More on the advantages of having *any* Dem as President

This argument was made in a previous post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2181672

"1. Congress no longer needs veto-proof support for bills. Squeaking by with a simple majority becomes just fine. And if we ever lose control of congress, we gain the power of the Veto.
2. Cabinet Secretaries & Appointments (DOD, DHS, Dept of State, etc.)
3. Judicial Branch Appointments, including SCOTUS and U.S. Judiciary. We know how important that is.
4. Regulatory Agency appointments (DEA, FCC, FEC, FEMA, FTC, FDA, SEC, etc)
5. Being in control of "Executive Privilege." Now, we get to wiretap them. (or, you know, stop breaking the law - either way, we win this one)
6. Set National Policy. We all know that its not just the President that sets policy. There is a lot of party politics that influences this.

And lets not forget the last one:
7. We stop Republicans from destroying our country and others.

You may not like the nominee we end up with, but to forego these solid advantages is simply foolish. My mom would call it "cutting off your nose to spite your face." Old people have such funny sayings."

********************************************************************

Here are my questions and comments:

These are very compelling reasons. They applied to the elections in '00 and '04 as well. I worked on both of those campaigns and attended an outdoor rally for John Kerry with 30,000 other Kerry supporters, while on the same day the president was in town holding an "invitation only", heavily guarded event behind closed doors in a suburban high school. Kerry, on that day, exhorted "Everything's at stake in this election!" And thirty thousand people cheered their hearts out. He also made the promise, "I've got your back." We all believed he was throwing us a lifeline.

Is there anyone hear who doubts that Al Gore and John Kerry, actually won their respective elections? Gore did fight for his win, while Kerry caved early the next day. Where the hell was the Democratic Party leadership in both of these instances? Why the hell has election reform been deferred to 2012? Why the hell are our Democratic congressmen/women caving on all of the issues they were put into office to fight for? Why the hell is impeachment off the table? And why the hell will they not even try to enforce subpoenas?!

Why do I have the overwhelming sense that Hillary is the anointed one; that her candidacy is a done deal and that if she does happen to win the general election the third time will be the charm? (And, of course, if she really and truly loses the election, well, that's ok too for the corporate powers that have successfully stacked the deck in their favor; for the rest of us, well, c'est la guerre, n'est pas?) Why should I have any faith that if a candidate like Gore or Kucinich should become the party's nominee, and win the election, that the Democratic leadership will go to bat for him when the inevitable election fraud occurs?

I ask you, in the name of all the people who have sacrificed their lives and their limbs to protect and defend our form of government -- the precious, shining, and oh so fragile gift that has been given to us and that we have given to the world -- IS THIS DEMOCRACY? IS THIS THE BEST WE CAN DO TO HONOR THOSE WHO HAVE SACRIFICED SO MUCH, AND GIVE ANY KIND OF A FUTURE TO GENERATIONS TO COME?

Admittedly, I am an idealist. I also recognize that pragmatism has its place. But there comes a time to take a stand. Like when laws have been broken and are being broken. Like when hundreds of thousands of people are being slaughtered and maimed because of an administration's lies. If our Democratic leaders in congress are not willing to uphold our laws, then don't we, in effect, have a one-party system? How can I endorse that?

Maybe the strategy of simply trying to buy time until a Democrat inevitably holds the office of president makes sense from a practical standpoint. After all, Bush's record and the Republican candidates are all so dismal how could a Republican possibly win in the next election? On the other hand, if the Democratic party does not stand up to this administration of lawbreakers, if, through passivity, it becomes complicit in the destruction of our government of laws, if it fails to at least express loud and unrelenting outrage over the abuses of the Bush regime, as opposed to censuring those among their ranks whose legitimate anger has reached the boiling point, and thus speak to the white-hot outrage of so many voters, how are Americans likely to vote if and when the "terror card" is played before the next election?

Unless the magnitude of the damage that this administration has done to our country and the rest of the world is addressed by Democrats in deeds, as well as words in a tone that reflects what is truly at stake in this election, I fear that folks will vote for the party that they think will protect them over the party that equivocates, and that goes along to get along.