Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

xchrom

(108,903 posts)
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 07:33 AM Apr 2013

Seriously? New York Times Calls Wall Street Front Group "Center-Left"

http://www.alternet.org/economy/seriously-new-york-times-calls-wall-street-front-group-center-left

Some lies will not die. As I have demonstrated repeatedly, Third Way is Wall Street on the Potomac. It is funded secretly by Wall Street (it refuses to reveal its donors), it is openly run by Wall Street, and it lobbies endlessly for Wall Street. Third Way, like every Pete Peterson front group, is dedicated to shredding the safety net as its highest priority and throwing the Nation back into a gratuitous recession through self-destructive austerity.

Third Way, like other Pete Peterson front groups, supports privatizing Social Security. That is Wall Street’s greatest dream, for it would increase their revenues by hundreds of billions of dollars. Eric Laursen documented Wall Street’s effort to in his recent book: “ The People’s Pension: The Struggle to Defend Social Security Since Reagan.” Laursen describes the Third Way’s leader as a Pete Peterson protégé. Peterson is a conservative Republican billionaire made wealthy on Wall Street, who has dedicated a billion dollars of his wealth to his assault on the safety net.

I showed in these pieces how journalists and Republicans used Third Way’s “false flag” status as a self-described “ center-left” organization to add faux credibility to their arguments. The Republicans, for example, used comments by one of Third Way’s founders deriding Elizabeth Warren as the centerpiece of ads trying to defeat Elizabeth Warren in her run for the U.S. Senate. Similarly, the Washington Post’s ultra-deficit hawk, Robert J. Samuelson, used Third Way’s support of austerity as faux evidence that even liberals who studied the question realized the need to inflict austerity on the Nation.

One of my prior articles provides the finance background of every member of Third Way’s governing board – exposing the total dominance by Wall Street and finance. My goal was to make it impossible for a journalist who did, even the most perfunctory research, on Third Way to describe it as a “center-left” organization (or any analogous term).
35 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Seriously? New York Times Calls Wall Street Front Group "Center-Left" (Original Post) xchrom Apr 2013 OP
With friends like these, progresssives don't need enemies. n/t HereSince1628 Apr 2013 #1
The NYT also used to claim Judith Miller was a journalist deutsey Apr 2013 #2
I think they are probably right. In America they are probably center left. nt stevenleser Apr 2013 #3
Not in America, just in Washington policy & social circles... JHB Apr 2013 #6
Bingo. n/t 99Forever Apr 2013 #8
indeed. nt xchrom Apr 2013 #9
Right, and we are just imagining the folks who vote for Repugs and listen/watch RW media stevenleser Apr 2013 #15
Polls on their actual economic policy proposals say otherwise JHB Apr 2013 #23
Polls are all over the place. You are quoting half of them that are phrased a certain way. stevenleser Apr 2013 #24
"Center left" summarized. hay rick Apr 2013 #20
That isn't hard right in America. That is in between what Democrats propose and what Republicans stevenleser Apr 2013 #21
Then you think that right wing policies are magically transformed to left wing policies Dragonfli Apr 2013 #26
I think the model is flawed dreamnightwind Apr 2013 #29
I disagree, how closely a policy aligns with corporate interests is how closely it aligns Dragonfli Apr 2013 #33
"they are not hard right in America" they ARE right ideologically, not extreme right. Dragonfli Apr 2013 #28
Tragicomic. marmar Apr 2013 #4
Just another propaganda rag The Wizard Apr 2013 #5
If Third Way is center-left then we must be wackos. hay rick Apr 2013 #7
That's what they'd like you to think, yes nxylas Apr 2013 #14
I'm to the left of Castro, in that case... Blue_Tires Apr 2013 #22
See post 26 /nt Dragonfli Apr 2013 #27
Rec + shared. ProfessionalLeftist Apr 2013 #10
K&R ~ A "know your enemy" must read. Third Way is totally Wall Street Bankster owned and operated. Zorra Apr 2013 #11
You said it far better than I would have. We need to find out in every election sabrina 1 Apr 2013 #16
Agree about not supporting them.... ReRe Apr 2013 #17
+1 - eom dreamnightwind Apr 2013 #30
"We need to find out in every election who is being backed by Third Way money and make sure Zorra Apr 2013 #18
One good place to start would be with all those Democratic Mayors sabrina 1 Apr 2013 #25
Absolutely... ReRe Apr 2013 #32
+1 to this sub-thread! dreamnightwind Apr 2013 #31
Wait long enough and Nixon will be seen as a Trotskyite... Junkdrawer Apr 2013 #12
Stupid-ass, unethical reporters catapulting the propaganda tabasco Apr 2013 #13
Ugh. progressoid Apr 2013 #19
There may have been a center once DonCoquixote Apr 2013 #34
also, whever I hear crap DonCoquixote Apr 2013 #35

