The DLC must go!

[Cascadian]

I wanted the subject to cut to the chase. You cannot get anymore straightforward about it! The DLC are at it again and now they going after Pelosi, Murtha, and Howard Dean. If anybody is going to rip the Democrats apart it's going to be these Republican Lite, Republican enabling DLCers. You lost in 1994, you lost in 2000, and 2002. Now the people are taking the party back and now you intend to take it away? Just move aside and let the populists have their day. If not then get out!


John

[Vincardog]

1. Aye

[William769]

2. So I take it you don't believe in the big tent?

[Cascadian]

6. I simply think they should step aside.

They have gotten too much power and now that the people have spoken I see the DLC trying to take it away so the mulitnational corporations can have more control over the Democrats. They can believe what they want to believe but do not think they will take over that easily. The only success that the DLC had was Bill Clinton. They are undermining the party and should not be the end all be all of Democratic Party policy.


John

[William769]

12. Your right the people have spoken and they happen to include the DLC.

I'm sorry but if they are going to vote with the Democrats as a whole, I don't want to see anybody leave the party. We all need to just work through our differences.

[Cascadian]

23. Populism won the election. Not the DLC! (n/t)

[William769]

25. I didn't say the DLC won the election. The people did which includes the DLC.

Not one group or idea won this election, it was a concerted effort and anyone who thinks otherwise is just fooling themselves.

[OzarkDem]

10. I think we do, the DLC doesn't

They want to own the tent and tell everyone else where to stand and what to say.

[Cascadian]

16. Exactly.

The DLCers keep saying it should be a big tent but they want to own the tent and marginalize those who dare to criticize their agenda. Why don't more people see that?


John

[geek tragedy]

47. How many voted against Pelosi for speaker? eom

[AZBlue]

56. Obviously not. If the DLC is thrown out, who will be next? Blondes? Left-handed people?

eom

[Jim Sagle]

60. When they came for the DLC, I said nothing...

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[AZBlue]

73. You may laugh (and that is sad), but I find nothing amusing about hypocrisy in my own party.

Are we the party for everyone or only the invited??

[Morgana LaFey]

74. A big tent where THEY (DLC ) can rip our leaders to shreds

but WE can't challenge them on it or object because that would mean we're not in favor of some "big tent"?

Sounds like Republican-style bipartisanship to me and a recipe for encouraging if not asking for our own abuse.

Bah!

[William769]

96. Did you not understand what I said?

Did I say anything about objecting? No. The original OP said they must go. Now if you want to talk about "Republican-style bipartisanship" I suggest you look within. :eyes:

[tavalon]

76. Not when the DLC

is actually the Republican wing of the Democratic party. If they would be truthful about that, then they would be appropriately marginalized but they use the term "New Democrats" and so people think they are Democrat when they are not.

[William769]

97. If it look looks like bullshit and it smells like bullshit, guess what?

IT'S BULLSHIT! They are Democrats and that meme your spreading just disingenuous (I am being kind here).

[longship]

3. We need DLCers, just not the DLC itself.

It serves no purpose except to divide our party. The DLC screeches its head off about moderation and allowing conservatives a place at the table. Then they hypocritically attempt to demonize and deny liberals a place at the table.

Their people? I like many of them, especially Evan Bayh, who has some of the best qualities of anybody in Congress. I don't always agree with his votes in the Senate, but you would be hard-pressed to find a Senator who works as hard as he does. Consider that he does represent Indiana.

I like many other DLCers. Hillary? Yup. Obama? Yup. Etc.

We need them, just like they need us liberals.

We just don't need the DLC. Fuck the DLC. Let them go the way of the dinosaur.

[LynneSin]

5. Seriously, it's the poeple NOT elected that really screw up the DLC

Some of the candidates, which once included John Kerry, aren't so bad!

[William769]

14. I would disagree, I believe it stimulates debate.

Which IMHO is always a good thing.

[longship]

22. Well, there is that argument.

However, many liberals--myself included--feel strongly that to so strongly undermine party unity plays directly into Republican spin that Democrats are not united. This leeches onto the nightly news daily and may strongly influence opinion. It's like debating whether or not a person beats his spouse.

If the DLC wants to discuss issues, that's fine. But I will not stand for being demonized for my beliefs, or for any claim that my beliefs and those of millions of other liberals do not deserve a place at the table. We liberals do not have to justify our existance to the likes of the DLC.

Until they open their eyes to these facts, "Fuck 'em."

[William769]

26. ANd the same can be said of the DLC

"that's fine. But I will not stand for being demonized for my beliefs, or for any claim that my beliefs and those of millions of other liberals do not deserve a place at the table. We DLC do not have to justify our existance to the likes of the" Liberals.

[longship]

28. I've always said that the DLC people are good people.

I've always said that their ideas are essential to good governance. But the same can and should be said of liberals and of conservatives. Good governance always comes from a diversity of opinion and by coming to consensus. Some things will drift towards the middle-of-the-road but many liberal and conservative ideas get enacted as well.

But that is not the position of the DLC. Instead, they (the organization, not necessarily the people) spew this bullshit that the country should stamp out liberal and conservative ideologies and instead govern from some perceived moderation.

Well, my friend, what kind of moderation is that, where one limits the spectrum of ideology to one monolithic standard? That's not moderation, that authoritarianism. It's precisely what we have now with the Bush regime.

[Fluffdaddy]

17. THANK YOU

Proud DLCer :P

Edit to add: It was us DLCers that brought this past election home;)

[OzarkDem]

20. Sorry, no

That wasn't the case and you're not doing your cause any favors by continuing to say so.

[Fluffdaddy]

29. I believe I'm helping our cause by showing the more progressives of us

that you win more elections by inching to the center

[longship]

30. You ought to know better than that.

"The center does not hold."

Governing from the center is not the same thing as governing from consensus. They are two entirely different things. What we need is the latter; what the DLC proposes is the former. The DLC position is nothing more than a bald attempt at ideological purity.

Consider the difference. By governing from consensus one embraces diversity. It's the *only* winning strategy.

If the DLC succeeds in their goal to drive off the liberals, the Democratic Party will be dead. They'll never again win a national election. Is that what the DLC wants?

[Fluffdaddy]

34. The DLC wants to WIN. They/we/us are sick of seeing the GOP kick our butts

We must compete in Red States to win. The DLC understands this. The more liberal of us in Democratic Party must learn to understand this also..............I have come to understand this. And if we are going to win back the White House in 08, you must come to understand this as well.

[longship]

38. Ah, but consider who was elected.

In Red states, we got moderates, including some real surprises. Nancy Boyda comes to mind--a real moderate. In blue states we got some liberals. But there's plenty of outliers. We got some moderates in some blue states and some liberals in some red states. There was a real mish-mash this time. Democrats of all stripe were swept into office.

From my perspective, it seems that we all won, and won handily. We basically beat up on the GOP big time. Together, we did it.

My pleas here really are for true consensus governing, with everybody at the table, including DLCers and liberals and conservatives. We all know what the GOP is going to do, but those moderate Republicans who can be convinced to wean off the kool-aid may just see the wisdom in this new fangled type of governing. (Actually, it isn't new. It's the way things were in the 50's through much of the 70's during my political awakening.)

There will always be issues where people disagree. But disagreement is not a bad thing. From disagreement comes compromise. From compromise comes consensus. But that does not mean that things will all be at the center. It means that the result will include the best of liberal and conservative ideas, as well as the entire rest of the political spectrum. That is decidedly *not* governing from the center.

Most of all, I am very sad that the DLC has chosen this strategy. It serves no purpose than to divide us. You and I could be strong political allies and close friends, but the DLC would have us carping at each other over some very silly things, like which faction was responsible for the November 7th win. We all won, my friend. All of us. We now need to all work together to see to it that the job gets done. I'll be advocating some liberal ideas, you'll be advocating some moderate ones. The job will get done.

Sorry for getting all preachy on ya.

Peace.

[Fluffdaddy]

39. Yes we all Won. And after 12 years it felt ........SO GOOD

Time to play some Xbox360 with my boys. Have a good-nite......... longship;)

[longship]

40. Thank you for a thoughtful discussion.

:thumbsup:

[Donna Zen]

41. Checking the list

None of the candidates that ran on a DLC NAFTA platform. In fact, it is quite the opposite. As you well know, the DLC is an exclusive club that can't be bothered with the grassroots.

Why do we have a party inside of a party? It is kind of like having a private militia undermining the legitimate government. A House Divided Cannot Stand.

If the DLC so hate the Democratic Party then perhaps they need to declare their. Oh wait, Joe Lieberman did.

