Joe Conason: DLC has no constituency!

[longship]

Joe is on Bernie Ward's program.

He said the DLC will not be picking the next Presidential nominee because they have no constituency. The activists in the party are on the Internet; they are the ones doing all the money raising.

Gawd, I love that guy.

[liveoaktx]

1. Good!

[Melodybe]

145. He's right, they don't

Corporatist Dems have no support from anyone on the ground.

Suck it Hillary and both Holy Joes.

[cyr330]

2. Yeah, he's great

I love Joe Conason too. Thank god the DLC is on its way out. They should just go and register as Repigs.

[krkaufman]

139. Don't count 'em out. Keep kicking 'em while they're down. : )

The DLC must go the way of the dodo -- and trickle-down (on my head) economics.

[spuddonna]

3. Go, Joe!!

Heck, I'd vote for Joe! :) lol I guess I'm one of those 'off the radar' Dems...

[rwenos]

4. I Thought the Moderates Still Had a Home

With us. Is believing in economic opportunity anathema to Democrats?

I love Joe Conason's columns, he's given Bushco hell, but can we really re-engineer our historic national majority by throwing people off the train?

[w13rd0]

7. The DLC are not moderates...

...nor are they a "historic national majority". They are lobbyists and corporatists. We've no problem with moderates, but the DLC leadership do the Democratic Party no favors.

[rwenos]

12. By "Historic Majority" I Refer to the FDR Coalition

Unfortunately, the southern white lower middle class seems to have left it. Thus, my remark that, if we hope to reassemble the Roosevelt Coalition, or a reasonable substitute, we can't throw people off the train.

Where's the money going to come from to fight the Republican Big Battalions? The Kerry presidential candidacy cost a cool $100 million. If we boot out the corporate Dem's, are we just going to keep running rich guys?

[firefox]

15. The DLC is not the Democratic Party

The DLC is not related to the Democratic Party like the DNC. It is a creation of Gore and others, but it is a handicap in changing the course of the country and catching up to where the people are. The DLC has weakened the party and drowned out the real opposition to the Republican Borg. If the Democratic Party does not morph in direct opposition to corporate rule, they are doomed to be beaten by a third-party that identifies the corporate rule problem and offers a real alternative.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

44. exactly. it is the GOP Lite, with a prettier face

They took a gamble, screwed up, and have been struggling to catch up since then. What is worse is that they actually damage the party by sowing confusion and more.

[FredStembottom]

75. Jobs, jobs, jobs

And at living wages.

That's how the southern whites come back.

New Democratic slogan: "We want your job to stay here."

Jobs trump everything.

[Greyhound]

80. When did WE ever not run a rich guy? n/t

[eridani]

119. DLC has nothing whatsoever to do with poor or middleclass--

--Southern whites. They do corporations, period.

[Zhade]

123. "the southern white lower middle class" you refer to were DIXIECRATS.

You consider it unfortunate that racists like that left the Democratic party?

At any rate, the DLC itself has admitted that their politics is in the minority and that they do not make up a majority of the Democratic party.

[yurbud]

59. moderates & DLC look the same on paper, diff is DLC will deny facts

and public opinion as they are doing on Iraq.

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. they are NOT moderates

they are just left of the RNC, but not by much, in some cases right in there. They are what once was Moderate Republicans... and even that today is being nice

[longship]

10. Well, he didn't say that moderates have no home.

Nor would I. But the DLC is not speaking for all moderates. They are speaking for their corporate donors, which is their main source of funds (according to Conason).

As a liberal, I still support moderate Dems (DiFi and Baca). They are definitely welcome in the party as far as I'm concerned. Would I prefer a liberal instead? You bet! But a moderate Dem is much, much better than a lunatic Repug.

[Zhade]

124. Don't you have a problem with Feinstein profiting off the war?

I know I do, which is one of the (many) reasons I will no longer vote for her.

[me b zola]

13. What does the dlc have to do with Democratic moderates??

Hearing a Democrat saying that they are pro-dlc is like a repub saying that they are pro-pnac.

Most people who say they are moderates are actually traditional Democratic voters---the very thing that the dlc loathes.


No voters are being thrown from the train, because there are no voters who are dlc. The dlc can be found on L street, but not around a voter's kitchen table.

[Spiffarino]

17. The DLC does not represent Democrats or democrats.

They are nothing more than a Democratic mask for the (slightly) more liberal corporate elite to hide behind.

I am not anti-business, nor am I anti-wealth. On the whole, I believe most Dems feel the same way. However, I am also pro-citizen and as such I firmly believe money shouldn't count the same as votes. I also firmly believe that extreme wealth shouldn't grant one special rights beyond the freedom that money brings. Hence, I am a democrat and a Democrat.

If I believed that wealth automatically imparted special status as an American citizen, I would be a Republican.

[JNelson6563]

27. "economic opportunity"???

Yeah, cause everybody knows, if you ain't DLC you are against economic opportunity. :eyes:

Got any other memes that the reich wing might use?

Julie

[TankLV]

125. We don't want no economic "opportunity" - we DEMAND full economic

PARTICIPATION & INCLUSION!

[rman]

28. DLC-style "economic opportunity" = theft

The measures the DLC proposes and pushes benefit primarily wealthy corporate people, at the expense of the workers.

Also, these Republican-light folks that make up the DLC are hardly the "historic national majority" of the Dem party. The DLC stands for the drive to move to the political center, which is as recent as the DLC, which was founded in 1985. The origins of the Dem party go back as far as the time of president Andrew Jackson; around 1830-ish. So much for the DLC representing the historic majority of the Dem party.

[sendero]

29. Economic opportunity?

You have GOT to be kidding. The DLC offers the same "economic opportunity" that Bush** has, increasing the poverty rate by about a third.

No thanks! The DLC, in addition to not being able to find their asses with both hands, couldn't get Jesus elected.

Screw that crap, been there, done that, have the scars.

[lostnfound]

32. Mega-Corporate capitalism has taken over democracy

Is it willing to be restrained with a leash and a bit? Or will it insist on keeping control and inevitably putting a leash and a bit on every actual human it ends up controlling?

The ideology that government should be replaced by private enterprise (i.e., why FEMA was brought to failure while Bush cronies were out creating private replacements, for example) is an idea that was fostured and nurtured by the corporatocracy.

The fact that peace activists can't get their paid advertising on TV is another example.

Moderates -- YES, absolutely we need moderates. But mega-businesses are inside the 5-yard line right now. Moderation means being willing to push it back to the 50.

[K-W]

58. If you think the left doesnt support economic opportunity,

You arent a modrate.

[bvar22]

84. The DLC does NOT believe in economic opportunity.

The DLC believes in Corporate Monopolies and cornering the market. FAIR Competition is an anathema to the DLC.
God Forbid that the American Worker compete on a level playing field with Slave Labor.

DLC Motto: If the American Worker wants to compete with Slave Labor in China, he better learn to live on $2.00 per day!


The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[Marr]

90. I wonder if we'll still hear DLC-types telling Dems to 'put their

personal agendas aside and support the party'? I suspect not.

Anyway- of course they can still vote Democratic. They just can't choose the damned candidates.