deutsey

(20,166 posts)
2. The NYT also used to claim Judith Miller was a journalist
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 07:59 AM
Apr 2013

instead of the Cheney propagandist she turned out to be.

JHB

(37,132 posts)
6. Not in America, just in Washington policy & social circles...
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 08:33 AM
Apr 2013

...that have spent decades being dragged toward rightward, by people whose definition of "liberal" means "insufficiently-enthusiastic cheering of conservative doctrine", and anything past that is "radical leftist".

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
15. Right, and we are just imagining the folks who vote for Repugs and listen/watch RW media
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 10:40 AM
Apr 2013

Pretending things are the way you would prefer to see them to be doesn't make it so. If you cannot honestly assess the situation, you cannot come up with the best way to address it.

JHB

(37,132 posts)
23. Polls on their actual economic policy proposals say otherwise
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 12:52 PM
Apr 2013

Overwhelming majorities oppose reductions in Social Security and Medicare. There is no majority clamoring for more free trade agreements.

Honest assessment includes assessing that there isn't much "left" in this "center left", and what there is seems to only be in terms of a few isolated issues such as gay marriage, and that doesn't really impact the current debates about chained CPI or raising the retirement age, nor on other economic issues.

It's great branding, though, if your main goal is austerity, fewer and weaker constraints on monied interests, and ever-lower taxes. It lets you position yourself as the "reasonable people", not like those zealots to the right and "radical" left.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
24. Polls are all over the place. You are quoting half of them that are phrased a certain way.
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 12:58 PM
Apr 2013

When the polls ask "Do you want higher taxes to pay for X" where X is Social Security, Medicare, etc. those things labeled 'entitlements' they are overwhelmingly against those 'entitlements' and higher taxes to pay for them.

hay rick

(7,521 posts)
20. "Center left" summarized.
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 11:55 AM
Apr 2013

I posted on this a while back: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021845455

One of the things I covered was a summary of Third Way's "The Bargain"- published in November of 2012: http://content.thirdway.org/publications/613/Third_Way_Report_-_The_Bargain.pdf

The summary starts:

1. Entitlement reform and tax increases. "Democrats must accept reconfiguring the budget so that, in relative terms, the amount of spending on health care and income supports is reduced compared to public investments."

2. Become an export giant. "Democrats must accept that expanding U.S. exports comes primarily through aggressive new trade measures like the Trans Pacific Partnership."

3. Reform corporate taxes and business regulations. "Democrats must accept that a simpler tax code with a low corporate rate and a streamlined regulatory regime that helps businesses grow is good for America."

4. Increase the productivity and educational attainment of the American workforce. "Democrats must accept that education funding comes with a commitment to reform that puts student performance above all else. They must accept that it is virtually impossible to reform and improve education without restructuring the way teachers are hired, promoted, and dismissed." Third Way Directors active in the charter school movement include William Budinger, Andrew Feldstein, and Derek Kaufman...


