Was There Ever a Sizeable DLC Community on DU?

[mot78]

Seems that being a DLCer is the second worst thing to being a Neo-Con for DUers. I'm wondering though, was there ever a "DLC community" on DU? If so, when did it dissapear?


BTW check this out:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dlcersfordean/

[mhr]

1. Many on DU

Are sensitive to DLC policies because these policies embrace corporate interests over people interests.

This is where much of the DLC discontent stems from.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

3. mhr correct...Bluedogs sing praises for the United States of Corporations

[caledesi]

5. I agree MHC. n/t

[efhmc]

2. Great quotes. I wish we could play them over and over and over on all

the bush channels.

[lcordero]

4. Read this

http://www.progressive.org/nich1000.htm

[IkeWarnedUs]

6. The DLC is a Trojan Horse for the neo-cons

I saw your other thread asking questions about PNAC. I hope you read through the links and info there to understand why this is so alarming.

The neo-cons have been putting their cabal together for many, many years and they have covered a lot of bases. They developed unholy alliances in the media, military, foreign governments, corporate world and have taken the Republican party to a place many traditional Republicans find uncomfortable. And, through the DLC, have infiltrated the Democratic party as well. As evidence I offer:

PNAC has issued a number of official statements, including their Statement of Purpose (6/3/97), Letter to Clinton encouraging him to attack Iraq (1/26/98), Statement on Post War Iraq (3/19/03) and their Second Statement on Post War Iraq (3/23/03).

Each of these statements were signed by 20-30 people. Among the signers are:

Will Marshall, the president and founder of the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) and former Policy Director for the DLC is a signer on PNAC's two statements on Iraq. PPI was created to set policy for the DLC and is very closely connected to the DLC.

Tod Lindberg, published by The Blueprint (DLC magazine) also signed both PNAC Iraq statements, as did James Steinberg, Deputy National Security Advisor to President Clinton.

Marshall Wittman, another Blueprint author, is a Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute (Richard Perle, trustee) and former aid to Ralph Reed.

There is another group, The Committee for the Liberation of Iraq (CLI) that was formed in the fall of 2002. Its Mission Statement says:

"The regime of Saddam Hussein has attacked its neighbors, acquired weapons of mass destruction, and directed those weapons against innocent men, women, and children. It has supported international terrorism and has savagely murdered and repressed the Iraqi people. The current government of Iraq poses a clear and present danger to its neighbors, to the United States, and to free peoples throughout the world."

Where have we heard that before?

It says they "will engage in educational and advocacy efforts" in support of liberating the Iraqi people.

Translation: it serves as another "authority" to support the PNAC agenda.

Who are The Committee for the Liberation of Iraq?

CLI Officers

Chairman of the Board Bruce P. Jackson

Executive Director Randy Scheunemann

Treasurer Julie Finley

Secretary Gary Schmitt

(Jackson, Scheunemann and Schmitt all signed the PNAC Statements on Iraq. Schmitt is also a founder of PNAC.)

Advisors include PNAC'ers Dr. Eliot Cohen, Robert Kagan, Peter Galbraith, William Kristol, Will Marshall, Josh Muravchik, Richard Perle, Danielle Pletka and James Woolsey. All were part of the select few who put their names to one or more of the PNAC statements above.

Note, Will Marshall, policy director of the DLC, is an advisor to CLI.

(Link to CLI website: http://209.50.252.70/index.shtml)

Finally, take a look at what the Blueprint (the DLC magazine) had to say right after 9/11.

America s New Mission
By Will Marshall The Blueprint Magazine 11/15/01

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?&kaid=124&subid=307&contentid=3916


The Case Against Saddam
By Khidir Hamza The Blueprint Magazine 11/15/01

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?&kaid=124&subid=307&contentid=3926


And this one from well before the 9/11 attacks:

Why it's Time to Revolutionize the Military
By James R. Blaker and Steven J. Nider The Blueprint Magazine 2/17/01

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=124&subid=159&contentid=2980


------------------------

The Blueprint speaks and you can hardly see Perle's lips move.

I'm sure many of the New Democrats (what DLC members are called) joined on for funding support and without really understanding what the DLC's agenda really is. Most of the DLC's message is spun to sound like it challenges Bush, but look at the core messages and you find them more closely alligned with the neo-cons than it appears on the surface.

When you realize this, Congressional Democratic support for the Bush administration's policies (out of control military budget, tax cuts and war, war, war) makes more sense.

