I'm enjoying all this fighting between Progressives and the DLC

[LittleClarkie]

But I'll enjoy my recess appointment even more.

Even so, the sight of Democrats fighting does the space where my heart should be good. Please. Continue.

God knows we here at the GOP need the distraction right now.

[Writer]

1. LOL. This is awesome.

You should make this into a poster.

... that man's head looks like it's been beaten by several bats, doesn't it?

[Gay Green]

15. What's that dead rat doing

on his head?

[bloom]

2. I noticed there is not a sarcasm tag

with your post.

[The Blue Knight]

3. Good post.

[Dr Fate]

4. Word. Truce.

Truce.

[MisterLiberal]

43. LOL

The DLC doesn't want a truce.

All they want is our vote.

They could care less for anything else we have.

[Dr Fate]

45. Most people vote on issues, even Liberals.

Either the "DLC" type issues will hold up, or they wont.

I vote we argue this in terms of issues & strategy rather than who is in what club.

[niallmac]

5. He really DOES look like an evil captain kangaroo! Dems will survive.

[LittleClarkie]

6. That is what would happen if Captain Kangaroo and Hitler had a baby

That's what I always say.

[checks-n-balances]

33. Captain Kangaroo (a/k/a the late Bob Keeshan) was a progressive

To mention his name in the same sentence as Hitler or Bolton is revolting, but I understand your point.

I read Keeshan's autobiography some years ago and his admirable views were apparent throughout. I always like to inform people about what a good person he really was - almost in the same vein as Fred Rogers, rest his soul.

[wli]

7. I don't really see a whole lot of fighting going on

We know the DLC is a bunch of AEI/GOP moles and reject them without a whole lot of fuss.

[LittleClarkie]

8. Yer kiddin'

The board is up to it's ass in "a whole lot of fuss."

Without a whole lot of fuss would mean we wouldn't have a dozen threads beating our tits about how evil the DLC was and how they're destroying the party and how we hates them, my preciousssss.

[wli]

17. I don't know, it looks pretty clear-cut to me.

As far as I'm concerned I just chime in with the usual fifth column stuff when questions come up and don't really put a whole lot of effort or anything into it. It's not like I sit around seething about the DLC.

[TroglodyteScholar]

21. For REAL...

I personally am a lefty. Would be a moderate Dem if I thought the Republicans had any interest in moderation. But you know, if we Dems are the reasonable party...you'd think we could embrace our moderates. Compromise isn't just something that happens between political adversaries -- it should be high priority within our party. And, honestly, it SHOULD be a lot easier than compromising with the rightwingers who think *so* differently from us in the first place.

Thanks for the excellent post...

[MisterLiberal]

39. My personal philosophy

Concerned GA Voter, is that we should if anything be MORE liberal than we really are, to give room for compromise. If we aim at 50%, we might hit 40%, so if we go 60% liberal, we might get 50%.

See what I mean?

Which is why the DLC is acting BACKWARDS. Answer this, DLC supporters; if the DLC moves us to the right, that is where negotiations START.

Which direction do you think compromise with the Repukes will go?

MORE to the right!!!!

And this is sane, how exactly???

[MisterLiberal]

38. LC

If we didn't have "fuss", then we wouldn't care, would we?

But we DO care, hence the fuss. Let me ask you this, if we aren't supposed to work out our differences HERE in a non-election year, when do you suppose we might be able to borrow our freedom of speech again.

If the DLC grants it, that is. They let us vote each election, but I'd like to borrow some of my other rights from them.

If you don't mind.

[OrwellwasRight]

9. But what would you have is do instead?

Love CAFTA? Vote to confirm Roberts just because he isn't Mussolini? Join Hillary in her holier than thou judgment of women who get abortions ("well, you can have one, but you must realize, it is a terrible, shameful thing").

I like the sentiment in theory, but when "let's just get along," is code for shut up and continue getting screwed, I just can't do it.

I'm an agitator.

But I do like the photo.

[LittleClarkie]

12. Work for Progressive candidates. Don't vote for DLC candidates

but for fuck's sake, if you think the DLC is too powerful, then don't make them MORE powerful by lamenting them in about a dozen threads here.