Their program starts off with cutting entitlements, endorsing the Trans Pacific Partnership, lower corporate tax rates, and Race to the Top style education "reform." If you think that kind of economic program is "center left" then we will have to agree to disagree.

They can make agreeable noises about supporting LGBT rights but that simply does not redeem their hard right economic agenda.
 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
21. That isn't hard right in America. That is in between what Democrats propose and what Republicans
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 12:43 PM
Apr 2013

propose.

On #1. Republicans want to privatize it entirely. On #2 - Republicans want completely free trade with everyone. On #3 - Republicans want no corporate or capital gains taxes. #4 - is a little more fuzzy.

Mind you, I disagree with every part of the 3rd way economic agenda. But they are not hard right in America by a long shot.

Dragonfli

(10,622 posts)
26. Then you think that right wing policies are magically transformed to left wing policies
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 03:12 PM
Apr 2013

When one of the parties goes extreme right and the other goes moderate Republican?
Oh dear, we are in deep shit then, the Republican party is drawing more and more neo-nazies, soon we will have to call Dick Cheney center left, or worse, left.

I always thought that ideas and policies were right , left, far right (fascist), and far left(Communist) based on reality. Those terms are now completely meaningless and arbitrarily assigned by what two parties or two people think at any given time.

I imagine it works the same way with a ph test


If you take two samples and one sample reads as 1 on the chart and your other sample reads 5, neutral ph is now 3,

So the hydrogen and hydroxide ions can go pound salt as they have nothing to do with acidity. I will take a couple samples, test them, and change the scale charts in my possession accordingly.

Thanks for the heads up!

dreamnightwind

(4,775 posts)
29. I think the model is flawed
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 04:09 PM
Apr 2013

There is a 2nd axis, I would label it as how closely a policy aligns with corporate interest. It is mostly unrelated to the left-right axis, though there is probably slightly more action in the corporate-right quadrant than in the corporate-left quadrant. Attempting to discuss policies corporations want using the left-right axis is mostly futile, IMO, left and right have limited relevance to bottom-line profit seekers.

Dragonfli

(10,622 posts)
33. I disagree, how closely a policy aligns with corporate interests is how closely it aligns
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 04:47 PM
Apr 2013

with fascism, by definition actually.

The realm beyond the left right axis (corporate-right quadrant corporate-left quadrant as you term them) is all just marketing, even the term corporate left is meant to rebrand right wing philosophy as somehow "left wing".

corporate-right (to use your term) is either very close to, or is fascism.

corporate-left (to use your term) used to be called conservatism, a compromise between Fascism and a Democratic free market.
The policies of FDR could be said to be a compromise between Communism and a Democratic free market..

30 or 40 years ago the Republicans represented the conservative compromise and Democrats the FDR compromise, those two were reasonable versions of a mixed economy, what you are calling corporate-right quadrant is a rebranding of Fascism.

There is another axis true, but that would describe authoritarian versus civil libertarian

Dragonfli

(10,622 posts)
28. "they are not hard right in America" they ARE right ideologically, not extreme right.
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 03:50 PM
Apr 2013

The ideology is right wing whether proposed from a moon base, mars, US, or the bottom of the ocean, what you and the 3rd way are doing is called rebranding.

Right wing economic ideology rebranded to make it appear left wing changes the marketing and not the product.
Example: If Republicans call themselves third way Democrats (and register accordingly), they would still be Republicans, just repackaged in an attempt to falsely advertise Republicans and their policies to consumers seeking Democratic policies.

It has been effective as a marketing campaign but it is still false advertizing.

The Wizard

(12,482 posts)
5. Just another propaganda rag
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 08:19 AM
Apr 2013

Why don't they just erect a statue of Goebbels in their lobby. Maybe they're trying to get some of Murdoch's readers. When did the Bush cartel install Karl Rove as the editor of the Times?

hay rick

(7,521 posts)
7. If Third Way is center-left then we must be wackos.
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 09:17 AM
Apr 2013

William Black is one of the good guys. Will read article later. K&R.

nxylas

(6,440 posts)
14. That's what they'd like you to think, yes
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 10:35 AM
Apr 2013

In journalism-speak, anything to the left of Third Way falls into the "sphere of deviance".

