Why do you guys hate the DLC?

[lessthanjake]

They are not republican light. They just advocate putting good spin on issues. THe republicans already do this and if we dont put a good spin on our position then we will always lose.

[Forkboy]

1. Get out the popcorn...this will be fun!

[greatauntoftriplets]

3. Popcorn, hell.....

How 'bout a six-pack?

[fujiyama]

112. I'm in

What kinda beer do ya want?

[tk2kewl]

4. lol

:P

[Liberal Veteran]

6. I'll have mine with extra butter thanks...

:)

[genius]

109. They're EVIL - like Bush

[greenohio]

131. Clinton is not evil

It astounds me how many people love Clinton but hate the DLC. The fact of the matter is, Clinton the last guy we got into the office. Every other sentence he uttered contained New Democrat.

[Eloriel]

144. Why I hate the DLC

(and Clinton continues to lose my esteem nearly daily as well -- but then, I always did call him, as Begala once put it, "the only Republican I ever voted for")

DLC
The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves. -- Lenin

LINKS - What every DUer and every Dem needs to know about the DLC
http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=4443&forum=DCForumID22&archive=

Let's be REALLY honest about the DLC
http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=23262&forum=DCForumID60&archive=


Outing the "New Democrats" -- Pukes in Progressive Clothing.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=1435&forum=DCForumID34

Everyone who is a fan of the DLC, needs to read this post,
(Devils Advocate NZ's post is included)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=11323&forum=DCForumID60#114

Kerry, the New Democrats, and American Military Hegemony
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=326015#326061

New Dems formed to get corporate donors, be free from party base ideology
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1346735&mesg_id=1346735&page=

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. Sorry they are REPUBLICAN LIGHTq

and right now they are trying to turn this party even FURTHER to the right....

Trust me son, when people face a republican and a republican lite, tehy will vote for the real thing.

Get your ass out of the corporate machine and come back to we the people, or you will be left behind by OTHER parties... yes pal, many of us ARE NOW CONSIDERING joining the Greens. It may be time for the DNC, if they do not get it, to go the way of the WHIGS

[LoZoccolo]

7. lessthanjake, please feel free to ignore this post.

Don't let anyone tell you the DLC is bad in such general terms.

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. You want specifics? SURE

who gave money this time around, WE THE PEOPLE, who organized the DLC,people looking to get money from CORPORATIONS

Joe Lieberman is DLC and REPUBLICAN LIGHT, and he receives plenty of funds from CORPORATIONS when running, who is your daddy?

Me, who gave oh lets say 100 tops, or Monstanto? THINK

And yes if the DNC does not do what it has to do, it will CONTINUE to loose its base

Maybe it it time for a voter revolt... it happened in the 1880s why do you think the DNC became a POPULIST party? READ SOME HISTORY, you are in for a shock

And the DLC is NOT only about spin, I wish it was, but IT IS NOT

[LoZoccolo]

18. I rest my case. n/t

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LoZoccolo]

32. Nah, I won't.

And where is this "Floor" you mentioned?

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LoZoccolo]

41. I can't change the subject.

I criticized you for being so general, and you pretty much just went and did the same thing.

What is technique number one? Also, I'd like to know technique number three, so I can use it next time.

[Julien Sorel]

70. But Joe Lieberman wins, and you said when

people are given the choice between Republicans and Republican-lite, they will choose the Republican. Lieberman didn't even campaign in his last senate election, yet won 60% of the vote. Did the Republicans run a "Democrat-lite" against him, and that's why he won?

[CTLawGuy]

94. his last senate opponent

was later convicted of child molestation.

Also CT republicans are hardly "real republicans" all 3 Repug congressman are pro-choice, for example.

[Julien Sorel]

97. So if his opponent had been a conservative Republican,

he (Lieberman) would have lost, right? A fake Republican against a "real" Republican?

[greenohio]

136. Thats right, Kerry refused ALL corporate money...

So did Nader and the greens...give me a fricken break. I guess everybody hates a winner like Bill Clinton.

"Going to the Democratic Leadership Council. In 1985, I got involved in the newly formed Democratic Leadership Council, a group dedicated to forging a winning message for the Democrats based on fiscal responsibility, creative new ideas on social policy, and a commitment to a strong national defense. ...

In March 1990 I went to New Orleans to accept the chairmanship of the DLC. I was convinced the group's ideas on welfare reform, criminal justice, education, and economic growth were crucial to the future of the Democratic Party and the nation....

I opened the convention with a keynote address designed to make the case that America needed to change course and that the DLC could and should lead the way....

...I was amazed by some of the criticisms of the DLC from the Democratic left, who accused us of being closet Republicans, and from some members of the political press, who had comfortable little boxes marked "Democrat" and "Republican." Bill Clinton MY LIFE

[merh]

38. Feel free to ask Skinner to set up a DLC group/forum

you and others can have fun talking about centralist concepts and leaning to the right.

[Forkboy]

39. I agree

I also think he should ignore your post.

[Zhade]

120. Here's a specific: Google DLC+Koch Brothers.

Any self-respecting Dem will be unhappy with those from whom the DLC accepts corporate palm-greasing cash.

[ever_green]

111. the green party looks much better to me than Bush-Lite

I'll switch if what happened this election happens again.

[Walt Starr]

5. Nope, they are not Republican Lite

They are REPUBLICAN HARD CORE!

[Debi]

8. Maybe you should go read some of Al Frohm's memos

during the primaries. He ripped all non-DLCers to shreds.

DLC stands for Democrats who would Like to be republiCans.

[Warpy]

31. I thought it was Desperate Lackeys of Corporations

[Debi]

56. That title is reserved for those who know the secret handshake

:hi:

[Zhade]

121. The DLC/NDN also compared Kucinich to RUMSFELD.

Utterly disgusting:


DLC | Blueprint Magazine | January 8, 2004

Stay and Win in Iraq

By Will Marshall {Note: Marshall endorsed two statements from the neoconservative Project For A New American Century, here and here.}

Are Dennis Kucinich and Donald Rumsfeld secret allies? You'd think the Democrats' most vocal peacenik and the GOP warlord would have little in common, but both seem to be in a hurry to get U.S. troops out of Iraq. Even with Saddam Hussein in the bag and awaiting trial, that's a bad idea.

If Rummy is from Mars, Kucinich is from Pluto. The longshot presidential aspirant wants to withdraw all our troops now and dump the whole mess on the United Nations. Rumsfeld's exit strategy is Iraqification -- drawing down U.S. troops in this election year and handing off responsibility for security to hastily trained Iraqi forces.

If the U.S.-led coalition was merely mopping up Saddam's diehards, bringing some troops home would make sense. But the Pentagon announced its force reductions back in November, which turned out to be the bloodiest month of the conflict to date as 81 Americans were killed.

The escalating violence prompted facile and mostly misleading analogies between Iraq and Vietnam. But in one respect, the comparison is apt: The United States is once again waging a classic counterinsurgency campaign in a country whose culture seems worlds apart from ours. Like it or not, America is back in the business of winning hearts and minds.

(More imperialist-inspired drivel at the link...)

[greatauntoftriplets]

9. I suggest that you read the website of this repuke lite group.

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=86&subid=85&contentid=893

[lessthanjake]

10. Can anyone tell me what position the DLC has that is similiar to the

republican position?

I just dont see it.

[Search Party]

22. Each time the Dems lose an election, the DLC's remedy is to move

the party further to the right.

Each time they do this it results in another loss. Why vote "somewhat right" when you can simply vote "right" ------ get it?

"It's the strategy stupid?"

(stupid not meaning you)

[lessthanjake]

28. We never heed their advice...

Besides that whole logic of going hard core right instead of slightly right is stupid. The republican platform DOES NOT represent the majority of americans and the DLC platform does.

[nadinbrzezinski]

40. WE HAVE BEEN HEEDING THIS ADVISE

yep that head in that hole you see, IS YOURS.

[Warpy]

42. 1. taking working class economic issues off the table

2. taking universal healthcare off the table in 2000

3. whoring for corporate cash while refusing help from grassroots organizers, "give us a check and don't let the door smack ya.."

4. wimpy campaign after wimpy campaign in which decent candidates were hobbled by DLC handlers and lost to Rethugs who went all out.

5. accepting the dogma of free trade along with the outsourcing that is killing this country

Face it, the farther right they drag the party, the more elections they lose. We are now effectively shut out of power. We have two right wing parties, one slightly more socially liberal, but that's about it.

The Democratic Party has traditionally been rather stable, being dragged either slightly to the left or slightly to the right when they start losing to the GOP, the party which has historically made some very wild swings in either direction. When they start being dragged the same direction as the GOP, left or right, they start to lose. It's time to recognize this, dump the DLC, and head back to the historical middle, no matter what conservatives in the party kid themselves the middle might be.

[Debi]

60. You forgot #6

Showing pictures of yourself hugging the pResident...or saying "I voted with the pResident XX% of the time" Got a whole lot of Dems elected didn't it...Mr. Daschle...Ms. Carnahan...etc....

[dogman]

11. The corporations only tend to give them half of the money

they give the rethugs. Enough to buy them but keep them behind.

[PatGund]

12. Because......

Because they're spineless, castrated WIMPS who keep insisting on bringing knives to gunfights, and are willing to kowtow to the GOP and let them define the issues.

Because they *HAVE* become the GOP right, and like it that way

[lessthanjake]

16. You people are irrational

Give me evidence of this. I see no issue where they let the republicans define it. In fact their website has multiple articles on how we should define our view on issues to make them look better. They are all about helping us to win.

