Hey guys.... Holder and Emanuel ARE liberals... and Hillary's a centrist

[scheming daemons]

Everybody to the right of Dennis Kucinich is not a conservative.


Holder is liberal by the standards of most reasonable people. So is Rahm Emanuel, who voted with the Democrats 98% of his time in congress.

Hillary is slightly less liberal, but still left of center.


Those are the only three names that we know have been offered jobs (aside from Valerie Jarrett and David Axelrod as "advisors").


I would bet that 75% of the American people are to the right of Holder and Emanuel.



We are getting liberals..... they're just not extremely left liberals.


And you know what else?

That's exactly where Obama is, and the type of people he promised.



So.... if you think that Obama is not "throwing a bone" to the left... then it probably means that you are SO FAR LEFT that you're off the charts.


This is a left-center country now.... not a left-left country.


We're getting the government that Obama promised us. If you voted for him and you don't like it, then you weren't paying attention.

[nemo137]

1. K&R. It's nice to have a bit of perspective.

I still think that even Dem left is a bit far to the right, but it's not as though Obama named Oswald Moseley as his SOS.

[rpannier]

2. For many the term seems do apply to how tight these people are with corporations

Holder and Chiquita for example.
HRC and the DLC and Corporate America.

I don't consider these people to be in the corner of the working class (as I would like them to be) because, for the most part, they don't really understand what it's like because they haven't been living it for the last decade or so.

Poverty in every generation is different than what came before it.

That said, I don't know how liberal they really are and in some ways I really am not that concerned.

I am more concerned about the policies of PE Obama and the ability of these people to make them happen.

[Jennicut]

3. Hillary is actually considered moderate. I am to the left of her but fine with her as SoS.

Its a left-center country, not right-center and that makes me happy!

[scheming daemons]

5. moderate and centrist mean the same thing, Jen.... I agree with you

[ruggerson]

6. Does her voting record differ from Emanuel's?

[scheming daemons]

8. Her stated positions on the campaign trail for 18 months were pretty centrist

To me, that says even more than her voting record.


With Emanuel, we pretty much only have his voting record and a few past statements to go buy.


With Hillary, we have her entire Presidential campaign.


I have no problem with where she is on the political spectrum at all.... I would place her just slightly left of center.

[ruggerson]

14. My take is that she is

to the left of Obama on some issues and to the right on others.

(and I have no preference as to her taking SOS. I think she probably does more for the things she cares about if she stays in the Senate. But it's Obama and her call, we're just spectators.)

[pnwmom]

49. Her voting record put her among the dozen most liberal people in the

Senate. But people here will still consider her a centrist.

[Dr Fate]

4. For the record- the only problem I have is freaking Lieberman.

But I blame Senate DEMS for that screw-up...I doubt very seriously that Lieberman would be his choice if he could choose...

I trust Obama to pick who ever he thinks is best...

[EFerrari]

7. Great. Let's marginalize the poor whimpy thing we call the left in this country.

That'll work!

lol

[Posteritatis]

9. By filling the cabinet with its representatives? Sure! (nt)

[Dr Fate]

11. I don't get it. n/t

n/t

[EFerrari]

19. Clinton? Holder? Right.

[scheming daemons]

10. Not marginalizing anything... just saying that the "left" is bigger than you think...

...and it includes people like Holder and Emanuel and stretches from the far left all the way to almost center.


And everybody Obama is looking at falls in that range.



Dennis Kucinich isn't getting a cabinet position.... so give up that dream.

[EFerrari]

17. LOL!

[Unsane]

12. Liked the Rahm pick, am also on board with Hillary as SoS, but Holder seems iffy

I guess I'm willing to turn a blind eye to his 2000s representation of Chiquita. A recent speech I read of his indicates he'd be on board with ending Guantanamo, torture etc.

[scheming daemons]

13. Lawyers spend their careers representing lots of people... not all clients are ideologically perfect

And it is insane to expect them to be.


The ACLU represented Rush freaking Limbaugh, for chrissakes.

[Unsane]

18. I'm not jumping off a cliff about it. I think Holder is a bright guy and could do a good job.

He is probably pretty solid ideologically too, but the Chiquita issue jumped out at me. Usually lawyers at the top of their profession, of which he is one, can pick and choose the kinds of cases they accept.

I'm willing to overlook that blip, as I think his vast DOJ experience and ability to hit the ground running in an Obama administration outweighs the aforementioned drawback.

[elleng]

36. Right.

Law Firms represent LOTS of CORPORTATIONS; Covington is one of the biggest (and 'best,') and represents probably thousands of businesses.

