The Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) is a not-for-profit-corporation.

[The Judged]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Leadership_Council

"The Democratic Leadership Council is an influential non-profit corporation that argues that the United States Democratic Party should abandon progressive principles."

...

"Critics contend that the DLC is effectively a powerful, corporate-financed mouthpiece within the Democratic party that acts to keep Democratic Party candidates and platforms sympathetic to corporate interests and the interests of the wealthy."

...

"The 2003 Invasion of Iraq

The DLC also gave strong support for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Prior to the war, Will Marshall co-signed a letter to President Bush from the Project for the New American Century endorsing military action against Saddam Hussein. Despite the DLC's centrist pretences, the organization spared no criticism of anti-war voices. During the 2004 Primary campaign the DLC attacked Presidential candidate Howard Dean as an out-of-touch liberal, because of his anti-war stance. The DLC has dismissed other war critics such as filmmaker Michael Moore as "Anti-American" and members of the "loony left"<1>. Even as domestic support for the Iraq War plummeted in 2004 and 2005, Marshall called upon Democrats to balance their criticism of Bush's handling of the Iraq War with praise for the President's achievements and cautioned "Democrats need to be choosier about the political company they keep, distancing themselves from the pacifist and anti-American fringe.""

...

"More vocal critics believe the DLC has essentially become an influential corporate and right-wing implant in the Democratic party. Among the DLC's leadership are individuals with impressive right-of-center credentials, such as Marshall Wittmann, a senior fellow at the DLC and the former legislative director for the Christian Coalition, and Will Marshall, a cosigner of a letter issued by the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) endorsing not only the 2003 Invasion of Iraq, but also a foreign policy that has much in common with the neoconservative world-view. Finally, progressive detractors of the DLC note that the DLC receives funding from the right-wing Bradley Foundation as well as from corporate oil giants, military contractors, and a large number of Fortune 500 companies."

...

Now some questions:

How can membership in the corporate "The Democratic Leadership Council" be permitted to overlap membership in the Democratic Party (DNC), by DNC?

How can the DNC permit such dueling and contradictory agendas to be funded, endorsed, and supported by the DNC membership?

The Democratic Party Agenda:

http://www.democrats.org/agenda.html

The "The Democratic Leadership Council" Agenda:

1). See Progressive Policy Institute:

http://www.ppionline.org/

Or read a profile on the PPI:

http://rightweb.irc-online.org/org/ppi.php

"Using language that mirrors that of the neoconservative Project for the New American Century (PNAC), in October 2003 PPI hailed the “tough-minded internationalism” of past Democratic presidents such as Harry Truman. Like PNAC, which warned of the present danger in its founding documents, the Progressive Policy Institute declared that “America is threatened once again” and needs assertive individuals committed to strong leadership. Its observation--“like the cold war, the struggle we face today is likely to last not years but decades”--mirrors both neoconservative and Bush administration national security assessments. In its words, PPI endorsed the invasion of Iraq, “because the previous policy of containment was failing,” and Saddam Hussein’s government was “undermining both collective security and international law.” (9)"

2). See Third Way Foundation

http://www.third-way.com/

"The Third Way National Security Project is designed to address one of the most serious problems facing progressives today – our lack of a compelling vision for protecting this nation and its interests both at home and abroad. In election results and opinion polls dating from both before and after 9/11, progressives are viewed as weaker than conservatives on the main qualities it takes to protect our nation: maintaining a strong national defense and prosecuting the war on terror."

"The Third Way National Security Project — with Senator Joe Lieberman as its Honorary Chairman — is using The Third Way Idea Network to draw upon the best minds in government, think-tanks, academia, the military, the business community and political professionals to move beyond anecdotal discussions of the problems that beset progressive leaders when they address how to best provide for America’s safety and security."

3). See The Project for the New American Century (PNAC)

http://www.newamericancentury.org/

Statement of Principles:

http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm

...

In response to the following complaint about the DLC:

"It is the transparency of the DLC's leadership in the DNC, the transparency of the DLC's steering of DNC resources toward their causes and members, and the transparency of the DLC's steering of the DNC platform toward their own that are questionable."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2308512#2308512

(The thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2308512 )

DU member "Freddie Stubbs" addresses a very important issue when he responds:

"I certainly understand his beef, but I fail to see how these concerns rise to the level of a legal controversy. There are no laws against what he is alleging that the DLC is doing."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2308512#2309364

In essence, it is somewhat like what we are hearing from the White House about the Plame affair:

If it isn't illegal, then its OK!