Dont dislike the rest of your party guys. Its stupid and its the reason we lose.

[ursacorwin]

27. i don't dislike the rest of the party.

it's that increasingly, the leadership of the party doesn't care about me. i'm queer, and i saw no real or effective strategy to defend my human rights in the face of one of the most cynical manipulations of popular senitment in the history of elections. and i guess i'm not getting married in 11 new states anytime soon.

that said, the DLC sucks because of one simple fact: for the last THREE elections, their overall strategy has been best summed up by "the democratic party needs to move to the right." hence 'leaders' like reid and daschle. and look what that got us? LOSSES IN EVERY ELECTION.

so it's pretty simple for me to say that the DLC sucks, doesn't care about me, and loses elections. tell me why that's worthy of respect?

[nadinbrzezinski]

34. Doing teh same repeteadly is a sign of insanity when it does

not work

You are asking us to continue doing the same but you call us INSANE

By the way, this is a very republican tactic when you cannot argue yourself out of a wet paper bag

I say it is time the party GOES BACK TO REAL POPULIST POLITICS, you don't like it, register Republican... you are already half way there anyway

[Debi]

61. Please give a list of the DLC members

who were elected or re-elected in 2004...2002?

Now make a list of DLC members (or those the DLC supported) that were defeated in the last two election cycles.

[Robbien]

62. Just saying "you people" highlights how arrogant you DLCers are

The only time you DLCers pay attention to progressives is when you are begging for money.

Why don't progressives like DLCers? Why should we? There is not even one reason why we should.

[fishwax]

92. Bingo!

the DLC just wants us to march in line to whatever candidate they throw up our way. After all, our reproductive rights depend on it (wink wink, nudge nudge, knowutimean).

The DLC says: "Oh no, we can't have a voice that represents the people ... that would upset mainstream america ... we should do what terry mcauliffe says is best."

[saracat]

64. The DLC is NOT my party. I had the pleasure of meeting and interviewing

AL From. The DLC is a dinosaur that has seen it's day! You do know that they have lobbied to take a women's right to choose out of the party platform for fear it might "offend" someone? I have firsthand knowledge of that one. They give themselves credit for the Clinton victories but fail to realize they haven't won an election without him. It was, Clinton, stupid.It was not going right!

[planetwarming]

108. Didn't Clinton Invent The DLC?

Correct me if I'm wrong. Didn't he open up trade with China promising all the wonderful Chinese markets we would have to sell USA stuff to a bunch of poor people and signed NAFTA which is causing the current outsourcing? Not some stupid little tax benefit for outsourcing. Did Clinton not kill about a million Iraqi children (more than Bush) with economic sanctions that starved them to death? Did he not bomb Kosovo and Bosnia with depleted uranium? Did he not do this other stuff that harms the environment-->? http://www.1hope.org/clinton.htm. I can't see how Bush is so much worse than Clinton to people. I don't get it.

[saracat]

113. Nooo. And if you were one of us you would know who did!

Hmmmmmm. Do you knoww? Just testing!

[Justitia]

114. HAHAHAHA - so busted!

I still want to see them hazard a wild ass guess, just for fun
:evilgrin:

[Zhade]

130. Work on your camoflauge.

[rman]

79. repubs also think we're irrational

-

[madfloridian]

14. You just advocated "spin"...twice. That is what they are about.

:shrug:

[lessthanjake]

19. Yes i did

We need to spin our positions on issues or else the republicans will do it for us.

[madfloridian]

25. Spin spin spin spin......lose your values...spin some more.

.

[nadinbrzezinski]

44. Problem is that the DLC has the same ethics as the RNC

NONE whatsoever...

Ah the new American way, steal, cheat win by any means possible, and SPIN...

[Forkboy]

46. That's the way go MF

Hell,this way we Dems can take any position at all.It's just a matter of making it more palatable.Who needs an actual stance? That's loser talk! :spank:

[Debi]

66. You mean like...

I voted for it before I voted against it?.....

[RunningFromCongress]

138. I hope you're not being serious right now

[LiberalEsto]

15. speaking only for myself

I feel they are too willing to compromise and give way to republicans on issues such as the living wage, overtime regulations, a balanced federal budget, environmental protections, and so much more.

These days republicans call us traitors for not acquiescing to their views and demands.

Letting them continue to get away with their ugly tactics is enabling them. The DNC has enabled them for too long, and it hasn't stopped the republicans from stomping all over us.

[Metatron]

35. I agree wholeheartedly.

The DLC opposition to a living wage for American workers is identical to the GOP's - and both are based on false premises that have been debunked on a regular basis for over ten years. Even conservative economists who initially opposed living wage policies have come out in support of the many benefits that workers, local governments, and private business have reaped from these policies. When prominent DLC Dems support business and profits rather than stand up for the low-wage worker, I have a hard time believing that they really give a shit about American families.