[AntiFascist]

92. What about the issue of pulling out of Iraq, even if not immediately?

That's a sensitive issue with you isn't it? Eventhough its not really a totally progressive issue. Not only do a majority of Americans favor this, but fiscal conservatives are fed up with the inflated war spending and corruption that goes along with the war. Where do you stand? Does the DLC stil maintain their "PNAC-lite" agenda?

[Morgana LaFey]

75. Sorry, bub

the damned DLC has helped move "the Center" several feet behind me, to the left. No more of that. The Democratic Party will have to turn around and RETREAT for it to "inch toward the center" again. I'm all for it, but that's not the direction the DLC wishes us to go, and they aim to have their way or die trying. And I'm for that too (the dying part -- figuratively speaking, of course).

The people have awakened and they won't be hewing to the DLC all that much.

[longship]

27. "It was us DLCers that brought this past election home"

Really?

For Christ sakes, haven't you learned anything in the past six years? Ideological purity only brings administrations like George W. Bush, with monolithic solutions to multi-dimensional problems. Only by tapping into the resources of ideological diversity can we govern effectively.

Plus, your claim is utter bullshit. It took DLCers + liberals + independents + moderate Republicans + everybody else who voted for Democrats.

But thanks for illustrating so clearly for the benefit of the rest of the world precisely why the DLC, as an organization, must go. The sooner the better.

You need us liberals as much as we need you. We are powerless without each other. When are you going to learn that inescapable fact?

[nebenaube]

59. smells like BS to me n/t

[Jim Sagle]

61. Chickenshit bullshit.

[OzarkDem]

19. Good point

Even DLC'ers don't march in lockstep with their non-elected leaders.

[HereSince1628]

21. I don't think we need DLC'ers there's only hundreds of them

at most. You should check out what it takes to be a real DLC member.

What we need are the New Democrats, and other democrats who see the DLC as a reasonable choice for their votes. There hundreds of thousands of THEM.

There is a huge difference there IMHO.

[geek tragedy]

48. There will be 62 in the House next year.

Would you care to give their seats back to the Republicans?

[HereSince1628]

66. The next round is for the 2008 elections. And I'd love to steal

away all their "new democrat" support in preparation of those races.

[geek tragedy]

67. What does that mean? eom

[HereSince1628]

71. It means I'd rather see Progressive Democrats elected in '08 with the votes

that in 2006 went for DLC candidates.

I'd gladly hand off actual DLC members to the republicans. Remember only successful politicians can truly be DLC, regular folks don't get invited to do anything but cough up money and votes. The DLC calls those regular folks that support them New Democrates.

I say let Republican voters support the DLC, just like their buddy Joe Lieberman. I'd gladly give up elitist politicians of the DLC good-old-boy club in 2008 in order to have the couple hundreds of thousands of former New Democrats supporters voting for Progressive candidates in 2008.

And that is the task now presents itself to Progressives--building a bigger base that defeats more of the DLC in primaries.

[geek tragedy]

79. Not realistic. Progressives can't win in a lot of districts.

DLC members hold 62 seats in Congress--most of those would go Republican before they'd go to a progressive Democrat.

Purity is suicide.

[LynneSin]

4. Just so you know, outside of the war, Murtha's record rivals just about...

...anyone in the DLC. The guy is pretty much hardcore conservative when it comes to many of the important causes we value here at DU. Don't get me wrong, I love that a warhawk that once made Joe Lieberman look anti-war could actually see the light and change his view points. But he's conservative in too many other areas

[Cascadian]

8. Fine but at least Murtha had the guts to admit he was wrong.

He is making up for it and therefore he gets a pass as far as I am concerned. John Kerry also admitted he made a mistake. Why hasn't Hillary?


John

[LynneSin]

13. But leadership is important for ALL areas, not just one

And trust me, I have tons of respect for what Murtha is doing, I'm just pointing out the obvious. Someone posted Murtha's ADA rating compared to Hoyers and Murtha was in the 70s vs Hoyers in the low 90s

[Nostradammit]

7. From the end of the Willamette Valley -

A hearty AMEN!!!

[OzarkDem]

9. Aligning with the GOP in Congress

will cause them a lot of problems. A lot.

Any member who has signed up for DLC membership will be under close scrutiny. Voters bought into Dem policies this past election. They're expecting Dems to go back to Congress and begin cleaning up Bush's messes, not taking sides with him.