That's the problem I have with the DLC.

[Eloriel]

12. Superb summary, Ike

One more point: there's some VERY rightwing money (Bradley Foundation and others I think) in the funding of DLC too.

Eloriel

[Rowdyboy]

7. There are Democrats of all stripes and varieties here and mostly

we're all made welcome. Some people, occasionally, just can't avoid being jackasses, though and deliberately try to be divisive....

[the_real_38]

8. We forced them underground...

... where they formed a mutant , bomb-worshipping cult.

[Zorra]

9. Why would a DLCer

be at a Democratic website?

[dolstein]

15. You mean, why would a Democrat be at a Green/Socialist website?

Sorry to break the news to you, but Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Joe Lieberman, Dick Gephardt, Bob Graham, John Kerry, John Edwards, and even Howard Dean -- YES, Howard Dean -- have all been affiliated with the DLC at one time or another. Now unless you are prepared to argue that each and every one of these people are faux Democrats (and frankly, I wouldn't put such hubris past any DU'er), I don't see the merit of your argument.

DU'ers who have been trying to brand the DLC as the bogeyman du jour are wasting their time. The DLC doesn't take Congressional seats away from liberal Democrats. It takes seats away from right-wing Republicans. If it weren't for the DLC, the Republican Party would probably control two-thirds of the seats in Congress. I'm sure there are plenty of DU'ers with narrow ideological litmus tests who would actually prefer that, but I'm not one of those people.

[jiacinto]

19. Good post, Dolstein

But I am sure that you will be ridiculed left and right for posting that.

[bpilgrim]

22. the dlc represents the establishment better than the people

if we go by the historical record.

thats bound to make them unwelcome in an open forum like DU.

:hi:

peace

[eablair3]

33. exhibit A = Cynthia McKinney

"The DLC doesn't take Congressional seats away from liberal Democrats. It takes seats away from right-wing Republicans."

Wrong. The DLC backed ex-Repug Denise Majette to unseat a multi-term progressive Democrat in Cynthia McKinney.

[Iverson]

40. great post, eablair3

I bet you'll be ridiculed left and right for posting that.

[AntiCoup2K4]

58. Nope. Only ridiculed from the right.

The left would have to agree. McKinney was robbed. Coincidentally so was Bob Barr (not that I usually support him, but in this case, the Georgia Repukes made sure he lost the primary because he dared to oppose the "Patriot" act and other Fraudministration policies)

[ulysses]

41. yup.

:thumbsup:

[RichV]

50. Don't just blame McKinney's loss on the DLC

I live in her district and I'd say she has herself to blame. Made some politically unhelpful statements and moves in the weeks and months leading up to the primary that were not helpful in this largely middle-class district with a significant Jewish community. Nasty negative campaigning against Majette also came off poorly, as did divisive comments and actions by her father. McKinney could have served for decades if she's just realized her behavior was more constrained by political realities than she believed.

I don't know if the DLC involved itself in Majette's race or not, but to be truthful I don't think it mattered. I think there was enough anti-McKinney vote to go around given we have open primaries, a fact of which McKinney had to be well aware. Yes, Republicans crossed over and voted in the Dem primary. They're allowed to do so, and a more skilled politician would have behaved accordingly.

[Classical_Liberal]

53. She supported a Palestinians state. and thought America should

behave what it's stated policy was. Meaning if the Israelis don't stop the settlements, we whould stop giving them international aid. This is very critical to security of the US, since Al Qaeda recrutes by using this conflict. This very responsible position became politically incorrect after 9/11, and prolikudnics outside her district with the help of the DLC funded her unseating. The DLC doesn't think the Democrats are right wing enough. Not even Clinton and Carter are right wing enough.

[jiacinto]

61. I apologize for being anti-McKinney to the extent that I was

But she also lost her seat because it was obvious that the people in her district didn't feel like she was representing them well enough anymore. Why else did she lose to Majette by a 58-42% landslide?

[Classical_Liberal]

66. Republicans can vote in Democratic Primaries

and Ralph Reed was on a mission to save the apocalypse. There were people on usenet who bragged about recruiting antiMcKinney voters from their fundamentalist church. I don't think much of their common sense actually. Anyway, I think McKinney is prepared this time and will take the seat back from Majette.

[jiacinto]

71. She should have been prepared for that

They have every right to vote in the Dem Primary if they want to. GA laws allow that. But even so an article in the Atlanta Journal Constitution back then stated that even without the "crossover votes" Majette still would have eked out a win against her. But it was obvious that a significant share of the population in her seat had tired of her.

