Can someone please show me how the filibuster deal was a "DLC compromise?"

[Writer]

I thought this was a centrist compromise between the Dems and Repubs, but now I'm reading from a few that the DLC engineered the deal. Can someone please post a link clarifying this?

Thank you.

Writer.

Edited for clarification

[AuntiBush]

1. I can't. None of it makes any sense to me at this point other then

a "raw deal" in the long of it.

[Writer]

2. Well... then why all this talk about the DLC?

Is it serving as a boogieman?

[cestpaspossible]

3. Lots of people on this board are totally misinformed about what the DLC is

and how much influence it actually has. Quite often the DLC is actually even conflated with the DNC, a display of ignorance that should be embarssing, but somehow when the error is pointed out, most of those making it just persist anyway.

I guess it is easier to fear the monster under the bed than the very real enemies that exist out in the world.

[Writer]

4. Okay, but my question is...

did the DLC orchestrate the filibuster deal?

[saracat]

5. The association is usually because of the declared "centrist"

position of the DLC and its influence over the Dem Party. This "deal" was brokered by the so called 'moderates' ,translation_"centrist", therefore the influence of the DLC is obvious.In addition most members of this "moderate" Dem delegation are listed members of the DLC. Lieberman is the quintessential example. I personally have no respect for the "centrist" position as they are, IMHO, sellouts to the Republican moderates. They often vote with them and are completely enamored of big business. They sell out the middle class in a heartbeat. These are the people that voted for the Bankruptcy Bill..I consider them DINOS and I think they brokered a bad deal when it wasn't necessary but that is JMHO.

[Writer]

10. Are all moderates and centrists members of the DLC? n/t

[saracat]

12. If they are not, I think they are at least influenced philosophically by

them. I doubt "all " are members but I haven't bothered to look them all up.

[Writer]

14. Hmmm... see, I don't know if placing all Dem centrists into

this organization is a good idea. Unless the DLC truly sought to push for this compromise. I don't understand why some are claiming that the DLC is behind all this.

Perhaps the DLC would agree with a compromise like this, but just because it jives with their philosophy doesn't mean that the organization put together the plan.

My thought is centrism doesn't necessarily have to be a DLC "thang."

[saracat]

16. It doesn't. But they are the ones, who with Al From

endorsed and created the philosophy of centrism.They believe it was what got Clinton elected.Clinton ran as a "centrist" and was a big part of the founding of the DLC. They treat every election as 1992 and every candidate like Clinton. I believe that is why we lose.

[Writer]

19. Centrism has always been around, but not the DLC

There has always been centrist Democrats, Republicans, Whigs... name the party and you'll find a centrist.

The DLC started to organize centrist thought. But not all centrists are members.

[saracat]

22. Exactly, but they pushed it to the forefront.

[Writer]

24. Yes, organizing philosophy into an organization does tend...

to promote that ideology. But getting back to my original question: did this group sit down, plan this compromise, pull Harry Reid aside, then initiate this plan through the minority leader?

I just want a link!

[saracat]

27. I doubt that, ergo, no link!

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Writer]

8. That was very rude.

I simply want to know if there is concrete evidence showing that the DLC orchestrated this compromise.

Or have I come across yet another conspiracy theory?

[cestpaspossible]

11. When someone asks a question, not understanding the terms used

in that question ( in this case, the term is 'DLC' ), then the question is meaningless.


CAN the DLC 'orchestrate' something? You'd have to understand what the DLC is in order to answer that question.


Since you are more capable of educating yourself than I am of educating you, I'll leave it to you to do so.

[Writer]

13. And uncalled for.

You're only being insulting. You don't know who I am nor what I read daily.

I just want an answer to my question. From an adult, please.

[cestpaspossible]

15. If someone doesn't know something, is it rude to say so?

I don't think telling someone that they are capable of educating themselves is an insult.


You are capable of educating yourself.

[Writer]

17. You don't know me, know who I am, nor know what I actually know.

If you think I may be missing a point, kindly inform me. But don't rudely dismiss what I ask as ridiculous and condescend to me because you think I don't "get it."

[cestpaspossible]

18. The question you posed indicates that you don't know what the DLC is,

who it's members are, or how it operates.


However, there's nothing stopping you from learning those things, if you wish to educate yourself.

I suggest you do so.

If you want to consider that rude on my part, fine.

[Writer]

20. Have you considered that I might be very well informed about the DLC?

Yes, you are being rude, thank you. You assume I know nothing because I asked a question. You are jumping to conclusions about someone you don't know from Adam, making many judgments, and I think that's rude.

So did the DLC, as an organization, put together the filibuster compromise?

[cestpaspossible]

21. No, because your question indicates otherwise.

I'm not willing to believe that you are pretending to know less than you really do. I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt.

[Writer]

23. Did the DLC orchestrate the filibuster compromise? n/t

[saracat]

25. I may be mistaken but I don't think you indicate a lack of knowledge of th

DLC. I interpreted your question as merely asking for evidence if the DLC had "officially " brokered this deal.But what do I know. I feel they influenced it "philosophically" but that I believe is all anybody knows.

[Writer]

29. Okay, thank you.

Yes, it was a straight-forward question.

[LittleClarkie]

30. There is also a dispute as to what the DLC is

I consider them centrist. Others see them as the right wing of our party. But not all of the ones from the Dem side are officially DLC. Only some.

I see the 14 as the centrists from both sides. The DINOs and the RINOs. The Republican base hates the RINOs. The Democratic base hates the DINOs. That's how I know they're centrist. They stand in the middle, with folks on both sides shaking their fingers at them.

But for some to say the DLC is part of the right wing is an overstatement. I'd much rather have Clinton in office than Bush, wouldn't you?

[Writer]

31. Yes, Clinton would be better than air

At this point. I do think that this is a centrist victories, so partisan bellyaching was inevitable.

As far as the DLC is concerned... my thought now is: :tinfoilhat:

[sam sarrha]

7. you mean like if we dont use it we can keep it till 2006..??

:applause: :applause: :woohoo: :applause:

[TreasonousBastard]

9. Unless they can prove their allegations...

ignore them. Face it, far too many posters here don't know squat more than Freepers, but just interpret their erroneous knowledge differently. Don't ever let a fact or two get in the way of your opinions, eh?

This was Byrd's and McCain's deal, with support from some others, but most of the other players came and went after getting beat up by their own parties. The meetings always started with the two of them saying "Country, Senate, and us" in that order.

And, bad as it was, it likely stopped a real mess from happening.

[Freddie Stubbs]

26. DLC = Bad; This deal = bad; therefore the deal = DLC

What is so hard to understand? ;)

[CWebster]

28. Sabotage

The 7 DLC Dems sabotaged the Dems who wanted to fight Bush's wingnut picks, while the 7 Republicans still did their wingnut leader's bidding because the Right still got what it wanted without using the nuclear option. The Dems who may wanted to make a stand for minority rights lost their right to filibuster AND their opportunity to contest the Bush picks.