Dems didn't turn out and contribute to support a GOP agenda.

[Cascadian]

11. Just like I said.

Any DLC, right-leaning Democrat who supports this god-awful fiasco in Iraq and supports corporatism deserves not to be in office let alone as a Democrat. Just is just my opinion. I want the Democrats to be the party of FDR, Truman, JFK, and RFK again.


John

[rinsd]

15. Yaaayy for permanent minority!

The New Democrats caucus is the second largest coalition of the House Democrats.

They have gained the most incoming freshman of any group as well.

[OzarkDem]

18. Second largest

Second largest.

[wyldwolf]

32. combined with Blue Dogs, they dwarf any other

[OzarkDem]

42. Blue Dogs are DLC'ers

and I don't think you can count your members as a solid voting bloc. Not every Dem who gets a membership card drinks the kool aid.

[wyldwolf]

44. no they're not. Shows how much you know.

[mtnsnake]

105. You've been wrong this time & a thousand others. Admit it for once? Let's see

if you do.

[dpbrown]

125. Progressive Caucus - 71, and 358 unaffiliated with the Blue Dogs or New Democratic group

Seems to me that "unaffiliated" dwarfs the Blue Dogs and the New Democratic group combined.

There is no evidence that the 358 unaffiliated members of the House are not ideologically more aligned with the Progressive Caucus than the other two groups.

[davidwparker]

24. Be sure to buy Dean's Democracy Bonds and contribute to the candidate

that you like directly at their website. I don't give to DCCC or the senate side because I don't want any of my money going to DLC.

I've started giving to DNC with Dean's Democracy Bonds and will let him distribute it as he sees fit. Basically, I support Dean. Outside of that, give directly to the candidate.

The netroots can lessen the impact of the DLC by starving the beast. Netroots small contributions and will v. DLC's corporate donations.

[wyldwolf]

31. I guess the country is lucky Cascadian doesn't run things.

[Cascadian]

51. What is that suppose to mean? n/t

[Jim Sagle]

62. He doesn't know what it means. Al From told him to say it so he said it.

That's ALL he knows.

[geek tragedy]

68. If you kick the DLC'ers out of the party, Dennis Hastert

would still be Speaker of the House.

[PassingFair]

81. I didn't think the DLC was IN the party...

aren't they a TAXABLE think tank OUTSIDE the party?

Aren't you already an ENTITY OUTSIDE the party.

The DLC are not the DECIDERS they once were.

The people are watching.

When we like what we see, we DONATE to the DNC.

That's the way it WORKS now.

Sorry, Carville.

Them's the BREAKS.

Corporate money is easily traced.

So are the votes.

We are WATCHING.

[movonne]

33. I'm really sorry to see our party going the same way the bush

administration making their party go neo-con.. they are doing their own swiftboating, using the rove play book...

[AJH032]

35. where is the DLC "going after" Pelosi, Murtha, and Dean?

I haven't seen this anywhere.

[geek tragedy]

37. Sour grapes from sore losers. The cult of Murtha

is about the most obnoxious thing I've seen around here.

[OzarkDem]

43. Check your local news headlines

Start w/ James Carville.

[AJH032]

46. my local news headlines don't say anything about it

and James Carville isn't "the DLC." I don't know if he's a member or not, but what he says certainly doesn't represent the organization's official viewpoint on anything.

[hostile_17]

65. I'm all for a big tent but I simply don't trust the DLC.

From Wikipedia:
"It is the opinion of the DLC that populism is not politically viable, citing the defeated Presidential campaigns of Senator George McGovern in 1972 and Vice-President Walter Mondale in 1984. The DLC states that it “seeks to define and galvanize popular support for a new public philosophy built on progressive ideals, mainstream values, and innovative, non-bureaucratic, market-based solutions."

The DLC has supported welfare reform, such as the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, President Clinton's expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit, and the creation of AmeriCorps. The DLC supports expanded health insurance via tax credits for the uninsured and opposes plans for single-payer universal health care. The DLC supports universal access to preschool, charter schools, and measures to allow a greater degree of choice in schooling (though not school vouchers), and supports the No Child Left Behind Act. The DLC supports both NAFTA and CAFTA.

Recently, the DLC also urged Senate Democrats to vote against Bush's nomination of Samuel Alito to the US Supreme Court "on principle", but firmly opposed any filibuster of the nominee.