[TwentyFive]

17. The DLC is really just a virus planted (by corporate america)

...into the Democratic party.

With the DLC, the Democratic party has LOST the HOUSE and the SENATE. If the purpose of the DLC is to make Democrats more electable...it seems like a huge failure.

We've already tried pulling the Democratic party right...I think it's about time we start looking to our left for issues we could "put a spin on" that would start winning elections.

[lessthanjake]

21. The DLC isnt different from the rest of the party

They just advocate fiscal responsibility and are willing to compromise for the sake of winning. Id sure as hell rather compromise on some things and win than just flat out lose.

[NYCGirl]

26. Fiscal responsibility? Didn't they vote for Bush's tax cuts?

A number of times?

[JohnKleeb]

33. no they didnt actually

it was mostly hosue blue dog democrats who voted for the cuts.

[madfloridian]

29. Ah, I need to drag out the article on their founding. Give me a moment.

Won't take long.

[SeattleDem]

43. sure compromise and win, NOT compromise and lose

I'd rather compromise and WIN too.

the problem is that the DLC has caused us to LOSE far too much these past many years.

[dogman]

57. Well maybe when they compromise you, you'll feel differently.

A compromise implies both sides give something. The GOP gives nothing. We are forced ever rightward. At some point principals count and you take a stand. You have to realize that you are compromising peoples lives and their very existence. The Democratic Party used to stand for something not just the monied interests.

[Debi]

69. Comprimise...with what?

What's the difference between a Republican legislature and a Democratic legislature that votes Republican?

I'd rather stand up for working Americans, women's equality (healthcare and working conditions), and against corporate greed.

Maybe a minority...but a moral one!

[Malva Zebrina]

73. But they are not winning!!!! nt

[PassingFair]

95. Hammer, meet Nail Head...

Thank you twentyfive, may I call you 25?
When From and Reed get the boot, you can bet they will both hightail it straight to the American Enterprise Institute.
Brookings wouldn't even answer the door.
Flush the sniveling trash.

[JohnKleeb]

20. I think honestly

the main problem is with the DLC leadership, I am talking From, etc. Thats who I have a problem with because I think the whole third way idea is wrong but I also disagree with a full speed break to the left, but many rank and file members of the group I do like like my own Governor Warner and a nearby Congressman Jim Moran who actually controversial to what many say about all DLC members voted against the IWR.

[lessthanjake]

24. Hey i must live near you

Jim moran isnt my congressman but i live so near to his district that i saw his campaign ads. Where do you live in virginia?

[JohnKleeb]

30. Wolf's district

neat though. I don't agree with the DLC third way idea but I do think the DLC is generalized too much by people, someone does something wrong, they get called DLC, Ive seen Daschle and now Reid get that label, neither of those guys belongs to the DLC.

[lessthanjake]

45. OH WOW

I live in wolfs district too.

I voted for socas.

Where exactly do you live, centreville?

[JohnKleeb]

48. herndon, I am a student

cant vote but did work for socas.

[lessthanjake]

51. Im sorry he lost

I fully expected it but i really dislike Wolf. I saw him on TV once on the BBC and he got owned by a random pakistani guy.

[JohnKleeb]

55. he spoke at HHS, didnt go too well though

I dont like him either really but I appreciate his maverick efforts on genocides but he pissed me off when he sort of justified the racial profiling that has happened.

[JohnKleeb]

36. Guys we like Governor Granholm of Michigan

Yes, she is DLC, does that make her a bad person and will you now never support her if the constiution was amended to allow foreign born people to run?

[Sick_of_Rethuggery]

47. My take on the DLC...

I think they were ok for the times; but they should have started correcting course soon after the tug of the 94 elections hijacked the country so abruptly into right-wing and Limbaugh land.

But to advocate equivocation in the face of repeated electoral failures (esp. due mainly to the Rethugs taunting them as no-vision folks) is sheer lunacy.

Right now what we need is an unapologetically progressive person laying out in a series of national lectures, the philosophy and virtues of compassion (which is what I view liberalism as).

The DLC, in other words, has long since outlived its usefulness and therefore is relevant...

[lessthanjake]

50. We lost in 94 due to being too far left

I may sound like im spouting MSM talking points but didnt we lose a lot of seats in 94 due to the assault weapons ban? That definetly wasnt something the DLC catered to the right on.

[ibegurpard]

54. Please don't forget redistricting

It plays a big part in a party's ability to be competitive.

[saracat]

72. Please. We lost a lot of our base because of welfare reform, and don't ask

don't tell. We began the era of muddying the waters and having no clear position. And 94 wasn't a Clinton race. He didn't have coatails. He was able to fly back on his own in96 ,but that was inspite of the DNC!

[DaveinMD]

98. Welfare reform passed in 96

not in 94. The assault weapons ban and health care reform hurt Dems.

