Behind all political struggles is the issue of status.

What does should the Democratic Party stand for, as determined by you and me, the users of the liberal/progressive blog The Daily Kos?

There are issues, and then there are principles.  I'm a principles and process person, so this post is about principles.  (It's okay, you can put the stem cell research funding on the entry table, it'll still be there for you on your way out.)  Of course issues are hugely important, since they're what impact people's everyday lives.  To have a coherent platform — to have something which the whole party stands for — I believe those positions on issues must flow from our principles.  I want you to question the biiiiiiiiiiig, obvious ones.  I want you to ask "Why?" ad nauseam, like a seven-year-old child questioning a parent.

What principles of government can we all agree upon?  Pointedly, I am not saying, "Why can't we all get along?"  If you disagree on a point, I want to hear why.  If there's nothing you disagree with off the bat, I challenge you to find something.  What is missing or miscategorized?  If you think something is of core importance, even if it's blindingly obvious, I want to hear about that most of all.

Crossposted at monchieland.

For the past several days, TV talking heads have been pontificating about whether Cho Seung-Hui's murderous rampage could have been prevented. After all, the signs of mental illness were glaringly obvious, especially his stalking of women and his disturbingly violent writings for an English class.

But maybe the bloviators of cable "news" ought to cast a watchful eye on one of their own.

More after the jump.

This sentiment was inspired by a diary on Booman Tribune that I read...

For all of its sturm und drang... does the progressive blogosphere actually have a concrete declaration of sentiments and aims put together?  Not necessarily a "platform" -- just a simple, articulable manifesto?

For the last four or five years, the blogosphere has been  nauseatingly crammed with talk about "movements" -- either of bloggers, of political parties, or of candidates -- and yet, when you ask about where the manifestos for these movements are, all you get is a blank look.

"We're having a conference in New York," someone will say to you.

Great.  When will the manifesto be presented?

"We're having breakaway working groups.  You can sign up for as many as you want.  And then, the keynote event will be an address by [insert famous politician name here]."

Terrific.  When will you read the manifesto?

"Huh?"

        A Letter to Professor Chossudovsky at Global Research regarding A Manifesto To The World! It's all about you!
 
         I have to say that being on kos has Humbled me! So many here do unheralded commendable work for the Democratic Party, for the average American, for the many increasing less fortunate of us, for our active military and returning veterans with a wide spectrum of issues and problems, and for women and children in danger.
         My hat is off to all of you and I commend you! I am but a humble man and am not suited to operate on the level that many of you are serving. My saving grace is that I do see the big picture that most seem not to.
         With that said I have put together from A to Z some of the facts we have discussed here and articles I have written about what is being done to us and the world by Bush, why, and what the plan is for our future and the future of the world.
         

The Democrats need their own manifesto.

Winning back the Congress would be beyond wonderful, but there are some serious risks. For one thing, you have to suddenly shift gears from being the opposition party to the party that's actually driving policy. This is a major shift in perspective, and not an easy one. The biggie, of course, is Iraq. Dems didn't break the egg, but we're going to have to get serious about how to put it back together again.

But I'm actually more concerned with attitude than specific policies...

Most ten-year-olds know what bullying is, and they know that it's wrong to call someone names -- sadly, though, many adults in America don't have as much common sense.

So let's clear the air, once and for all.  Why did Democrats in Congress oppose the administration's most recent detainee legislation?

The below is a personal response I e-mailed to Mr. Cohen after reading his whinefest essentially stating "Why is evabody always pickin' on me?"

After reading it again I decided it was worth a diary entry. It pretty much summarizes my political views and positions and is my statement as to why I am a partisan Democrat.

Liberals surrender to the right, news at 11.

The problems with the "Euston Manifesto" are both subtle and egregious.  But worst of all, it is completely pointless, except to vindicate Hugh Hewitt and Michele Malkin and every other half-baked wingnut pundit.  Yes, most of the principles stated within are on the surface quite agreeable.  They're not even up for debate.  Let me stress that.  They were never in question.  The Euston Manifesto claims that liberals have created doubt.  It's our fault, and now we must reaffirm that we like democracy and freedom.

This is a McCarthy-ite loyalty oath, nothing more.

The Conservative Elites Are Destroying America.

The conservative elites all went to good colleges, even though many of them didn't deserve to get in and only were admitted through connections.  They join secret societies like Skull And Bones or the Federalist Society, and then shut out everyone who isn't a member.  Once they get on the gravy train, everything they get in life is handed to them. Now their greed and incompetence is destroying our country.

more. . .

Unsure whether the cookbook reaction to FlagstaffHank's What About the Threat From Islamic Fundamentalism reflects antipathy to Daniel Goldhagen, the time of day, or something else, I reproduce a British socialist view of Islamic fundamentalism. The Sharia socialists, from Workers' Liberty, begins by quoting a 1994 pamphlet from the British Socialist Workers Party, a Trotskyist group that is the mainspring of George Galloway's Respect Party:

"But [against the state] socialists cannot give support to the Islamists either.

That would be to call for the swapping of one form of oppression for another, to react to the violence of the state by abandoning the defence of ethnic and religious minorities, women and gays, to collude in scapegoating that makes it possible for capitalist exploitation to continue unchecked providing it takes 'Islamic' forms. . . .  

continued

The manifesto - "Together facing the new totalitarianism" - was signed by 12 writers and political activists, some of high reputation and some obscure, including Salman Rushdie, Taslima Nasrin, Bernard-Henri Lévy and Ibn Warraq, each of whom has connections or disconnections with Islam. I'll return to their "credentials" further along. Here's what the manifesto says: