Flash! Progressives know full well DLC "centrism" is a code word for elitist right wing dems.

[wcepler]

Thanks to the combined efforts of George Bush (and Bill Clinton!) the "continuum" of political viewpoint is now totally meaningless. Indeed, the 2008 centrism of the DLC would have been VERY right wing eight years ago.

So, save the continuum nonsense for political TV sitcoms. Progressives and Liberals don't "compare" themselves to camouflaged right wingers -- dem or otherwise. We have our own compass and vision and our only commitment is to honor the will of the American people.

And speaking of the will of the American people, Barack Obama was elected assuming he would not immediately start morphing into an Obama/Clinton Presidency. We also assumed he would make appointments grounded in the factual, historical certainty that the ONLY hope for dealing with the Middle east metastasized cancer is with even-handed compromise and diplomacy.

However, with respect to the Middle East, things are starting off badly and so far diplomacy and compromise do not seem to be on the agenda.

The sad truth of the matter is that so far Obama hasn't even thrown a bone to the Palestinians and the Muslim world in general and this is NOT the will of the American people, but the will of . . . who? What deals did Obama make during the election to start off so one sidedly?

We thought he was going to be a man of peace and diplomacy, but you would be hard put to find anyone in the Muslim world who still has much optimism about that.

Of course, many appointments are still forthcoming and we can pray that President Elect Obama will "rise to the occasion" and be a passionate man of conscience and intelligence and transcend the fettering political deal making during the election.

Having said that, however, millions of Americans (certainly most progressives and liberals who supplied the political financing, effort, and infrastructure that actually elected Obama) are now deeply concerned that the DLC machine will continue to pump out more right wing dems so beloved by the fascist elites and that Obama will continue to give the Palestinians and the Muslim world in general the impression that the talk he talked during the election will absolutely not be the walk he walks AFTER the election.

The bottom line is that so far Obama seems to be consistently rejecting his base (and progressives, like it or not, ARE his base), as well as ignoring his promise to deal with the Israeli/Palestinian conflict with diplomacy and compromise.

This is not a matter of not giving Obama a chance. More appointments notwithstanding, he IS being given that chance as we speak, but the specter of the DLC taking over EVERYTHING again is an agonizing and suicidal mistake (never forget that the DLC had it’s hand up the puppets of the 2006 Congress of dem traitors).

Lest we forget, this is exactly what we voted to LEAVE, i.e., to get away once and for all from these elite-sucking-up DLC centrists. We thought Obama was going to be a sort of "new deal" and a quantum jump into high rationality and ethics.

But so far, all we’re getting is a recycled DLC -- which is more than a tad ironic since we thought only John McCain would be chaining America AGAIN to the dead and rotting “past” this Presidential election gave Obama an overwhelming mandate to leave.
**********************************************************************

W. Christopher Epler (Bill)

<http://theliberationofrealism.blogspot.com/>

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

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

[bread_and_roses]

3. the Palestinians need not be one's "only concern," nor does opposing Israeli actions

make one an Anti-Semite. Nor does opposing Israeli actions in Palestine mean that one supports every action of every Palestinian.

The issues raised in the OP are issues for many who supported and still support Obama. Support does not equate to silence.

[TheWraith]

4. That's uncalled for.

I despise the DLC paranoia as much as anybody, but your response is wholly inappropriate.

[Kitty Herder]

7. If that's what you took away from that article, I'd say you need to re-read it. nt

[Vidar]

14. Awfully selective reading there, aquart.

[BlueCaliDem]

2. IF, and that's a BIG "if" (Obama isn't sworn in yet) takes a dive to the right of Emanuel

...there'll be hell to pay.

Independents, Progressives and liberal Dems won't vote him a second term and I don't think he wants to be a one-term President especially now that he's the first minority to become President of the United States.

It would set a bad precedence for those minorities that would want to come in after him, and that's not a legacy he'd want to leave behind.

I have to believe he realizes this. I have to believe he's truly the man for change in our country. I believe that the DLCers he's surrounded himself with so far have the experience in government from which he can take and use to his advantage.

In the meantime, let's not get ahead of ourselves. He's not even sworn in yet, so it's too early to make any judgment.

[TheWraith]

5. Sigh.

As you pointed out, Obama hasn't even been sworn in yet, but already you're looking for the worst case scenario, like Obama's years in the Senate and 20 month presidential campaign don't already give you an idea of what his positions are.