I didn't say that those who don't like their policies shoule go along with them anyway. But they should not be the scapegoat for all that is wrong in the world. They're not Satan. They're not closet Republicans sent by Karl Rove to destroy the party.

They're a group of people who's point of view differs from your own. And tacking a DLC label on the forehead of someone who shares some of their policies isn't fair either.

I'm seeing us turn into a liberal John Birch Society, seeing Communists ... I mean, Republicans... behind every tree and bush.

[OrwellwasRight]

16. I do those things,

but I am not sure how we try to get more people to see the light unless we help them realize they are in the dark when they choose a Kerry over a Kucinich because he is more "electable." Electable is as electable does, and we do not help ourselves by trying to pick the most Republican-lite candidate. And if the DLC is the group most responsible for pushing the Republican-lite candidates, can't we blame them?

Your point is taken, but although there may not be Republicans behind every tree, there may be people whose actions aid the Republican agenda (whether wittingly or not) behind some of them.

[LittleClarkie]

19. How far to the left do you have to be to see one of our more

liberal Senators as "Republican lite".

And, personally, when I look at him, I see "qualified" not "electable". Of course it might be the fact that he's qualified that makes him electable, but I'm cool with that.

Dean is Repub lite in alot of his fiscal leanings. He himself would tell you he's not a liberal.

I would have to rebut, dispute and otherwise go against you in that regard, as your "light" looks kinda "dark" to me. I would engage in getting people to see the light about what a wonderful president Kerry would have made, and could still make.

Some have said that Kucinich didn't run because he thought he could be president. He ran because he wanted to affect the debate. And that he did. Do you not believe that is what he was doing?

[OrwellwasRight]

20. Well, about as far left as anybody who ever game a damn about the

little people. I believe in universal health care, living wages, quality, free public education, that peace is better than war, and that the Fourth Amendment should not be trashed just because somebody sets off a bomb.

Unfortunately, the DLC puts these things (if they even belive in them) on the back burner and instead emphasizes how strong we are on national security, free trade, and cutting almost as many taxes as the Republicans.

And I am not how much my personal leftism (or lack thereof) is relevant. And please do not put words in my mouth. I never even mentioned Dean (not would I saw he is a true liberal), nor did I say that Kerry is Republican-lite.

However, Kerry did run as if he was Republican-lite, and he was supported by the DLC, which is Republican-lite, and he was pushed by the party establishment as "electable" and therefore the right nominee. Thus people chose him because they thought he could win, but out of some deep-seated attraction to his candidacy. That was a mistake, and will always be so, regardless of who the candidate is.

We meed to pick somebody who connects with us and gets us fired up, not some milque-toast that the powers that be say we should pick because they'll "play well with the middle."

I can't say why Kucinich ran. He didn't tell me. However, he did change the debate during the primaries, and then his views were promptly ignored in the general. Doesn't negate that he has a passion to help the people, and Kerry's campaign did not get that message across.

[Miss Chybil]

27. Sometimes you need to use STRATEGY to win.

Ask Karl Rove.

I'd rather have Hillary - much rather have Hillary - I'll vote for her in a minute - than another fucking Republican. I want the Dems to win this time and they aren't going to do it with an extremist and neither are the Republicans. Americans are tired of the partisan wars and most of us live somewhere in the middle of the ideological spectrum.

You said... "I believe in universal health care, living wages, quality, free public education, that peace is better than war, and that the Fourth Amendment should not be trashed just because somebody sets off a bomb."

So do I, but walking around with a peace sign painted on one's forehead isn't going to win an election in this country. You have to play it tough, or you can't win. This is a fact of American political life. These are the cards in our deck.

I'd stake my life on the fact I believe, Hillary, or another centrist Dem, is more likely to espouse universal health care, living wages, free education and diplomacy around the world - which will sooth the tensions caused by the fucks now in charge - than another Republican, which is who will win, if we drag ourselves down in another internal fight.

[OrwellwasRight]

29. Yeah, cause centrism worked for Kerry and Gore

and Bush is not an extremist.

Have fun compromising and good luck.

