While Democracy and the Democratic Party may sound similar, the party leaders again showed yesterday that one has little to do with the other. President Obama and party leaders wanted the party’s platform changed to include a reference to both Jerusalem being the capital of Israel and God. The omissions however were not accidental and a high number of delegates opposed the change, which had to be agreed to by two-thirds of the delegates. As shown in the video below, in calling for a voice vote, the leadership was shocked when it appeared that more people voted no than yes — certainly well short of two-thirds in support of the changes. That did not matter. The leadership just declared the vote as having passed by two-thirds acclamation.
Many wanted to be neutral on the divisive issue of Jerusalem but Obama was worried about the political backlash among Jewish voters. Many others wanted a secular platform and to stand apart from faith-based politics. Obama himself has relied on faith-based politics and policies, as discussed in earlier columns. Obama objected to the removal of the word God and seemed to miss the secular purpose of the move, asking him “Why on earth would that have been taken out?” It appears that no one had the courage to answer that question by explaining to Obama that it is not necessarily that delegates do not believe in God but were standing against the use of God for political advantage. Instead, Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz insisted that “the platform is being amended to maintain consistency with the personal views expressed by the President and in the Democratic Party platform in 2008.”
The problem is that the platform actually reflects the views of the party members and they did not agree. The GOP had already pounced on the omissions in the platform and the Democratic leadership wanted the issues removed regardless of the opposition of the membership. Waserman Schultz dismissed the omitted language as a “technical oversight” ignoring the obviously high number of delegates supporting the omission. When combined with the rejection of the clear vote, the statement left the convention looking like a Chinese Party Congress. The “technical oversight” in this case proved to be the views of the delegates who were told that they would decide the content of the platform to reflect the views of the party base rather than the party bosses.
In fairness to the Democratic Party, the GOP has relied more heavily on faith-based politics in the past as shown most vividly by George Bush in his first successful run for the White House. The GOP also did not show much commitment to participatory politics in their treatment of Ron Paul supporters. However, many of us have criticized the use of faith in politics as not only demeaning faith but often also injecting sectarian divisions into our political system. It also undermines principles of separation of church and state when politicians run on their intent to advance religious values in government. Yet, it is how the leadership forced through the changes that was the most unnerving for those who watched yesterday.
Party leaders dispatched former Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland to push through the changes. Strickland started out by noting his credential as an “ordained United Methodist minister.” Strickland announced “I am here to attest and affirm that our faith and belief in God is central to the American story and informs the values we’ve expressed in our party’s platform. In addition, President Obama recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and our party’s platform should as well. The 2008 platform read, “Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel. The parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths.”
It took three voice votes and the opposition was clearly loader than the support for the changes. Yet, Strickland simply declared the measure passed despite all appearances to the contrary.
For those long unhappy with the Democratic leadership, it was a telling symbolic moment. Once again, it appeared that Democratic voters (even delegates representing the most loyal activists) are given only the appearance of participation in their party. For years, Democratic leaders lied to their members about their knowledge and even support for Bush’s torture program and surveillance policies until it was revealed that key Democrats were briefed on the programs. The party leadership then worked with Bush to scuttle any effort to investigate torture and other alleged crimes to avoid implicating key Democratic members. Likewise, while the majority of Democratic voters opposed the continuation of the wars, the Democratic party leaders blocked efforts to force a pull out under both Obama and Bush. These controversies were seen by many that the Democratic Party is primarily run to ensure the continuation of a small number of leaders in power with voters treated as ignorant minions. It was a particularly poignant moment in an uncontested convention after Democratic voters were not given any alternative to Obama.
The image of the chair just ignoring the obvious opposition from the floor of the conventional symbolized this long simmering tension. For full disclosure, I have long been a critic of both parties and have argued for changes to break the monopoly on power by the two parties. It is really not the merits of these two changes that is most bothersome. Arguments can be made on both side of such issues. It is the disregard of the views of the members and the dishonesty in how the matter was handled. The illusion of democracy was all that the leaders wanted in the vote.
Notably, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa seemed to be ready to acknowledge that the delegates clearly rejected the change on the first vote. He then insisted on a second vote and it got worse. He seemed about to admit the failure of the motion and then called for a third vote which sounded even more lopsided (with not just a failure to get two-thirds but even a majority). Yet, he declared the motion passed to the boos and jeers of the delegates.
In creating the illusion of democratic voting, the delegates might have just as well bleated like sheep in protest. It did not matter. The message was clear that the delegates are just a backdrop to be used by party leaders to celebrate their reign.
Source: CNN
Did anyone notice the R former President had the slot of, “He who must not be named,” versus the D rock star?
Talk about the invisible man!
The flourish at the end was a masterpiece of theatrical stagecraft at its best.
mespo,
Slarti turned me on to this link and I have been thoroughly enjoying the read.
http://americanhistory.si.edu/JeffersonBible/the-book/
I have to agree that every convention is messy and it is not true democracy, but either is our democracy. The same people who are complaining about God not being mentioned by name are the same people who want their God’s rules to be my rules. Frankly and Swarthmore have it right.
