>Dennis, both the comments on Columbia and on Nicaragua seem like a statement
>that if progressives did not win everything wanted, nothing was acomplished.
>In the case of Nicaragua, the Boland Amendment was hardly "minor", since it
>forced the Reagan Administration into the whole back channel and illegal
>Iran-Contra operation to keep funding flowing for the Contras. Current
>Democratic leaders like Richard Bonior struggled mightily and successfully
>to progressively defund the Contras. Possibly it was too late as the Contra
>murder and US pressure finally demoralized the population to the point of
>voting out the Sandinistas, but there were real victories made in
>restricting the Contra menace, in pressuring the El Salvador government to
>restrain the ARENA death squads and in pressuring Guatamala to end its dirty
>war against left guerillas. And most of those struggles started with losing
>amendments that were built on over time.
>
>That the Columbia misadventure already had 186 Congressfolks willing to vote
>against Clinton's full package is worthwhile, if not enough, to build upon.
>This is why I dispair of leftists who ignore the real progressive core of
>Dems we can work with. Absolutely marginal efforts like Nader's are
>celebrated with infinite gallons of virtual ink, while the broad organizing
>needed to move from 186 No votes to a winning 218 No votes on narcowar in
>Columbia is ignored.
>-- Nathan Newman
Nathan, I have no problem with pwogs working with those Dems who are pwog-minded. Honestly. But get your history straight. The Boland Amendment grew out of the anti-intervention movement in the grassroots. Try as you might, you cannot hold the Dems up as the defenders of Nicaraguan soverignty and Salvadoran justice (especially since it was the Carter administration that got the blood flowing in C. America). It was the direct action folk outside the party who did that, who organized resistance, who helped refugees escape the slaughter, and who made the cost of Reagan's policy apparent to the wider public. Dems like Bonior piggybacked on these efforts and, yes, helped to a degree at the legislative level. But as I said before (I believe to Brad), it was the solidarity groups who did the dirty work. I remember. I worked with many of them at the time, and the frustration with the Dems was palpable. That's where Iran/contra came from, not the Boland Amendment (though it was symbolic of other efforts). If the Dems were truly geared to toppling Reagan, they could have when the scandal broke. But they weren't (too afraid of being red-baited), and instead helped in damage control. The hearings were a joke, and part of the PR effort.
I'm happy that there are Dems who resist the Colombia policy. But again, the dirty work is being done at the grassroots. I'm all in favor of a coalition effort.
DP