[BlueCaliDem]

6. You're right, of course. His political background should be enough, but on the off-chance the myth

... about being in the WH can change a man (okay, this was according to a disillusioned Scott McClellan regarding Dubya on Real Time some weeks back), it's not an impossibility.

Then again, looking at how strong Barack has been throughout his life; how he beat every odd against him and avoided corruption to the point it drove the media nuts in search of anything to crucify him with, it should give us all a clue how he will govern.

Biden said he had a spine of steel. I say he has one of titanium.

His past shows that he's absolutely not interested in own gain, but truly concerned and caring about this country and the American people as a whole.

I never meant to present the worst case scenario. I apologize if I gave that impression.

[TheWraith]

10. It's alright. I'm just weary of the negativity around here.

You'd think most DUers were living in a world where Obama had run as a total sellout to the right.

[Just-plain-Kathy]

18. You know, it's just that we have been burnt before....

In 2006, we gained control of the House and Senate on the promise of ending the war. That didn't happen. Nancy Pelosi spoke about "Subpoena Power", she never used it. ...It just seems the most corporate dems get the most powerful positions. Obama considering Ms NAFTA for SoS was a real kick in the pants.

We were promised "change"; a lot of us are getting a little antsy hoping Obama wasn't feeding us a line.

[cascadiance]

21. If that happens, then in 2010, the Democratic Primary will be THE election that year!

And perhaps we should already start organizing to oust those *FAKE* Democrats and replace them with real Democrats then in Congress! The more power progressives have in Congress, the more Obama will have to listen to them then!

[wcepler]

8. its irresponsible not to give feedback during this period

Yes, the jury is still out and yes Obama has a respectable record, but that doesn't change the facts before us, which are that his appointments and remarks are not hopeful to progressives. And not to openly point this out is to be the silent little mice the DLC keep pretending doesn't exist.

We didn't vote for a DLC/Obama Presidency. We voted for an Obama Presidency and so far we are getting exactly the opposite.

Also, it is precisely during the transition period that we should speaking out about such things before it is too late.

The first comment is also a symptom of why we are so concerned. It didn't take long, did it, before a simple liberal take on things is now attacked with such arrogance and vulgarity.

[bertman]

9. Excellent post, wcepler. You expressed my concerns very succinctly. I'm willing to give our

President-elect a chance but I'm also going to light up the phone lines and the emails at Obama headquarters.

The Obama transition team needs to hear from those of us who are unhappy with the way this is "trending".

[Jim Sagle]

11. Here's a clue for you, wc. The American people did NOT elect Obama primarily to bash Israel.

They elected him, among many other reasons, because they were sick of war, unemployment, offshoring, government lawlessness, torture, and many other things.

Looks as if the American people didn't get their priorities straight - at least, not straight from you. :rofl:

[Dragonfli]

13. You should really read the post - No Israel Bashing there.

Did you mean this?
"The bottom line is that so far Obama seems to be consistently rejecting his base (and progressives, like it or not, ARE his base), as well as ignoring his promise to deal with the Israeli/Palestinian conflict with diplomacy and compromise."

I am sure you simply misread it.

The OP may or mat not be correct about how Obama will deal with Israel/Palestine, but as a progressive I can assure you diplomacy and compromise is not some "super-secret progressive code" for bashing Israel - at least not to the progressives I know.

Obama did run on diplomacy as well as many other issues. I think the OP is simply stating his concern that he does not believe some in the DLC will be on board with such an approach. I don't think anyone knows yet what the extreme right of the Democratic party can or has done to influence his decision making process regarding foreign policy.

If the OP is guilty of anything it is making premature assumptions, he is certainly not guilty of "Israel Bashing" or calling for it.

I am sure you feel diplomacy is a good thing and should be pursued by the new administration as much as any of the less corporate democrats and simply mistook what you read.

If that is the case as I believe, I think you should apologize.

[Jim Sagle]

17. Negotiation is certainly necessary, but it can mean almost anything.

My problem with the Op is that I/P was the ONLY issue he focused on in any detail.

Keep in mind that this the same W C Epler who in another post made a BIG deal out of the fact that Rahm Emmanuel's middle name is Israel.

[Dragonfli]

24. I am confused. Does that mean you feel justified in

painting this post as a call for "Bashing Israel"?
I missed the post you mentioned but if your characterization of that post is anything like your characterization of this one, I find your account less than credible.

Your charge was very serious and you should back up your remarks with some proof of the Jew bashing you claim exists or apologize.