I just can't support these people. For some reason all the DLC and it's membership ever seems to do is support Corporate America, play nice with the Republicans and and stir up unrest within the Democratic party which plays right into the hands of the right wing media. Currently Bill Clinton is the one exception to this, but maybe the organization is different now than it once was.

But then again, this is my first post, so what do I know?

[PassingFair]

84. Welcome to DU, Hostile!

I find you quite friendly.

[SaveElmer]

72. Apparently any House member voting against Murtha...

Is DLC...the mere fact that Murtha wasn't supported is an attack...

And the only place I see anything about James Carville is here on DU...

[PassingFair]

83. Are you living in a cave?

Concerted drive in the media attacking Murtha
and Dean, and painting Pelosi as ineffective.

[wyldwolf]

94. so the DLC controls the media?

[PassingFair]

100. Corporations control the media.

The DLC is just a think tank, run on
corporate funding. They dole out
money to individual candidates as they
see fit.

[wyldwolf]

101. Sorry

No, the DLC can't "dole out money." That is illegal for a 501(c)(4)

I don't believe you can show an instance where the DLC has contributed money to a candidate.

But back to the original queation: where is the DLC "going after" Pelosi, Murtha, and Dean?

[PassingFair]

104. Some history:

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=253638&kaid=131&subid=192

snip>"Yesterday, President Bush unveiled a "plan for victory" to shore up sagging public confidence in his Iraq policies. Though it broke little new ground, the president's speech at the U.S. Naval Academy did provoke an unfortunate reaction from House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, who endorsed Rep. John Murtha's earlier call for a swift withdrawal of U.S. troops.

We share the widespread frustration with the Bush administration's utterly inept handling of Iraq's post-conflict rebuilding. But too much is at stake in Iraq for America to simply give up and come home. What Democrats really should demand from President Bush is victory, not a hasty departure."

:puke:

Actively working AGAINST the efforts of the minority leader to get us out of Iraq.
As late as ONE YEAR AGO.

Triangulating "stay the course". DEMANDING VICTORY!

Heads up their ASSES. Looking to wrest power from the center. The DLC
is the WAR-WING of the party.

One year ago, nothing has changed.

[wyldwolf]

112. you can't answer the question or prove your factual inaccuracie...

No, the DLC can't "dole out money." That is illegal for a 501(c)(4)

I don't believe you can show an instance where the DLC has contributed money to a candidate.

But back to the original queation: where is the DLC "going after" Pelosi, Murtha, and Dean?

[geek tragedy]

36. Dishonest nonsense.

A MAJORITY OF DEMOCRATS in the House voted for Hoyer over Murtha.

Those same Democrats also voted for Nancy Pelosi.

The only one seeking to cause division and fighting is you.

[LittleClarkie]

45. Go where exactly? And how do you propose getting there?

What are you suggesting?

[Cascadian]

52. Once again for the umpteenth time.....

I want the DLC to move aside. I want the influence of the DLC to fade away. They are only good at neutralizing the Democrats and allowing the GOP to have their agenda forced upon this country. Not only that, they are pro-corporate and when big corporate money infiltrates the Democrats then the people lose out.


John

[LittleClarkie]

54. Uh huh. Well, I reckon they're not going to just step aside on their own

Or fade away. Your explanation still doesn't tell me how you expect that to happen. Are you just wishing on a star?

If you think that what Dean is doing for the party is lessening the DLC's influence, are you helping him through donations or grassroots activism? Are you supporting non-DLC candidates? Are you involved on the local level with the Dem party in your state or county?

What are you doing to make what you want happen besides essentially typing out on a messageboard "Go away, DLC!"

[PassingFair]

86. I don't know about him, but MANY of us are working from the

bottom up, because they are NOT handing anything over!

I was the person in my county who stood to give the resolution
at the county convention nominating Howard Dean for DNC Chair.

I was the person commending him at this PAST convention for
WINNING BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS.

I am a precinct delegate. I walked the precincts for local
dems. I take election days off to work the polls for candidates.
I volunteer for MoveOn.

I speak out against DLC dems at local dem club meetings and
conventions. And people BACK ME UP.

When people gripe about the government, I give them the
URL for the DNC and I tell them to DONATE.

