Posted on 06/06/2003 2:28:25 AM PDT by kattracks
Washington (CNSNews.com) - Anti-war activists gathered at a three-day seminar in Washington designed to move the Democratic Party to the left expressed "tremendous concern" over the party's current direction.
"Democrats have to understand that this (anti-war stance) is a position that resonates with the American people," said Medea Benjamin, a spokesperson for the peace group Code Pink. Benjamin, a panelist at a workshop called "Next Stage for the Peace Movement," said the anti-war community fears what it sees as the Democratic Party's shift to the political center.
"There is a tremendous concern about that," Benjamin told CNSNews.com. The workshop took place Thursday at the "Take Back America" conference sponsored by the liberal Campaign for America's Future. Several of the declared Democratic presidential candidates also addressed the group.
Philippe Chabat of the D.C. Anti-War Network lambasted the Democratic Party for trying to move to the political center to win the presidency in 2004.
"I am sick and tired, as a progressive American, of being totally taken for granted by the Democratic Party that has a leadership that wants to chip away at the" moderate middle of the electorate, Chabat said in an interview with CNSNews.com.
Ohio U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich and former Vermont Governor Howard Dean are the most acceptable Democratic presidential candidates to the anti-war movement, according to Chabat. But he spared no criticism of other candidates.
"Joseph Lieberman is a Trojan Horse for the Republican Party, and John Kerry is a warmonger, and he's from Massachusetts, so he'll never win," Chabat asserted. "Dick Gephardt is the biggest loser that the Democratic Party has had in the last 50 years."
Speakers at the workshop predicted the anti-war movement would expand.
"We are going to turn this country around within one year, and we are going to have peace and security on different terms," said Bob Musil, executive director of Physicians for Social Responsibility.
The participants slammed the Bush administration for its "occupation" of Iraq and its energy policy.
Benjamin warned of the "second invasion of Iraq" by U.S. corporations and called for a "real secure energy system that would force the automobile companies to give us cars that get 50 miles per gallon."
John Cavanah, co-founder of the group United for Peace and Justice, said: "The Democrats will be strengthened if they make [anti-war policies] the centerpiece of their [2004] campaign.
But Cavanah warned that if the Democrats do not oppose Bush's "reckless and unsafe" foreign policy, they will "likely lose millions of people who have been energized by the peace movement."
Chabat predicted that anti-war Democratic candidates would gain in popularity.
"Those candidates like Kucinich and Howard Dean who actually stood up and spoke out against this stupid, senseless war are going to find themselves the frontrunners," Chabat explained.
E-mail a news tip to Marc Morano.
Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.
Let's not take a page from the dems and rewrite history....he never wavered from his support for the war.
The clip I saw had each candidate riding his own hobby horse: Dean against the war; Edwards bashing the drug companies; and Kerry (in an interview) backing national defense.
They were dancing on the head of a pin, trying to make pronouncements to the "progressives" that would resonate while not providing sound bites that would alienate the average Dim voter.
Let's get a big bowl of popcorn and watch the Democrap Follies.
If they're liberal Democrats? Don't ask.
Unless you rank Algore the loser's loser in with the others. He might just rank up there with Geraldine Ferraro and Walter Mondale, Then there is Little Tommy Dasshole - All losers
And those terms? Cowardice, surrender, failure, collapse, decline... sure.. these glowing ideals will certainly "resonate" with the American people. Were the participants of this seminar the ones that cheered when they watched the World Trade Center crumble and crash to the ground? These people are exactly as they appear; enemies of liberty, human rights, and our republican form of government. But other than that... they mean well.
Yes, but only about 25-30% of them.
Yep. I can believe anything after learning the AMA was encouraging its members to poll their patients as to whether or not they were gun-owners, presumably under the guise of "statistical purposes only." Balderdash.
.45MAN and I are fortunate to go to a doctor who once proudly served in the Navy. She could no more care less if we were gun-owners or not. And, I'd wager she has no interest in trying to save the world from nuclear threat. She's busy enough tending to her practice.
As it SHOULD be !! Thanks !
Well if "Pinko" Benjamin and the rest of her commie freaks would get out of San Fransicko and Moron (Marin) County, they'd figure out the rest of the nation isn't a bunch of flaming leftists.
It probably made him jump back a bit.
But I don't think anyone is ever going to top Arafat snapping at Christiane Amanpour to "BE QUIET!!"
That's what she keeps telling me - that I shouldn't have to worry about her commuting on public transportation, sometimes late at night. Sheesh. I live outside of Atlanta, it's not like I fell off the turnip wagon. No matter how *safe* a place allegedly is, an idealistic, 5'4" 110 pound woman does not need to be travelling alone at night.
Sorry - I'll be a worrier when it comes to her naive, tree-hugging self the rest of my life!
She should live in my neighborhood, Dupont Circle. It's very busy.
There can be a tremendous amount of difference between "busy" and "safe." I know, I know...."don't worry" - Hah!
Hollyweird couldn't write scripts this funny.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.