[Miss Chybil]

36. Bush is not an extremist?

Are you saying he's a centrist? Poleez. He didn't win on centrism, either. He cheated. By the way, Kerry and Gore got a lot closer to the White House than say... Kucinich did. And were it not for the Supreme Court, well, Al Gore would be president. So, your argument is nul.

[oge]

55. With You on that,

...MC; the interventionism of SCOTUS in the election will go down in history as one of the most undemocratic debacles in American politics.

[OrwellwasRight]

56. Umm, try reading the whole conversation before you jump

to conclusions.

Gore and Kerry ARE centrists and Bush IS an extremist. It is called sarcasm, in case you had not heard of it.

Extremism worked for Bush. Centrism didn't work for us. My argument is not "nul." My argument is that we should stop trying to nominate someone who will play well to the middle. We should nominate someone who stands up for our values.

But, hey thanks for insulting me before you had all the facts. I enjoyed it.

[MisterLiberal]

42. And THEN what?

The slide of the Democratic Party to the right begins in earnest.

All you have suggested doing is putting off the inevitable; for the party to ENERGIZE the base and work for us for once!

As we saw in 2000, you can't take our votes for granted (though I did vote for President Gore)

[Miss Chybil]

46. Hey, vote for who you want. It's a democracy.

I'm voting for the Democrat who promotes universal health care, fair wages, quality - free education, a woman's right to choose, human rights, protection of the environment, FAIR trade and isn't going to be "soft of terrorism." Seems to me, all but the last is a left of center issue in most people's minds and the last issue should be non-partisan.

You see Americans won't vote for anybody they think won't protect and defend them. PROTECT and DEFEND being the operative words, do not mean striking off on empirical adventures to change the world. Some political posturing is in order here, though, as the Dems have been accused of being "soft of terror" and the image, (false as it is), must be changed, if we are to win.

I'm voting for Hillary Clinton.

[OrwellwasRight]

57. I have not suggested a slide to the right

or to put off anything. Did you really mean to respond to my post?

[MisterLiberal]

40. Yes

The DLC basically wants only a vote, not a voice.

Sorry, but the 14th amendment ended slavery. It's time the DLC noticed that.

[fujiyama]

10. Sorry I often like your posts

and also like John Kerry, but those setting the policy at the DLC seriously need to be stopped. This argument is healthy and in fact up until now I used to be one of those that would lash out at those that whined about the DLC.

But after reading the DLC website's policy initiative thing written by Marshal and From, I was pissed. I was amazed how similar it was to Rovian talking points.

[LittleClarkie]

13. It is healthy to oppose or even violently oppose the policies of the DLC

but the discussion is bordering on hate. Where is the hate coming from. These are people you disagree with, not Satan come to steal your children. That's what I'm railing against.

Be against them. But the tinfoil hat stuff about them being Republican infiltrators sent to destroy the party is just bananas.

[fujiyama]

18. I don't think the DLC senators themselves

are infiltrators.

But I seriously do have to question From and Marshall, among others. They literally are repeating Rovian talking points of how the left is "incapable of looking past Vietnam", how "patriotism is not natural for us", etc.

Mainly, they have seemingly conceded this idea that the WoT is related to Iraq. If we let in to that myth, we deserve to lose, because it basically justifies the ridiculous claim of "we're fighting them there so we don't have to fight them here".

I would say many of us are only defending ourselves from the same bullshit Zell Miller claimed. I expect Rove to smear us. His entire career is based on destroying the opposition, but once our one side doe it, it's beyond the pale and cannot be accepted.

[MisterLiberal]

44. Tinfoil hat?

Oh where is THAT hate coming from? Your demeaning of those with whom YOU disagree is no better than that which you accuse others of.

I don't think the Repukes have anything to do with it. I think a bunch of conservative Democrats want to steal control of OUR party like conservative Reps did in theirs.

And this is not hate, it is ANGER.

You better be ready to DEAL WITH IT, because it's not something you can sweep under the carpet or ignore.

THESE ISSUES WILL BE ADDRESSED either here or at the ballot box.

Which will it be?