...

Finally, what are we to believe about the DLC?

Is it time for the DNC to sever itself from DLC's corporate influence and agenda, even if the DLC is a not-for-profit corporation?

Is it time, after 20 years now, for the DNC to recognize that the DLC's brand of not-for-profit corporate influence and agenda will not be separated from the for-profit corporate influence and agenda in America?

Is it time for the DNC to stop pretending that the DLC shares the DNC agenda, and instead realize that the DLC undermines the DNC agenda?

Is it time to question the results and success of the DLC over the past 20 years in terms of advances made by them for the DNC in the SCOTUS, Congress, and the Executive Branch and general societal advances made by them relative to the Republican Party over the same period of time?

Is it time that the DNC outlaw membership in the DLC for its members based on the inherent contradictions between the DNC and DLC agendas, and the reality that the DLC should become a political party in itself, if it seeks to have its members elected to public offices in order to advance the DLC agenda?

Is it time for the free ride for the DLC on the backs of the DNC members to end?

Finally, is it time vote NO CONFIDENCE in DLC candidates and instead vote for DNC candidates that readilly affirm their allegience to the DNC political platform, without exception?

You be the judge!

[Oversea Visitor]

1. There is a third party in US

It is call Corporations.
They are truly well represented by both party haha

[Dogmudgeon]

2. My judgement

Most of us DUers are wa-a-a-ay too paranoid about the DLC, which has been declining in influence since the middle 1990s.

If the DLC wants to raise money and supply TV pundits, fine. The Party is its People. Forget that fact, and your days in politics are numbered.

--p!

[The Judged]

3. These are their Governors and Senators! Declining - NOT!

New Democrat Governors

Gov. Jim Doyle of Wisconsin
Gov. Michael Easley of North Carolina
Gov. Jennifer Granholm of Michigan
Gov. Ruth Ann Minner of Delaware
Gov. Janet Napolitano of Arizona
Gov. Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania
Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico
Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas
Gov. Tom Vilsack of Iowa
Gov. Mark Warner of Virginia

Members of the Senate New Democrat Coalition

Sen. Max Baucus of Montana
Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana
Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington
Sen. Tom Carper of Delaware
Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York
Sen. Kent Conrad of North Dakota
Sen. Byron Dorgan of North Dakota
Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California
Sen. Tim Johnson of South Dakota
Sen. John Kerry of Massachusets
Sen. Herb Kohl of Wisconsin
Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana
Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut
Sen. Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas
Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida
Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska
Sen. Mark Pryor of Arkansas
Sen. Debbie Stabenow of Michigan

http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Democratic_Leadership_Council

Here is a Wikipedia list:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Democrats#Members_of_the_House_New_Democrat_Coalition

Members of the House New Democrat Coalition

Rep. Jim Davis of Florida
Rep. Ron Kind of Wisconsin
Rep. Adam Smith of Washington
Rep. Tom Allen of Maine
Rep. Joe Baca of California
Rep. Brian Baird of Washington
Rep. Melissa Bean of Illinois
Rep. Shelley Berkley of Nevada
Rep. Marion Berry of Arkansas
Rep. Earl Blumenauer of Oregon
Rep. Lois Capps of California
Rep. Dennis Cardoza of California
Rep. Ed Case of Hawaii
Rep. Ben Chandler of Kentucky
Rep. Jim Cooper of Tennessee
Rep. Bud Cramer of Alabama
Rep. Joseph Crowley of New York
Rep. Artur Davis of Alabama
Rep. Susan Davis of California
Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois
Rep. Anna Eshoo of California
Rep. Bob Etheridge of North Carolina
Rep. Harold Ford of Tennessee
Rep. Charlie Gonzalez of Texas
Rep. Jane Harman of California
Rep. Ruben Hinojosa of Texas
Rep. Rush Holt of New Jersey
Rep. Mike Honda of California
Rep. Darlene Hooley of Oregon
Rep. Jay Inslee of Washington
Rep. Steve Israel of New York
Rep. Jim Langevin of Rhode Island
Rep. Rick Larsen of Washington
Rep. John Larson of Connecticut
Rep. Stephanie Herseth of South Dakota
Rep. Zoe Lofgren of California
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy of New York
Rep. Mike McIntyre of North Carolina
Rep. Carolyn Maloney of New York
Rep. Jim Matheson of Utah
Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York
Rep. Mike Michaud of Maine
Rep. Brad Miller of North Carolina
Rep. Juanita Millender-McDonald of California
Rep. Dennis Moore of Kansas
Rep. Jim Moran of Virginia
Rep. Grace Napolitano of California
Rep. David Price of North Carolina
Rep. Silvestre Reyes of Texas
Rep. Mike Ross of Arkansas
Rep. Steve Rothman of New Jersey
Rep. Loretta Sanchez of California
Rep. Adam Schiff of California
Rep. David Scott of Georgia
Rep. Brad Sherman of California
Rep. Vic Snyder of Arkansas
Rep. John Spratt of South Carolina
Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan
Rep. John Tanner of Tennessee
Rep. Ellen Tauscher of California
Rep. Mike Thompson of California
Rep. Tom Udall of New Mexico
Rep. Robert Wexler of Florida
Rep. David Wu of Oregon