[saracat]

116. It was proposed before that. Being mealy mouthed centrists up against

a facist machine cost us the election.

[greenohio]

132. Welfare reform came after the election of 1994

Clinton signed it just before he was reelected, it was largely forced on him by a repuke congress.

[Sick_of_Rethuggery]

74. Gingrich and his...

Contract with America were the proximal causes -- but that was really successful only because it presented a coherent theme, right or left probably didnt matter much. Plus, by then, the wing-nuts had already perfected the art of beating up Clinton (a stand-in for the "liberals") for every ill that ailed the country and distorting the public dialog on every salient issue (gays in the military for example) in the process.

(All this was happening while the DLC/DNC were busy cleaning up Bush I's mess on the one hand, and patting themselves on the back on the other, too busy in either case to recognize the dangerous course being set for the country.)

There is really no one galvanizing issue either on the left or the right in my opinion (many voters may be single-issue voters, but these need not be the same single issue) in general.

That said, I am not really sure that the assault weapons ban was even passed with sufficient time for the right to pull off a righteous feeding frenzy in the 94 elections...

[Lydia Leftcoast]

99. The Republicanites began beating up on Clinton TWO WEEKS

after his inauguration.

I had a "what the f**k" experience when I heard a commentator on NPR talk about "the failed Clinton administration" when he hadn't been in the White House for more than two weeks.

I distinctly remember thinking again and again, "The Republicans sure are sore losers."

[Kipepeo]

49. Their "spin" is wrong

Their spin is Republican spin. Did you hear one of the DLC founders the other day criticizing Michael Moore? Why waste time bashing our own and doing the Republicans' job for them??

With allies like that, who needs enemies?

[lessthanjake]

52. Moore isnt our own

Hes not even a registered democrat.

[Kipepeo]

58. Do you really not know what I mean by

one of our own?

Moore's recent film has done more to energize our party than any republican-pandering press release sent out by the DLC.

I ask you this, why would the DLC want to bring down a film that is critical of Bush? Why do they feel a need to distance themselves from the truth? Is it because Republicans have mastered the 'Moore = Bad' spin and now the DLC must adhere to that Republican frame like usual?

They don't spin issues. They recycle Republican spin.

[Sick_of_Rethuggery]

77. Exactly!

In fact, this business of throwing our own to the wolves (witness their treatment of Gore, before, during and after the 2000 elections) is what I believe leads the general, apolitical body-politic to spurn the Democratic party more than any other single issue concern -- if the party wont stand up for its own standard-bearers and friends, then how can it be trusted to stand by anything or anyone else?

(As an aside, I think the majority of the public may have voted for Kerry this time around, but that is probably more due to the galvanizing revulsion for Bush rather than any enthusiasm for either the Democratic party or for Kerry; mind you, I personally think Kerry is a terrific human being and would have made a terrific President, but that is not to say that everyone else who voted for him had the time to find that out for themselves.)

[Kipepeo]

85. It's true

As soon as the Republican party labels someone as ""Wild-eyed" or "Angry," or "Out of Touch," they rush to sacrifice those liberals.

They try to finish what the RNC starts.

[Sick_of_Rethuggery]

75. That does not matter.

The rallying issue is checking the right-ward careening.

Whether one is a registered Democrat or not, is not really the point.

As someone else already said in some other thread, I would prefer to personally be registered as an Independent -- but with the current Rethug leadership there is not a chance that I am going to vote Rethug in the near future, so I believe it is more effective to be a registered Democrat (which is what I am :-)) in these circumstances...

MM is the best friend the Democrats are ever going to have. He is unafraid, he is principled, he is influential and vocal -- what better friend can we have? He is, therefore, the best "one of our own" (far more than the Clintons, for instance ;-))

[lessthanjake]

53. The only thing the DLC has done that i disliked is

really going after howard dean. That was wrong.

[w13rd0]

67. But that's a glaring demonstration of what they are about...

...part of the reason your "everyday joe" thinks things like:
wimpy
willing to say anything to get elected
unprincipled
pandering

in regard to the Democratic Party is because many of those in leadership and those who craft the platform let it (and their principles) be redefined every couple years purely as a response to losing. not as a response to new evidence, not as a change in conviction, but because they "triangulate" ever rightward on an outdated left-right spectrum. The DLC leadership are pioneers in this regard. They need to f*** off.

[damntexdem]

59. Let's see -- here are three reasons:

2000, 2002, 2004. Hey, isn't it supposed to be 'three strikes and you're out'?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

68. Between 32 and 52 The Pugs Lost Ten Straight Elections...

I don't think they had a circular firing squad...


Come to think of it...


How did the Pugs get back into power?


They found a non-ideological war hero to follow...

They rejected the Taft wing who wanted to repeal the New Deal...

Smart folks will see in this little story an answer to our current dilemma...

