2000: "There is no difference between Gore + Bush. I'm voting Nader!"

[Mark E. Smith]

2005: "There is no difference between the Republican Party and the DLC. Either they go or I do!"

Same shit, different year.

[nickshepDEM]

1. I give this thread 3 minutes... But yeah, your right.

[rabid_nerd]

2. Wrong...

Al From is what's wrong with the DLC, and the Democratic Party.

[BlueEyedSon]

3. There is LESS difference between the DLC and Republicans

than between the DLC and the other Democrats.

Don't forget the the American political "center" has moved and moved until it is slightly to the right of Attila the Hun.

[welshTerrier2]

4. no, this year is different ...

in 2000, some said either they go or I do!

this year, they are going !!! and i'm not ...

[Mr Rabble]

40. make that 2 of us.

[CTyankee]

5. Just when I thought I'd calmed down...

your post made me mad all over again. Don't get me started on Ralph Nader...

[TwilightZone]

6. Agreed. And the anti-Hillary crowd may help elect the next R.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2027574&mesg_id=2027574

[Roland99]

7. Honestly, what good would Hillary do?

[TwilightZone]

8. Oh, I don't know....(sarcasm)

Let's see.

She's:

Pro-choice
Pro-stem cell research
Pro-civil rights
Anti-discrimination
Pro-gay rights
Pro-drug treatment
Anti-school vouchers
Pro-education
Pro-environment
Pro-health care
Pro-labor

You're right. She's just as bad as a Republican.

[Roland99]

10. Ok, now, how about answering my question. What good would she do?

Saying one has a stance on an issue doesn't mean squat.

What actions has she done to advance those?

Honestly, I don't know what her record has been as Senator but I do know she's quite the DLC-dandy and there's plenty of her I don't like in that she seems to be too politically-correct, is in favor of more troops into Iraq, won't curtail the military-industrial complex, etc.

What's her plan for reducing spending and lowering the deficit? What's her plan for replacing NCLB? What's her plan for environmental regulations?

[TwilightZone]

15. Perhaps you should bother to find out.

I don't know what her record has been as Senator

So, in other words, you hate her, but you're not really sure why, since you're unaware of what she's actually done as a politician. So, you're basing your beliefs on general anti-DLC disdain and the fact that she's overzealous about video games.

And that somehow makes her as bad as a Republican.

As far as her actions, I'd suggest that you start here: http://www.issues2000.org/Senate/Hillary_Clinton.htm

And try her web site. I'm sure there is plenty of info on what she's done as a Senator.

Frankly, I don't care how bad you think she is, she isn't Bush. I disagree with many of her recent actions, as well, but overall, she's light-years ahead of any Republican alternative.

[Roland99]

20. I missed where I said I hate her.

Care to point that out to me?


Anyway, my biggest beef with this administration is it's ability to lie continually and get away with it. The DLC has proven to be not very critical of this administration which leaves me with a lot of doubt about any candidate they would offer up.

And just because she isn't * doesn't mean she'll be any better. After all, there are plenty of people that surrounded Bill Clinton in the White House and his Cabinet that are now part of the Carlyle Group.

[TwilightZone]

36. "just because she isn't * doesn't mean she'll be any better"

You cannot be serious.

Apparently, you've been living in a cave for the past five years. Bush is the worst president we've ever had, and you honestly believe that Hillary wouldn't be any better?

Amazing.

[Roland99]

37. Yeah. I've been stuck in a cave, completely unaware of anything.

:eyes:

[papau]

19. Gore had a lot of plans - but media buzz because of them was nada

Likewise Kerry put out plans - and the media ignored and repeated GOP buzzwords as the equivalent of real Dem plans.

Hillary would at least break through the media barrier.

And by the way - the junior senator from New York has quite a nice list of proposals, and a list of allies found and kept on those proposals - some might even say she has been effective - indeed a damn sight more effective that the rest of our elected liberal officials. And I know her as the liberal that was pushing for single payer health back in 93 - who got shot down by Bill as Bill was told - and believed - that the insurance company approach of large HMO's would not be opposed by the insurance companies. Never Trust an insurance company promise is a lesson the Democratic Party may finally have learned. (I lobbied tax (international and domestic life company) and life insurance product tax and regulations back then)

[greekspeak]

11. She is also pro-censorship, pro corporatism, pro unilateral war

If she is anything like her hubby, she is lukewarm on gay rights at best. The rest of those items I would expect most dems match her views.

[TwilightZone]

16. And, again, that makes her as bad as a Republican?

No, it doesn't. Take those stances and reverse all of those that I listed, and you have what we'll end up if we lose again in '08.

Is that really what you want?

[greekspeak]

23. Censorship makes her as bad as a republican. Unilateral war

makes her as bad as a republian. Corporatism makes her as bad as a republican. Stop threatening with this "Hilary is the only way" line of logic. It doesn't work.

I think we will keep losing as long as we keep putting up these milquetoast "middle grounders" like Kerry who talk a good game and then concede as quickly as they can to their Puke ueberlords. We need someone with some gumption who does not sell the same bill of goods as the Pukes. We don't need "more of the same" with a D next to her name.

[StudentOfDarrow]

31. She isn't as bad as a Republican.

And she would be one of my last choices for the nomination. But if she DOES get the nomination, I would much prefer a corporatist, pro-war censor over an racist, sexist, fundie nutjob, environment-destroying, corporatist, pro-war censor.

[TwilightZone]

35. Sorry, but I don't agree.

Nowhere did I claim that "Hilary (sic) is the only way".

My statements were based on my initial post, which includes a poll where the two options are Hillary and Jeb. In that situation, my vote goes unequivocally to Hillary.

Apparently, a lot of DUers would prefer another 4-8 years of the Bush family in power.

[Roland99]

38. Do you always Jump to Conclusions like that?

[TwilightZone]

42. Uh, what conclusion would that be? That Hillary is better than Jeb?

Pretty easy one to call, thanks.

[greekspeak]

39. By siding with the DLC, here is a list of things she stands for.

"...(supporting) the bankruptcy bill...ANWR...confirming torture architects as Attorney General...voting for an illegal criminal invasion of a country which has NEVER been a threat to the United States of America, and refusing to admit that invasion and the resulting occupation was wrong even now. And obviously, that's just the tip of the iceberg." Thank you to AntiCoup2K4 for the list. Even if she goes out and marries 100 gay couples, saves 100 forests and saves 100 jobs, she sides with the people who did these things.

When it comes right down to it, if Hillary somehow gets the nomination, I will have no choice but to flush my vote down the toilet for her. But I am going to fight to keep this scenario from playing out. The DLC and its minions are great at handing elections to the RW by playing the middle ground, where their support is shaky at best, while ignoring left too. Paraphrasing Dr. Dean, I am from the democratic wing of the democratic party. Thank you.

[mtnsnake]

32. Yeah, let's only talk about her minuses and forget all the pluses she has

[AJH032]

34. right, she's a corporatist

which is why she voted NO on CAFTA and favored OBRA-93 to raise corporate taxation.

Sure, she's a corporatist.

[bottomofthehill]

17. She is not my first choice but.....

She would spend the first 4 years undoing all the crap that King George has done in his reign.

Do you really think that she would not be better than Frist, Brownback, Newt, or the rest of the Republican God Squad.

Really, think about it

[Roland99]

22. Welcome to DU, bottomofthehill. But, one must also consider...

are there no other good candidates out there for the Democratic Party? Is Hillary the best there is?

If so, the Democratic Party is in worse shape than I thought.

[bottomofthehill]

26. I start out by saying she is not my first choice but...

There are plenty of other good democratic candidates out there, all of them are better than most of the Republican field. To me it is pretty simple, vote for who I think will best represent my views in the primary and then in the general vote for the person who has the best chance to win and represents most of what I stand for.

By that criteria, in 2000, Ralph Nader was close to a lot of my core values but so was Al Gore. One had a chance to win, the other had no chance at all. I voted for Gore and am still proud of my vote. Look what we got in the Whitehouse. Do you really think that Gore, Kerry or Clinton would be any worse than what we have. I know that things would be very different if any of them were the President.

[Roland99]

29. There would be differences but, imo, just a few key ones:

Iraq - we obviously would not have invaded if this asshole wasn't president (although, I did vote for him in 2000 - voted for Kerry last year)
Taxes - likely they would not have been cut, at least nowhere near as drastically as they have been.


But, there still would have been special interest legislation, big spending, etc.


Until we wrestle away the corporate control of politicians, this country will be on a general path downward. Hillary represents that pro-corporate path.

[Hippo_Tron]

46. Reagan, Nixon, and Hoover were all better than Bush...

Does that mean that I want to vote for any of them? It's not that I totally disagree with you. I just don't think that we should be holding our leaders to the incredibly low standard of "He's better than George W. Bush".

[MadHound]

9. You are correct, but not how you think

Welcome to the two party/same corporate master system of government! Nader saw that long ago, as did a few precious others. Now it is becoming ever more obvious, enough so that even the most die-hard is now recognizing the problem.

Now the party has two choices in how to deal with this problem. the first is to continue with the same ol' same ol', taking that corporate lucre and demonizing their leftist base. Or than can repudiate their corporate masters, take the party back to its roots and start energizing the base and winning elections again.

However sentiments like yours only further the problem. Perhaps you should stop demonizing the left and instead go after the real culprits, the corporate masters who are calling the DLC tune.

[Mark E. Smith]

24. Talk about demonizing...

... I'm a very liberal Democrat who supports gay marriage, pulling our troops out of Iraq this fucking instant, and with an Impeach Bush sticker on my car.

But to me this intraparty bullshit is only helping the GOP and the far right.