Local politics are not exempt from the influence of the DLC either, though I lack the links at this moment to illustrate the #'s.

[Freddie Stubbs]

27. Seems like voters must really like DLCers

as their numbers are growing.

[MrBenchley]

29. Go figure!

The people have some nerve picking candidates they agree with, instead of candidates who know "what the people want"....

[The Judged]

4. Progressive Caucus is more loyal to DNC than DLC members are!

http://www.mydd.com/story/2005/4/28/152434/381

"Comparing the three Democratic groups studied so far, an interesting picture voting loyalty emerges:

Progressive Caucus: 97.3% loyal
DLC: 79.0% loyal
Blue Dogs: 54.3% loyal"

Throw the bums out!

DLC and "Blue Dog" members seem to be Democrats in name only!

Unfortunately, this link doesn't highlight the DLC members allegiance to PNAC.

[The Judged]

5. Progressive Caucus! More disciplined than the Republican Party!

http://bernie.house.gov/pc/

Coming soon:

http://www.congressionalprogressivecaucus.org/

An example of what you will find at Bernie Sander's website:

http://bernie.house.gov/corporate_media/index.asp

"Corporate Control of Media "

"A Message From Congressman Sanders

The media plays a crucial role in our democracy in providing objective and unbiased points of view.

Since Congress passed the 1996 Telecommunications Act, the United States has seen an enormous upsurge in media consolidation that has led to the increased homogenization of what Americans see, hear, and read. Profit has eclipsed traditional concern for the public's interest and brought with it a host of consequences. Minority programming, seen as less appealing to advertisers, has become increasingly under-represented. Budgets for investigative journalism have been reduced turning reporters into unofficial mouthpieces for the decision makers they are supposed to challenge. Programs with violent and sexual content have become pervasive while local radio has been replaced with formulaic one-size-fits-all content delivered from corporate headquarters thousands of miles away."

[MrBenchley]

22. Even the progressives on DU don't give a crap about the Progressive Caucus

I wonder when the last thread promoting a program or proposal by the Progressive Caucus went up on DU?

[The Judged]

24. I wonder the last time you didn't show up to denounce DLC criticism?

You predictably attack any information that puts the DLC and its members in a negative light.

Wisecracks are weak, especially when an unabashed and prolific DLC lackey launches them in order to deflect attention from the real issue: The DLC is not adequately supportive of the DNC Platform to merit being voted into office by Democratic Party voters.

[MrBenchley]

30. It's a free country, chief.

"The DLC is not adequately supportive of the DNC Platform to merit being voted into office by Democratic Party voters."
What a fucking shame for you that DLC members keep getting elected. Why, it's almost as if your claim was both silly and untrue.

[MrBenchley]

31. So why are there no posts promoting the Progressive Caucus?

Or criticizing them, for that matter. Doesn't seem like even you "progressive purists" give two shits about them.

[Freddie Stubbs]

32. It would seem that voters want representatives who think for themselves

rather than following blindly. This explains the growing influence of the DLC.

[The Judged]

6. New Democrats Try to Assuage K Street

DLC Democrats! Whose side are they on?