[Spiffarino]

5. I don't care if it's a short post, longship

I'm recommending it. We are finally done with the DLC Republiclones and their days are numbered. Conason nailed it.

Most Dems are not anti-business per se, but there is no reason to be a Dem if all you do is whore for corporations. If that's your agenda, join the Republican party and be done with it.

[longship]

11. Thanks, Spiff.

nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. And that DiFi is in for a shock

sorry that was music to me ears

[I_Make_Mistakes]

14. Don't celebrate, organize. This is a very critical time to re (group

and think) the democratic message. The press keeps saying WE have no message. I know that is BS, but let's start thinking outside the box!

We can, too many overly competent Du'ers craft an unstoppable message!

The crap has hit the fan, former legislation, 911, Katrina, Los Angeles power outage, etc. We actually need problem solvers and not theorists (thin tanks), to solve the problems we are facing.

And, I know WE have the resources!

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. Oh trust me I am not the celebrating kind

just the activist kind, even if I don;t go to them meetings that much.. there are days I want to throw the towel, there are days what I do has an effect, and I can see it.

;-)

[firefox]

19. Message- Do you want to be ruled or governed?

As one who believes that we are in fact ruled by treason, it is my wish to see government return to the US. Do you want to end corporate rule and return to a government of/for/by the people?

Disillusionment is a keyword for our times. Katrina has made many deal with the disillusionment that came upon them. On September 24th, the sign I am most interested in seeing will be "I want my country back." That is what motivates people here to help others fill in the blanks. If things were fine instead of upside down, there would not be so much conversation on political realities. The country has been lost to corporate rule, the Constitution is a joke, and the media plays along. We don't need marketing too by the Democratic Party. We need servants from the Democratic Party that will do the general welfare stuff and say this country is a rogue country on the way to being a failed state.

[eleny]

9. "Nobody listens to the DLC"

That was great!

Don't forget - KGO archives for 24 hours. I'm going to listen to this interview with my morning coffee.

[FreedomAngel82]

18. So true

Look at what has happened ever since the last "election"!!! Barbara Boxer to Camp Casey! And yes Conason kicks ass.

[I_Make_Mistakes]

21. They (the corporate masters) made us feel ineffectual. They did this!

Howard Dean gave us the power to be effectual. It is time for us to rise to the cause.

My dad is a wealthy Repuke, who didn't get locally elected prolly cause he never contributed before. Thank God!. I only know this because my sister was in the area, and saw a sign. My mom told me, I said he was probably ticked off, he didn't get his way, and my mom said, that's what your sister said.

The truth is, they are alienating their own base, little by little, and the Repubs, have to jump ship or not be viable party for a long time.

Oh, by the way, did I tell you, we were all Repukes?

[incapsulated]

20. I love Joe, but

I don't know if they will need us, though, with the money that they can raise through their corporate backers.

[Skidmore]

25. Corporations may have money but they can't vote!!!

We have something more important, people and votes. I got a survey form from the "Friends of Hillary" in the mail this week. It was a stupid survey, which you couldn't but endorse that you agreed with the the priorities of every social agenda vs. tax cuts, then they wanted to know about what party you trusted to deliver, and asked you for a donation (please put a stamp on the postage-paid envelope to save them campaign dollars). I started to fill out that stupid questionnaire, and then I got pissed--really pissed--when I started to recall all the words and how they match up with the votes of some of these DLC types. I quit checking boxes and started writing. I wrote in every available space on that 4 page survey from page 2 on. I filled up the comments section. I talked to them about getting the church out of the state and the need to quit chatting up the extremists of the country and call them what they are--extremists. Because you can't say you are for the rights of women and children by adopting part of the agenda of a group that believes that God tells men to rule them. These are not compatible. You can't say you are for the working man when you vote for bills that destroy the safety net for the poor. Rebuild the safety net. STAND FOR SOMETHING!!! I won't donate to a party that refuses to address the concerns of the worker. I filled out a DNC survey similarly and sent in back with a stamp on the envelope. There is a very good chance that my job will be gone by the end of January. I will not donate hard earned money at this time when I can't be convinced that the Dems are any more interested in standing up to this radical Republican agenda that is destroying our nation. They need to quit participating in the destruction. AND I told them to disband the DLC, it does nothing for the party or for the base, and to not reconstitute under an other name for it will meet the same level of distrust and still not be supported by the base.

[joanski0]

26. I'm glad you did that. I received that survey

also, and just threw it in the trash.

[OnionPatch]

35. I think I got the same one

I started to fill out the form but knew I couldn't send money that time. When I got to the end, there was a box that said, "Yes, I want my opinions added to the rest (or something like that) Here is my survey and my contribution." There was nowhere to check that you were only sending back the survey. It kind of ticked me off because it seemed like they only wanted my opinion if there were $50 attached to it!

[natrat]

39. corporations can't vote? ....yea they can and it may get worse

diebold. How many states have adopted e voting since 2004? have any states reformed e voting? where does the dlc stand on evoting?

[RSchewe]

101. That is the bottom line, unless that corporation owns voting machines

Yikes!

[Douglas Carpenter]

22. I guess I must of pegged Conason wrong

I actually thought he was coming from the slightly more liberal end of DLC thinking -- I suppose, I thought I was reading between the lines on his views about the battle for the DNC Chair and some other comments he made.

Then last week on Al Franken I heard him sing the praises of Juan Cole. I thought to myself, hmmm that's odd for a DLCer.

Now these comments from him. I guess I have to admit that reading between the lines can sometimes result in misreading.

[Douglas Carpenter]

23. recommended and thank you for your post

[Skidmore]

24. He's so right....er....correct. Smokin' Joe!!!

[Cocoa]

30. they have a very narrow elite constituency

media and corporate elites.

But virtually no grassroots constiuency.

[librechik]

60. exactly, they are Beltway Boys

thus their disproportionate power to their non-existent constituency.

[Fluffdaddy]

31. On a National election I think DLC will find a constituency in fact I'm

betting on it and putting my money where my mouth is. In 06 when the DLC is picking off some soft Red states, You guys will jump on the bandwagon for the big one in 2008. This is if you don't want to see the GOP running all 3 houses for 6 more years
The choice is ours, Keep getting our ass kicked in the Red States or try.......TRY something new. If we can pick off one or two red states the WH is ours

Edit to add, I know I'm in the minority here...........But I'm use to that :hide:

In

[mod mom]

33. DLC- or as I like to call them DEMS who LOVE CORPORATIONS, have directed

our party into the pockets of big business. I want progressive change not business as usual. I hope Joe Conason is correct.

[oc2002]

36. if by that you mean that they get a DLC candidates to run

down south as Republican lite, they will certainly lose. If they dress up a DLC candidate as a Progressive and try to sneak them into office they will lose too.

They are a slimey bunch at the DLC.

[SaveElmer]

71. So I take it...

You will be opposing the renomination of the 1/3 of Senate Democrats who are DLC members wen they come up for re-election?

[Lerkfish]

37. why do you always have to use that tired blackmail?

"if you don't vote DLC, you'll lose elections"

its always that, or some variant thereof.

sounds very much like
"If you vote for Kerry, we'll be attacked" line of Cheney's.

here's my problem with that disgusting tactic:

instead of being adults and laying out the DLC platform, or their goals, its always "you'll lose elections without us!".

here's my challenge:

1. lay out EXACTLY what your DLC platform is..to whom is it directed, constituents or corporate america.

maybe if you did more of THAT, and less blackmail, you'd be getting a better response here.

