Blame the Right Wing of the Democratic Party if Bush* 'wins' in 2004

[Q]

- The Neocons and their media may have created the untouchable Bush* Government...but it was the Democratic Right Wingers who gave them 'legitimacy' and excused their crimes against democracy in exchange for power and a seat at the table.

- It's no accident that election fraud, government secrecy, corporate corruption and 9-11 have never been investigated or prosecuted. How is it that so many crimes and traitorous acts have been committed and still remain unexamined and unreported by the public trust?

- The answer could be that the DLC works for the same corporate interests that installed GWB* into the highest office against the will of the people. Making the Bush* administration accountable would expose the collusion between the Bushies, American media and the right wing of the Democratic party.

- How does the Right Wing of the Democratic Party expect to win in 2004 when they devote so much time trying to divide, discredit and defame liberals and social democrats? The answer is that they don't expect to win...and will forfeit the election if they can't get their own version of GWB* into the White House.

- The DLC has essentially the same goals as the Neocons: end 'big government' with the elimination of social programs and the privatization of government services. Regulation, oversight and accountability will become voluntary instead of a mandatory function of a democratic government.

- There is no such thing as the magical 'swing voter' that will help Democrats win if only they can act more like Republicans. This is a mere distraction invented by the right wingers within the party as a rationalization to abandon the working class poor with a clear conscience and for the 'greater good' of winning by any means necessary.

- The DLC should be considered a subsidiary and functionary of the New Republican Party. They have no place in a party that claims to be the 'party of the people'.

- End Sunday Rant - Q

[Jacobin]

1. I agree with you.

The RW "Dems" have joined forces with the neo-cons and are the "ostensible" "pretend" "opposition" that legitimizes the neo-con's fascists aims.

They are worse than the neo-cons. They are traitorous pricks sucking from corporate funds to maintain their power as professional quislings.

[Solomon]

2. Not only are the right wing democrats kowtowing to the same

corporate interests as the republican party - but they are also corrupted in the same degree, i.e., immersed in personal business deals with the opposition and subject to blackmail which renders them worse than useless, especially for the common people.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

3. Blame the DLC...

and the asses in charge like Al From and Bruce Reed! Let's remember Dixie Boy Zell Miller, Neo-Con wanabe Holy Shit Joe Lieberman and Pretty Boy (NOT) Dan Quayle wanabe Evan Bayh!!!

The DLC will be to blame for our losses next year as they were to blame for this past falls debacle!


:kick:

[KG]

4. Should RW dem/DLC apologists be considered DINOs?

The RW dems and DLCers are just as much an opposition party as the Repukes are, so why should we be leniant on DLC apologists? If they're not supporting the party aren't they more or less DINOs?

[Ardee]

5. Dont be silly, Q.....

It is far, far easier to look outside oneself for the reason one fails...the boss hates me, that teacher had a grudge against me, she only liked me for my money(or car, whatever), Nader and his silly 2% cost us all the keys to heaven.......

Self examination takes real effort and commitment, realising that the leadership of ones party has subverted the path of the party, refused to support those who run counter to its own philosophy and goal for the party and the nation is just to much change for some folks to undertake. So they are quite content to blame others, refusing to accept responsibility for their own party's egregious failures or refusing to undertake the effort to restore the Democratic Party to its once noble goals.

"Dont blame me its Nader's fault.........

[Q]

6. This is obviously not a very popular theme...

...with the 'anyone but Bush*' crowd. They don't seem to mind that the monied interests INSIST that Dems must become like the neocons in order to compete.

- This leaves the working class shit out of luck...stuck with a government that serves only itself.

[Iverson]

7. well, duh

Look at the latest green-bashing thread. It was at over a hundred posts at six o'clock this morning. Granted, there were varied opinions there, but so far this thread has six total.

Think of it as the path of least resistance. If you can scream a foamy "j'accuse!" at Greens while standing shoulder to shoulder with Bush (or rationalizing those who do), that's a hell of a lot easier than actually opposing the scoundrels with whom you so desperately pursue bipartisanship.

That's the generic "you," not you specifically, of course.

[DerekG]

8. Amen, Q...

I've been saying for more than a year now that Clinton and the DLC had a part to play in dismantling The Great Society as surely as Reagan and Bush did.

[Upfront]

9. Q, I Agree

I also think it is about greed. Most of these boys will lose their big tax cuts if thr right democrat gets elected. I was a member of the any one but Bush group, but after watching Kerry on MTP today I now wonder. Russet did all he could to get Kerry to destroy both himself and Dean, and Kerry did not help either himself or the rest of the democratic party. Kerry said, "Dean will raise your taxes 20 times", give me a break. Libberman and the rest of these so called democrats are giving Karl Roe all the talking points he needs. If we elect a DLC canidate like these guys, nothing much will change. Republican is as republican does. Before you flame me notice that I do not cridisize these candidates on there positions, I could but won't. What I don't like is there attacks on the other candidates. I support Dean more then ever after this, but as for any candidate that attacks another democrat, I doubt it.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

10. EXACTLY !!!

[robbedvoter]

11. If they re-select W I'll blame Diebold and all the dirty tricks

they'll buy with their 200 million. You want to poit the gun this way - maybe you should take it with your shrink.

[Terwilliger]

14. you'll always blame someone else, robbed

that's your problem

[Cocoa]

12. what happened to your "dem unity" kick?

I preferred that new Q to the old Q that blamed the dems for everything.

Now you're planning which dem to blame for the loss that hasn't happened yet?

[Terwilliger]

15. What is your realistic assessment of the results of the 2004 election

given everything that happened before...everything that's happened up to now...and even a moderate (ugh!) prediction about the course of events from now until then?

What do you think are the chances of __(Dem candidate)__ vs. George W. Bush?

[Cocoa]

19. probably very close

but possibly a dem blowout, if the primary ends reasonably soon and the whole party can unite behind the nominee.

When the nominee is chosen, the party will unite. If Lieberman is nomminated, Kucinich and Sharpton will be behind him, and vice versa.

[Pepperbelly]

13. not unless you can actually ...

tie them to what happens rather than relying on tired cliche and assumed culpability.

After the election, make your case. Otherwise, this is just hot air.

I suspect that we will win, btw and where will your theory be then? Would you then be willing to cede credit for success to the ones you now condemn?

Of course not because we do not yet know the shape of what will occur.

[Terwilliger]

16. you have evidence (not Bill Clinton) that right-wing pandering has worked?

any?

I believe Gore lost because he had to listen to the DLC. Do you disagree?

[Pepperbelly]

20. yes, i do disagree ...

I think he lost for other reasons.

[Q]

23. We will win the election but lose the soul of the Democratic party...

...if the right wing of the Dem party stays in control. Keep in mind that they have many of the same plans for this country as the GOP right wingers. They'll just put a friendlier face on it.

- The Right Wing Dems use the same 'big government' rhetoric to denounce the principles and values of their own party. They call Bush's* election fraud a 'close race' and his illegal wars a 'just cause'.

- It's not really 'winning' if the Dem party sacrifices OUR shared values on the alter of the golden calf.

[KoKo]

17. We are starting on changing our party from within......those of us who see

this are trying to do what we can. Fortunately the internet gives us the ability to "call out those who consort with the RW Repugs."

It's going to take a long time. And for those of us in states where our Democrats are really controlled by Repug lites.....we just have to keep plugging away by getting more involved.....going to those "town meetings" our elected reps hold around our states..and voicing our objections. We have to be more vocal that the right wing.......we have to keep writing letters, e-mailing, faxing and phoning. They won't listen until our voice makes them listen.

Thanks Q.......I always agree with your posts. I think we have to be reminded how often we "grassroots" dems have been overlooked by the Beltway insiders. Your posts are that big reminder.......that "kick in the butt" we need to keep going.
:-)'s

[Q]

24. We need to kick ourselves in the butt every day...

..to remind us why we're Democrats. We're NOT the party that caters to big business or sells legislation or political favors to the highest bidder.

- If indeed we have become THIS kind of a sellout...it's time to either get rid of the right wingers or find another party.

[birdman]

18. The fact is you need both wings of the party to win

Clinton for all his flaws was able to bring the
liberals and moderates together. About 40% of the
electorate is Dem about 40% is Pubbie and the battle
is for those in the middle. The worst mistake any
party can make is to seek ideological purity because then
you erode your 40% and you can't win at all without them.

If, say, Governor Dean will do 80% of what you want
and might be able to win while Dennis Kucinich will
give you 100% but can't be elected it is ridiculous to
insist on Kucinich because then you wind up with Bush
who will give you 0% of what you want.

And yes there indeed swing voters and they are not looking
for Dems who act like Pubbies or vice versa. They decide
on shallow things like sound bites or a candidates appearance.
That's why your candidate has to be saleable.

[Q]

22. Actually 'two wings' within a party is destructive...

...and leads to an internal battle where neither side can win.

- 'Two wings' means opposing principles trying to coexist side by side. A party can't cater to the rich and the poor at the same time because...in terms of cash and influence...the poor have nothing to offer.

- I and many others will leave the Democratic party if they continue to slide further to the right at the expense of the working class and the poor.

[birdman]

27. Nonsense - successful parties are always coalitions

During the Democrats most successful period (1932-1964)
they were an amalgam of liberal northerners, unions,
minorities and Southern segregationists.

The Republicans have a moderate wing just as the Dems do.

If you restrict the party to it's left side you will have
only 20% (instead of 40%) of the electorate and you will
have about 100 congressmen and 25 Senators. Is that what you
want ?

Your philosophy is an invitation to disaster.

[Clete]

21. I have thought this, but never posted.

Thanks for saying it. I know you don't post anything you haven't thought about deeply and critically for some time.

[Q]

25. The DLCers have become the Grima Wormtongue...

...of the Dem party. They're constantly offering 'advice' that takes us further from our purpose and blinds us to the needs of the people.

- I'm a Democrat...not a Republican. I would make one suggestion: if you're a right winger...join the Republican party and leave us to be the party of Jackson and Jefferson.

[Q]

26. Dems must offer the electorate a choice...

...between corporate and representative government. Between social and corporate welfare. Between war and peace. Between a free press and media monopoly.

- The DLC and right-leaning Democrats want a NEW Democratic party...not to make changes within the old framework of the party of the people. They don't want to be associated with the old Democratic party that fought for civil rights or environmental regulation. Rights and Regulations stand in the way of the very industries that keep corporate-friendly politicians in office for a lifetime.

- BTW...when was the last time you heard a government official call themselves a PUBLIC SERVANT? The last time I heard it was on the "West Wing".

-