[Blue_Tires]

63. I've said it since 2000

I believe STRONGLY that the DLC has been infiltrated...people on the inside leaking information to the press, strategy to the repubs, and intentionally nominating weak candidates, and then sandbagging them in the races

[Sick_of_Rethuggery]

78. Now, this I am really curious about!

What makes you say that? What could possibly be their motive?

[Blue_Tires]

89. no real proof, just a hunch

motive?? making the party implode from the inside (i've thought about joining the GOP to do the same thing, but i'd be too easy to spot)

[Lydia Leftcoast]

100. I first suspected that someone high in the party was trying

to throw the election in 1984 when they mismanaged Mondale, and again in 1988, when they first of all picked Dukakis (a decent man, but not ready for prime time) and then mismanaged his campaign so badly.

What party in its right mind would have nominated Dukakis, for heaven's sake? I'm proud to say that I and 39% of Oregon Democrats did not vote for him in the primary.

[crasmane]

65. The DLC is a neocon collaborationist plant.

There's nothing Democratic, liberal, compassionate, or even anti-Republican about them. They are a canker worm in the Democratic party. They should be expelled.
I'm not jumping across the ditch of division created in 1996, strengthened in 2000, and restated in 2004, no matter how virtuous a jump may look. I despise the theofascistic neocons who are in power, and as far as I'm concerned, anyone who tries conciliatory strategies or to weaken the spine of the more liberal party, the one which should be an opposition, shouldn't be welcome in it.
The DLC has always geared its activities toward making the Democratic party more conservative and thus more conciliatory to the Republicans.
It is more irrelevant and even dangerous now than ever.

[madfloridian]

71. lessthanjake, take a looky at the article I just posted.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1365751

Would love to hear your arguments on this.

[Zhade]

122. That's essentially the DLC admitting to being corporate whores.

At least they're finally starting to be honest about how they're actively selling out We The People.

If people can still justify that kind of viewpoint from DEMS, they need a serious backbone implant.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

76. The DLC Is The Favorite Whipping Boy Of The Left

They are a divisive force and therefore are rendered ineffective...



That being said their diagnosis of American politics is that the votes are in the center and folks favor market based solutions to government based ones...

To me that's a sound diagnosis...


It would be like going to a doctor and the doctor tells you you have cancer...

You might not like the diagnosis and fire the doctor but you still have the cancer....

[Robbien]

80. And look how good the DLCers are in getting those votes. Not!

The DLCers want the centrists votes. Why should the centrists vote for the whimpy DLCers when they have a perfectly good GOP party to give their vote to.

But the DLCers keep running the same loser centrist platform over and over and over again. And they lose, over and over again. Half the US population stays home because they cannot see the difference between the GOP and the DLC. Get to the heart of those non-voters and someone other than the GOP might win. But no, the DLCers keep molding themselves as corporatist lapdogs wanabees, a wimpy GOP party.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

84. A Couple Of Things...

I hardly think the Pugs are centrists...


We lost in 04 despite the best turnout since 1960 and there is
little evidence that non voters differ in preference from voters....It almost seems that the only voters who came out of the proverbial woodwork this year were fundies falling all over themselves to kill gay marriage....

That being said here's a nice piece on preferences of voters and non voters...

http://www.igs.berkeley.edu/publications/par/July1999/HightonWolfinger.html

[Robbien]

86. The pugs are not centrists, they just play them on TV

that is why they win the votes.

The best turnout this year for the Democratic party was because we Progressives decided this year the DLC was the lessor of two evils with the GOP being a very bad choice.

We did not vote DLC, we came out in droves to vote non-GOP.

The fundies come out every year. This year was no different. The growth in pug votes were the centrists who usually stay home but came out this year against Kerry.

[greenohio]

134. Huh? DLC had no role in 2004 pres election.

Kerry is no DLC member. If Gore had ran as a DLC New Democrat in 2000 he would have won. Instead he made the stupid move of trying to protect his left flank from Nader. We haven't had a New Democrat run as New Democrat since Clinton (who won BTW).

[Zhade]

124. See posts #71, #120, and #121 as to why the whipping is justified.

NT!

[rman]

81. what's that saying about trying the same thing over and over,

and expecting different results?

report back to headquarters that it isn't working.

please try something new, it keeps us sharp.

i'd almost start thinking HQ has run out of ideas.

[NoPasaran]

82. I don't hate the DLC

I just don't understand their fascination with failure.

[BlueManDude]

83. Actually most of them hate The Democratic Party n/t

[rman]

87. they sure don't want progressives to highjack "their" party

how old is the Dem party?
DLC has been around since 1985, with their corporate rightwing agenda.

[KnowerOfLogic]

88. Uh, a good spin is not "Yeah, what the Republican said."

[lessthanjake]

90. They dont say that...

...

[greekspeak]

91. Because I am a democrat and want democrats, not puke clones, in my party

The DLC is a conservative part of the democratic party aparatus. I have no use for conservatism.