[Douglas Carpenter]

42. thank you...I was thinking something along the same lines just the other

day. It is amazing to me that the DLC types never makes its case on the bases of what their proposal are -- just the claim that the Democrats cannot win without them --- they never lay out their agenda
just the claim that they are "moderates" or "centrist".

There simply are not many people who are not committed Republicans already who support neocon foreign policy and right-wing economic theory and believe that the corporations need to be empowered and protected even more.

[Fluffdaddy]

45. Sorry. wrong place

[U4ikLefty]

140. I smell..........CHICKEN!!! n/t

[Lerkfish]

94. and notice the challege goes unanswered, as far as I can tell.

pffft!

[Zhade]

126. Well, they CAN'T accept your challenge.

Then they'd have to deal with the fact that...

A majority of Americans want universal health care, while the DLC does not...

A majority of Americans want the illegal war in Iraq to end, the DLC still supports and always has supported it...

A majority of Americans want NAFTA either overturned or amended with worker protections, while this threatens the DLC's corporate base...

I could go on, but you get the point.

[MisterP]

136. that and the messianic complex: "we are your saviors--your GODS!"

they're Bushlike not just in every morally bankrupt policy that they slobberingly push or foist onto us

[mopinko]

38. if you don't think the earth has shifted in the red states,

WAKE UP.

[porphyrian]

40. Just like in the last 3 major elections, huh?

How much more failure should we expect from your "leadership" before we're allowed to call you ineffectual? So far, my money might as well have been handed straight to the republicans for what good it's done. Sorry, you're deluded and wrong. Goodbye, DLC.

[Douglas Carpenter]

43. something new??...there is nothing new about a 30+ year failed strategy

[Larkspur]

118. Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! DLC picking off Red stats.

:rofl:

[oc2002]

34. But they still have lots of MOLES in the DNC to keep them abysmaly

..incompetant. Dean needs to clean house NOW, not after yet another disaster election year, and he needs to start grooming real progressive candidates with money and grass roots organization.

the DNC right now is as bad as the DLC. Rotten to the core.

[natrat]

41. who are the dlc? hillary,harrold ford, biden

[Zodiak]

77. Glad you asked...

Not ALL DLC members are horrible. There are a few that vote consistent with Democratic principles. The ones you list are the face-men of the DLC....and they tend to be more liberal than the ones you don't hear about. Look at the vote scores for last Congressional session and decide which DLCers are worth keeping and which ones aren't.

Harkin (Iowa) 95
Boxer (CA) 90
Lautenberg (NJ) 90
Akaka (Hawaii) 80
Corzine (NJ) 80
Dayton (MN) 80
Durbin (IL) 80
Feingold (WI) 80
Kennedy (MA) 80
Kerry (MA) 80 - DLC
Levin (MI) 80
Dodd (CN) 70 - DLC
Leahy (VT) 70
Mikulski (MD) 70
Reed (RI) 70
Sarbanes (MD) 70
Shumer (NY) 70
Wyden (OR) 70
Clinton (NY) 65 - DLC
Obama (IL) 65
Bayh (IN) 60 - DLC
Biden (DE) 60
Dorgan (ND) 60 - DLC
Stabenow (MI) 60 - DLC
Byrd (WV) 50
Inouye (Hawaii) 50
Murray (WA) 50
Reid (NV) 50
Rockefeller (WV) 50
Baucus (MN) 45 - DLC
Bingaman (NM) 40
Cantwell (WA) 40 - DLC
Johnson (SD) 40 - DLC
Kohl (WI) 40 - DLC
Conrad (ND) 35 - DLC
Feinstein (CA) 35
Carper (DE) 30 - DLC
Leiberman (CT) 30 - DLC
Landrieu (LA) 20 - DLC
Lincoln(ARK) 20 - DLC
Nelson (FL) 20 - DLC
Salazar (CO) 20 - DLC
Pryor (ARK) 15 - DLC
Nelson (NE) 0 - DLC

These scores represent a rough estimate of how often these senators vote against the Bush agenda. Notics also that of the 13 senators who consistently work against progressive ideals, 12 are DLCers.

[wuushew]

110. Here are the Senators

Max Baucus, U.S. Senator, MT
Evan Bayh, U.S. Senator, IN
Maria Cantwell, U.S. Senator, WA
Tom Carper, U.S. Senator, DE
Hillary Clinton, U.S. Senator, NY
Kent Conrad, U.S. Senator, ND
Byron Dorgan, U.S. Senator, ND
Dianne Feinstein, U.S. Senator, CA
Tim Johnson, U.S. Senator, SD
John Kerry, U.S. Senator, MA
Herb Kohl, U.S. Senator, WI
Mary Landrieu, U.S. Senator, LA
Joe Lieberman, U.S. Senator, CT
Blanche Lincoln, U.S. Senator, AR
Bill Nelson, U.S. Senator, FL
Ben Nelson, U.S. Senator, NE
Mark Pryor, U.S. Senator, AR
Debbie Stabenow, U.S. Senator, MI

http://www.dlc.org/new_dem_dir_action.cfm :puke:

[Fluffdaddy]

46. The proof is in the pudding. With few wins in 06 you guys will understand

what the DLC is doing. The Hard-left side of our party had bleed us enuff. Another 4 years of this and we will go the way of the The Whig Party. It's time for the Centrist/moderates of our party and Stop the bleeding. And start winning same damn national elections

[mod mom]

47. The "bleeding" has more to do with fraudulent elections being stolen from

us. I am an active member of the election reform community and I can tell you point blank that the DLC is not involved with us, in fact they have hampered our progress by remaining in denial. I (and I am not alone) will vote third party over DLC any day. They do now serve the constituents of the democratic party but instead the greedy pockets of big business.

[Fluffdaddy]

49. People Voting third party got us in the mess we are in Today.

Can you say Nader and the Green party in the 2000 national elections ? I Knew you could

[JHB]

72. It was the abandonment of economic populism that got us in this mess...

...not third party voting. Hell, the third party voting is in large part due to the abandonment of economic populism.

Time and again, people have seen the good jobs where they live dry up or shut down and moved to somewhere else, fattening the pockets of self-serving greed-head MBA weasles "entreprenures", and leaving them to work longer and harder for less. Not to mention attacks on their pensions and Social Security.

This is not a natural process, and even real natural processes sometimes can be altered with properly directed effort.

[mod mom]

85. Actually we won in 2000 and 2004, so it was the silence of

the dems, who were so afraid of disturbing the markets that contributed to the mess we are in.

David Cobb (Green) stood up and fought in Ohio for Kerry/Edwards, and against the election fraud that occurred. Don't blame 3rd party voters.

[Marr]

92. Third party voters were the only thing that got the DLC into the WH.

Clinton/Perot/Bush.

That's the sad reality.

[Zhade]

129. HA!

Sorry Fluffdaddy, but you've been

[U4ikLefty]

141. LOL...you beat me to it!!! n/t

[Zhade]

128. Can you say "More Dems in FL voted for b*s* than anyone voted for Nader"?

Can you say "illegal voter purges"?