[welshTerrier2]

11. not to worry, my good friend ...

i'm multi-tasking ...

btw, just wild speculation, i'm guessing Bolton is dead ... it looks more and more like he's tangled in the Plame business and a recess appointment would only make things worse for the WH ...

and my real thoughts on "all the fighting" ?? i think it's very important and very necessary ... we could pretend to all get along or we can air our grievances ... in the end, i truly hope the Party can find unity but pretending it exists or going along with Hillary's hollow "help us" doesn't change the reality that there are plenty of Democrats who don't believe the Party represents them or do believe the Party is even overtly hostile to them ...

the "loudness" of the fighting has only intensified because of Hillary's remarks yesterday ... it will quiet down again all too soon ... if those with the most power in the Party respond in a positive way to the outcry, perhaps some progress towards unity will result ... i'm not holding my breath ...

[Bucky]

14. Good God, LittleClarkie, is that a TOOP he's wearing? It's godawful

Like there's a big badger humping his earhole.

[MoonRiver]

22. Jesus H. Christ, LC, we are talking about how to WIN elections!

Some, like moi, think that bad DLC tactics, along with blatant dirty tricks like bbvs, which our leadership has refused for 4 long years to seriously address, are losing us elections. The debate about which direction our party needs to move is vital to the survival of the Democratic Party, and perhaps our country. NOTHING is more important to discuss right now than this, imcpo.

[Kolesar]

23. Most Americans don't even know what the DLC is

DU has a way of magnifying ideological issues.

[MoonRiver]

24. They may not know, but they still hear the message,

as filtered by the DLC handpicked candidates.

[SCDem]

25. Fighting over 2% undecided center vs 1/2 adult population not voting

I find it highly amusing that there is so much effort on the slide 2% voters who can go either way when at least half our population that is able to vote chooses not to. Maybe they do not because the center lacks conviction, lacks meat, lacks real solutions to problems that Americans are facing.

That is my only ilk with the DLC.

[emulatorloo]

26. thank you littleclarkie - & don't forget there are pot-stirrers onboard

doing the work of their beloved Grand Old Party.

[Catrina]

28. Yep,

That's what makes me wonder about the timing of the DLC announcement that we all should get on board with them ~ regardless of their support for Bush administration policies.

Almost makes you wonder where they came up with the idea, since most of us pretty much dismissed them after the their last devasting loss!!

Rove knows, 'timing is everything' ~ but as someone else said, we can multi-task. Crimes were committed by this administration. Distraction from the growing scandal certainly is in the interests of the Bush administration.

The very fact that the DLC chose this moment to emerge with their 'let's forget all that stuff' message, means one of two things to me ~ 'they have no idea of how to strategize', or they are on board the 'let's distract from the growing scandal'. Either way, they prove by their choice of the timing of the debate, what we already know. They can't win for us!!

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

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

[indigonation]

31. Dubya must be giving lessons now in smirk. n/t

[shifting_sands]

32. Dems arguing

LittleClarkie. You don't get it, most of the Dems on this site don't get it either but they are doing it all the time. We are not for or against the RNC, DLC, DNC or any other political group. We are for America and we are fighting for America and American ideals. We are fighting for the Constitution. We are against pre-emtive strikes and the murdering of innocent people. We are against torture as an American ideal, we are against treason from the White House. We are against our money (taxpayers) being used to make rich thieves and liars and murderers.

We are not "for abortion" as a group, we are for "choice" as human beings. We are not against Christianity or Jews or Muslims, we are for the right to worship (or not) freely. We are not against prosperity but we are against greed in the extreme. We are for decent jobs, and fair salaries. We are for the human being and the freedoms of the human spirit. We are not for oppression.

This isn't a game of which party wins no matter who they are, this is about a patriot's fight for our country and the people on this board are trying to find leaders who care about this country too, they aren't looking for thugs and bullies, liars and traitors, we are looking for leaders, true leaders that can lead us into the best of ourselves as a country, not the worst of ourselves.

What you are seeing now Little Clarkie, is very close to the dialog in 1760 when the burdensome Stamp Act from England was imposed on this country and the frustration of the men who eventually became our Founding Fathers,began fomenting against England who had become the oppressor. They had opposing "parties" too, and arguments as to how a new Republic, should they gain their independence from England, might look like. They formed a group and talked and discussed and argued right up to the 1776 Declaration of Independence even though the war started in 1775.