[ulysses]

93. welfare reform in 1996 was not "spin". n/t

[merkins]

96. the DLC are the Washington Generals

Ever watch the Harlem Globetroters when they came to town or on tv?
They always played the Washington Generals whose job was to look like
they were giving it their all and without fail to make sure they were
the patsys of the Globetrotters and to lose at the end.

F these douchebags and the corporate barge they sail on...

[hickman1937]

104. I used to be one of those DLC moderates

Then I bought a computer(in july) started lurking here and other sites, and researching. With your help and direction I got the fence pole out of my butt and re-embraced the left. Thank You.:hi:

[NightOwwl]

117. Hey Hickman!

Your first post and I get the honor of welcoming you! Glad you found us, and enjoy your stay. :hi:

[Zhade]

125. I love a story with a happy ending!

So, what turned you around? Learning that the DLC/NDN loves corporate cash from such rightwingers as the Koch Brothers, who steal oil from Native American wells? Or was it because Will Marshall endorses PNAC statements?

Please, share with us the good news of how you broke free from the DLC corporatist enabler crowd!

And congrats on seeing the light about them! :toast:

[greenohio]

135. Welcome to DU

:toast:

[lojasmo]

101. Um, we lost the last three national elections.

The policies of the DLC don't freaking work! Guh.

[QC]

106. Um, we won in 1996. n/t

[lojasmo]

127. 2000, 2002, 2004

races for the presidency and congress.

[UpsideDownFlag]

102. lol, i thought this would end up in a flamefest. nt

[Zhade]

126. Well shucks, UDF, what do you expect?

When pro-labor rights, pro-working class Dems and other progressives tell the truth about the corporate-cash-loving neoimperialist "Third Way" (To Fuck Over The Little Guy) DLC, of course its fervent defenders will leap into the fray, eager to downplay or attack that truth in a desperate attempt to believe there isn't a group affiliated with the Democratic party that might not actually care one whit about their plight.

If I was a DLCer, I know my cognitive dissonance would be almost as bad as a Republican's!

[UpsideDownFlag]

129. for the record, i consider myself to be in the first group you mentioned

i also loathe the DLC. However, i also have a hobby of trying to estimate how many posts it will take a given Dean or DLC thread to develop before it turns into a war zone.

that's all.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

103. What I hate about the DLC right now is that

they seem to have assigned all their interns to spam this board with ridiculous and highly premature suggestions for '08 nominees, with assertions that betray a brainwashed view of recent history, and with snide dismissals of the dedicated people who actually did all the grassroots groundwork in this last election.

[Lerkfish]

143. wow. I was thinking the same thing: instead of fighting for 2004, they

adopt this defensive "well, we couldn't do any better" attitude and spend a great deal MORE energy chiding people who don't like them rather than listening to WHY people don't like them.

It reminds me a lot of setting up focus groups for a product you already have. You keep interviewing people until you find some who like your product. Then you ask those who don't why they don't like it ALL THE WHILE NEVER INTENDING TO CHANGE YOUR PRODUCT, because you've already invested heavily in it.

the purpose? finding a better way to market the same product to those who don't like the product, so they'll buy it anyways.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

149. Do you also notice...

that they have a positively Rovian way of appropriating words? "The Progressive Policy Institute" -- a group that is in NO way progressive by any stretch of the imagination?

Sounds suspiciously like the use of "compassionate conservatism"...

It's things like that (and Will Marshall's chuminess with PNAC and a now former Christian Coalition turd onboard) which lead me strongly to believe that this group is a plant.

105. DLC are pro militarism

The DLC is a pro militarism institution which is why liberals don't trust them. Most of its politicians would not be in power if it was not for the funding of the corporations that get welfare (corporate welfare) from the very same Republicans they are running against.

[ever_green]

110. yep. Let's face it, they are in stark contrast to what we are supposed to

stand for.
I WILL consider another party if this keeps up. What is the point? Really.

[w4rma]

107. The DLC can't even spin well. They are utterly horrible.

They are as incompetant as Bush.

The DLC is the organization built only for the purpose of taking corporate money for campaigns in exchange for laws that favor those specific corporations who donate. It's like the mafia setup that the Republicans have on a much smaller scale. They are Repug light.