Can you say "machine fraud"?

Can you say "unprecedented one-time partisan Supreme Court decision that put b*s* in the White House instead of the actual WINNER of the election"?

[Douglas Carpenter]

48. hard left ?? who ?? what policies supported by major Democrat figures

are hard left?? please be specific

If you consider (and I don't know whether you do or not) Gov. Dean to be hard lift. Please specify what policy proposals he supports , you consider to be hard left.

Now I will grant that Dennis Kucinich can be fairly called left. But what policy proposals does he support that you consider to be hard left?

Is Move-on hard left? If so, what policy proposals do they support do that you consider to be hard left?

Is Kos or David Sirota hard left?? If so, what policy proposals do they support do you and other DLCers consider hard left?

I'm not trying to be snide. I really am just awfully curious.

[Zhade]

130. You won't get an answer, I'm betting.

None of these DLCers actually use the term "far left" with any real sense of accuracy. I mean, I look around, and don't see any Dem politicos calling for collectivization and forced redistribution of wealth.

Ironically, Kucinich would be considered a moderate in Europe.

[pberq]

51. The DLC has had their chance and have

proven to be an utter failure at the polls. Who in their right mind would vote for Republican-Lite when they can have the real thing?

[glitch]

68. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. nt

[K-W]

70. Yes, lets buy into republican lies about the left.

That is sure to help us win!!!!

[SaveElmer]

73. I'm not a DLC hater...as many here are...

And I am supporting Hillary Clinton in 2008. If people here would truly dig down and take a look at DLC positions on many issues, they would find wide areas of agreement. The DLC is well within the mainstream of the Democratic Party, and are progressive on most issues.

The flaw with the DLC is the arrogance they tend to display at times, often acting as though they had a monopoly on the truth. When, in reality, they are merely on group within the Democratic Party contributing to its identity. If they recognized this and worked with others in the party, their rep wouldn't be so bad. The first thing they need to do is get rid of Al From...or at the very least keep him off TV. The guy is a prick!!! Hillary was a good choice for a visible role, and it may be she should be the face of the DLC.

This is not to say that the Liberal Liberation wing of the party hasn't been guilty of this too...their attitude is well represented on this board and in this thread.

[greendog]

106. Well within the mainstream!!!!

Since when is shipping American jobs to China "well within the mainstream" of the Democratic Party?

[SaveElmer]

112. Typical anti-DLC strategy...

Some pithy statement with no context. Fact is it is easy, very easy to cherry pick things you do not like and apply them generally. This statement is so broad it is meaningless.

If you would take the time to look at the DLC positions on any number of issues you would be surprised at the level of agreement you would have with their positions. Global Warming, Church and State, Environment, Energy, even gun control....

I don't support everything they do, but most of it is, yes, well within the Democratic mainstream

[greendog]

113. No context?

How about the "context" of their votes on trade scams like GATT and NAFTA?

[SaveElmer]

116. I have a challenge for you...

You tell me who you believe were the greatest presidents in our history, and I bet, in 500 words or less, based upon their actions, I can convince you they were the scum of the earth.

These issues are not black and white. Presidents are not born out of some "issue" formula. Issues are one aspect. Certainly I could not vote for someone with whom I disagreed most of the time. But if I agreed with them 90% of the time, and I saw other qualities which I believe would make them a good candidate, I would vote for them. FDR was that type of politician. He ran as a balanced budget conservative, but had other qualities which made him great. He was able to look beyond his preconceived notions about things and do what was right for the country.

I see in Hillary some of these qualities.

[U4ikLefty]

142. Note the moving of the goalposts when challenged on GATT & NAFTA . n/t

[SaveElmer]

143. What the hell are you talking about?

You insist on some kind of liberal purity in your Democratic politicians ...I am simply challenging you to name a politician you admire whose every position they have taken meets with your approval.

As I stated above I do not agree on Hillary Clinton on every issue, I agree on enough of them for me to be comfortable with her as a candidate, and her other qualities makes me an enthusuastic supporter.

As to NAFTA, I was for it when passed, but I believe it needs modification. I would not support its repeal.

[greendog]

149. SaveElmer, this is your lucky day!

Give me 500 words on why Nixon was scum. Find the bad stuff...all of it. And once we've eliminated all the dirt on Dick we'll compare him to your beloved Bill Clinton.

:rofl:

[SaveElmer]

152. I tell you what...

It would not take 500 words to convince anyone that Nixon was scum.

[LSK]

162. Howard Dean

No, hes not president. But his stance on issues are clear. Go ahead, rip him apart.

[wuushew]

109. Hillary Clinton will do poorly in swing states

What combination of states do you see her winning without Ohio or Florida?

Also politicans should be punished for voting for the Iraq debacle. How about we destroy the popular myth of only pro-war politicans being able to win the Whitehouse. Vote Feingold.

[SaveElmer]

111. I think Hillary would stand an excellent chance in swing states...

Particularly Florida. I also see here picking up a western state or two. Colorado, Arizona, Nevada are all ripe for the picking. I think Hillary would resonate well there.

Also, I do not believe only those who voted for the Iraq War resolution (I reject the pro war term as applied to Hillary), can be elected. I would gladly support Russ Feingold were he nominated. I simply believe that Hillary gives us the best shot, and she is the one I believe would be the best President.

[wuushew]

114. Jeb controls Florida absolutely

Her votes under your non-landslide scenario could range from 238-334


-Nevada went Bush and had fraud in 2004, what has changed? Nuclear waste?

-New Mexico had fraud, Dem win possible

-Iowa went for Bush in 2004?! Large numbers of white fundies will vote against Hillary in that state.

-Wisconsin also in jeopardy for same cultural reasons as Iowa

-New Hampshire is not a given for the Dems

-Colorado maybe

-Louisiana maybe

-No possibility of a blue Arizona

[SaveElmer]

115. Disagree with some of this...

Nevada and Colorado having been trending blue...issues of personal privacy will resonate there (re: Terry Schiavo). In addition, there is the continuing nuclear waste issue.

Arizona continues to grow due to retirees...the Social Security privitization debacle will resonate there, as well as in Florida.

Iowa, fundies are gonna vote against whatever Democrat runs. Iowa will be a tossup. Wisconsin is much more diverse than Iowa, with large industrial centers. I don't see much change there. Feingold as Veep would secure it however

No Democrat is going to win in a landslide. The Republican party could put up Satan as their candidate, and Nebraska, Oklahoma, Kansas, North and South Dakota etc etc will go red.

Hillary has one advantage none of the other candidates have. Long term, successful experience dealing with the right wing attack machine. It is no coincidence that of all the right wing sleaze books that come out aginst one Democrat or another, the Ed Klein book backfired the most. Hillary has an army of defenders who know how to beat this shit back. Can you imagine Hillary putting up with Swift Boat type attacks as long as Kerry did?

Aside from the political considerations, I truly believe Hillary has what it takes to be a great President.

[Zhade]

132. "I reject the pro war term as applied to Hillary"

Then I hope you also reject it for ANYONE who voted for the IWR, including Republicans.

Otherwise, you're a biased hypocrite. But then, you're not a hypocrite, right?

