2:31 pm
political blogs are the most self righteous things i’ve ever seen. “just because you disagree with him doesnt mean you’re right.”
give me a break, and get off your high horse!
May 23rd, 2006 at 7:44 pm
transunion
stalling Appalachia:psychiatry hordes:hurling Watanabe:credit http://www.available-credit-report.com/