A little background on Progressive Democrats for Delaware
Well it looks like Mike Mathews, Nancy Willing and some anon commenters at DWA are fixing to drag a group that I belong to through the mud. That’s fine. It is a free country.
But on the way to the beating that I will no doubt soon endure over at DWA at the hands of a few people who think everyone who disagrees with them “hates democracy” I thought I’d get a few facts out about Progressive Democrats for Delaware (PDD).
1) PDD grew out of the Delaware for Howard Dean Meetup. Once Howard Dean was defeated by Karl Rove, we decided a few things about keeping the group together and trying to have some small impact at a time when the President was collecting king-like powers for himself without a peep of protest issuing from the Democratic Party. Here are the main things we decided:
a. Progressive Democrats for Delaware is for Democrats. We are liberals, but we don’t want to join the Green Party. This rubs some people the wrong way, but our philosophical home is the Democratic Party. We think that the best way to get to the kind of government and society we deserve is by working through the Democratic Party. Hence our name.
b. We realize that the Democratic Party needs reforming and we are dedicated to reforming it from the inside. This really rubs some people the wrong way. By taking part in party politics we are less pure than some ivory tower liberals. We sully ourselves by dealing with unsavory characters like John Daniello and Tom Carper. We even endorsed (and some of us worked for) Dennis Spivack who won the Democratic Party’s primary soundly defeating the multi-party candidate Karen Hartley Nagle. That really really, rubbed some people the wrong way – because they thought Nagel was more liberal that Spivack. And why would a “progressive organization” endorse the less liberal person? (I don’t concede the point that Nagel is more liberal than Spivack, but see point a)
2) There is no 2. That is basically it. I think every thinking person who has lived through the Bush years decided at some point that they had to “do something.” For some, that something was moving to Canada. For a few, Bush’s reign of evil stupidity drove them to help Mike Castle by constantly beating up on Dennis Spivack. (I happen to regard that choice as misguided – but like I said it is a free country).
Anyway, for some others and me it was forming PDD. Do we still have a lot of work to do? Yes. Are we a front organization for regressive elements in the Democratic Party who want to keep the party “republican lite”?
If you believe that you are irredeemable.
Thank you so much Jason. I wanted to respond to the bashing but frankly I was too chicken. I’ve been beaten up so often by the “pure people” that I no longer have the heart to reply to them.
It’s a funny thing. I work within the Delaware Democratic Party and I sometimes find myself disagreeing with other members of the Committee. We manage to disagree with some semblance of courtesy and occasionally I make a point. In my life I’ve never found that I was able to sell an idea by bashing and abusing and lying.
About the lying thing. Mike M. you are being lead down the garden path. It will be interesting to see what your take on this is in about three months. There is another side to this and you aren’t hearing it – yet.
Gemma and Jack Buckley have worked tirelessley for the good of our community and Delaware for many, many years. They have never asked for any reward, or payment. To question Gemma’s motives goes beyond insulting. It is deliberately hurtful. It is aimed at breaking her spirit and clearing her out of the way for another agenda. It is in fact, dirty politics practiced as a fine art. By the “pure people”. Talk about hypocrasy.
Onward!
Rebecca
Rebecca,
I stand by my story and the sources who provided me the information. Also, listen to the audio. Gemma’s attempt to purge certain members — most notably Karen Hartley-Nagle — is questionable at the most. The problem is Gemma has never offered to answer those questions. The hard questions. Not the softballs The News Journal lobbed at her in yesterday’s article.
And I’d like to add that my commentary has not been meant to impugn anyone but these particular bad actors who are members of both PD and CC.
I think that you all know this.
I beg of everyone to listen to the audio, to consider the compendium of documents that make up our concerns and to remember that we all cherish John Flaherty who has stepped down for reasons that you can’t get your hands around: Gemma undermined John.
John = Common Cause.
Common Cause is being manipulated by Gemma
Those are facts.
Please come to the meeting tomorrow night. This is not about personalities as far as I am concerned. I did try to work with Gemma.
When the issue was simply a misunderstanding of membership dues I was willing to forgive the horrible behavior that led to the Annual Meeting fiasco.
At the May meeting I suggested that the way to avoid all of this kingd of pain in the future would be to have a membership committee that would track members, assist in dues compliance reminders (especially of steering group)
Gemma asked if I would chair that committee and I gladly agreed to do so. I worked with Gemma right down to the revelation of the email that showed her undermining John’s good name and his authority to do the work he has done for our state in CC’s name for umpteen years.
Then and there I took a radical change of heart as to what I thought must be happening and what on earth was motivating these events that directly led to John feeling that the president had given him a no vote of confidence.
Gemma’s statements to Andrew Tangel are not borne out in our experience.
I believe that folks who bear witness to the entirety of what is indisputably documented, you will either change your tune or go merrily along your way in blinded loyalty to these folks.