I regret being against her to the extent that I was here. But frankly, when an incumbent only gets 42% of the vote, it's clear that the constituents in the district were not happy.

[Zorra]

37. LOL - A corporate whore

by any other name is still a corporate whore. Yes, those people you mentioned are, ideologically, faux democrats. Read some Jefferson, the founder of the Democratic Party, and his views on corporate influence in government. There is no reason for the DNAC to exist other than to insure that the needs of corporations are represented by the Democratic Party. If you call narrow ideological litmus tests adhering to Jeffersonian principles, well, yeah, I'd prefer that Democrats were ideologically Democrats, and if all Democrats were ideologically Democrats, they'd occupy the same seats occupied that the DNAC now occupies, and more. We don't have to sell out to get elected. I'm a Democrat because I don't like republican ideology. And I'm sick about how corporate influence has shifted the party to the right. It was not a necessary shift, it was a calculated, devised shift. Money does amazing things in politics.

The DNAC has really helped us a lot in the last two elections, don't you think? lol A republican house, a republican senate, and a republican white house. Scorecard: republicans 3, Democrats 0.

Time to return to our roots.

[Q]

44. Correction: Gore is no longer associated with the DLC...

...and I think you know this. Saying someone has been 'affiliated' at 'one time or another' is misleading. The DLC 'disassociated' with Gore and others who didn't pass their 'litmus test' for corporate whoredom.

- It's also important to note that DLCers separate themselves from Democrats by calling themselves 'New Democrats'. You'll find hate rhetoric against liberals and others on their websites.

- No one would have any complaints against them except for their RWing-like tactics of divide and conquer. They've made it quite clear that they won't work or compromise with the 'liberals' of the party...even as they work and compromise with the Bush* admin.

- They are the Republican-lite wing of the Democratic party and support many of the programs and policies of the Bushies.

[charlie]

45. Hey!

You didn't leave... supremely cool! :hi:

[Q]

46. My mind 'leaves' on occasion...but I'm still here...

- The DLC is to the Democratic party what the far right 'christian' zealots was to the Republican party in the 80s and 90s. Eventually...the 'christian right' forced out most or all of the moderates and real conservatives of the party and replaced them with the likes of DeLay and Armey.

- I see the same thing happening to the Dem party with the DLCers...who have worked since the 80s to rid the party of 'liberals' and others who stubbornly refuse to change the party into GOP-lite in order to attact 'swing' (aka, conservative) voters.

- The Democratic party has an enormous base of voters...mostly of the poor and working class. Unfortunately...they can ONLY vote and don't have the CASH it takes to keep a modern campaign afloat. The DLC set about ignoring the poor and began wooing...to put it bluntly...those with fistfuls of cash and a desire to buy favors and legislation.

- If the DLC is successful in transforming the party into a clone of the GOP...the traditional voter base will suffer even more...and more will stay home instead of voting for a party that doesn't represent their interests.

[Jose Diablo]

51. If the poor and working lose representation

There will indeed be extreme civil unrest.

The blending of the spectrum of ideology untill there is little difference between the Republican and Democratic parties will disenfranchise a vast majority of the people in the USA.

The only possible outcome of a developement like this would be rebelion.

[Ardee]

49. thanks for the perspective,Dolstein

The DLC is not the problem, the leadership of that organisation IS the problem!

[jonnyblitz]

10. I suspect many of the Clark supporters have no problems with the DLC

and embrace their message, based on their shared disdain for the left as evidenced in many of their posts.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

11. Very frightening, that.

Maybe the storm front will move on through.

[Capn Sunshine]

13. I don't know about sizeable

but there's several here. Me included. I'm not about to engage the paranoia patrol again about this. There's a reason for the DLC. But it's not an evil cabal.

But DU is interesting in its firm leftwing approach. I love evrybody in the party. It's always funny to come here and be called right wing. But hey, I know what I am. I am secure in my wingedness.

Or lack of it.

read up here , newbies.

http://www.ndol.com

Later.

[Code_Name_D]

14. Ah yes. Memories.

Their once was a large DLC community on the DU. During and shortly after the 2002, I would even say the majority of the DU supported and defended the DLC. And their was much flame warring, much carnage, and much political blood shed. The flame wars were about as deep and persistent as we are now seeing with the Clark Cluckers, trying to shout down any one who dares think for them selves, and ask questions of Clark's campaign.