[SaveElmer]

137. Simply voting for the IWR does not imply a Pro-War stance...

And to suggest it does is intellectually dishonest.

But the recognition of nuance is not a strong point on this board unfortunately.

[Larkspur]

120. If you support Hillary and the DLC, when are you joining the Army?

Hillary wants to increase the size of the Army. Are you willing to sacrifice yourself and any kids you have or may have to Hillary's Army? And will you demand that you and your kids get sent immediately to Iraq or any other hot spots so you can be cannon fodder for their wars?

Are you willing to sacrifice your job to India and China?

DLC are pro-corporate Dems. At best they are Eisenhower Republicans masquerading as Democrats. At worse, they are Neo-con moles inside the Dem Party Establishment.

[SaveElmer]

121. Typical rant...

Alot of wind with no substance...

Hillary's position is that an immediate withdrawl from Iraq would be dangerous. I agree.

She believes that the troops there now are overworked and shouldering an unreasonable burden. She is advocating increasing the number of troops there to give those troops that are there, and have seen their tour of duty extended to the horizon, a chance to stand down.

I would rather have Hillary presiding over a phased withdrawl, than have the immediate withdrawl advocated by others.

[Larkspur]

156. Where is HIllary going to get the troops when recruiters are losing the

recruiting battle? The Iraq war is destroying our military and hurting military recruiting.

Is she going to favor slave labor by using prisoners and the poor to stock the Army? Is she going to favor re-implementing the Draft? Using taxpayer money to hire more mercenaries?

She is light on the specifics and maybe because she has no real plan to save the Army. She certainly doesn't want to lead by example, which would require signing up Chelsea to join the Army.

[Zhade]

131. From is a prick, and the DLC's schtick is sick.

Again:

A majority of Americans want universal health care. The DLC does not support this.

A majority of Americans want the illegal war in Iraq to end. The DLC continues to support the war, as it has from the beginning.

A majority of Americans want civil liberties protected. The DLC supports the Patriot Act.

A majority of Americans want public education to be well-funded. The DLC supports taxpayer-funded private school vouchers.

A majority of Americans want NAFTA to be overturned or amended to provide worker protections. The DLC does not support this position.

I could go on and on. At what point will you concede that the DLC in fact does NOT share the positions of a majority of Americans, let alone Dems?

They're progressive the way I'm the friggin' pope.

"Progressive".

:rofl:

[SaveElmer]

138. The DLC is not a monolithic organization...

Take a look at their website...they do not have a set of positions on issues everyone adheres to. They primarily publish papers on various issues by members of the DLC and prominent journalists. One third of the Democrats in the U.S. Senate belong to the organization. To even think you could get that many to adhere to a list of policy strictures is ridiculous. ANd they do not even try.

Just a quick look will show you there are far more of these articles opposing vouchers as supporting them.

I don't agree with eveything everyone proposes there. But after having read many of these papers, there are not that many I can't get behind. And I appreciate the discussion. Particularly interesting are the articles showing how Democrats can take what they believe (on gun control for example), and reframe the debate to take the issue away from the rw'ers and the gun lobby, while still adhering to our core beliefs on the issue

As to their public persona, as I have said, Al From is a prick and outta keep his mug off TV. But really, I think people here take their power way too seriously.

[bvar22]

86. The "hard Left"?

You mean the people who believe in:

*Universal HealthCare

*Fair wages for a days work

*The right to form Unions

*Guaranteed Health and Retirement benefits for Worker and Family

*Protecting American jobs

*Concerned about Environment

*support effective Social Programs (Social Security)

*Limiting the size and power of Corporations

*Criminalizing Corporate lobbying

*Fair and open verifiable elections

*Public financing of Elections

IRO voting or proportional representation

*that Mom & Pop (independents) deserve protections that allow them to compete with Wal-Marts (generic) and Factory Farms

*Windfall Profits Taxes to prevent Corporate Gouging

*that SOME businesses SHOULD be regulated: Utilities, Transportation, Energy, Banking, Investment, Lending, Insurance

*affordable Quality Education available to anyone who wants it

You mean THAT HARD LEFT?
Isn't it peculiar how DLC cheerleaders AVOID the issues?
Who pays you guys?





CENTRISM!!!




The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[Zhade]

133. BAM!

And the best part? Those are MAINSTREAM, MODERATE positions!

Only conservatives and rightwingers are misinformed enough to call that "hard left".

I guess that's why they can't win without either lying about their positions or third-party voters whittling down their competition (see Clinton, for both his betrayal on NAFTA and his win thanks to Perot).

[Marr]

91. That's a laugh riot.

The Democratic Party is in the position it's in BECAUSE of DLC Republicrats. They've been losing elections for YEARS. Kerry is only the most recent pathetic example.

[longship]

104. Really? The DLC has controlled the Dem agenda since the 90's

Other than Big Dawg, we've seen nothin' but loss. The reason is a simple one, an old established political maxim.

"When there is little difference between the incumbent party and the opposition party, the incumbent party nearly always wins."

In other words, unless the opposition gives the voters a different choice, there is no reason for the voters to change. Now, substantially because of Dem moderation, we've had the worst President in the history of this country for 5 years. The only responsible position to take in opposition to the Repugs is to run on issues that are *different* from the Repugs. The extent to which us Dems run on the same issues as the Repugs is the extent to which us Dems will continue to lose. That's the reality of the situation. Get used to it DLCers.

[Zhade]

127. Hard-left? Since when did Maoists and Stalinists cost us elections?

NT!

[Beelzebud]

50. He should let Franken know about this. :D

Franken is DLC all the way, which is why the more I hear from him the less I like him.

He almost sounds like a republican on this point: "We need to keep our troops in Iraq, and we need more to get the job done."

No Al, we need to LEAVE Iraq.

Hopefully Joe will tell him personally that the DLC has no constituency.

[pberq]

52. I knew Franken was bad, but this tops it all!

The idea that keeping our troops in Iraq is going to accomplish anything is nothing but Republican propaganda.

[Fluffdaddy]

54. At this point keeping our troops in Iraq is a must. I don't like it because

our troops was sent there under a Bush/Neo-Con lie. But we are there now and we must get the job done. If you know anything about the American people..........we don't run away.

[Mizmoon]

56. What job exactly are we "getting done" in Iraq?

Is it the creation of an Islamic republic? Do our troops really need to keep getting killed for THAT?

What exacly do you see changing in Iraq in the next year that justifies more American lives?

[Douglas Carpenter]

57. I agree that pulling out --will have consequence . When the British

pulled out of India, there certainly were consequences. When the U.S. pulled out of Viet Nam there certainly were consequences. But, anyone with a cursory knowledge of the Middle East and sentiments there and the whole history of military occupation in general know that the Iraqi people will never, never, never accept a government that is perceived as being installed by the U.S. We can face that reality now, or a year from now or ten years from now. But, there is simply no job to be done.

But back to my question on post # 48 of this thread. Who do you consider of major figures in the Democratic Party to be hard left?
And what specific policy proposals do you consider to be hard left?
I sincerely wish to know.

[longship]

64. That's DLC tripe

"We don't run away."
"We can't cut and run."
"We have to support our troops."
"America! Love it or leave it."
blah, blah, blah, blah, blah!

