"We're all populists now," says the DLC's Will Marshall, but the organization still scorns the populist economics that was central to Democratic election victories across the county last year.
That is a quote from Robert Borosage at Huff Post.
Wrong on the RightBorosage has some interesting observations on the National Conversation this week-end, and he points out Will's hypocrisy about the populism.
The corporate wing of the Democratic Party -- the Democratic Leadership Council -- will meet in its "National Conversation" this weekend in Nashville. The press is already noting that while all of the Democratic presidential hopefuls will appear at the YearlyKos progressive blogger gathering in Chicago, not one is slated to join the DLC in Nashville.
DLC head Al From suggests this is because the candidates have "tunnel vision," and, focused on the Iowa caucuses, are chasing liberal activists. But From is certain that the party's nominee will turn to the DLC and drift to the right when it comes to the general election. "It's sort of like you play on one end of the field to win the nomination," From said, "but if you want to win the game, you've got to play on both ends."
..."This has been the DLC's theme from its inception. Democrats, the group argued, had to distance themselves from "liberal interest groups," bite their tongues, and appeal to a center that, over the years, moved ever further to the right.
Exactly right, Mr. Borosage.
He points out that the DLC always had base built on corporations, not activists. And the money will still hold sway. It does. He is right. It is showing up in who on the Democratic side gets the big money.
But the DLC -- indelibly dubbed Democrats for the Leisure Class by the Rev. Jesse Jackson -- has always had a base built on corporate money and lobbyists, not on activists. Its isolation isn't because it doesn't have troops in Iowa or New Hampshire. Its isolation comes because it simply has been wrong on the fundamental questions of our day.
..."But From needn't worry; corporate money will insure that the DLC remains well-heeled, even if it is increasingly out of step with the country.
I thought it very odd that Will Marshall would make the populist comment. Not long ago they were calling us neo-populists and inferred we were opposing their free trade. (Which we are.)
DLC doesn't like populismRight-wing populists claim immigrants are stealing Americans' jobs. Left-wing populists say trade is shipping our jobs overseas. Both look backwards toward an allegedly better past and argue that, by sealing our borders and retreating from global markets, government can recover it.
..."After six years of stagnant incomes, increasing inequality, rising debt and declining confidence, many Americans are rightly anxious about their economic futures.
But the last thing they need is an old populism that plays to their fear, anger and pessimism, and, in the end, will only make matters worse. Yet, there are unmistakable signs of a growing "populist" revolt against globalization, especially immigration and trade.
Will Marshall's statement was just not correct....we are not all populists now. If they were respecting our populism, they would not have written an article like that.
Borosage is right. When you have the money you don't need a base. I only hope we get a chance to build our base through the grassroots. There's a chance.
The DLC has viciously fought Robert Borosage's group, Campaign for America's Future over Social Security and Medicare. Now they have changed the wording a little over their previous harsh language.
Robert Borosage is a co-director of Campaign for America's Future. Here is
the website, a very good one.
www.ourfuture.org
They led the fight in the 2002 elections to save Social Security and
Medicare in its current form.
Will Marshall, PPI/DLC, attacked them viciously in 2002, calling them a
union-backed group that can be compared to the Inquisition, latter-day
Torquemadas, who oppose change to the system.
http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=251076&kaid=125&subid=165"Nothing better epitomized the hackneyed and reactive character of the
Democrats' 2002 midterm campaign than "The Pledge."
Like camp meeting converts swearing off demon rum, nearly every Democratic
candidate for Congress dutifully took the Pledge. They vowed to never, ever
allow working Americans to divert some portion of their Social Security
payroll taxes into personal retirement accounts. In leftish circles, this
goes by the name of "privatization" and is regarded as the ultimate
political thought crime. "SNIP.."And lest Democrats entertain any impure thoughts about reforming
Medicare, the pledge also requires them to swear fealty to a new
prescription drug entitlement "that will cover all drugs beneficiaries need"
and that won't "push beneficiaries into HMOs and other managed care plans."
The pledge is the brainchild of the Campaign for America's Future, a
union-backed organization that is to Social Security and Medicare what the
Inquisition was to medieval Christiandom.
Its latter-day Torquemadas enforce
New Deal-Great Society orthodoxy and ferret out heresy with religious
zeal..."Remember those words when they refer to privatization in other terms.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