Zorra

(27,670 posts)
11. K&R ~ A "know your enemy" must read. Third Way is totally Wall Street Bankster owned and operated.
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 09:47 AM
Apr 2013

If we are ever going to have an effective democratic Democratic party, every one of these filthy diseased rats must be exposed, caught, and sent back to the sewers and outhouses that they came from. Then we need to herd the cats and stand guard all around to catch and eat the Third Way rats before they can slink back in and infest our house with the deadly Red Plague again.


sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
16. You said it far better than I would have. We need to find out in every election
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 10:46 AM
Apr 2013

who is being backed by Third Way money and make sure to expose them.

Never give donations to any candidate that has any ties to these infiltrators. Give it directly to real Progressives.

We should also now be asking candidates to go on the record with clear statements about issues on which they will be asked to vote. And on who they will have as advisers.

And in presidential races all candidates should be asked who they intende to place in their cabinets.

Excellent comment!

ReRe

(10,597 posts)
17. Agree about not supporting them....
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 11:32 AM
Apr 2013

.... come election time. But first we have to identify them. I can't remember when the filing deadline is for the 2014 midterms. That is the day that a list can be compiled of Third Way/DLC candidates. They need to be primaried, but good, and effing eliminated in their tracks. But, that will be difficult, since they will have Wall Street big money backing them. That is why it is so important to jump on the list as soon as the filing deadline day comes!

Zorra

(27,670 posts)
18. "We need to find out in every election who is being backed by Third Way money and make sure
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 11:38 AM
Apr 2013

to expose them."

Excellent comment backatcha!


sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
25. One good place to start would be with all those Democratic Mayors
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 12:58 PM
Apr 2013

who participated in the Federally Coordinated attacks on OWS. Not one of them should be reelected imho. Maybe it's not too early to start making a list.

ReRe

(10,597 posts)
32. Absolutely...
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 04:31 PM
Apr 2013

... I forgot all about those anti-American Mayors. Good thinking! Let's see... the lady mayor in Oakland, where the Iraq vet was shot in the head with something by the riot-starting police? Can't remember her name. Bloomberg, in NYC, of course. My mind has gone blank..

dreamnightwind

(4,775 posts)
31. +1 to this sub-thread!
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 04:19 PM
Apr 2013

It's very important that this work gets done. People should know what they are voting for, at the very least. The corporate media will spin corporate interests as the "center" (of course in their corporate centered world view it is by definition the center), when it has little or nothing to do with left and right, it's just about corporate profits. Nothing centrist about it, just greedy, transferring control and revenue from the grass-roots to corporations.

Exposing these connections at election time, actually well before election time, is a great place to put energy. Even better would be to have legitimate non-corporate candidates running against them.

We need a corporate taint index, or something similar, that we can point to in elections. With anonymous campaign funding sources this can be difficult to come up with, but would be worth attempting.

 

tabasco

(22,974 posts)
13. Stupid-ass, unethical reporters catapulting the propaganda
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 10:30 AM
Apr 2013

What should we expect from the New York Times?

DonCoquixote

(13,615 posts)
34. There may have been a center once
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 10:54 PM
Apr 2013

But sadly, the Clintons took that flag, and turned it into a means of leaning the center rightward. We need to go to the left before the bloody level even comes close to balance.

DonCoquixote

(13,615 posts)
35. also, whever I hear crap
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 10:57 PM
Apr 2013

Like "the interwebs killed print journalism!" this reminds me of why that is BS. If the New York times decided it wanted to act like it's old, more liberal self, people would buy it, and then they could say "this is journalism you cannot get on the internet!" The fact many of us have to huddle around here shows there is a need that is not only not being filled, but one the media is refusing to fill.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Seriously? New York Times...