We've heard it all before. They are all just as meaningless and just as unapplicable as they were in the 1960's. The Iraq war is a hopeless mess. The only responsible position is to get out. Now we can discuss how we should go about getting out, and we should. Meaningless sloganeering does not advance the dialog.

[mzmolly]

66. Dean says the same thing frankly.

:shrug:

I support Dean and I allow Democrats to disagree with me.

[bvar22]

87. How many more Iraqis do you think we need to kill?

If we kill more Iraqis, will they one day smack their foreheads and say, "GEE. You guys are right! Our bad!"

WTF will we gain by staying in Iraq?
What specifically are you waiting for that you believe will make everything OK?

[stickdog]

98. What kind of argument is this? What did Vietnam and Korea

teach you?

[Zhade]

134. The "job" is illegal, or did you block that part from your memory?

NT!

[K-W]

62. It is also believed by a majority of Americans.

Al is wrong. Al is niave. Al is ill informed.

Al does however hold very progressive values.

[Douglas Carpenter]

53. well, I beg to disagree with you--he may hold some positions like the

ones you mentioned. And I do wish he didn't. But, he campaigns for unionizing Wal-mart. He supports single-payer universal health care.
He's campaigned for Bernie Sanders and many, many others of similar persuasion. He has also called himself a life-long McGovern Democrat. And many or most of his positions reflect that. He highly praised David Sirota's attack on the DLC and expressed his strong agreement. I really wouldn't call him "DLC all the way".

[Fluffdaddy]

55. Some people believe you must tow the line on EVERYTHING or you are

a dirty Traitor to the cause

[Paulie]

63. Some people believe in the tooth fairy, cloud beings, and Santa

When corporate interests are put BEFORE the people's, then yes, I have little problem saying someone is a dirty traitor to the cause, the cause of species survival.

[Douglas Carpenter]

67. thank you for your courteous response. but for the sake of understanding

and in fairness. I would really like to know. If I am mistaken - then I should correct my misconceptions. But, I really would like to know (my question in post # 48 of this thread) who of major figures in the Democratic Party do you consider hard left? And what specific policies are they advocating do you consider to be hard left policies?

I sincerely (and I do mean this) would like to know.

[Touchdown]

76. I'm joining Doug Carpenter here.

I'd really like to know who you think is far left. I'd also like to know what exactly is the platform of the DLC, what's in it for the average American, small business owners, union members, and why we should support them over these "far left" people that lose us elections that you haven't identified.

I'd really like to know as well.

[Fluffdaddy]

93. If you really wish to know, All your questions can be answered here:

http://www.dlc.org/
Home of DLC Leadership Team

[Touchdown]

103. Actually I wanted to know who you thought was too left.

...but if you just can't be bothered, and waved your dismissive hand with that link, then you can't expect me to take anything you have to say on the subject seriously. I already know what the DLC thinks. I was asking about you.

[Douglas Carpenter]

108. thank you for that link --- however, like most statements much of it is

vague--Except for their proposal for major increases in military spending while reducing the budget deficit -- it didn't tell me a whole lot. But the most contentious element of the DLC is their constant message that the Democratic Party is too dominated by leftist and ultra-liberals. This is the part that pisses many Democrats off.

So again I ask, who of significance in the Democratic Party do you consider hard-left or ultra-liberal and what specifically do these people propose do you consider hard left?

Mr. From has been quoted attacking Move-on. Could you perhaps enlighten me as to what specifically does Move-on support that he or you consider hard-left?

The DLC is known to have a negative view of Howard Dean. Does the DLC consider Gov. Dean hard-left? If so, what specifically does Gov. Dean support do you consider to be hard-left proposals?

The DLC frequently hearkens back to the Mondale and Dukakis campaigns as examples that prove that the American people reject ultra-liberal policies. What specifically did Mondale or Dukakis advocate that you would consider ultra-liberal or hard-left?

Thank you very much.

[Zhade]

135. Cop-out.

You can't answer the question - big surprise.

Here's a hint: we don't have any hard-left politicians in office.

[Fluffdaddy]

144. That depends on your Definition of a hard-left politician

[Douglas Carpenter]

146. please tell the rest of us who you consider a hard-left politician??

And more importantly what do you consider hard-left policies?

I don't want to put any words in your mouth. But, I just cannot think of a single major Democratic Party figure who by any wild stretch of the imagination can be considered a hard-left politician.

So again, who do you have in mind and more importantly what policies do these "hard-left" politicians advocate that makes them hard-left?

[Zhade]

147. Communist. Marxist. Maoist. Stalinist. Leninist. Anarchist. Trotskyite.

THAT'S the definition of hard left.

Not what you DLCers try to pass off as "hard far left extremist fringe McGovernites". ACTUAL hard left ideologies.

[Fluffdaddy]

148. No, They Are RADICAL LEFT

[Douglas Carpenter]

150. Okay then I still repeat my question...Is this an unfair question??

I don't think it is, considering that you have brought up the term "hard left". Considering that the leadership of the DLC has been spreading this message throughout the mainstream media that the Democratic Party is dominated by far-leftist and ultra-liberals.

So again I ask, who of significance in the Democratic Party do you consider hard-left or ultra-liberal and what specifically do these people propose do you consider hard left?

Mr. From has been quoted attacking Move-on. Could you perhaps enlighten me as to what specifically does Move-on support that he or you consider hard-left?

The DLC is known to have a negative view of Howard Dean. Does the DLC consider Gov. Dean hard-left? If so, what specifically does Gov. Dean support do you consider to be hard-left proposals?

The DLC frequently hearkens back to the Mondale and Dukakis campaigns as examples that prove that the American people reject ultra-liberal policies. What specifically did Mondale or Dukakis advocate that you would consider ultra-liberal or hard-left?

Thank you very much.

[Touchdown]

154. He can't tell, because he's created a straw man.

It's obvious that on the 3rd day, he can't come up with just ONE, 1, UNO, EIN, UN Democratic official that he considers "hard left" that he never will. He's getting his arguments from the DLC, and they don't have anything but straw men either.

They're real problem is anybody in the Democratic party that has a pair of balls and criticizes the GOP, instead of being lapdogs like the DLC want all of us to be. When one speaks up, some benefactor of theirs might get bent out of shape and withold a couple of thousand dollars and James Carville will have to wait until Friday to buy Mary Matalin that 48 Karat diamond necklace he saw yesterday. THAT'S what they're really afraid of. The person's politics means nothing, because there are no "hard left" people in power or the major media. It's all a red herring.

Move On, Michael Moore, George Soros and AAR are a threat to their domoinance of the party, and that's why they name call.

Now...watch our friendly DLCer give me another one sentence, dismissive comment, telling me that I don't know what I'm talking about, but offering nothing to back his statement up.:popcorn:

[Zhade]

158. Yep, you nailed it.

When given actual hard left ideologies, he denies the reality that they are such, and still refuses to provide anything to explain his views on what "hard left" means.

He's got nothing, and it's abundantly obvious by now that he won't come up with anything, because there's nothing to come up with.

A strawman, as you said.

(Nice line on Carville, btw!)