[LittleClarkie]

107. Well, there you go

Do you see what I mean, though? There have to be actions to go with the sentiment. Maybe the DLC needs to go, but like you said, they won't be going on their own.

[PassingFair]

108. I don't get why you just

assume that the poster is not doing
any of these things, the most important
being, in my opinion, just speaking out.

Why assume he/she's only posting here
and not living the life?

[LittleClarkie]

109. Because he/she didn't describe the how, just the what

And I just want to make sure people are thinking about the how, and also talking about the how. I'm trying to focus people on actions, get them thinking about what they could do, rather than just bitching about it here. We need to give each other ideas.

[PassingFair]

111. He wasn't talking about the hows, he was talking about the whys.

We all do what we can.
Even if it's just pointing out truths on
an internet board.
Maybe he's housebound, Maybe he's a
precinct delegate, Maybe he's Russ bleeping Feingold!

Bitching about things here helps us to define the
problems!

:)

AND to make our case in public.

:hi:

I have come to like Clark more than I did during the primaries
from the "bitching" seen here.

[onenote]

49. DLC v. Murtha --- can someone explain why progressive love Murtha

Yes, he got it right on the war (not at first, but before many others). But it was my understanding that the hatred of some here for the DLC was based on the assertion that DLC'ers are merely "DINOs".

So here's my question, what do you call a Democrat with the following record:

Has a 0% rating from NARAL on abortion rights issues.
Voted yes on restricting bankruptcy
Has a 50% rating from the ACLU
Supports legislation and/or constitutional amendment to protect the flag.
Voted no on funding for alternative sentencing rather than prison building
Voted to restrict habeas corpus for death penalty appeals.
Voted no on replacing the death penalty with life in prison
Voted yes on allowing school prayer during the war on terror.
Voted no on raising CAFE standards.
Voted no on prohibiting drilling at ANWR
Voted yes on administration's energy policy.
Voted no on campaign reform.
Has an A+ rating from the NRA
Voted to ban physician assisted suicide
Has a 44% rating from SANE
Voted yes on increasing fines for broadcast "indecency"

Would such a Democrat be appropriately labelled "progressive"? A "liberal". A "moderate". A conservative? A DINO?

Or would he simply be John Murtha.

(PS - I know that Murtha has high rating on seniors and union issues, but that's my point -- people here want to condemn members of the Democratic party because they participate in an organization -the DLC without regard to those members actual records on specific issues. And they want to coronate Murtha because of his position on one issue (and his lack of membership in the evil DLC) without regard to his position on numerous other issues.

[LittleClarkie]

53. Some will collapse at the feet of anyone they think is speaking truth to power

I found it quite sad to see comments this week like "What do you mean he's prolife?!" Helloooo. Suddenly he didn't have as many fans here as he used to. But then that's the roller coaster that is DU for you.

[DaveinMD]

50. give me a break

Hoyer is more liberal than Murtha. Hoyer has worked hard to build the party his entire career. He does no such enabling. Those who start threads ripping other Dems are the ones that have to go.

[Cascadian]

55. All and all, the proof will be shown further about the DLC

Just watch which Democratic lawmakers support what half-baked Bush-Neocon proposals that float into Congress. And if they support an invasion of Iran, then they should be kick out of office. I have said it before and I will say it again, any Democratic lawmaker who continues to support the war and support the multinational, worker-breaking agenda does not deserve to be in office. Many of whom ARE DLC!

And yes.....POWER TO THE PEOPLE!


John

[Generic Brad]

57. Isn't the DLC a farm team for the RNC?

They've been acting like it for the past few years. Their poor decisions have prevented Democrats in all 50 states from playing in the political big leagues. Playing for an undefined middle is ludicrous and a losing mentality.

Democrats need brand identity. State who we are, what we stand for and offer a clear, sane alternative to the American citizenry that contrasts with the right wing b.s. the Republicans have been forcing on us. The DLC may raise money, but they sure as hell don't win elections. They only stand for money and corporate interests.

[philly_bob]

58. As a progressive, I'm no DLC fan, but, gee, they get to stay in the party!

Work on building up progressive faction. Defend Pelosi and Dean if attacked.

DLC does bring a certain level of economic expertise. Remember Clinton's budgetary successes.

[geek tragedy]

69. I'm not a DLC fan myself, but we do need them.

Are they occasionally obnoxious and irritating? Yes. But that's generally true of just about any group with a distinct viewpoint.

