Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Idea: Force auditions/and a vote for SOTU Dem Responder

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
iconoclastNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-01-06 12:22 PM
Original message
Poll question: Idea: Force auditions/and a vote for SOTU Dem Responder
Edited on Wed Feb-01-06 12:24 PM by iconoclastNYC
DLC Darling Time Kaine was awful last night. His voice, mannerism, and manner of speech failed to convey strength, and I'd argue served to reinforce a lot of negative stereotypes Republicans hold of our party.

Next year we should force the DNC into holding web auditions for the Democrat who will be our spokesman for the night.

One week before the event and the rank and file of the party should pick the best speaker to speak for our party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-01-06 12:25 PM
Response to Original message
1. There was a very brief web campaign to draft Murtha
But WOW did it get shut down fast!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iconoclastNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-01-06 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Yeah.
I think my suggestion is just another example of how we can take back our party. Who selected Kaine anyway?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iconoclastNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-01-06 05:30 PM
Response to Original message
3. Kicking my own thread
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-01-06 05:32 PM
Response to Original message
4. Disagree completely with your premise...
I thought Kaine was right on target....


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-01-06 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. American Idle.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iconoclastNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Interesting.
Hillary and Kaine are your favroites. What's your take on the DLC?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. They have value...
They are often off the mark, but I think many of their ideas, particularly how to reframe issues to our advantage have alot of value. They have some excellent articles on how to reframe the gun control debate for examples, so that instead of continually arguing of the NRA's turf, we shift it to our own. Same for environmental issues etc.

I have to say I am not a fan of Al From...he is a bad person to have out front for them. I would replace him. I am a fan of any group that has ideas to bring to the table. I belong to the PDA for example, though I think some of the stands they take are too liberal. Much of what they fight for is right on. I do not think any one group or set of people has all the answers. I would want all to be heard, and we should take the best ideas no matter where they come from.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iconoclastNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. If you like framing
See the rockridge institute. The DLC is the enemy within. They are stealth Republicans and they attack progressives all the time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Sorry...they are not...
And you give them way too much credit. They do not control anything. Members are not creatures of the DLC, the DLC is a creature of its members.

If you take a nice deep look into their position papers, you will clearly see that George W. Bush is the primary target of their criticism, and that you would probably agree with their positions the vast majority of the time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iconoclastNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Too much credit?
Edited on Thu Feb-02-06 02:00 PM by iconoclastNYC
The DLC is a creature of it's donors (the list is secret, but it's known that they are funded by corporate America)

If you take a look at the soundbytes the DLC feed in the media you notice their real target is people who wish to keep the Democratic party populist and focused on the needs of average Americans. They eviserated Gore for moving to the left in his 2000 campaign. They said it'd cost him the election but his poll numbers edged up as soon as he started doing this.

You have no creditability if you deny the power of the DLC. Thier purpose is to move the party to the right and make the DNC the Republican parties JV squad.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. I see...
Describe to me the actual mechanism by which the DLC forces compliance with it's positions. And what was different about the Alito filibuster fight that kept John Kerry and Hillary Clinton from following their position. And exactly how is the corporate money received by the DLC different than the corporate money received by virtually every member of congress (DLC or not)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iconoclastNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. I'm not going to argue with you
Edited on Thu Feb-02-06 04:24 PM by iconoclastNYC
Since you are obviously a DLC sycophant but not every congress person takes corporate money.

The DLC is corporatly funded and the mission is to push the Democratic party to support more pro-corporate positions and advocates suicidal moves like throwing labor overboard as well as other traditional democratic constituencies. Thier mission is to change the DNC. That's the problem and why it's different from congresscritters taking corporate money (which i have a problem with too).

The DLC forces thier position on us in a lot of different ways. The have a lot of friendly contacts in the corporate media and they use that bully pulpit to dress down Democrats who don't toe thier "centrist" pro-corporate anti-populist message. They did this to Gore, they did it to Dean in spades. They reinfoce GOP frames such as that by standing up to bush on domestic spying we are opening up the GOP to call us weak on terror. The GOP doesn't need to call us weak on terror when the DLC is already doing it.

They also give support to people who are new in thier political careers if they go along with thier agenda and don the "new democrat" moniker.

The Alito filibuster wasn't a corporate issue per se. And there was a huge reaction from the base.

The DLC's first objective is to fly under the radar. They choose thier battles wisely.

The DLC is evil so quit defending them. I think it's beyond disgusting that big corporations are funding a group that's mission is to remake the democratic party to advance thier agenda. And that's the real purpose of the DLC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Funny...
Edited on Thu Feb-02-06 04:57 PM by SaveElmer
First you say...

"I'm not going to argue with you"

Then you proceed to do exactly that. Of course you didn't answer any of my inquiries...not surprising because the DLC has no mechanism for enforcing compliance.

"They also give support to people who are new in thier political careers if they go along with thier agenda and don the "new democrat" moniker."

Precisely how do they do this? They do not, in fact legally cannot give money to candidates.

This is a typical anti-DLC rant...all bombast and no substance. And then in further typical fashion, you resort to personal insults....