[Zhade]

157. Sorry, you're wrong. Those are hard left ideologies.

You could say they're also radical, depending on your view of their affect on the societal status quo, but they remain hard left ideologies, despite your one-line attempt to deny that reality.

[Zodiak]

82. Its the ones who vote against us more than 50% of the time

that I have a problem with. No one senator has voted with progressives on every issue, but let's not pretend that the like of Nelson have EVER supported ANY progressive politics.

I scored these things because I am tired of the claim that DLCers are only off on "one" or "two" issues.....only Kerry fits that description.

Clinton, Biden, Dodd....those three are alright.

The rest of the DLCers are dirty rotten traitors. And that is a fact..at least from last years scores.

Byrd (WV) 50
Inouye (Hawaii) 50
Murray (WA) 50
Reid (NV) 50
Rockefeller (WV) 50
Baucus (MN) 45 - DLC
Bingaman (NM) 40
Cantwell (WA) 40 - DLC
Johnson (SD) 40 - DLC
Kohl (WI) 40 - DLC
Conrad (ND) 35 - DLC
Feinstein (CA) 35
Carper (DE) 30 - DLC
Leiberman (CT) 30 - DLC
Landrieu (LA) 20 - DLC
Lincoln(ARK) 20 - DLC
Nelson (FL) 20 - DLC
Salazar (CO) 20 - DLC
Pryor (ARK) 15 - DLC
Nelson (NE) 0 - DLC

All of these Democrats voted with Bush's agenda at least 50% of the time this year.

[K-W]

61. That is a mischaracterization.

Al Franken has identified himself as DLC but has also identified himself as a progressive and as a wellstone democrat.

Al is wrong on some issues, but he isn't "DLC all the way"

[Douglas Carpenter]

65. my sentiments exactly--He is not 100% progressive on every single issue

but, he probably gets it right (or left) 80% to 90% of the time

[K-W]

69. It is important not to dismiss people like Al.

Because deep down he is a progressive. He wants equality, peace, and justice, he just holds certain misconceptions and misunderstandings that are unfortunately pandemic amongst liberals in our society.

But there are alot of Al Frankens out there, and while it is terribly frustrating to try and convince them to reassess their flawed assumptions and perceptions it is an absolutely vital step if we ever hope to enlighten more people and create a stronger progressive movement.

But it seems some people are happier just to sit back and feel superior.

[Zodiak]

83. Which makes him like Kerry

and Kerry's positions this year were fine. He voted with progressives 80% of the time.


Harkin (Iowa) 95
Boxer (CA) 90
Lautenberg (NJ) 90
Akaka (Hawaii) 80
Corzine (NJ) 80
Dayton (MN) 80
Durbin (IL) 80
Feingold (WI) 80
Kennedy (MA) 80
Kerry (MA) 80 - DLC
Levin (MI) 80

I know I parrot these numbers over and over, but I think it is important for us to know which Democrats we should support as progressives and which to put out to pasture durng the primaries.

The scoring system is my own....explained here, if you want further explanation. It was a few hours of research, but it has really opened up my eyes as to where these Democrats stand in reality versus the rhetoric we see here on DU.

I like facts and positions, not assertions, and there are precious few facts in these DLC-progressive debates.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/9/10/133312/333

[Douglas Carpenter]

89. thanks again -- I now have your whole list saved on my desk top

[Zodiak]

97. you're welcome

Just make sure you understand my methodology (explained in full on the Kos diary I posted) because many DLC-types will challenge it (without knowing it). DLCers like to spout ADA ratings, which are useless in determining the differences between Democrats, imho. The funny thing is...they aren;t relly familiar with how ADA does it, either.

That's why I came up with my own system...hopefully one more like a DUer would construct, and the final numbers from it are VERY telling.

No more DLCers stabbing us in the back, pissing on our heads, and telling us it is raining. I'll take four DLCers (Clinon, Kerry, Dodd, Bayh..not perfect, but can be pressured to be progressive) the rest can sit on a stick as far as I'm concerned.

[Douglas Carpenter]

107. yes--if you don't mind - I will post your methodology below

this comes from the comments section in your article at Kos--It seems that the ADA method was designed in a way that automatically makes Democrats look good and Republicans look bad -- by basing almost everything on party line votes -- without distinguishing procedural versus real votes--your link:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/9/10/133312/333

"The method was relatively crude, and simple (none / 0)

I took all of the votes from the 109th Congress and chose only the issues that met these criteria:


The bill or confirmation was not passed unanimously

The vote had to be for the bill's passage, not a token amendment. Or for the confirmation, not a cloture vote.

The neo-con corporate agenda must be served by the vote going one way or another (usually the bill's passage or the confirmation means Bush wins).


Here are the 11 issues (there were only 11 after the criteria above were used). Ten points were awarded for voting against the neocon agenda, zero for voting with it, 5 for abstaining (I had to make the distinction). There are other exceptions, noted below.


Rice confirmation (inept) 2.7

Gonzales confirmation (torturer) 8.3

Class action lawsuit bill 5.91

Bankruptcy bill 5.7

Negroponte confirmation (criminal and murderer) (0.5)

Cheney's Energy Bill (1.6)

CAFTA I (7.8)

CAFTA II (two votes for it (votes changed), + important issue) (7.5)

Election Reform (object to Ohio vote, 5 pts for speaking out, 10 for voting with a conscious) (0.6)

Confirmation of radical RW judges (0 pts for voting for one of the three judges, 5 pts for being one of the 7 senators in the compromise, -10 pts for voting for TWO of these judges) (8.5)

Firearm manufacturer immunity from legal liability (6.7)


The number that follows the issue is an indication of how much the Democratic Senate as a whole agrees with liberal bloggers, basically.

Hee is the complete breakdown of Senators (score out of possible 110, scale to 100)...I allow for the senators the be off by one vote because I do not demand ideological purity..they get one betrayal for free).

Harkin (Iowa) 95
Boxer (CA) 90
Lautenberg (NJ) 90
Akaka (Hawaii) 80
Corzine (NJ) 80
Dayton (MN) 80
Durbin (IL) 80
Feingold (WI) 80
Kennedy (MA) 80
Kerry (MA) 80 - DLC
Levin (MI) 80
Dodd (CN) 70 - DLC
Leahy (VT) 70
Mikulski (MD) 70
Reed (RI) 70
Sarbanes (MD) 70
Shumer (NY) 70
Wyden (OR) 70
Clinton (NY) 65 - DLC
Obama (IL) 65
Bayh (IN) 60 - DLC
Biden (DE) 60
Dorgan (ND) 60 - DLC
Stabenow (MI) 60 - DLC
Byrd (WV) 50
Inouye (Hawaii) 50
Murray (WA) 50
Reid (NV) 50
Rockefeller (WV) 50
Baucus (MN) 45 - DLC
Bingaman (NM) 40
Cantwell (WA) 40 - DLC
Johnson (SD) 40 - DLC
Kohl (WI) 40 - DLC
Conrad (ND) 35 - DLC
Feinstein (CA) 35
Carper (DE) 30 - DLC
Leiberman (CT) 30 - DLC
Landrieu (LA) 20 - DLC
Lincoln(ARK) 20 - DLC
Nelson (FL) 20 - DLC
Salazar (CO) 20 - DLC
Pryor (ARK) 15 - DLC
Nelson (NE) 0 - DLC

I belive this method beats the tar out of ADA because:


it distinguishes between Democrats and takes into consideration the danger of the Bush agenda

it does not rate any one senator as "perfect" (ADA rates 14 as perfect, including Feinstein and Kohl)

It is only based on what affects the American people, including confirmations of criminals and radical right-wingers to key posts. No token amendments or procedural votes are included.

the method can be changed according to the best ideas at the time (which I wuld be willing to do) rather than by some mysterious committee that meets once a year and cherry picks party-line votes when they feel like it (they should keep a running total)."