By Erin P. Billings
Roll Call Staff
September 20, 2005

"Just months after registering its opposition to a key trade bill this summer, the centrist House New Democrat Coalition is reasserting itself with the business community and sending the message that it has not abandoned its support for opening up global markets."

http://www.rollcall.com/issues/51_25/news/10551-1.html

It may not be fresh news, but it sure does give the impression that these DLC members of the DEmocratic Party are beholden to K Street.

[The Judged]

8. DLC attacks Dems as "offering surrender," then calls for "inclusion"

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_david_si_051212_dlc_attacks_dems_as_.htm

by David Sirota

"Less than two weeks ago, the Democratic Leadership Council said that people like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Vietnam War Hero Rep. Jack Murtha (D-PA) were "offering surrender" by supporting an exit strategy from Iraq. This followed on the DLC's long record of slamming anyone who it disagrees with (for more, just see the DLC's treatment of Howard Dean in the 2004 presidential primary). Now, the DLC is desperately attacking those like Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) who have been critical of Sen. Joe Lieberman's (D-CT) support for the Iraq War, and in the process, actually claiming the DLC has always been for "inclusion" in the Democratic Party and against "polarized politics.""

...

[The Judged]

9. Where to look for leadership on Iraq?

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_329.shtml

"By Randall Morris
Online Journal Guest Writer

On December 1, the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) issued, in their New Dem Dispatch, a plea to the Democratic Party at large to "steer a course between two extremes" in dealing with Iraq's occupation by U.S. forces. The DLC's opinion is firm that we Dems should neither "stay the course" that BushCo has slimed us into, nor should we listen to people such as Representative John Murtha (along with a growing, agitated anti-war movement) who advocate immediate "redeployment" of troops outside Iraq's borders.

No, as always the DLC advocates the "middle ground" . . . also known as the ground that isn't really worth fighting over. They chided House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's decision to back Murtha as "an unfortunate reaction." Their advice to ignore his proposal to "immediately redeploy U.S. troops consistent with the safety of U.S. forces" is apparently based on a fear that we might lose our occupation in light of some "self-fulfilling prophecy.""

...

[Freddie Stubbs]

33. It shows they are on the side of growing the economy

[MrBenchley]

7. This bullshit AGAIN--and with a wikipedia smear too....

"How can membership in the corporate "The Democratic Leadership Council" be permitted to overlap membership in the Democratic Party (DNC), by DNC?"
Didn't you know? The DLC took over control, bwahahahahahaha!!!

"Finally, what are we to believe about the DLC?"
That a bunch of Junior Joe McCarthys are trying to start a hate campaign about it. And looking damned silly when they do.

[400Years]

20. No, you are the one who looks damn silly defending PNAC criminals

[MrBenchley]

23. Hahahahaha....

[The Judged]

10. Joe Lieberman: Republican Posterboy

http://villagevoice.com/news/0550,ridgeway,70900,2.html

"Out with Rumsfeld, in with the senator from Connecticut?

by James Ridgeway
December 9th, 2005 5:28 PM

Washington, D.C.—If Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld retires and gets replaced by Democratic senator Joe Lieberman—the hot speculation here this week—what would America get out of the deal? Well, another hawk who never went to war, for one thing."

...

[The Judged]

11. Manchester Dems expected to split with Lieberman on war

http://www.journalinquirer.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=15739115&BRD=985&PAG=461&dept_id=161556&rfi=6

"By Ben Rubin, Journal Inquirer 12/12/2005

MANCHESTER -- The Democratic Town Committee is expected to approve a resolution early next year criticizing Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman's support for the Iraq war, according to longtime Democratic Town Chairman Theodore R. Cummings.

Town committee member Joseph Rafala, 79, proposed the resolution two weeks ago, saying he was angered by the continued closeness between the Republican Bush Administration and Lieberman, a Connecticut Democrat.

"My primary goal is to get Sen. Lieberman on the same page as his Democratic colleagues," Rafala said. "Short of that, I wish he would stop being a poster boy for the Republican Party.""

...

[The Judged]

12. Lieberman's Dangerous Gamble on Bush's Fraying Coattails

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_andy_ost_051212_lieberman_s_dangerou.htm

"by Andy Ostroy

Sen. Joe "Zell" Lieberman, the delusional Democratic hawk from Connecticut, has confidently walked up to the political roulette wheel and placed all his chips on the ever-fraying coattails of our historically unpopular president. In emphatically supporting the Bushies' dreadful Iraq military policy, he must be thinking this will either curry him favor with this bankrupt administration and/or with hardline voters next November. To the contrary, as the NY Times reported over the weekend, members of his own party are growing increasingly frustrated and angry with Lieberman. The backlash from his home-state constituents could soon follow."