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iconoclastNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #13
19. What personal insult was that?
Edited on Thu Feb-02-06 07:03 PM by iconoclastNYC
Oh and they they don't direct donation from thier buddies. You're DLC defense is so pathetic and transparent it's beyond ridiculous.

"One by one, Fortune 500 corporate backers saw the DLC as a good investment. By 1990 major firms like AT&T and Philip Morris were important donors. Indeed, according to Reinventing Democrats, Kenneth S. Baer's history of the DLC, Al From used the organization's fundraising prowess as blandishment to attract an ambitious young Arkansas governor to replace Senator Sam Nunn of Georgia as DLC chairman. Drawing heavily on internal memos written by From, Bruce Reed, and other DLCers, Baer says that the DLC offered Clinton not only a national platform for his presidential aspirations but "entree into the Washington and New York fundraising communities." Early in the 1992 primaries, writes Baer, "financially, Clinton's key Wall Street support was almost exclusively DLC-based," especially at firms like New York's Goldman, Sachs."

What inquiries did i not address?

They don't have any mechanism? Smearing people in the press isn't a mechanism. Pulling strings so thier top stars get good press mentions? No they aren't the SS but they aren't this benign powerless little thinktank you'd like us to believe they are.

Just keep on ignoring everything I keep replying with and...go cry me a river becasue I called you a sycophant.

"While the DLC will not formally disclose its sources of contributions and dues, the full array of its corporate supporters is contained in the program from its annual fall dinner last October, a gala salute to Lieberman that was held at the National Building Museum in Washington. Five tiers of donors are evident: the Board of Advisers, the Policy Roundtable, the Executive Council, the Board of Trustees, and an ad hoc group called the Event Committee--and companies are placed in each tier depending on the size of their check. For $5,000, 180 companies, lobbying firms, and individuals found themselves on the DLC's board of advisers, including British Petroleum, Boeing, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Coca-Cola, Dell, Eli Lilly, Federal Express, Glaxo Wellcome, Intel, Motorola, U.S. Tobacco, Union Carbide, and Xerox, along with trade associations ranging from the American Association of Health Plans to the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. For $10,000, another 85 corporations signed on as the DLC's policy roundtable, including AOL, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Citigroup, Dow, GE, IBM, Oracle, UBS PacifiCare, PaineWebber, Pfizer, Pharmacia and Upjohn, and TRW."

And for $25,000, 28 giant companies found their way onto the DLC's executive council, including Aetna, AT&T, American Airlines, AIG, BellSouth, Chevron, DuPont, Enron, IBM, Merck and Company, Microsoft, Philip Morris, Texaco, and Verizon Communications. Few, if any, of these corporations would be seen as leaning Democratic, of course, but here and there are some real surprises. One member of the DLC's executive council is none other than Koch Industries, the privately held, Kansas-based oil company whose namesake family members are avatars of the far right, having helped to found archconservative institutions like the Cato Institute and Citizens for a Sound Economy. Not only that, but two Koch executives, Richard Fink and Robert P. Hall III, are listed as members of the board of trustees and the event committee, respectively--meaning that they gave significantly more than $25,000.

In 1996 Lieberman, Breaux, and Simon Rosenberg founded the New Democrat Network political action committee. "Our role is to add political muscle," says Rosenberg. In the 1997–1998 reporting period, its first full cycle, NDN raised $1.4 million directly, and another $1.2 million in so-called "bundled" contributions, gathered at fundraisers for individual candidates and funneled through NDN. In the 1999–2000 period, NDN more than doubled its take, raising $4 million directly and bundling $1.45 million more, plus $450,000 for GoreLieberman. Nearly $2 million of NDN's take in the last cycle came in large, unregulated soft-money chunks from companies such as Aetna, AT&T, and Microsoft and from trade groups such as the Securities Industry Association, who helped sponsor a $1.2-million fundraiser honoring Lieberman on February 13.

NDN's brochures sound like investment prospectuses. "NDN acts as a political venture capital fund to create a new generation of elected officials," says the PAC. "NDN provides the political intelligence you need to make well-informed decisions on how to spend your political capital. Just like an investment advisor, NDN exhaustively vets candidates and endorses only those who meet our narrowly defined criteria."

Exceprts from "How the DLC Does It" ----- http://www.prospect.org/print/V12/7/dreyfuss-r.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-03-06 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #19
22. Thanks for some actual links...
I will look them over...really all I asked...I have never said the DLC was perfect, although I still do not see, based on these links, that the DLC is different from any other group receiving corporate money. And I have to say, if pulling a few strings in the media is all the actual power they have, it is pretty weak IMO. But unlike some, I do regard myself as open-minded and will gladly look at any credible information people wish to send my way, including what you have sent over.

And yes, I do regard syncophant as an insulting term. Nothing in my original reply to you, in which I thought you were looking for a rational discussion indicated that I was a syncophant. In fact I took pains to give some initial criticisms of the DLC and Al From, and went out of my way to praise the PDA, of which I am a member.