[CrispyQ]

74. Thom Hartmann says

the DLC is the neocons attempt at infiltrating the Democratic party.

They are too similar to the Republican party for my taste. They fear being called a liberal instead of embracing that label proudly.

on edit: Conason rocks. His book "Big Lies" is wonderful & I'm giving a copy to my repuke mother this holiday.

[Gloria]

78. LOL! I just scrawled a little message on the back of the

Hillary "survey of critical national issues" telling her to stick to NY and how sick I was of her, the DLC, and all the palsy-walsy stuff with Newt. Oh, and Bill on Bush's boat....I told her no $$ from me...

[bloom]

79. There are about 5 of them.

They post on DU. Of course they might be paid.

[xkenx]

81. Read Any Poll

on a progressive site, and the clear winner is Wes Clark. The activists have already discovered that the man speaks for all the people, is not beholden to the corporate interests, and stands up to the Rethugs at every opportunity. We can make his nomination in '08 inevitible through grassroots organizing and fundraising before the DLCers and Rethug-lites can get moving. See www.securingamerica.com

[Gloria]

96. Re: Clark--Conason's recent article pointed toward CLARK as the

Democrat with the best credentials. He blasted the DLCers in the same article.

There is nothing wrong with moderate/centrist Democrats. But the DLCers' seem to be extremely eager to be Republican-lite...their ACTIONS in the Senate, with their votes, indicate this. They seem to be the leaders of this "cooperative" stance as the country is frittered away. It is more and more nauseating.

They have the money. Hillary is raising it like crazy and the one with the money is going to pull the strings for the nomination. It will be an inside job. People like Clark don't have the clout or bucks. I find this situation really depressing....It's like "let's keep doing the same thing, maybe we'll win if Bush messes up enough." That to me is NOT a party that is really ready to lead. And that is what the Republicans capitalize on every time....There is no longer a core to this party. People like Clark are trying to create a cohesive message, but there is no help from this mob....

[xkenx]

105. Take Heart!!!

That is EXACTLY why grassroots work is so necessary. And it CAN be successful. Who, in 2002, aside from political junkies, knew anything about Howard Dean. After his grassroots fundraising and recognition successes, HE was annointed the nominee by MSM, and was possibly on his way to the nomination until he imploded in Iowa. And this was a former governor of a small, liberal New England state, without the national security credentials of Wes Clark. Clark will not mistake his way out of the nomination with his mouth. What needs to be done is for the grassroots to do the hard slogging and fundraising so that Wes Clark can overcome the big business contributions to HRC or some other Republican-lite weasel.

p.s. Clark only announced 9/03, and by the beginning of '04, was outraising even Dean who was thought to have this amazing internet/grassroots support. TAKE HEART!!

[Gloria]

122. IMPT Correction! Just saw my old post...it's Gene Lyons, not

Conasan who praised Clark.....SORRY!

[Douglas Carpenter]

88. Ever notice that DLCers never want to talk about their positions?

They constantly put out the message that they are the only ones who can save the Democratic Party--we cannot possibly win without them.
And of course they claim to represent the moderate center.

I keep trying to get DLCers to answer specific questions about what they believe and why. But they just will not do it.

We have all heard them claim that too much of the Democratic Party is dominated by far leftist and ultra-liberals.

They claim that Mondale and Dukakis lost because they were just soooooooooo liberal.I have asked them just what specifically did Mondale and Dukakis propose was just soooooooo liberal. Not one of them has given me an answer.

I have asked some of them just who specifically in the Democratic Party is in their opinion so far-left or ultra-liberal. And just what proposals are they talking about do they consider so far-left or ultra-liberal.

Not one of them has ever replied.

Nor have I ever seen a single one of them deny that they support a corporatist agenda and neocon foreign policy.

Rather than argue with them about whether or not we need them to win--I suggest that we progressives just try to get them to explain themselves.

I would very politely listen--if they would just explain what they want to do.

[Lerkfish]

95. yup. I said that further up the thread. its blackmail essentially. nt

[mvd]

99. Their "innovation" just seems like variations on..

Repuke ideas to me. I hear all the buzzwords: growth, responsibility, opportunity, market-based, etc.

[mattclearing]

100. I've been saying the DLC has no constituency for awhile.

It's true. Gotta love Conason.

Edit: Actually, it's partially true. The DLC has a constituency, but they generally vote Republican.

[Generator]

102. Du'ers you have spoken

Amen.

Which reminds me-I got a copy of "What went wrong in Ohio", that Conyers wrote. He signed it personally! (you too can have a copy for only $50 donation to Conyers) Now that is a man that has done everything in his power to bring Bush down and shine light on this band of thieves. I will not support anyone that doesn't support me. It seems simple enough. Conyers and the Black congressional congress have been practically all that gives me any hope for America.

[LincolnMcGrath]

117. Go Joe Conason!

:yourock:

[nvliberal]

151. I heard that show,

and Bernie Ward, who sounds like a Green with his ignorant criticisms of the DLC, should have been talking about Conason's book.

That's supposedly why Conason was on the show in the first place.

Instead, Ward went on this DLC nonsense and spent what seems like HOURS on the Plame matter (a pet issue of Ward's) instead of discussing the vicious class war waged by the administration on the American people.

Which, after all, is REALLY the most important issue in this country.

They spent very little time on that.

[longship]

153. DLC is very important issue

A faction attempting to take over a political party is important news. Were it only true that we would have been all aware of the Christian Coalition's Republican takeover attempts in the late 70's, early 80's we might not be in this horrible situation now.

The DLC is to the Dems what the rapture rightists are to the Repugs.

[Douglas Carpenter]

155. please keep in mind that the DLC goes on the mainstream media

regularly and backs up the GOP talking point that the Democratic Party is too dominated by far-leftist and ultra-liberals. They are the ones who started this fight. The give valuable aid to the GOP in its propaganda war by doing this.

Yet, they don't want to talk about what they are actually proposing.

Is the Democratic Party full of hard-leftist and ultra-liberals??

If so, who of significance in the Democratic Party is hard-left? And much more importantly, what proposals are these alleged "hard-leftist" making that makes them unelectable "hard-leftist"?

[Zhade]

160. Do you really think Mr. 12-Post DLC Defender doesn't know that?

I don't.

[Douglas Carpenter]

161. well, I suppose you are right -- they must know

[Zhade]

159. *Yawn*

You say the class war is important (I agree), yet you think it's nonsense to discuss one of the organizations helping to wage that war against the American people - or did you forget about the DLC's support for policies like NAFTA/CAFTA that help destroy the working-class?

Tell your DLC field commander that you need more training. Your argument is weak and contradictory.