No, we aren't "fighting" for a party Little Clarkie, we are fighting for the Republic of the United States of America.

[Generator]

35. Great post!

I really don't give a crap about the DNC one way or the other. All I know is the country is going down the tubes..and real opposition to what is before our very eyes-liars..thieves..and traitors is what we need or we as a nation(what we thought America was) will perish.

How we frame the words or frame the debate or all that b.s. semantics is useless if we don't fight those that are ruining our country with the truth. I want the truth to come out of Hillary Clinton's mouth. I don't give a shit about video games. I give a shit about torture in my name..a useless war that is bankrupting my children's future..and a few other things. But Hillary Clinton (for one there are many others) is part of the damn problem. WAKE THE FUCK UP.> this is my entreaty to her-it's not 1992 anymore!!! The world has changed forever with the terrorist mantra leading all debate. WE need the truth. The lies are going to kill us. I don't give a shit whether she gets to be president or not. I care about NOW and the next war that these ideologues could lead us into with one MORE terrorist attack on this nation.

[oge]

41. Great Points

in your post, shifting_sand. thanks for the reminders. i wonder, though, why the 1770's seem to have had so many great leaders and ours are still in the woodwork. is it just that things have to get worse before our guys step out? anyway, i think it is a great idea to keep pushing the two georges as the enemies of the republic, then and now.

[shifting_sands]

47. leaders

OGE, they were leaders by the 1770's but it was 1760 when they were young and just beginning. They started with an underground movement called "The Son's of Liberty" or something like that and it started because of the oppression of King George (who was insane by the way) Leadership didn't come to them until 1773 and the Boston Tea Party. Literally thousands of people were against it, the country was split down the middle over anything resembling revolution. Thousands left the country in protest, returning to Europe or going off to Canada.
Every single signer of the Declaration knew they were considered traitors and if the English had won they would have been hung for treason against the Crown. Leadership was forced upon them by the people and it was a rag tag group of people at that. The oppression of the British who just kept pushing and pushing became too burdensome for half the country to bear and they declared War in 1776.

We are just beginning to find our voice, search our country for leadership, and we will find it, we may not even know their names yet, but we will find those leaders. Some of them might be on DU

[oge]

54. Really nice thinking,

...S_S, thanks.

[DrGonzoLives]

34. GAHHHHHHHHHH

Post a warning before posting scary pictures.

[MisterLiberal]

37. yeah real funny

I'm tired of it, though. I'm NOT going to back down.

It's way past the DLC's turn to compromise.

Tell me Mr Funny, name ONE TIME that the DLC has wanted to compromise with the party base.

JUST ONE TIME, ON ONE ISSUE.

I bet you can't.

And that IS funny.

[Don1]

49. Good point...

and if we do not pressure them they will nominate people like Bolton and Roberts.

[LittleClarkie]

51. Ms. Funny actually

I'm not defending the DLC per se, but the strife in here is starting to remind me of how freepers respond to Bill Clinton. Disagree with their policies if you must, but we're bordering on obsession.

So don't vote for them. Can we get back to work on DSM, Plamegate, the war etc. Fucking distraction, and for what. Because From and Clinton shot their mouths off.

WHATever.

[sunnystarr]

48. While the Rs meme is now how inclusive they are

we're here showing how we want to kick out some Dems. In the meantime labor feels ignored, minorities feel ignored, hell from the little responses I get when I start a post even I feel ignored lol. Where's all the warm fuzzies? Or have we become more like the stiff necked Rs?

[Don1]

50. "I'm not enjoying it at all..."

"The DLC are my friends and Lieberman is pushing for my nomination! Please tell the Progressives to fall in line with the DLC and Lieberman immediately."

[stewarde]

52. Bolton

That picture of Bolton makes me want to vomit...

[LittleClarkie]

53. What picture of Bolton DOESN'T make you wanna vomit

Eh?

[CWebster]

58. The Progressives arethe ones

most likely to oppose him.


THAT IS THE POINT!

[Totally Committed]

59. Suggested reading:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1964899&mesg_id=1964899