But I digress. Proceeding the 2002 elections, a lot of voices were critical of the DLC's campaign strategy, or lack their of. A lot were also critical of how the DLC Dems handled the war issue in Iraq, or more accurately, IGNORED the Iraq issue. It was a comedy of errors. Gepheardt himself tried to campaign on school funding, but every one kept asking about Iraq. The DU kept asking about Iraq. And the response was (and I quote from one former DUer) "Sit down and shut up. The DLC has a secret plan that we do not know about."

It was impossible to get past that. And the flaming got to be so bad that the mods chose to simply forbid any discussions about the DLC, deleting the whole post once found, in order to maintain a facade of unity. Most of the DU leadership in fact was loyal to the DLC, and is in fact the stated purpose of this message board.

But after the election, this did not remain so. Many of the predictions and warring made by DLC critics were proven to be true. Not only did the DLC lose the senate, but the Repugs opened the advantage in the House, and Cynthia Mckenny(sp) was openly betrayed by the DLC. As was Wellstone, who was dead at the time. The DLC didn't just approve of the war, but actively supported it.

The DLC apologist started finding themselves on the wrong side of the fence. To defend many democrats, increasingly meant defending Bush and his war. It was the Iraq war resolution itself that weakened mush of the DLC's support. But that support was finally crush as Bush stepped over each and every "trigger" placed in the Iraq War resolution, even as the DLC continued to applaud. And example, the resolution required all diplomatic means to be exhausted before the resolution came into effect. But Bush refused to send in inspectors, even as Hussane openly invited them in. According to the arguing DLC before the resolution was signed, failing to do so would render the resolution voids, and nullifies Bush's powers. But when this trigger was hit, the DLC did not bat an eye.

When the invasion finally took place, the suport for the DLC on the DU finally collapsed. I remember reading many an open apology as many former DLC supporters came to recognize that the criticisms were true, an well founded.

Nader's Declarative, "there is no difference between the Republicans and the Democrats," was proved to be prophetic. All though some DLC stalwarts still rail at this suggestion, in regards to the Iraq War, and in regards to "free trade" and other corporate friendly polices, Nader was proven to be correct.

The last pillar was removed when the DLC openly attacked the Dean's supporters. And the party became split between the Wellstone Democrats, and the DLC "New" Democrats. And much of the Wellstone Democratic movement has bee defined here, on the DU.

But ironically, the DLC has seen something of a comeback of late. All though not through a position of strength. Many Clark cluckers, being new to the board, did not know the prevailing opinion of the DU when they began pushing for Clark. And one of the selling points, was his ties to the DLC. They have no doubt learned the hard way (they seem to be slow learners) that this is not seen as a positive, so they then moved to distance Clark from the DLC.

And it almost worked, until some reporters starting to unearth Clark's not so clean past. It's not his "former" allegiance to the DLC that got him in trouble however. Not for the past year has their even been an alternative to the DLC. So links between the DLC and Dean and Dennis K are many. It is the current support that Clark is getting from the DLC however that turned many heads. After all, if the DLC continues to lend support to Bush, than why should we support any one else endorsed by the DLC?

The Clark wars will fade in time. And Clark's support will begin to erode quite quickly. Clarks past is just to seamy, to chummy with PNACers, for many to ignore. His so called "economic plan" is also failing to have a galvanizing effect as we are finding it to be too similar to Bush's own economic plan. He has even been caught using the same talking points word for word, as the ceo-con supply siders. I suspect the Clark Cluckers are aware of this as they have now gone on the war path against Dean. And it is clear they are marching under the DLC's banner.

[Rowdyboy]

16. What a thoroughly hateful response...

You must be very proud...

[Code_Name_D]

32. Say something bad about Clark

And the Clark Clukers try to peck your eyes out. I am sooooooo impresed with the quality of his supporters.

NOT

[dolstein]

17. False memories, that is

I've posted on DU since well before the 2002 elections. There was NEVER a large DLC community on DU, and certainly not anything even remotely approaching majority support.

[jiacinto]

20. You are right

There are more Greens and Socialists.

[Terwilliger]

55. Carlos is WRONG

There are more Democrats or Democrat leaning people here than any other category.

I'm not surprised Carlos wouldn't know that.

[w4rma]

64. I defended the DLC back then.

I don't any more, though.

Many other DUers who defended the DLC don't anymore, either.