In the future, you may want to tone it down a bit, a hostile reaction to a non-hostile post just tends to get your conversation partner's hackles up and makes for a very non-productive discussion. Had you responded to me with this link, and a more courteous explanation of your views, we could have had a more fruitful discussion.

Anyway, good luck to you. I know both of us have no more fervent desire than to see the Democrats back in power in Congress next year, and to have a good Democrat in the White House in 2008.

Peace

O8)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-03-06 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #19
23. iconoclastNYC...
I've looked over the link you sent me...and here are my initial thoughts....

1. This article is somewhat dated, nearly 5 years old...I would like to see something more recent.

2. Though the article is clearly intended to be negative in tone toward the DLC, it is not a pointless diatribe, and does do an excellent job at looking at the source of funds for the DLC.

3. It does note that the DLC is not an organization controlled by the influence of its donors. Even Barney Frank, who the article points out is a foe of the DLC acknowledges that "...money is not the primary motivator for the organization, "Its ideological" he says' (Dreyfuss, 7)

4. It looks to me the financial foundation of the organization is hardly different than any other group, think-tank etc trying to influence the national debate. I see nothing nefarious about it.

5. It seems to me the success of the DLC is in its ability to organize itself, which left groups seem unwilling or unable to do. It seems alot of the ire directed at the DLC is motivated by jealousy over this ability. Left organizations cannot seem to organize around any other motivation than hatred for centrist groups such as the DLC. For example, I rarely, if ever hear any discussion on this board of the activities of the PDA. I wish left groups were as successful, I think it is useful to have strong healthy groups from every part of the party exerting influence.

6. The far left and populist movements have a very bad track record at gaining national power. Starting with the populist movemnet of the late 19th century which foundered on racism generated as a backlash to reconstruction, to William Jennings Bryan, to Henry Wallace's challenge to Harry Truman, and George McGovern's disastarous campaign of 1972, populist movements have consistently failed to wield true power. Having said this I do believe populist movements can be valuable, and can gain influence for some of their ideas. These tend to get incorporated within the mainstream party idealogy, which is why the Minnesota Democratic Party is called the DFL (Dmocratic Farmer Labor) party, and the Non-Partisan League in North Dakota eventually merged with the Democratic Party of that state.

7. A more centrist, pro-business counterweight to the influence of the left was needed in my opinion. The fact is, most Americans are moderates. Strong anti-business sentiment does not resonate with them for long periods of time. I see no logic in ceding this influence to the Republican Party.

5. The article also made it clear, though in a backhanded way, that the DLC has come around to progressive positions on social issues (abortion, gay rights). Reading their position papers I would say that they hold progressive positions on the environment in large measure, and on gun control as well.

6. Some of the criticisms of the DLC in the article are warranted. I am very disappointed in the reaction to Al Gores populist turn in 2000. Though I believe true populism will fail in electoral politics, some elements of it are useful in reaction to recent events. Public disgust at price gouging by Pharmaceutical industires, and the scandals surrounding energy companies certainly warranted a populist tone during that campaign. Make no mistake though, Al Gore was no populist. He would not have gone about dismantling the influence of business in national policy, though I do believe he would have worked to restrain these egregious abuses, and he was correct to highlight and campaign on these abuses of corporate power.

7. In general I do not believe it is useful for the DLC to criticize other Democrats during election campaigns. It is counter productive. I also believe Al From is a very bad public face for the DLC, and should either be removed, or kept out of the public eye.

Anyway, just my first thoughts on the matter. If you care to send anymore info my way I will gladly read it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 05:13 PM
Response to Original message
14. He talked about state issues.
Edited on Thu Feb-02-06 05:31 PM by Radical Activist
We needed a national response, not someone who talked about the kinds of issues that Governor's deal with at the state level.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. No he didn't, good fucking god
He talked about the fact that Washington Republicans have fucked everything up and that states are having to pick up the slack, and that putting results over partisanship is how they're doing it. People deserve service and outcomes from their government and if they aren't getting it from Washington, change the government. Maybe we should have had a cartoon character up there to make the point because people sure don't know how to listen anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Exactly. The same things people say when they run for Governor.
We don't need someone at the national level who is going to make the lines at the DMV shorter. It was the wrong message for the occasion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Are we electing a President? NO
We're electing a bunch of local people to go to Washington and change things. He wasn't talking about the DMV, he was talking about federal policy and its affects on education, health care, and issues that affect people's every day lives. Just like Howard Dean did, and it was a-ok then.

Kaine forgot to say chickenhawk, that's his only problem.

Nothing personal, really, but jesus fucking christ, I'm so sick of my way or the highway stupidity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 05:24 PM
Response to Original message
16. He is the most recently elected Democrat.
The Dems were just showcasing his victory.

I don't think he was terrible. He was innocuous IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Missy Vixen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 08:11 PM
Response to Original message
20. I'll try out
;-)

Let a private citizen do it for a change. It would definitely be more entertaining :woohoo:!

Julie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSdemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-02-06 09:21 PM
Response to Original message
21. What, does C-SPAN need a new reality show to revive ratings?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 04:07 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC