A question comes to mind when you look at the uproar from Obama's comments: Do Democrats stand for anything?
Below I examine the question, sorry for length.
The thing about a political party is that it is suppose to have a common ideology. Obviously, no two people have the exact same ideas and beliefs, but political parties are, in theory, made up of people who have similar outlooks on big issues related to the governing of the country. Whether that is as a one issue party, i.e. Greens, or a party with a overall philosophy about government, i.e. Libertarians, we join because we agree with each other on how to handle the governing of our country. Republicans, for all their faults, have an ideology. Economically, they believe in helping the rich corporations mixed with individual self-reliance and in theory this helps all. They mix that with social conservatism on certain hot button issues and voila, they have a party base with common ideology. But do Democrats have a common ideology? If you judge us by some of our supposed leaders, you might begin to wonder.
The Clinton campaign's reaction to what Barack Obama said recently is exactly what leads to that question being asked. However inartfully spoken, what Obama said was pretty self-evident. There is a segment of the population who is socially conservative but economically liberal. Those people have tended to vote Republican (who in theory support them on social issues) rather than Democratic (the party that supposedly is more in line with them economically). Why? Could it be that our party leaders (and consequently our party) have been much more interested in pandering to polls rather than having a position and sticking to it? Could it be that action over the last 20 years has left the country at large questioning whether we really believe what we say?
Let's look at the last election. We all hated the 'flip-flop' crap from the last election, but it rang true to some people out there. It wasn't Kerry's change on one particular issue, rather it had more to do with our party's lack of conviction on more than one occassion. Many of our recent leaders have left the American people at large with the belief that Democrats don't stand by their beliefs. Do Democrats support free trade or do we want some regulation and conditions to trade? Are we for pre-emptive war or against it? Do we believe in giving the poor a better chance at joining in our prosperity or not? Do we believe in personal liberties and do we think the government can take them away to protect us? I hope the majority of Democrats (and I believe the majority of Americans) would agree on the answers to those questions. The problem is, the recent leaders of our party have left Americans unsure if Democrats do have positions. And we as a party have to make a choice.
This election has become that choice. A choice as to whether we are going to elect a leader who won't take a position on anything that can't later change if it suits her politically or a leader who will tell the American people what he believes and then act accordingly.
Hillary Clinton is the ultimate go with the prevailing wind politician and her nomination will lead more Americans to believe that Democrats don't stand for anything. Whether it is her position on trade: she was for NAFTA in meetings in 1993 but now she is against it, maybe, and she is against the free trade pact with Columbia although her two chief campaign strategists (Bill Clinton is the other one), are both for it and have been paid handsomely to lobby for it. (Side note, has anyone in the press bothered to ask her about the fact that she is receiving $800,000 income based on her husband's support of a trade agreement that she is against, and how that is not a conflict?)
Or her position on the Iraq War: she was for it in 2002 when the Bush administration and the TM had convinced the American people it was a good idea, but she is against it now that it is politically expedient to be against it. A position that makes you wonder what will happen if the war in Iraq starts to poll better?
Or her position on gun control: the way she has been talking lately, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/... , makes one wonder what she meant back in 2000, http://www.naa.org/...
Or even her position regarding Florida and Michigan delegates; Hillary takes positions based on political expediency rather than principle. If she is nominated, Democrats will be saying that they are of a like mind. That is one of the choices.
Or the other choice. Someone who speaks out against a war even when it was popular (ask yourself this, if Obama was as ambitious as people claim he is, shouldn't he have been for the war like so many others trying to get to higher offices?); someone who has been consistent on trade ; someone who has taught and respects the rights and freedoms established in our Constitution; and someone who is not afraid to tell the truth even if political pundits think it's too risky. If Barack Obama is nominated, Democrats will be telling Americans we believe in our principles. We stand them and will govern by them.
That is the choice Democrats face: Do we stand for anything?