The 2002 elections made me think about their poor judgement.
Their support for the invasion of Iraq sealed it.

[Pastiche423]

25. An Absolutely Fantastic post!

I'm saving it, if you don't mind.

[Melinda]

30. Wow, talk about revisionism

I want some of what YOU'VE been smoking for the last 18 months. :eyeroll:

[Mairead]

38. "...and Dennis K"? Could you clarify, please?

I'm not sure it reads as you intended it to.

[Code_Name_D]

63. Trying to spell Kucinich's last name is fringing.

Especially where one's spelling is as bad as mine. So I just call him Dennis K. I seem to be the only one who uses that, but I have seen him only called "K" or "DK"

[Mairead]

65. um, that wasn't really what I meant

it was your "So links between the DLC and Dean and Dennis K are many"

I don't quite see in what way there are many (or any!) links between Dennis and either the DLC or Dean. That's what I was hoping for clarification on.

[Code_Name_D]

70. I am not aware of any details.

You are corect, I am not aware of any links to the DLC and DK. But that is not to say that their arn't any to be found, or that I wouldn't be surpized to see them. After all, the DLC has governed the Democratic party for about 11 years now, and its influence stretches back even further. With so much invluence, one would expect to see a long shadow.

[jiacinto]

18. No they were scared off and driven away early on

I've been posting at DU since about the time of 9/11 and this place has always been dominated by Socialists, Greens, and the far left of the Democratic Party. Moderate Democrats have been either driven away or banned from DU.

At DU some posters routinely refer to me as a "Republican" or "Conservative" even though those lables don't apply. That shows how skewed this place can often be to the very far left.

There was never a "DLC community" here because a certain group of posters has made it very hard for those who aren't Greens or supporters of far left Democrats to stay here. And they know who they are. They have driven away many people who tired of their BS.

They can be very intolerant at times to those who dare to stand up to their viewpoints. I often think that this clique of posters creates a very hostile environment for those who disagree with their views on certain issues.

The other thing is that people often cling to misconceptions about the DLC and the DNC. They are two different organizations, yet people act as if they are synonymous to each other. They also use that line to somehow question the "loyalty" of other Democrats. Or to ridicule them completely.

Ultimately you are right--there isn't much of a "DLC Community at DU" because of what I've said above. And I think it's sad because only one viewpoint really is represented here.

And I say this as someone who, despite the false claims, is not a member of the DLC.

[prolesunited]

21. You know I've never seen you post anything NICE

about DU and your fellow DUers. Why are you here? Why do you stay? And before you accuse me of being a Green or Socialist trying to drive you out, I'll let you know that I'm neither. Did it ever occur to you that tolerance goes both ways?

[jiacinto]

24. It does

But there is a group of people who does bully people who aren't Greens, Socialists, or far left Democrats.

[prolesunited]

27. And I have seen you make a number of snide comments

about them. All I'm saying is it goes both ways. Not having my feet planted in either camp gives me the objective perspective that you and your cohorts give as good as you get. Do you see any truth to that statement?

[jiacinto]

29. Yes and no

I usually don't respond harshly unless provoked.

[thebigidea]

36. apparently mentioning Michael Moore or Ralph Nader is enough

Worship like a God, yadda yadda...

[Cheswick2.0]

56. what's up with Michael Moore?

He goes from being a Nader supporter to Wesley Clark? Did he ever see an "outsider (who is really and insider)" band wagon he didn't jump on?

[AntiCoup2K4]

60. That's a good question.....

I haven't made up my mind yet what to believe about Clark, though I don't like the allegations being made recently. Michael Moore shouldn't be attaching his name to anybody right now without doing his homework, because it's crucial that his new movie, Fahrenheit 911, isn't dragged down by his association with any candidates who could have a bad rep by then.

[Code_Name_D]

34. Labels, labels, labels.

It has been said that nothing marks a conquered race than when they begin to use the language of the oppressor. If you are not a conservative, than most certainly your mind has been conquered by them as you freely use their terms and definitions.

Words like socialists and far leftists have no meaning in my dictionary, for I have yet to see them defined.

As for there being a large socialist community on the DU? Apparently, you must be referring to another message board for I have only talked with two self proclaimed socialist. But I am sure that this number would rise substantially if I was to use the Rush Limbaugh definition.

[bpilgrim]

23. on an open forum defenders of the establishment over the people

isn't going to get a warm reception.

maybe in their private functions their ideas are better recieved :shrug:

the owners of this forum are known to be very FAIR and BALLANCED and i put very little stock in your conspiracy theories not to mention that i've been here as long as you have.

