Broadcasting disunity does not win elections

If there was ever a time to start building a third, viable Party, it is now.

Of course, their isn't time between now and Novemeber, so I will vote straight Democrat, and then immediately start working against both major political parties.

David Sirota:

"Call me crazy, but I just do not understand how the Washington Democratic Party establishment can publicly say that in advance of the 2006 elections, there needs to be no Democratic Party unity on the Iraq War - the most pressing national security issue of the day. To make such a claim, you have to be either dumb; totally out of touch with the majority of Americans who want an exit strategy; deliberately dishonest because you are embarrassed you supported the war in the first place; disdainful of voters' intellect; or all of the above. But, incredibly, that's what Democrats in Washington are telling the media, and consequently, broadcasting to the American people.

Stories like this one in the Christian Science Monitor only reinforce the public's image that the Democratic Party in Washington, D.C. stands for nothing. In the piece, for instance, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi actually says 'We don't even have a party position on the war.' Why? Because 'We don't ask members to do one thing or another.' Right, why should they? They are only the leaders of the party? Why should they lead? Good god, what is wrong with these people - do they not see that their fear of actually leading and taking a real position is what is at the heart of voters' reservations about supporting them?"