Mespo,
You are spot on that the Clinton speech was not only a masterpiece in public speaking, but a masterpiece in dismantling your opponents lies. And doing it with a smile on your face.
Swarthmore mom
1, September 6, 2012 at 9:15 am
see post for link
Blog’s “favorite son”, Blouise’s words, delegates were shut out by the RNC.
——————————————————–
Yeah, but that’s different … it was Ron Paul’s people … geeze! 😉
robert sloan:
“Read the book of revelations to see our future.”
*************************
It’s not my future my deluded, history-challenged friend, but I earnestly hope it’s yours. Watch out for that seven-headed, ten-horned beast!
Elaine M.
1, September 6, 2012 at 9:18 am
To be sure the Democratic party has its faults. Still, I’ll take that party over the Republican party.
The Democratic party gets criticized for this vote on a platform change. Where is the criticism for the Republican platform that is anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-immigrant, anti-worker…for a party that is for voter suppression, for privatization of Social Security, Medicare, government services, for big tax breaks for the 1%, for eliminating social safety nets???
—————————————————————————-
But a disagreement over wording on Jerusalem and god-given is so much more important than any of that stuff … just ask any empty chair.
This was a matter of consequence. You can see that on the face of the woman holding the sign, Arab Americans for Obama. She and others who want real peace and real justice just got the big FU from president and party.
And yes, this was completely consistent with what is happening in politics. It was an open dismissal of the actual will of the voters in favor of what those in charge really want. Glenn Greenwald called it Stalinist and that’s what it was.
Elaine,
I must tell you the truth. The cheering, the applauding, the ignoring, the screaming to honor and elect a man who killed a young 16 year old boy, the death threats to people like Scahill for questioning Obama, the inability/refusal to understand that most Democrats are not on the economic, social issue side of the people are far more scary than Republicans. We all know who Republicans are, but Democrats–people won’t look at the truth. That is a much more dangerous situation.
The following is from Gene Sharp:
“Rejection of Authority
Withholding or withdrawal of allegiance
Refusal of public support
Literature and speeches advocating resistance”
Republicans and Democrats are united in their inability to reject their party’s authority figures. This has a real result-unchecked power equals unchecked abuse and cruelty. This is fascist.
Read Matt Stoller at naked capitalism showing how the 2008 platform was never delivered on, not even close.
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/09/broken-democratic-platform-promises-from-2008.html
Read Black Agenda Report as to why they don’t cover Republicans so much as they do Democrats. There’s a very good reason for it.
On the more snarky side when I saw this video here was my reaction in addition to exactly JT’s reaction:
Praise Jesus that a constitutional law scholar wanted god in the platform! According to those who write books like “Left Behind” (no, not your butt cheek!) when the capital of Jerusalem is restored to the the Israelites, Christ will return. (And yet, Obama’s already here and the capital has not been rightfully restored.) The guy with the really bad hearing aids looked a lot like the presenter at the children’s beauty pageant from “Little Miss Sunshine”. The movie guy did seem more honest though.
Clinton’s nominating speech was a masterpiece in both design and delivery … medicare, medicaid, women’s rights, education and student loans, the economy/job growth, and “z-ero”.
It was a speech aimed at independents (notice the theme of cooperation) and disciplined to appeal to them. The battle isn’t for the base, it’s for all those people (44% of registered voters as of May 2012) who have left the base on both the right and the left. Clinton gave them substance to consider rather than rhetoric to repeat and in so doing acknowledged their importance with respect.
As for the lack of signs … consider Youtube and the social network technology. One stupidly worded sign can go viral and totally destroy a well disciplined presentation taking the focus off of the candidate and losing votes.
Complain about the Democratic Party leadership all you want but, hot da*m, that leadership isn’t stuck in the quicksand of the past relying on a bunch of old white men and denying that the world of politics has changed drastically.
A disagreement over wording on Jerusalem and god-given is all the opposition can find to talk about … that’s just more empty-chair talk for empty headed listeners and angry white men who can’t admit the good ol’ days are gone.
Mike,
And we shouldn’t forget “American Exceptionalism.”
“This is not democracy.”
Sling T.
You are right, but then you see in the history of political conventions they have never been about democracy. In fact, though I hate to say it,
America has never been about democracy and our Constitution says so. Democracy has been used as a term of art by politicians since this country’s founding. The notion that “we the people” run this country is just a stale bit of fluff that more and more people have gotten wise to. The choice has always been between the bad and the rotten. As long as most of the people are distracted by the propaganda and the mythology of the on-existent “American Dream” and its corollary “Cowboy Rugged Individualism”, it will remain that way. This is why Gene Howington and I have spent so much time dealing with those things in most of our blog posts.
“somehow now we think that we know more than almighty God on how to run our lives”
Robert,
Why do I get the feeling that your conception of God, is not my conception and then the question arises about who is right? With that question you see why you can’t use peoples faith as a means of running a country, or disaster ensues.
Why have we forgotten where we came from, our constitution and everything about our great country have been based on the bible and somehow now we think that we know more than almighty God on how to run our lives. Now we are paying the price for turning away from God and it will get only worse as we turn from our brother Israel and then God will turn from us ! Read the book of revelations to see our future.