:hi:

peace

[jiacinto]

26. I didn't accuse the board managers of anything here

But there is a group of posters that I did mention that does bully people.

[bpilgrim]

57. oh really

well thats how it comes off...

some might consider you in that group as well considering your well documented intolerance.

:hi:

peace

[jiacinto]

67. Spare me

I've never threatened anyone here or been as brash as some others have been to me. I've even been sent cryptic messages from other DUers into my inbox.

But the managers are doing a good job here. I never said otherwise.

[PATRICK]

39. Oddly

The DLC message boards were pitiful and disappeared completely, only frequented by one Freeper,so unchallenging was his task. The posts read like internal pencil pushers on their day off or people with position papers thinking they had a way to get in with the crowd. By their nature i don't think there were many of them, just professional organization poeple, others drifting to the shoals of the GOP. The core reminds me of the book about the magic sword Soulcutter. The closer you get to the core the more apathetic and burned out you become.

Oddly, as mentioned the people supported by the organization who did well are the vibrant outer core that seem to justify the existence of the arrogant, naive and destructive ideologues that won't be convinced their tactics alone are suicidal until it is far too late. Their very powerlessness and unpopularity(the leadership core) which makes them no match for their "counterparts" on the right also keeps them from being able to dominate the party. Only the mad Right has it both ways.

[fla nocount]

28. There is a sizable DLC/DNC community here at DU.

You'll know them by their fruits (candidates). Read the posts, like Pravda, it's all written between the lines. Note the times and the frequency of the posts. Sometimes it seems as though posting here and elsewhere is their job.

[jiacinto]

31. A perfect example of what I've said

People who aren't to the far left are demonized or are subtly and accused of being "freepers" in a thinly veiled fashion.

[PATRICK]

42. That would be wrong

The person trying to post here from the DLC even for hopes of influencing or disturbing the progressive trends would usually be too much the Democrat professional. That is not thuggery or subversion. Ineffectuality in debate should give them aclue they may headed in the wrong direction more ways than one.

You can't move the "center right" and be a weak sister. They'll have you for lunch, intellectual or solid reason on your side or not. They have been put into the position of being collaborators and that is in truth choking their influence to death, because they are neither that no the other. The DNC(the REAL organization leadership of the party, not an ideological centrist crusade) on the other hand is also having a tactical problem, probably due to a whole generation of mistrained political pros without a beacon. They too have trouble getting a message out and seem less numerous than DU maybe for being DAV(Democrats Above Ground) and having to comform to rules the GOP long ago abandonned with their media pass.

[fla nocount]

68. Nice post.

I'm not too old to be educated. I'm not too old to hit the streets either. Business as usual is not working. Like a deer during season, it's our habits that will get us shot. The party has become staid and predictable and it's time to get outside the box if we are to be a force for change. The Same-O Same-O just proves that Nader was right (shudder) "there is no difference between the parties."

[depakid]

35. I almost set my silly watch

to see how long it would take this thread to degenerate into a Green/Dem battle. I didn't, and actually it took much longer than I expected for the first post to appear.

I think that's a good sign.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

43. I'm A Unhyphenated Democrat

I think the Democratic Leadership Council, the New Democrat Organization, and the Progressive Caucus have some good ideas....

I follow FDR's approach to the Great Depression... Let's try everything and see what works...

[Q]

47. We've already 'tried everything' over a span of 200 years...

...and found that in order to be the 'party of the people' we must actually represent those people over the interests of the 'ruling class'.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

48. I Subscribe To Joe Kennedy's Philosophy

which he handed down to his children...

"The rich can take care of themselves , somebody has to look out for the interests of the little guy."

[artr2]

52. How to tell a DLC'er?

Look for the Clark avatar.

[Classical_Liberal]

54. This site was created by people who were angry

at the party not fighting the FLA recount better. So yes there is an antidlc spirit, since the DLC helped the republicans to label us as sore losers and conspiracy theorists, and would never acknowledge Bush's theft of the election. There are third party people here at the behest of those who created the site, so it can be difficult to sort our where people are coming from.

[rman]

59. DLC does not need an "Underground" forum

-

[caledesi]

62. mot - That Faux News animation is great!

[Gman]

69. I see the children have come out to play today

and hunting the DLC boogie-man.

We'll all be glad when they have to go back to school tomorrow.