Don't know in what role Holder is said to have 'represented' Chiquita, but potentially one of many 'minor' matters.

AND, MOST clients are not ideologically perfect!

[mwei924]

15. Hillary is to the left of Obama on healthcare. To the right on foreign policy.

[meow mix]

16. translation: f-u left, you get nothing... now sit down and shut up. untill..

4 years.. when we need you again.

[scheming daemons]

21. The problem is that you think that you're getting nothing....

The "left" IS getting something. Holder, Emanuel, and Clinton are left-of-center politically.


The far left is getting nothing - so far....



If you think Holder, Emanuel, and Clinton are not left enough - then it is YOU who are out of whack politically.

[Skwmom]

52. Oh the stupid political games. The county must just be filled with

far, far left people then.

[stillcool]

28. sounds like something...

I read Pat Buchanan said.

[AtomicKitten]

20. They are centrists. How they'd function in an Obama administration remains to be seen.

[scheming daemons]

22. They're only "centrists" to people who are VERY left

Not to an objective political observer.


To beings on Neptune, Mars is a warm planet. But Earthlings wouldn't think so.

[Dr Fate]

24. So was supporting the war in Iraq "left" or was it "centrist"?

Or was it just fucking stupid? ;)

[scheming daemons]

25. If you want a cabinet of ONLY people who were against the war from the start, the list is very small

Russ Feingold can't fill every fucking cabinet post.

[mwei924]

26. You also wouldn't have a Vice President.

[Dr Fate]

30. You shouldn't assume that I want such a cabinet or VP.

I was just hoping to see someone split some hairs, that's all!

;)

[Dr Fate]

27. I dont want that at all. Interesting that you couldn't answer the question though...

...my take is that it depends on the issue- "centrists" and so called "liberals" have often been "far right" on a major issue or two...

My biggest problem is DEMS who cave to the GOP and can't stick up for the party or themselves- center, left or otherwise...


In any event, I don't have a problem with any of Obama's picks so far...

[pnwmom]

50. Correct. n/t

[Truth2Tell]

23. It depends on the issues.

The DLC wing of the Party is still very liberal on a great many issues, thank goodness. But on others they are well to the right of the average American, not just the average Democrat.

All three of these individuals support American wars of aggression, excepting the screwed up Iraq, and they support the general framework of the so-called "war on terrorism," as defined by George Bush. The majority of Americans know better.

All three of these individuals support so-called "free trade" corporate investment arrangements with foreign nations designed to export American manufacturing jobs to locales with lower costs and less regulation. A majority of Americans do not support those types of deals.

Hillary and Emmanuel (I don't know about Holder) both supported the Wall Street "bailout" giveaway, with no strings attached. The majority of Americans not only opposed that, but are pissed about it.

Both Hillary and Emmanuel (but not Holder) also supported most of the Bush era Constitutional roll-backs, from the Patriot Act, to Military Commissions, to FISA, etc. It's still questionable if a majority of Americans are concerned about that stuff, but there is no question that none of it is "liberal."

So in the critical policy areas of war, trade, corporate largess and civil liberties these DLC Dems are way to the right of almost all Democrats and somewhat to the right of most Americans, regardless of party.

To be fair, on issues like the environment, civil rights for minorities, tax fairness, health care, education, poverty and a host of others, the DLCers are usually liberal.

So it's a trade off. All in all I don't consider them liberals. They are missing too many critical pieces of the puzzle to qualify. But that's just my humble opinion.

[scheming daemons]

31. Point by point rebuttal

- Concerning the "war on terrorism" as define by George Bush. Puh-lease. That's too assinine to even comment on.

- Concerning Free Trade and exporting of jobs overseas. Links please. NAFTA support doesn't count.

- Hillary and Emanuel supported the bailout. So did Obama. Sorry... they are aligned with the President-Elect.... and 53% of the voting public voted FOR him, knowing full well that he supported the bailout. Your opinion on what the "majority" feel is not based on facts.

- 99 Senators voted for the Patriot Act. Obama can't appoint Russ Feingold to every fucking cabinet position.



75% of the American public would consider them to be to the left of the majority, 25% of the public would consider them to be to right of the majority. (give or take 10%).

Based on an objective view of American politics, all three are left of center and would be considered liberal.


To a person on Saturn, Mars seems warm. To an earthling, it is cold. They're to your right, so you don't consider them liberals.

[Truth2Tell]

37. OK

- You didn't refute point one. Saying it's "asinine" isn't a rebuttal, sorry. Americans are generally not supportive of the notion that we need to forever maintain a vast militaristic empire. And the view that we do is not the least bit liberal.