[Cocoa]

63. defeat them in the primaries

it's not realistic to think they will just go away. They must be defeated. In the primaries seems like the logical place.

[katinmn]

78. We won some and we lost some. (They had control of the money!)

Not next time though. We won't let outsiders choose our candidates again.

[earth mom]

64. I agree with you!

Kick the DLCers to the curb!

Power to The People!

[cosmik debris]

70. I remember what happened last time.

We drove out the centrist Democrats in 1972 and we carried ONE state and the District of Columbia.

You don't have to like the rest of the Democratic Party, but you do have to get along with them if you expect to have any impact on national politics.

[jzodda]

77. What a bunch of bullcrap

First of all who exactly was going after Murtha?

Correct me if I am wrong but Steny was #2 and in line for the promotion correct. Steny is the one that held the Dems together on tight votes over and over the past few years correct? Steny is the one who was out working his ass off to get other Dems elected correct?

Murtha was not in a leadership role outside the Iraq issue and has some very cozy (some would say too cozy) relations with defense contractors. He's also all about earmarks and does not even believe that reform with regards to campaign finance is needed. He's who we DO NOT NEED in a leadership role, at least that high a leadership role.

Even if you love him to death, the fact is what did Steny do wrong besides not get along so well with Pelosi. She wanted to start off her leadership tenure off by ramming Murtha down the throats of Dems who had long already committed to Steny. Was that a wise move on her part? Nope, and Steny did nothing to deserve the venom thown his way. Hes universally liked by the other members and can work with the other side to push stuff through AKA "Getting things Done" which has not been going on much with this past Congress. I for one am glad for Steny and it has nothing to do with the DLC or howard dean or Carville. Murtha and the leadership race is a totally seperate matter.

[PassingFair]

87. "Steny is the one that held the Dems together on tight votes"

:rofl:

Dems DON'T hold together on tight votes, or
we wouldn't be IN THIS MESS.

Dems were SPLIT on most legislation,
from the war to flag burning.

You make me laugh.

[jzodda]

93. another un-informed Dem

I make you laugh when I speak the truth? So what are you trying to say? Steny is a bum? If we are to take what you are saying at face value then Pelosi does not deserve to be speaker either I guess. If they were so divided that speaks to her qualities as a leader as well. You are emotional but somewhat un-informed I think.

I said the last few years, meaning the last Congress. The war vote did not take place in this Congress thats outgoing and I would hardly call the flag burning vote a monumental piece of legislation.

Go look at the record of the votes in the last 2 years (this past congress) then come back here and tell me that the House Dem caucus did not hold together on much of the voting. Do you know the record? Do you even know the year of the flag burning vote? I very much doubt it

[PassingFair]

103. First of all

the word "few" usually, if not ALWAYS connotes 3 or more. You said FEW, not a couple.
If you meant TWO years, you should have said two. I am not splitting hairs here, YOU are.

"I said the last few years, meaning the last Congress. The war vote did not take place in this Congress thats outgoing and I would hardly call the flag burning vote a monumental piece of legislation.

Go look at the record of the votes in the last 2 years (this past congress) then come back here and tell me that the House Dem caucus did not hold together on much of the voting."

But go ahead and twist away WHATEVER you originally posted, I don't care.

Steny Hoyer has been around a lot longer than a COUPLE of years. Before you go around calling someone
uninformed, why don't YOU check out recent legislation.

Look at the recent TORTURE BILL for instance. The usual suspects voted in line
with the administration when their chips were called in, including my own
Senator, Stabenow, who votes like a traitor when her seat is considered "safe"
as in this last cycle.

If Hoyer can make Nelson, Nelson, Landrieu, Salazar, Lieberman, et. al vote
like DEMOCRATS when it MATTERS, then more power to him.

Thanks for playing and thanks for telling me what I do and do not know.

[k_jerome]

80. very exclusionist of you...

any other groups you don't want to be in YOUR party?

By the way, Murtha lost because he is an anti war right winger. Like Pat Buchanan.

[Cascadian]

82. Murtha is getting a pass because he is against the war.

Of course Murtha is on the right but he is no longer for this war fiasco and therefore we need him right now. Why hasn't Hillary Clinton admitted she made a mistake in supporting the Iraq invasion? My whole point is the DLC MUST no longer dictate Democratic policy anymore. We need to chart a new course. The lawmakers that are Democrats can no longer vote for or support anymore Neocon-Bushite bills. I want the Democrats to fight and not compromise with these thugs!


