Dean misstates Democratic platform on gays

[Socrates]

from MSNBC (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12743945/)

[quote][b]Dean misstates Democratic platform on gays
Party chairman’s pitch to religious conservatives angers gay advocacy group[/b]

Updated: 5:44 p.m. ET May 11, 2006
WASHINGTON - Democratic Party chairman Howard Dean mischaracterized his party's platform on gay rights in an interview courting evangelicals, then set the record straight Thursday when an advocacy group called him on it.

Dean told Christian Broadcasting Network News that the 2004 Democratic platform declares "marriage is between a man and a woman" — just one of the points he made in reaching out to religious conservatives who are largely hostile to the party.

But the platform does not define marriage that way, and his remarks prompted the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force to return a $5,000 donation from the Democratic National Committee.

Dean later acknowledged his misstatement, but the group sent back the money anyway. "We need for Governor Dean to demonstrate real leadership on our issues," executive director Matt Foreman said in an interview, "not to equivocate depending on the audience."

Dean sought to establish common ground with religious conservatives in the interview on Pat Robertson's network, a tall order considering their opposition to the Democratic Party's positions on abortion rights, gay rights and some other social issues.

‘Misconceptions about the Democratic Party’
Dean said that "one of the misconceptions about the Democratic Party is that we're godless and that we don't have any values."

He went on: "The truth is, we have an enormous amount in common with the Christian community, and particularly with the evangelical Christian community. And one of the biggest things that Democrats worry about is the materialism of our country, what's on television that our kids are seeing, and the lack of spirituality."

With Republicans embracing the traditional definition of marriage in 2004, Democrats sought to appeal to such traditionalists without giving up their support for gay rights.

The result: a platform plank that left the central question about what defines marriage to the states and specifically rejected President Bush's support for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.

It asserted: "We support full inclusion of gay and lesbian families in the life of our nation and seek equal responsibilities, benefits and protections for these families."

Dean stated in the interview: "The Democratic Party platform from 2004 says that marriage is between a man and a woman. That's what it says."

He added that the party differs with some religious leaders in believing "everybody deserves to live with dignity and respect and that equal rights under the law are important."

Dean: ‘I misstated’
After the gay rights group went public with its complaints about his remarks, Dean acknowledged: "I misstated the Democratic Party's platform, which does not say marriage should be limited to a man and a woman," and reasserted the party's commitment to equal protection for all.

Foreman said Dean should be persuading Democrats to fight against ballot initiatives seeking to ban gay marriage but instead has misrepresented the party's "important and affirming plank" several times.

"There has been a disturbing lack of clarity from Governor Dean about where we fit into the party and the country," he said after Dean corrected himself.

Foreman said the $5,000 was for sponsorship of the group's leadership awards dinner in Washington last week and will be missed.[/quote]

This speaks for itself. Gotta love those Dems!

[Era Might]

Pandering is a political virtue that crosses all party lines.

:

[OLAM Dad]

What a doofus.

[ironmonk]

[quote name='Era Might' post='979096' date='May 12 2006, 06:47 AM']
Pandering is a political virtue that crosses all party lines.

:
[/quote]

duh

but where as 8 out of 10 dems flat out lie, 2 out of 10 reps do.

Most people who say they believe in God, [b][u]and practice [/u] [/b] their faith will be more honest than the godless. Dems at national level are godless pagans, even when they try to say they are not... prime example... Kerry, all the Kennedy's, etc...

The two major parties in America are no longer equal in morals... the dems have none... the reps are closest to Catholic values... their priorities are in the right order.

Saying "pandering crosses all party lines" is almost ignorance of the reality of which side tries to build their base with it. All dems at a national level are politictian liars... Some reps are, but most that I have seen at national level are statesmen, their story doesn't change based on who they are talking to.

Fifty years ago, the parties where pretty equal... that has long since changed.

[Era Might]

The Republican Party...redeeming the world one tax break at a time.

Gimme a break. So Dean pandered to Evangelical Christians. Not like Republicans would ever do that. No sirree.

Political parties, of whatever kind, are about as useful and trustworthy as a block toilet.

Whatever the merits of the Democratic or the Republican platforms, Dean pandering is hardly a relevant commentary. Your child-like faith in the innocence of Republican politicians is charming, really. It almost takes me back to the apple pies and hop sack races.

[ironmonk]

obviously you don't pay much attention... ignorance is not bliss, this is something you can fix by actually researching it instead of assuming so much. Going by so much hearsay is not a wise choice.

I have no faith in any party, I simply call it like I see it from the research I actually HAVE done. I have yet to see an honest dem at the national level... yet, I have seen many honest reps and a few bad ones.

Dean pandering is relevant.

Did you vote for kerry?

[Era Might]

[quote]McCAIN: Do you believe in the exemption, in the case of abortion, for rape, incest, and life of the mother?

BUSH: Yeah, I do.

McCain: [But you] support the pro-life plank [in the Republican Party platform]?

BUSH: I do.

McCAIN: So, in other words, your position is that you believe there’s an exemption for rape, incest and the life of the mother, but you want the platform that you’re supposed to be leading to have no exemption. Help me out there, will you?

BUSH: I will. The platform doesn’t talk about what specifically should be in the constitutional amendment. The platform speaks about a constitutional amendment. It doesn’t refer to how that constitutional amendment ought to be defined.

McCAIN: If you read the platform, it has no exceptions.

BUSH: John, I think we need to keep the platform the way it is. This is a pro-life party.

McCAIN: Then you are contradicting your platform.


--2000 Presidential Debate, "Larry King Live"[/quote]

[Jaime]

LOL

The surest way to end a thread Eremite is to point out that Bush is prochoice!

[jezic]

well then we won't end it.

I don't think the republican tax breaks are good for much except making the rich richer anymore, but the democratic national convention donating to a very pro-homosexual organization is not a good sign.

the whole issue of homosexuality and government is an interesting one because they can't have kids. So there will be fewer new taxpayers to support our government.

[Era Might]

I was just being flippant about the tax breaks. The way people talk sometimes, you'd think the Republican party was sent by God, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those under the law.

I think it's silly to take political pandering and use it as an example of something vast and irreligious in a political party. Politicians of EVERY stripe pander. It's what they do. They're politicians. George Bush has pandered. Bill Clinton has pandered. It's how you convince all kinds of people to vote for you; tickle their pet peeves. If they're Christian, quote some Scripture. If they're from Nebraska, talk about corn. If they frequent Phatmass, eat some tacos, so very tasty and good for you,.

Howard Dean wasn't accurately reflecting his own party's platform. Ok. George Bush did the same thing in 2000, and Senator McCain called him on it. That's what happens. Sometimes you pander too much and it comes back to bite you.

Democrats may be Godless and Republicans may be the Redeemers of the world. But pandering is hardly proof of either.

[Tufsoles]

"Most people who say they believe in God, and practice their faith will be more honest than the godless. Dems at national level are godless pagans, even when they try to say they are not... prime example... Kerry, all the Kennedy's, etc..."

That's so True, Ironman.
I also question their supposed devoutness to catholism and that "oh my politcal veiws are different from my religous veiws"

[Jaime]

[quote] I also question their supposed devoutness to catholism and that "oh my politcal veiws are different from my religous veiws"
[/quote]

and you can find that with republicans as well.

[HomeTeamFamily]

i like mccain

[Momma's Boy]

[quote name='VoloHumilisEsse' post='979289' date='May 12 2006, 12:15 PM']
i like mccain
[/quote]

Hey all-new to the forums. I had to jump in on this one. I am a Republican. I am one because I like the idea of a Republic more than a Democracy. However, as far as how "moral" each party tends to be, I think I'd have to say that, while I can't read people's hearts, I can look at their actions. The fact of the matter is, on moral issues, the Republicans tend to be more on target than the Dems. On issues of abortion, euthenasia and gay marriage-all at the core of our faith, most Republicans tend to hold to the Christian ideal (That's not to say that some do not and many have varying views on what "pro-life" means). Dems are almost all on the other side of the fence on these issues.

THe biggest question that this thread implies though is: are both sides just doing it for the votes? Politicians know there are vast numbers of people who tend to hold strong viewpoints on various things. However, I would argue that, in general, Republicans tend to really believe in their political positions. In other words, they have a certain amount of character. I don't think this is true for many Dems. I'm not trying to judge them but they do vastly go by poles more than Republicans do. Did you all know that Al Gore started off as being pro-life? When the tide of the nation turned the other way, he switched. If you watch the Dems, that sort of thing happens a lot.

Now, I don't want to say that the Republicans never play politics-that would be naive. As a matter of fact, my guess is that Conservatives are probably more conservative than they claim to be and Liberals more liberal than they claim. Neither side can say it in public because they think they would lose votes. They are probably right because the masses tend towards mediocrity and we don't like extremes. I have often wondered if Bush weren't really against all types of abortion but didn't want to say that because he knew he would lose the eleciton if he did. Is that a bad thing? I don't think so. There is a good way to play politics and a bad way.

In the end, it's hard to judge. But, as partially stated above, I do think that Republicans believe in the reasons behind their actions. Again, they tend to be men of character. I believe Bush went to war with Iraq because he felt that it was necessary, not just to somehow line his pockets, and so on. I often wonder though if the Dems really believe in anything. They had a good party once, but it became infested with morally corrupt platforms promoted by people who oftentimes ran from the party line if they really thought it would benefit them in the long run, such as Howard Dean's comment. What if the only way the Dems could get votes was to say that they were pro life? I think that the vast majority of Dems would do it. I don't think the same is true for most Republicans though if the shoe were on the other foot. I course, I could be wrong.

This doesn't apply to every sphere of society. Hollywood saw how they could make mega money (the equivalent of votes for politicians if I can draw the comparison) by supporting Christian themed movies after the Passion was made but they stuck to their anti-Christian guns and showed the real reason why they don't want to support such things: It's not the money, it's the theme. But, that's a topic for another thread:)

All in all, I do hope that the Dems can one day shake the antiChristian elements from their party and focus on what's really good for people. I might even vote Dem if that were the case. Until then, it's Republican everytime.

[curtins]

"Most people who say they believe in God, and practice their faith will be more honest than the godless. Dems at national level are godless pagans, even when they try to say they are not... prime example... Kerry, all the Kennedy's, etc..."


AMEN brother

It just goes to show you how far left and radical the democrats have gone and now they're realizing that most of America doesn't agree with them and so they're backtracking.