- If you don't agree that NAFTA constitutes exporting jobs overseas then I guess we will have to agree to disagree. And regardless of what you or I think about it, supporting it is still a position to the right of most Americans.

- Just because Obama supported the bailout doesn't make it a "liberal" position. And just because people voted for Obama doesn't mean they support the bailout. Again, you didn't refute that their bailout support puts all of them, including Obama, to the right of average Americans.

- And again, simply because 99 Senators voted for the Patriot Act doesn't make it liberal. I granted in my post that it may enjoy majority support (I think it's a close call), but it is by no means liberal.

75% of Americans may indeed believe Emmanuel and Hillary are liberals. But all that does is prove how disconnected the labels used by our media are from the actual politics of our leaders as they relate to the real opinions of the American people.

One thing is for sure: The definition disconnect certainly works well for those who wish to see the Democratic Party stay with the Republicans on these particular issues.

[BlooInBloo]

29. Obama picking just ONE person to the left of himself would do a lot to calm people here down....

methinks.

Not that calming insane DUers down is high on his list of priorities or anything - just sayin.

[Dr Fate]

32. And I think he will- folks need to give the guy some time...

And it's not just DUers who are liberal, but you knew that...

;)

[scheming daemons]

33. After he's made all his picks, then we'll see. He's not even 10% done.

[LynneSin]

54. Yes but look at how many people this guy is going to have to pick

I'm going to assume by the time he's done he's going to hit the entire political spectrum

[JeffR]

34. An even harder line on marijuana is not liberal by any rational standard.

If Holder's changed his mind on that issue, great. If he hasn't, that alone should preclude his running the Justice Department.

I don't expect Obama to decriminalize pot. I do expect that the Federal Government's response to it isn't elevated even further into the realm of the ludicrous.

[Dr Fate]

41. People place "the center" at different places.

For instance- some will try to tell you that agreeing with the far right & neocons on the war was "moderate" or "centrist"- when it is really far right...

Pot? It would actually be a conservative thing if they let the market decide that one- then the Liberals could tax the fool out of it!!!

I guess I'm saying that people can argue that almost anything is "centrist", "liberal" etc.

[JeffR]

43. I'll rephrase: An even harder line on marijuana is patently stupid,

unjust and wrong.

[Dr Fate]

45. Hey- smoke 'em if you got 'em.

I never disagreed with you- I'm all for leaving pot heads alone...

[NorCalDem]

35. I agree.

I realized he isn't as far left as I would like him to be, and I'm cool with that. You gotta start somewhere, and after Bush for the last 8 years he's a pretty damn good first step. If all goes according to plan, maybe in 2012 the people will be ready to take another step to the left.

[Norrin Radd]

38. What some call "far" left, I name "true" left. See? The slur can move in two directions.

[scheming daemons]

39. That's because... as I said in the OP.... you're "off the charts" left

An OBJECTIVE view of American politics would place all three of them left of center in this country.


Which is exactly where Obama is.

[Dr Fate]

42. I get it- so under this "objective view"- invading Iraq was a moderate act, not a far right act.

n/t

[Truth2Tell]

47. Of course...

a bunch of Democrats voted for it so it must be liberal!

[Dr Fate]

48. Before the night is over, we'll probably turn any DEM who supported Bush's tax cuts into socialists.

Hell, even Joe the Plumber could probably play this game!!!

[crispini]

55. No, actually, NONE of them are on the left.

The problem is that in this country, the labels of "left" and "right" have gotten so screwed up that everyone thinks that Kooch is a leftist radical when in fact there is an entire spectrum of "left" to the left of him.

I give you the 2008 presidential primary Political Compass -- you should check that site out.

[TwilightZone]

72. Mike Gravel is far right?

Methinks there might be a little problem with the veracity of the data presented in your graph.

[Truth2Tell]

75. Gravel is a Libertarian. On many issues

he is very far right.

[TwilightZone]

77. You cannot be serious.

http://ontheissues.org/Mike_Gravel.htm

Scroll to the bottom. You can't get much further left. At least not in national-level politics.

[tkmorris]

56. And you are... as I'm saying in my reply... A wishy-washy Centrist

An OBJECTIVE view of your position makes it clear that you are afraid to take a position on any issue, and thus you split every topic right down the middle.

Gee, I'm liking your debating style. It's just so freeing, not having to use any logic, or defend any position. Just start labeling and insulting and there you are! WOOT!!

[scheming daemons]

71. As is most of the country.... including the President-Elect

[Sebastian Doyle]

40. There are no liberals in the DLC

period.