I still am hoping you "didn't really mean to go there" and were just angry with the guy.
You can and should criticize him if you find cause for disagreement, but your comment was way over the top and not even accurate.

What is so hard about an apology? We all get angry and post crap we don't mean from time to time.
I understand your point of view, just not the rhetoric.

[acmavm]

23. As far as I know, and I've been reading way more than is good for me

(or anyone probably), Obama hasn't said anything about or made and decisions about the I/P situation. I've only seen reports that indicate that he's trying to put together his administration, not form policy.

Maybe I missed it.

[creeksneakers2]

12. If you can't give Obama enough freedom to pick even his own

chief of staff then you aren't supporting him at all.

[Vidar]

15. You've nailed it as usual, Bill. Highly recommended.

[wcepler]

16. Progressives aren't going to roll over and play dead for ANYONE

Thank you, Vidar. Dear God, are liberals already knee jerk classified as anti semitic if we are true to our values. We voted for Obama to STOP the Israeli/Palestine conflict and we voted for Obama to STOP the Iraq War and we DIDN'T vote for Obama to keep pumping out DLC right wing dems. And if whomever thinks we're going to roll over and play dead for a NON diplomacy and compromise approach to the Middle East, they better drink some more cool aide. After these last eight years, WE ARE HERE TO STAY -- any you ain't seen anything yet!

[Vidar]

20. I hope you're right. At least I do have hope now, something that's been sorely lacking

for the last 8 years. Unfortunately, we still have far too many corporate whore centrist dead wood types in the party disguises as progressives along with the ever-helpful Blue Dog Dems, who at least are what they claim to be.

[KG]

19. the dem party is not, and will not soon be, a vehicle for progressive politics and policies.

don't expect it and you won't be disappointed.

[wcepler]

22. we're still here and getting stronger

Progressives have zero desire to take over everything! We just want our political piece of the pie we busted our butts to earn. WE elected Obama and WE even got Obama into the primaries with commitments, money, effort, and putting into place an infrastructure for several years before the election, but now we're hearing rubbish like if we want follow through with Obama's promises, that means we want to "take over" the government.

No, what's happening now is increasingly clear.

We've been "set up" (again!) to be the non event in American politics. Alternative viewpoints are already calling us racist dirty names simply because we DEMAND that Obama hold to his promise to deal with the Middle East in general and the tragic Israeli/Palestinian "conflict" with DIPLOMACY AND COMPROMISE. And if anyone thinks we're going to roll over and play dead about this, think again, because we're going to keep hammering and hammering to ONCE AND FOR ALL end this conflict with fairness and justice. May I say those words again? The words are "fairness" and "justice". And, trust me, we are NEVER going to lighten up about this since this endless conflict is now and always has been the CORE CANCER on the planet. A cancer, alas, that has long since metastasized to the entire planet.

Also, if whomever ever thinks liberals are so brain dead we don't know EXACTLY what the elite sucking up DLC is doing (i.e., trying to flood the congress with elitist right wing dems -- just as they did in with the 2006 congress of traitors), think again.

So bottom line, it's become realistically probable that progressives got "back-room-dealed-out" out of things by the anachronistic DLC (so disliked by voting Americans) and Middle East diplomacy-rejectors (also so disliked by voting Americans) during these last few months.

Well, whatever, but here's something for anti progressives to chew on. This isn't once upon a time; this is year 2008 and however much some may hate it, progressives now have the muscle of millions of activists, vast funding, and a patriotic anger that reaches Mars. So get used to us, folks. The DLC may think they can make us go poof with a few back room deals, but they are going to learn very quickly that we are not only still here in spite of such deal making betrayals, but these attempts on only make us MORE passionate and determined PERMANENTLY break out of the box the elites, the DLC, and those who choose war over diplomacy think they've got us trapped it.

So whoever thinks liberals and progressives are going to go poof -- in your dreams. We're just warming up.

And by the way, nothing would make us happier than if Obama moves away from an Obama/DLC Administration. Unfortunately, all the evidence to date is exactly otherwise.

Sometimes things are so toxic you have to peel the onion in layers. Well, the fascist pugs were voted out, mostly by progressives. That's layer one. Layer two is elite/fascist/DLC dems. Well, they're next and eventually we'll have a government that is the true will of the people (not pig, pig rich elites and their DLC puppets). And this will also be a government whose first commitment is to diplomacy and justice, not money cow wars for the elites.