OK? May I suggest what you should do with your assumptions?

[MadHound]

28. Let's see here friend

You compare Nader and his voters to those of us who wish to rid ourselves of the DLC and other corporate whores in the party, and from that single post in this thread I'm somehow supposed to divine that you are an ultra leftist? What the fuck ever.

Look friend, I'm sorry if you find it disheartening, or divisive, or merely inconvient, but there is some house cleaning that needs to be done in the Democratic party, and you have three choices, either lead, follow or get the hell out of the way. If this house cleaning isn't done, then the party is going to go the way of the Whigs, and the Greens will become the party of the left. Of course since you are supposedly some sort of ultra leftist then you wouldn't mind seeing the Greens in the ascendency now would you?

Get off your high horse and stop scolding people friend, there is real work to be done, and your pious mouthings contribute nothing. Just because you have the right talk, and a bumper sticker doesn't mean you're some sort of ultra lefty. Time for you to actually DO something.

[Mark E. Smith]

43. Looks like you and Karl Rove have something in common

Both of you find something positive in tearing the Democratic Party apart.

[JackDragna]

49. Oh, yes! Something positive!

After all, what we SHOULD do is follow lock-step with those who support the war, the idiotic "war on terror", CAFTA, the Patriot Act..I mean, how dare we become an opposition party! We're DEMOCRATS, by gum! ALL HAIL THE NAME "DEMOCRAT!"

[greekspeak]

12. The Nader Boogie Man Returns

Nader is not equal to the DLC. Maybe he was a spoiler in 2000. He is also an opportunist who I think probably has a little blood on his hands ala the Pukes.

The DLC is a group of Puke-wannabes who is trying its best to move the dem party as far to the right as it can get It is a group of Me-Too-ers who see all the power the pukes have taken, and want it for themselves, and will whore out to anyone who will give them power. If that means screwing the base over great. If that means throwing elections, cool. If that means demonizing the "left," go for it.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

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

[Mark E. Smith]

21. Oh. Then you'll probably hate this one, too:

"Let's help the Republicans and beat ourselves up."

[AntiCoup2K4]

27. Helping the Republicans is what the DLC does best.

As in the bankruptcy bill, as in ANWR, as in confirming torture architects as Attorney General, as in voting for an illegal criminal invasion of a country which has NEVER been a threat to the United States of America, and refusing to admit that invasion and the resulting occupation was wrong even now.

And obviously, that's just the tip of the iceberg.

[JNelson6563]

30. never heard it

Though I get your point. I can only agree with it in part.

For instance, Sen. Stabenow is one of mine. After she voted for the bankruptcy bill there were folks who declared MI Dems needed to dump her before 06. Yeah, brilliant. Nevermind that there is no Dem of stature to run in her place--those with the stature too smart to take on the incumbent of their own party in a primary. So yes, the vote was awful but take her off the ballot? Special kind of stupid IMO.

One thing to rail against a vote or statement, quite another to call for the end of a career (with no replacement in sight but a Rethug opponent!).

Julie

[mtnsnake]

33. I agree. Some of the exagerrations around here border on extremism

and it's counterproductive to anything we're trying to accomplish as an opposing force to the Republican Party, which is NOT the same as the DLC.

[flpoljunkie]

14. The Republicans did not tell their base to go to hell, altho perhaps they

should have. They listen to their base--unlike the establishment Democrats who expect us to shut up and get with their program--no matter if it works against the core tenets of the Democratic party--like enabling the recent one-sided bankruptcy bill to pass and be signed into law-- and which takes effect in October, by the way.

We are not going to shut up and go quietly into the night. We are eager to stand with Democratic leaders who will stand up and fight for Democratic party principles--not cave in to corporate interests and not timidly "go along to get along."

[Gyre]

18. Get over it

I don't love Ralph but the election was stolen by the S. Ct., NOT by Ralph Nader!

Gyre

[jonnyblitz]

25. the DLC can go to hell...

who needs Freepers when you got those chickhawk rat bastards calling us Un-American because we don't support Bush's invasion.

[bottomofthehill]

41. And take Ralph Nader with them

[Hippo_Tron]

45. I'll agree there... no DLC, no Nader sounds good to me

[Hippo_Tron]

44. Okay, but this thread isn't helping the situation

[Sparkly]

47. I, for one, agree with you.

Idealism is important, but so is a realistic perspective.

[JackDragna]

48. Time for a little logic lesson for all you DLC apologists

Strawman: The misrepresantation of someone's argument for the purpose of attacking someone's position. Your statement is a strawman because the position of the Naderites is..oh, wait a minute. Nader correctly pointed out the vast majority of the Democratic national leadership to be capitulating, unelectable bastards. And now, people here are pointing out the DLC to be capitulating, horrible bastards. You're absolutely correct!

[Sparkly]

50. "unelectable bastards"

Nader knows about being "electable" how?

[Moderator]

51. Locking

Flamebait, this has run it's course.