...

[The Judged]

13. Lieberman's View Of Women In Iraq Troubling

http://www.theday.com/eng/web/news/re.aspx?re=1C7787A2-544E-409A-AF6E-2F4652B98E75

Published on 12/14/2005

...

"Is it possible that Sen. Lieberman thinks women play inconsequential roles in the global war on terrorism? If the former is true, why don't we just send all the noncombat units home? Sen. Lieberman's actions indicate that we can do without them. To all the women from Connecticut who serve our country, I salute you. Even if Sen. Lieberman does not appreciate what you do, I do."

Shilpa Nagaraj
New London

[The Judged]

15. China will choose its own time

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2005/12/14/2003284396

"By Sushil Seth

Wednesday, Dec 14, 2005,Page 8
US Senator Joseph Lieberman, a US vice-presidential candidate in 2000, has raised the alarmist scenario of a possible future military conflict between China and the US, arising out of their competitive quest for the world's dwindling oil resources. He believes that the race for oil, unless cooled down through urgent talks between the two countries, could become "as hot and dangerous as the nuclear arms race between the US and the Soviet Union" during the Cold War period. And "this could end up in real military conflict, not just economic conflict," he recently told the Council on Foreign Relations."


...

[The Judged]

19. The Honorable Joseph Lieberman - Voting History on War and Peace!

http://www.peacemajority.org/dia/organizations/PeaceMajority/scorecard/scorecard.jsp?person_legislator_ID=344

Voted for:

Uphold Secret Detentions
Kill Amendment to Block Iraq Embassy Funds
Alberto Gonzalez Nomination
New Earth Penetrator Nuclear Weapons
Low-Yield Nuclear Weapons
Iraq War Authorization
Helms Amendment - Opposing International Law

Voted against:

Judicial Review For Detainees
Iraq Exit Proposal
Block Funds For Guantanamo Prisons
Levin Amendment - Cut and transfer missle shield funds
Durbin Amendment - On Imminent Threat Before Iraq War
Levin Amendment - On Pursuing UN Inspections/Resolution Before Iraq War
Byrd Amendment - Opposing Pre-emptive War
Byrd Amendment - Limiting Authority for War

[The Judged]

25. Video Games Have Sequel-Happy Year

http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/ap/2005/12/14/ap2391945.html

Associated Press
12.14.2005, 12:39 PM

...

"Three states - Illinois, Michigan, and California - imposed laws that fine retailers caught selling mature-rated games to minors. A federal judge has since found the Illinois restrictions unconstitutional.

Sens. Hillary Clinton and Joseph Lieberman have proposed similar legislation on a national level."

...

[wyldwolf]

14. don't be the"judge," be the voter

The DLC will never go away simply because you gather information from pretty unreliable sources (wiki, rightweb, and of course Democratic Underground), build a "case" and then make pretty outlandish suggestions that the DNC somehow outlaw the DLC.

It's up to the voters.

And to suggest that the DLC be dealt with legally or through some DNC policy is certainly more rightwing than anything you accuse the DLC of doing.

Sorry. If the far left wants to win, they've got to get their lazy asses off their high horse and actually do some work instead of whining, moaning, bitching, and complaining.

So I'll throw the customary challenge out to you that I give to all leftwingers when they think they've uncovered some hidden truth about the DLC:

Let's debate this, you and me. We'll discuss the policies of the DLC and explore if they are contrary to traditional (FDR to present) Democratic policies and statements. We'll also explore whether all the "bad" things the DLC do are unique to them, or if other Democrats do them and have always done them.

No spinning. No rationalizing. Just presentation of reliable source material to make our case.

Isn't if finally time for someone to step up the plate and once and for all slay your dragon?

Game?

[The Judged]

16. The lawmaker, Sen. Byron Dorgan of North Dakota ...

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0512140184dec14,1,6775430.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed

"Top Democrat on Abramoff panel returns $67,000 in donations
Contributions came from lobbyist's clients

By Philip Shenon
New York Times News Service
Published December 14, 2005


WASHINGTON -- The ranking Democrat on the Senate committee investigating the Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff announced on Tuesday that he was returning $67,000 in political contributions from Abramoff's former partners and Indian tribe clients.