The voters are NOT running the show anymore, but we can’t merely act like we all just suddenly found out that Obama could care less.
Strange how the Dem party acts like the spouse of a wife beater, so afraid to leave and have any hope for anything better in life. The label sickness (and it is definitely a type of sickness) has dragged the entire nation down with it. The party simply does not care that it has been abused, makes feeble and futile excuses since before Obama’s first nomination when it because very clear that he would lie with intent to lie.
I got the distinct impression that poor ole Clint Eastwood had voted for Obama only to be bitterly disappoint about the constant lies and disreguard for the people of this nation. At least you have to respect Clint Eastwood for not be “down with the sickness”.
I just love the Chair’s reaction to the first attempt. That’s 2 minutes into the video
He was running to a script – flying on autopilot.
So he begins “In the opinion of …..” and stops dead.
It dawns on him that he’s going to look totally ridiculous.
OK. We’ll do it again.
And we’ll keep doing it until you get it nearly right enough.
It’s all very well to say that this just a pragmatic move to maintain power.
The question is – if they do that live on television, what would they not do when in power and behind closed doors?
Note: That question was rhetorical.
This is not democracy.
To be sure the Democratic party has its faults. Still, I’ll take that party over the Republican party.
The Democratic party gets criticized for this vote on a platform change. Where is the criticism for the Republican platform that is anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-immigrant, anti-worker…for a party that is for voter suppression, for privatization of Social Security, Medicare, government services, for big tax breaks for the 1%, for eliminating social safety nets???
Great speech from Clinton, although the man is known , not to keep order in the White house or the red house, he pulled this one well.
Why did Obama have to rub in Anything about Israel, Jerusalem, ? Was this a speech for International Affairs, and if so why was Israel singled out ? I don’t see the point – or do I ? When will everyone see the comedy ?
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?388124-Ron-Paul-delegates-furious-over-RNC-shut-out-%28mentions-signage-confiscations%29-RT-News Blog’s “favorite son”, Blouise’s words, delegates were shut out by the RNC.
I note that many Ron Paul delegates were stripped of their credentials:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/28/ron-paul-delegates_n_1837955.html?utm_hp_ref=elections-2012
And for the first time since I began watching elections in 1956 a candidates delegates were not permitted to bring signs into the Convention Floor:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/29/ron-paul-convention-delegates_n_1841741.html
This was a real suppression of democracy because these delegates had been elected to their positions at the State level. And so it goes.
Let us look at the point in dispute in this post and examine it in terms of the real political world. We have a Corporate Media that has limited its convention coverage more severely than at any time in the last 56 years and I know since that is when I first started watching Conventions. I even attended the Democratic Convention in 1976 as an “honored guest” to hear Jimmy Carters acceptance speech ad since I was there for the entire session I know what goes on away from the cameras. This “voice vote” was nothing new at conventios ad I can cite hundreds of incidences where similar events have taken place in the 56 years that I’ve watched political conventions. I snarled as I watched the TV in 1968 as I saw a police riot outside and a “managed” convention inside. How much better for us all that principles prevailed and Dick Nixon became President. We kept our purity of principle as Nixon escalated the war for seven more years and destroyed the civil rights movement.
Our “Democracy” has been further threatened by Citizens United and by the fact that the media not only has a conservative pundit bias, but emphasizes only the “horse race” aspects of the Presidential/Congressional Races.
I don’t feel either issue should have been in the platform, except that for many years they were in the platform and with our media slavering to find something wrong at the Democratic Convention to balance things out, after the Republican debacle, so this change was going to be magnified beyond its proportion. When you have polls saying that may voters see Obama as a Muslim and polls showing a majority of Americans would not vote for an atheist, then this omission takes on importance.
As for the Jerusalem issue I’m sorry to say that this is an issue that resonates with me very strongly as a Jew. Please remember everything that I have written here over the years which includes my ardent dislike of the current Israeli administration and my dislike of some Jewish organizations such as AIPAC. further understand that I believe a two state solution is the only path to peace in the middle east. However, I also personally believe that Jerusalem should be the Capitol of Israel.
In both these instances the point is obvious that the Democrats were pandering to a constituency. So what else is new. all democratic politics, everywhere they exist in this world is the process of pandering to Constituencies. Is this shocking? I think not, merely process. However, many will say that principle must prevail over victory. Well they can vote as they choose. I, however, agree with Mespo regarding the Clinton speech which clearly laid out all the reasons this is a watershed election. I will add that I strongly believe that if the Republicans are elected this time all our issues will become moot, since even the pretense of “American Freedom” will have ended, women will be again relegated to subservience, minorities will be even more brutally suppressed ad the wars will escalate to other venues. However, some of us will be able to bask in the glow of our “clean hands”, even as we are taken away to prison for subversion. Unlike many of you, I am old enough to remember the McCarthy era,
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57506976-503544/romney-democratic-platform-shows-party-is-extreme/ The Mormon bishop was attacking the godless democrats.