[Selatius]

115. DLC is a CORPORATIST front. Read THIS:

The DLC and its close associate, the Progressive Policy Institute, are the recipients of grants from many Fortune 500 companies and such right-wing foundations as the Bradley Foundation. Corporate contributors to the Progressive Policy Institute include AT&T Foundation, Eastman Kodak Charitable Trust, Prudential Foundation, Georgia-Pacific Foundation, Chevron, and Amoco Foundation. (17) The Third Way Foundation, an umbrella group of the New Democrats in the DLC, receives funding from the Lynde & Harry Bradley Foundation, Howard Gilman Foundation, Ameritech Foundation, and General Mills Foundation. According to one magazine report, the DLC enjoys funding from Bank One, Citigroup, Dow Chemical, DuPont, General Electric, Health Insurance Corporation, Merrill Lynch, Microsoft, Morgan Stanley, Occidental Petroleum, and Raytheon. (9)

Are you happy sharing "the people's party" with corporate robber barons? Don't trust bankers. Don't trust oilmen, and don't trust large, wealthy corporations in general. Do you understand where "Republican lite" comes from now when people talk about the DLC?

http://rightweb.irc-online.org/org/demleadcoun.php

[Zhade]

128. You forgot "don't trust weapons contractors who own broadcast networks".

To find the DLC taking money from weapons contractors like GE, whose NBC helped pimp the nonexistent WMD/al Qaeda ties for the illegal Iraq War, should give anyone with a brain and a sense of democratic principles a rather nasty shock.

[JSJ]

118. because it blew off all but the wealthy and connected

[Zhade]

119. Check my signature for why.

EDIT: Er, sigs are off. Never mind!

[salin]

123. Suspicion of motives

DLC or not, Lieberman represents to many the DLC approach. His latest rhetoric (that he would welcome a bushco admin spot) does little to lesson the suspicions.

[Carolab]

133. Because they push their OWN agenda

not ours. We are just as nothing to them.

What the hell, they don't even need our votes anymore. Just preset the machines to whatever outcome you want.

[greenohio]

137. And we don't care if we win. We like losing. Its fun.

Bill Clinton, souther chair of the DLC won twice. But apparently could earn any votes from DU today. What a sad state of affairs.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

140. Clinton won for two reasons...

1) Because he is a fucking rock star who could sell ice to an Eskimo.

and

2) Ross Perot.

Clinton being DLC doesn't enter into the equation.

[Lerkfish]

145. absolutely. clinton won because he's clinton and could charm the pants off

anyone he liked. (yes I intended to say that).

I admire clinton mightily, but he won because of CHARISMA. The closest person to come to that was Kerry, towards the end, but even he is unworthy to unlatch Clinton's sandals in that regard. Don't get me wrong, I LIKE Kerry, but he is not the charisma machine Clinton was.

The problem with the DLC and the Dem party is simply look at all the previous dem candidates besides Clinton since Carter......Dukakis, Mondale, Gore, Kerry....errr...Leiberman??

what we have in the dem party is a serious deficit of charismatic leaders.

[Skidmore]

139. Because they do not back the people, but the corporations

that suck the life out of the worker.

[Snivi Yllom]

141. ummmm, because they keep losing?

I get tired of being told how great things are after losing.

[goodhue]

142. DLC promotes corporate interests over people power

[Zhade]

146. Here's another reason to despise the DLC...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1365751

[Cheswick2.0]

147. good spin........... nope

they are not just spinning. The are republicans.

[Merlin]

148. Here's why.

Because it's been transformed into a Rockefeller Republican front for Holy Joe.

Al From sold the whole damn shop, lock, stock and barrel, in the late '90s, to Joe Lieberman--a man who is so far to the right, he might as well be a Republican.

The DLC website, since then, has been blatantly and exclusively pushing Lieberman for President.

There was NONE of that back in 1988-92 when I was active in it. The DLC, like all of us then, was earnestly trying to stop the seemingly permanent control of the white house by the Republicans. GA Senator Sam Nunn was the DLC kingpin at the time. John Breaux hung out with us. I once won $100 from him betting on who would succeed Jim Wright.

Early DLC supporters included the likes of Sam Nunn, Al Gore, Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Charlie Rangel, Chuck Robb, Bob Edgar, Harold Ford, K. K. Townsend, the chairman of Lowes, and many, many more.

The DLC did a lot of good back then. It pushed for interesting new progams like AmeriCorps (a DLC idea). It pushed for a balanced budget as a means of cutting interest rates for the average American and stimulating the economy. It promoted many creative ideas, trying to refocus the role of the federal government to adjust incentives, where possible, rather than attempt brute bureacratic enforcement.

The DLC was a vibrant force that had a big role in Clinton's election. I was proud to be a part of it then.

But I will tell you that the very first meeting I went to after Clinton took office -- in about April of '93 -- was attended by a large crowd of businessmen who were literally shouting about how Clinton was acting way too liberal. From that point on, I had my doubts about it. And from that point on--it seems to me--it went down hill.

By now I am so pissed about how Al From--once my friend--has sold this group up the river, that I wouldn't have anything to do with it if you paid me. They've stooped to bringing on two certified Straussians to their staff. Will Marshall--once a decent, bright, inventive, true blue Democrat--has signed on (I'm sure through pressure by Lieberman) to PNAC. Al From is reduced to shilling for Lieberman. It's a scandal now. It's now the Democratic Lieberman Council.

The DLC is dead! Period.