[Dr Fate]

44. On some issues, certainly there are. n/t

n/t

[LynneSin]

57. Wowza - John Kerry and Herb Kohl aren't liberals? Who would have thunk that

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Democrat_Coalition#Current_senators

I was looking at this website for Conservative ratings - Kohl was one of the few dems to get a big fat ZERO from then (Feingold was a 4). You're saying he's not liberal? http://www.acuratings.org/2007all.htm#WI

:rofl:

[Dr Fate]

I thought I read that Kerry stopped associating with the DLC...

I could be totally mistaken....

The site you link lists DEMS who "belong or belonged" to the DLC- not necessarily current members...

Do they even keep a current membership list public anymore?

Anyway, we agree that DLCers can be Liberal on certain issues...

[LynneSin]

59. When a guy has a big fat 0 rating from the American Conservative Union....

http://www.acuratings.org/2007all.htm#WI

The guy is a liberal. That's Herb Kohl. And the link from Wiki says current for both Kerry and Kohl.

[Dr Fate]

61. You dont have to convince me that Kerry is cool, I was asking if he is still DLC...

Like I said, he may be, but thought I read he wasn't an active member anymore...

Your link does not say that Kerry is a current DLC member-only that he is a current Senator- it says:

The following Senators belong or belonged to the Senate New Democrat Coalition.<3><4><5>


Current senators

Then it lists current Senators who either "belong or belonged" to the DLC, including Kerry.

[karynnj]

69. Not to mention - Gary Hart and Tim Wirth were among the first DLCers

[Dr Fate]

70. And Joe Liberman was a founder. n/t

n/t

[Hippo_Tron]

74. Gary Hart actually wasn't a DLCer

Some of his policies were similar to the third-way agenda but he was never associated with the group. The DLC was actually formed as a reaction to both Hart and Mondale.

[karynnj]

68. He has not participated in any of their forumns at least since 2004

He also was not on the Al From list of DLC people potentially running for President in 2006 - HRC, Bayh, Warner and Vilsack were. (It wasn't that he was not thought of as someone running - he outpolled Bayh, Warner and Vilsack at that point. In addition, his voting record was NEVER in line with theirs.

[xchrom]

46. the voting records of barack and hillary are very similar. nt

[Skwmom]

51. Labels are irrelevant and have become so twisted they are meaningless.

They have tried their hardest to make liberal a dirty word. Now they are trying the same with left and progressive.

To me, moderate is what has become the really dirty word.

Moderate seems to = corporatist. Someone who is on the side of the big corporations and not the people.

Go ahead with your inane ridicule. The funny thing is I just don't think it is going to work this time. People are really, really, really, really, fed up with politicians that they can't trust.

It seems many want to go back and use the Clinton playbook without stopping to consider that times have changed.

[LynneSin]

58. Each of us has our own individual line in the sand to determine who is left and right

scary!

[natrat]

62. yea its a joke-barney frank (D) disgusting paid off whore but he's a liberal

he gave 2 trillion unquestioned to the thugs

[nolabels]

63. People trained in highest echelons of the establishment's arenas

will always do the establishments biding. Don't try to fool yourself, it will only hurt more when you figure it out :shrug:

[LynneSin]

53. How dare you make sense

:eyes:

[cliffordu]

60. Yep.

[tomp]

64. i see, people who disagree with you are not reasonable.

left-center, my ass.

[nichomachus]

65. Everyone you named

is to the right of Richard Nixon

[Tatiana]

66. Thank you. For goodness sake, Rahm believes in UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE.

And has believed in it way before it became popular with the average American.

I actually feel better about our chances of getting some sort of national health care with Rahm as CoS. Between Obama, Rahmbo, Hills, and Teddy we will get the legislation passed and signed.

[Skwmom]

67. Of course they are liberals, even Hillary.

It seems like Holder is a good Liberal-Corporatist (we're really sending a strong message to the corporations with this pick).
And Rahm is a Liberal-Neocon (Wasn't it great how Lindsey Graham praised his appointment), though he is probably a good Liberal-Corporatist-Neocon (he did push hard for NAFTA).

Clinton is definitely a Liberal-Corporatist-Neocon.

Being a plain old liberal (or progressive) just isn't good enough anymore.

[Lisa0825]

73. Thank you.

This place has become practically unbearable.

[mmonk]

76. I don't care about labels. I care about their views on monstrosities

such as invading countries that pose no threat or intent or allowing the constitution and Bill of Rights to be shredded, or if corporations control their every thought on the economy.