The lawmaker, Sen. Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, has been accused of hypocrisy by Republicans for having not acknowledged the contributions from Abramoff's clients while at the same time sharply criticizing him in hearings of the Senate panel, the Indian Affairs Committee."

...

[The Judged]

17. Alito encounters more hostile Senate than did Roberts

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/13400024.htm

"By JAMES KUHNHENN Knight Ridder Newspapers"

...

"Meanwhile, conservative and liberal groups are aiming Internet, television and radio ads at fence-sitting senators.

Keith Appell, a Republican strategist helping to coordinate support for Alito, said conservatives are focusing on Democratic senators from states won by President Bush in 2004. That includes Democrats such as Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Bill Nelson of Florida, Mark Pryor and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, Ken Salazar of Colorado, and John Rockefeller and Robert Byrd of West Virginia."

...

[The Judged]

18. The Honorable Byron Dorgan - Voting History on War and Peace.

http://www.peacemajority.org/dia/organizations/PeaceMajority/scorecard/scorecard.jsp?person_legislator_ID=378

Voted for:

Halliburton Sweetheart Deals
Iraq War Authorization
Warner Amendment - Against International Law
Helms Amendment - Opposing International Law


Voted Against:

Levin Amendment - On Pursuing UN Inspections/Resolution Before Iraq War
Byrd Amendment - Opposing Pre-emptive War

[Freddie Stubbs]

21. As long as voters keep showing a preference for DLC candidates

all of this is moot.

[radio4progressives]

35. As long as voters are not informed and are offered no real choices

there is no democracy.


when corporations run the government, there is no democracy.

and as long as we "choose" leaders who are beholding to corporations, we have fascism. fascism is anathema to democracy. it's really that simple.

when the democratic party shows itself to be about doing the business for the people - and defending our constitution - when they stop touting nationalistic slogans and wrapping themselves in nationalistic symbols - they will win. because that behavior is antithetical to what our Constitution is about, and what democracy requires to thrive. and the american people instinctively knows that to their inner most core, imo.

[The Judged]

26. DLC support PNAC policy! DLC is a not-for-profit corporation!

See above links at start of thread!

[radio4progressives]

28. Kicked, Nominated And BookMarked! Excellent Judge, thank you!

Vital to the effort in "taking back our country" is understanding who the perps are that gave it away in the first place!

[ToeBot]

34. And here I thought it was an LLC, my bad n/t

[The Judged]

36. I forgive you!

[AntiCoup2K4]

37. Just read this line again

"The Democratic Leadership Council is an influential non-profit corporation that argues that the United States Democratic Party should abandon progressive principles."

No further argument neccessary. The DLC is dedicated to opposing the priniciples of the Democratic Party. Therefore any defense of the DLC is against the rules of Democratic Underground.

Not to mention a CANCER on this party which will KILL IT if not removed immediately.

[The Judged]

38. In all fairness that is a wiki claim. The DLC makes no such claim.

Instead, the DLC claims to be modernizing progressive politics for the 21st century.

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ka.cfm?kaid=86

Also, the DLC claims to "carry on Clinton's insistence upon new means to achieve progressive ideals."

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=86&subid=194&contentid=3775

You could make many arguments about what the DLC states are its "ideas," being that they don't use words like Agenda or goals, but you will be hard pressed to find the DLC claiming to try to get the DNC to abandon progressive principles.

Instead, the DLC seeks, based on the "ideas" presented on their website, to be redefining progressive ideas using innovation!

One strange thing about the link above to "progressive ideals" is that in the same credo, the DLC states that:

"We believe that government programs should be grounded in the values most Americans share: work, family, personal responsibility, individual liberty, faith, tolerance, and inclusion."

These values seem to be a bit of a problem for me, because they are limited in scope to reflect less than the values that the US Constitution and the Bill of rights guarantee all Americans, and because, for instance, "work" is not usually referred to as a value.

This reminds me of the US Department of Labor which was founded as an advocate for and a protector of workers rights now primarily acting as an advocate for and a protector of employer rights.

These values seem to be a departure from values, as I am accustomed to thinking of them.