John

[k_jerome]

91. you need him RIGHT NOW, i see...

what do you do with him when he has served your purpose?

[upi402]

85. DINO's must go

now!:spank:

[k_jerome]

88. Please supply your approved list of DINO's...

your blacklist so to speak.

[Cascadian]

89. Hillary Clinton for starters. n/t

[k_jerome]

90. who else...

what is your criteria for weeding out these unwanted people in our party?

[geek tragedy]

113. Hillary has gotten millions of votes from

her constituents--almost all of them Democrats.

Who are you to say she doesn't belong in the party?

Silly rantings.

[Cascadian]

121. So you agree she was right about supporting the war then?

As well as not fessing up she was wrong about it?


John

[geek tragedy]

122. I don't think Democrats have to be perfect. eom

[Q]

95. The 'big tent' doesn't mean...

...allowing any (d)emocrat to try to divide the party, take control and run their own agenda financed by outside interests.

They can CALL themselves Democrats...but they can't control the party WITHOUT the consent of the voters.

The problem remains: the DLC is an OUTSIDE organization that uses corporate cash to get corporate whores elected. It would be different if they used their moutains of cash to get DEMOCRATS elected...but their goal is to get ONLY 'new' democrats in office.

It's difficult to trust an organization that constantly smears progressive/liberal Democrats and praises Bush and RWing programs.

[PassingFair]

110. "difficult to trust"

You are TOO kind.

:hi:

[zanne]

98. center = weak

I've posted this opinion elsewhere, but you don't try to "negotiate" with wild animals. The right wing has centrists for breakfast. They're aggressive, mean and skilled at smear politics. The Democrats have to act on the courage of their convictions, or we're all doomed to live in a once-great democracy; a country full of people who just let it all slip away.

[wyldwolf]

99. LOL! The left/right fringe = spectators

[geek tragedy]

114. That approach sure worked well two weeks ago, didn't it?

I guess some people don't care about winning elections.

[Greyhound]

102. Not repuke-lite, Corporatists.

It's often hard to tell the difference, but if you look very closely you will see that their bribes, although they come from the same source, are deposited in different banks.

[PassingFair]

106. History 101: A Primer

Here are all the LOSERS in their usual modes. Emanuel, Hoyer, Harman, all working OPENLY
against Pelosi and Murtha and anyone ELSE that was trying to slow the KILLING in Iraq.
PLEASE read this article, and you will see why Pelosi wanted Murtha, DESPITE his shortcomings.

They either read the public COMPLETELY WRONG or they WANTED to prolong the war.

We will probably have NO real investigation into how much money and has been
POURED into the pockets of the war profiteers. The enablers are sweeping sand over everything.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/06/AR2005120601707.html

snip>"Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) and Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (Md.), the second-ranking House Democratic leader, have told colleagues that Pelosi's recent endorsement of a speedy withdrawal, combined with her claim that more than half of House Democrats support her position, could backfire on the party, congressional sources said.

These sources said the two leaders have expressed worry that Pelosi is playing into Bush's hands by suggesting Democrats are the party of a quick pullout -- an unpopular position in many of the most competitive House races.

"What I want Democrats to be discussing is what the president's policies have led to," Emanuel said. He added that once discussion turns to a formal timeline for troop withdrawals, "the how and when gets buried" and many voters take away only an impression that Democrats favor retreat.

[geek tragedy]

115. So, most Congressional Democrats are DINO's?

Because they dared vote against a rightwinger like Murtha?

[PassingFair]

116. SOME of them probably don't even know...

that they are merely following through on
an old game plan.

But SOME of them probably do.

[wyldwolf]

117. ah! So you know more than they do.

:rofl:

[PassingFair]

119. Well, I can read the article from this time LAST YEAR.

And see how the cookie is crumbling NOW.

"rofl"

You'll get dirty rolling around in the
slop like that.....

[wyldwolf]

120. so, that article proves they're DINOS and don't even know it?

:rofl:

[geek tragedy]

123. Internet posters know more than people

on a first-name basis with Hoyer, Pelosi, and Murtha.

Didn't you get the memo?

[wyldwolf]

124. must have missed that memo

[AntiFascist]

118. The DLC is obviously playing right into Rove's hands n/t