I know that Gemma is more than passionate about getting a PG DEM elected. I don’t know how much of what she has done to hurt CC is tied up with KHN etc. I hope that she will come to the meeting tomorrow night because I intend to ask her.
I have attended several PG meetings and I am impressed by this group.
I do find it ironic to see that she said that she had just asked National CC for more money for John at the same time she was making his job impossible.
Rebecca – what do mean when you say that something will happen three months from now?
Could you elaborate?
And by the way Jase, I worked for KHN’s election but I voted for Spivak in the primary and the general election because he was the one with the best odds – that did bear out even though Castle couldn’t be touched.
I even phoned Dennis late one night to encourage him Onward. IF I can be accused of being an ivory tower purist, it is not the case that I took any offense at Spivak’s primary win!
I also saw a marked improvement in his skills as the campaign took on momentum.
Okay, you are entitled to disagree. But when will the liberals in this community learn that we can disagree without making attacks on people’s personal integrity or strongly held values? We can disagree over strategy without trashing each other’s worth. It takes effort, toil and tears to be a liberal in 2007. There’s enough in-coming crap from the folks with the Corporatist-War agenda. (And yes, some of those are in the Democratic Party, at least for now.) To mortally wound one of our own seems very, very wasteful!
I second that.
It is as if our basic powerlessness creates a frustration that gets vented in ways that only result in more powerlessness.
Amen!
Nancy –
I guess I should have been more specific. I was mainly refering to Dana Garrett, because I see a a lot of echoes of Dana’s previous comments bound up in this eagerness to link PDD to the nefarious “Party” over at DWA.
Nance,
I don’t know of anything that is going to happen in three months. I’ve just observed that these things seem to have a 90-day shelf life and then folks get back to working on what they believe in.
Rebecca
Dean was beat by John Kerry and himself not Karl Rove.
“Dean was beat by John Kerry and himself not Karl Rove.”
Well, maybe not Rove. But a major assist must go to the conservative MSM and its continuous loop of the ‘Dean Scream’. After Iowa, it was all about the serious, smart people on TV telling us he’s too crazy, a madman!
Thanks Cracker. I was using some shorthand.
By endorsing Spivack, the PD’s endorsed a man whose solution for ending the USA’s involvement in Iraq was to replace our troops with troops from Lebanon.
My befuddlement over the PD’s endorsement of Spivack didn’t raise any questions in my mind about the integrity of the progressiveness of the PD’s organization (I’ve known for a long time that their progressiveness only finds expression in the few cracks and fissures of it permitted by the national and state leadership…after all, they’ve said would support Thurman Adams over a liberal Republican Republican…an unambiguous morally irresponsible position that real progressives would be incapable of holding). My doubts about the PD’s endorsement about Spivack went to their judgment.
Only a lunatic would think that Lebanese army would or even could replace US forces in the region and it requires even greater lunacy to endorse such a candidate.
Thanks for clearing that up Dana.
Dana – Where did you hear Spivack say he wanted Lebanese troops in Iraq?
“Dana – Where did you hear Spivack say he wanted Lebanese troops in Iraq?”
It was on his campaign website.
It seems pretty clear that Gemma Buckley must resign to alleviate the perception of impropriety of this whole mess and let John Flaherty get back to work on the issues important to all of us.
Knowing nothing about this (other than what I’ve read on blogs) it seems pretty clear (and I’m pretty thick – so it must be clear) that some folks wanted CC to go big time into the Fusion bill debate – and Gemma Buckley asked National CC for guidance which the fusion-ites didn’t like.
What is equally clear is that the fusion-ites have particularly virulent form of self defeating craziness.
Mebbe stick with “pretty thick”?
I jest, but I also do not see your limited conclusion reflected in the discussions.
There is disease and there are symptoms – I don’t know which is which. And I don’t know if the actors know which is which.
*sigh*
it is certain that much of the discussion is based on speculative supposition which is not exactly useful, IMHO and Gemma deserves better than that.
“What is equally clear is that the fusion-ites have particularly virulent form of self defeating craziness.”
You’ll eat those words when the fusion bill doesn’t come up for a vote before the end of the day on June 30. When that happens I will be openly mocking the DE Dems for their colossal failure.
Just an FYI: A Progressive Democrat thug named Vikki Bandy came to a meeting tonight discussing the future of Common Cause and she was un-civil enough to call the room full of people “renegades”!
If I were the Progressive Democrats I would not send Idi Imin but maybe Dale Carnegie to public meetings!
A Progressive Democrat thug
🙂
Knowing what I do of National Common Cause in general, I would conclude that their interest is in keeping fusion candidacies a legal, viable option.
Another point, if Common Cause becomes decidedly partisan, doesn’t that defeat its purpose of being?
Dana –
You will contiue mocking Democrats no matter what happens. What choice do you have?
r smitty:
Yes, you are correct. John Flaherty has always been 100% of the time middle of the road and totally non-partisian. This apparent in-fusion of partisanship is not very pleasant.