I think the splinterist left might eventually support the idea of super PACs while Democrats won't.

[LoZoccolo]

[dawg]

1. I think the DLc might eventually support the idea of soylent green while the splinterist left won't.

[LoZoccolo]

3. The DLC no longer exists.

[dawg]

5. That's what they want you to think!

[dawg]

13. Now they are top secret.

And call themselves the DLc. That's why I typed it that way.

[LoZoccolo]

14. I thought that this was humorous.

[bvar22]

20. "The greatest accomplishment of The Devil....

...was to convince the World that he didn't exist."---Verbal Kent



[font size=5]
The DLC New Team
[/font]
(Screen Capped from the DLC Website)
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=254886&kaid=86&subid=85




[font size=5 color=green][center]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[Autumn]

2. splinterist left ? Which side is that? n/t

[LoZoccolo]

4. They are left-wing, but support third parties and/or not voting.

[earthside]

10. Reality.

Right now the establishment 'Democrats' support super PACs -- despite what they say, they are utilizing them.
Pres. Obama has at least one ... Senate and House candidates have them.

The 'splinterist left' as you define it are actually those who tend to be most in favor of public financing of election campaigns, ie., Naderists, Greens, etc. These lefties, when they run as third party candidates, are the ones who don't accept PAC money and tend to put limits on what kind of contributions they will accept.

You seem to be trying to turn reality upside down for some odd reason.

[LoZoccolo]

11. I think there's one reason that some of them might change their mind or temporarily support them.

[earthside]

17. I think there's already plenty of reasons ...

... why the establishment Democratic Party is just fine with Super PACs right now.

This is about as silly a post and argument that I've seen lately.

[Norrin Radd]

28. How could one support a third party by not voting for them?

[LoZoccolo]

29. They may support a third party in one race, and not voting in another.

[daleanime]

7. They were democrats at one time....

but they refused to move to the center when they were told to.

[Bluenorthwest]

6. I think good people support equality in marriage while stupid wicked people don't.

Also, oak furniture looks good in the morning light.

[A Simple Game]

9. I prefer maple, but I do sleep in every chance I get. n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

21. The hard woods in general....excellent napping support...

[bvar22]

8. "the splinterist left" ?

Do you mean those mainstream/center FDR/LBJ Working Class Democrats who still hold on to Traditional Democratic Party Values?

"In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

*The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

*The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

*The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

*The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

*The right of every family to a decent home;

*The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

*The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

*The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being."--- FDR, SOTU, 1944

Do you mean Democrats who still believe in those old fashioned vlaues?

Please note the FDR describes the above as Basic Human RIGHTS,
and NOT commodities to be sold to Americans by private For Profit Corporations.

--bvar22
A proud, old, mainstream/center, FDR/LBJ Pro-Working Class loyal DEMOCRAT,
now relegated to the Fringe Left Wing of the "New Democrat" Centrist Party.
I haven't changed.

DU UnRec.





[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

[Morning Dew]

12. Wish I could rec your post. nm

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

15. The same people the "moderates" used to call Commies, Reds, Pinkos, Socialists, Hippies.

The nomenclature changes the targets remain the same.

[LoZoccolo]

16. Your old avatar was an anarcho-syndicalist flag.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. So? Does that qualify as "splinterest", Senator McCarthy?

[LoZoccolo]

23. You were complaining about labels, while proudly wearing one.

[pnorman]

32. I was Googling "Tierra y Libertad" (with which I'm very faniliar),

and came upon this excellent LAT article on OWS:
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/dec/09/opinion/la-oe-martinez-the-roots-of-occupy-la-20111209

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

33. Busted. It was also a slogan for the Anarchists in the Spanish Civil War.

[pnorman]

34. Yes; here's a DVD that's based on that:

Land and Freedom (Tierra y libertad)

It's mainly about the Trotskyist POUM, which fought closely alongside the Anarchists.(CNT-FAI)
http://www.amazon.com/Land-Freedom-Tierra-libertad-Regions/dp/B002M0V8FM/ref=sr_1_1?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1326592488&sr=1-1

I first identified that slogan as of the Magon brothers, Mexican Anarchists who were followers of Zapata.

(lapsed?) Anarchist for Obama!

[dawg]

19. Okay. I'm done being silly for the moment.

I'm interested in hearing why you think this would be so. To me, it seems that the far-left is the group that is most concerned about the power of money over our political system. They are the ones who are willing to take ideological postions that piss off the big money donors and make it harder for Democrats to compete with Republican in the financial realm.

The centrists, on the other hand, seem to take a much more cautious approach and continue to rasie many millions of dollars in campaign donations from business interests and the well-heeled.

There is much to be said for either approach. Sometimes, the only way to change a corrupt game is to win it. On the other hand, it's hard to change something when you have lived and died by it for years.

I just wonder what is the reasoning behind your unexplained OP. On a practical note, it would require leftists to not only accept but embrace the Citizens United ruling. That sounds like pure science fiction to me, hence my snarky soylent green comment.

Please explain your reasoning.

[LoZoccolo]

22. They can take in big corporate money to run attack ads against Democrats.

[dawg]

24. No doubt there are a few who *would* take this deal with the devil.

But the vast majority of left-leaning folks are probably far too principled. (Sometimes too principled for their own good.)

Also, big corporate money is already being used very effectively against Democrats. Why would they want to spread it around to some ultra-leftists? It would muddy their message that the all-knowing free market should be worshipped, government is always bad, and that the rich deserve our deference.

And while spending money helping radical leftists might help them win a few elections here and there, conservatives are playing the long game. And the long game is all about ideas and changing the public's perceptions about government, business, the safety-net, class differences, and the environment.

The right has been playing the long game for years, while Democrats have just been trying to win elections.

To the radical left's credit, we want to play the long game too. But there must be a balance. We can't allow ourselves to sacrifice too much at the ballot box for the sake of ideological purity.

But neither can we focus just on the election results, and continue to allow the Republicans to brainwash the public, unanswered, in the war of ideas.

I really freaked out when President Obama started using the conservatives' "tighten our belts" rhetoric. I like the President, and I support him, and anyone who doesn't vote for him is voting for Romney. But he has been a disaster in the arena of the long game and the war of ideas. It's okay to compromise our policies, but never our principles.

[frylock]

25. you should probably not think, or whatever it is you're doing

[ibegurpard]

27. right

when LoZoccolo thinks God kills a kitten

[99Forever]

30. I think some thoughts..

... are best kept to ourselves.

[Rex]

31. This probably belongs in fantasy literature.

Since Democratic candidates do support the idea of a super PAC.