Debunking ‘Centrism’

[Q]

Debunking ‘Centrism’

by David Sirota

Looking out over Washington, DC, from his plush office, Al From is once again foaming at the mouth. The CEO of the corporate-sponsored Democratic Leadership Council and his wealthy cronies are in their regular postelection attack mode. Despite wins by economic populists in red states like Colorado and Montana this year, the DLC is claiming like a broken record that progressive policies are hurting the Democratic Party.

From’s group is funded by huge contributions from multinationals like Philip Morris, Texaco, Enron and Merck, which have all, at one point or another, slathered the DLC with cash. Those resources have been used to push a nakedly corporate agenda under the guise of “centrism” while allowing the DLC to parrot GOP criticism of populist Democrats as far-left extremists. Worse, the mainstream media follow suit, characterizing progressive positions on everything from trade to healthcare to taxes as ultra-liberal. As the AP recently claimed, “party liberals argue that the party must energize its base by moving to the left” while “the DLC and other centrist groups argue that the party must court moderates and find a way to compete in the Midwest and South.”

Is this really true? Is a corporate agenda really “centrism”? Or is it only “centrist” among Washington’s media elite, influence peddlers and out-of-touch political class? The American Heritage Dictionary defines “centrism” as “the political philosophy of avoiding the extremes of right and left by taking a moderate position.” So to find out what is really “mainstream,” the best place to look is public polling data.

Let’s start with economic policy. The DLC and the press claim Democrats who attack President Bush and the Republicans for siding with the superwealthy are waging “class warfare,” which they claim will hurt Democrats at the ballot box. Yet almost every major poll shows Americans already essentially believe Republicans are waging a class war on behalf of the rich—they are simply waiting for a national party to give voice to the issue. In March 2004, for example, a Washington Post poll found a whopping 67 percent of Americans believe the Bush Administration favors large corporations over the middle class.

Continues: http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1216-20.htm

[Q]

1. More interesting quotes:

"The “centrists” tell Democrats not to hammer corporations for their misbehavior and not to push for a serious crackdown on corporate excess, for fear the party will be hurt by an “anti-business” image. Yet such a posture, pioneered by New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, is mainstream: A 2002 Washington Post poll taken during the height of the corporate accounting scandals found that 88 percent of Americans distrust corporate executives, 90 percent want new corporate regulations/tougher enforcement of existing laws and more than half think the Bush Administration is “not tough enough” in fighting corporate crime.

On taxes, self-described “centrists” like Senator Joe Lieberman, a senior DLC leader, attacked proposals to repeal the Bush tax cuts to pay down the deficit. Yet even the DLC’s pollster found in 2001 that a majority of Americans support such a policy, and that a strong plurality of voters would actually be more likely to vote for a Democrat who endorsed this proposal. Lieberman caricatured those in favor of repeal as extreme, claiming a repeal would alienate millions of voters who supposedly feel the tax cut helped them. Yet a September 2004 CBS News poll found that 72 percent of Americans say they have either not been affected by the Bush tax cuts or that their taxes have actually gone up.

On healthcare, we are led to believe that it is a “liberal,” “left” or “socialist” position to support a single-payer system that would provide universal coverage to all Americans. But if you believe the Washington Post, that would mean America was some sort of hippie commune. The newspaper’s 2003 national poll found that almost two-thirds of Americans say they prefer a universal healthcare system “that’s run by the government and financed by taxpayers” as opposed to the current private, for-profit system."

[BrklynLiberal]

30. Was just going to post this article and figured I should see if anyone

else had seen it before I did so. Great article. More excellent argument for NOT moving to the right! Add them to what Lakoff says.
Sirota is on Al Franken very frequently. He is the one who did the Progress Report for them.
They have a website: americanprogressaction.org

He is a fellow with The Center for American Progress

[Redleg]

2. Excellent article and eye-opening too.

I just wish Sirota had used more quotes from these DLCers to illustrate their bullcrap. I used to be indifferent to those bastards but now I am realizing that we Dems need to tell the DLC to wise up and embrace progressivism or take a friggin' hike.

[Q]

4. And finally...we're getting down to the meat of what the DLC is all about.

I still remember how the DLC (From and others) lambasted Gore when he expressed concerns about out of control corporate corruption. Gore and the DLC parted ways after he started sounding too 'populist'.

Every Democrat should be aware that there's only a small degree of difference between the DLC and Bush* RWingers on numerous issues. This article nicely points out only SOME of the similarities.

[kentuck]

12. Gore is one of the few "populists" left on a national level....

in my opinion.

[Redleg]

34. Yes, the DLC is more "compassionate conservative."

I do remember, and still resent, that Al Gore was abandoned by so many in the party after 2000- because he was "too liberal," "too much about class warfare," "too anti-business."

[fertilizeonarbusto]

3. AW

go Cheney yourself, From.
Edit: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAND Evan Bayh SUCKS. "Dogma" indeed! He's a rethug poodle. I heard him being interviewed on NPR yesterday about his recent trip to Iraq, and even after what he just saw, he had to be prodded (repeatedly) by the reporter into publicly withdrawing his support for Rumfilled. And you could hear the fear and reluctance in his voice when he said it. What a wuss!

[jonnyblitz]

5. I keep reading good stuff wrtitten by this Sirota guy...

I am surprised I haven't noticed him until these past few weeks. Apparently he has been around for awhile. He seems pretty sharp.

his blog :

http://www.davidsirota.com/

[Q]

6. Thanks for the link. It gives more depth to this article...

...that he supplies the background for each of his arguments:

For background on each of my main assertions in the piece see the following backgrounder:

DLC ATTACKS DEMOCRATS FOR WAGING "CLASS WARFARE"

"DLC members complained Gore in 2000 reverted to a tired class warfare message, and at the 2002 DLC meeting, Lieberman triggered an ugly split when he accused Gore of ignoring the DLC message."
- Hartford Courant, 5/7/04

"Angry DLC leaders ganged up on Al Gore, charging that his leftist, class-warfare, anticorporate message in the 2000 election turned off millions of middle-of-the-road, investor-class voters. It was bad enough the founder of the centrist-leaning DLC, Al From, and its national chairman, Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh, both attacked the former Democratic presidential nominee. But, Mr. Gore's former running mate, Connecticut's Sen. Joe Lieberman, also stuck the knife into the man who put him on the ticket."
- Washington Times, 8/5/02

DLC ATTACKS DEMOCRATS FOR BEING "ANTI-CORPORATE" DURING ENRON SCANDAL IN SUMMER OF 2002

"Angry DLC leaders ganged up on Al Gore, charging that his leftist, class-warfare, anticorporate message in the 2000 election turned off millions of middle-of-the-road, investor-class voters."
- Washington Times, 8/5/02

"Lieberman went out of his way several times in the course of his speech to urge Democrats not to appear anti-business."
- Fox News, 7/29/02

"'You can't be pro-jobs and anti-business,' said Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee. Lieberman, a potential 2004 presidential contender, warned of 'the twin dangers of doing too little and doing too much.'
– AP, 7/11/02

[NYCGirl]

8. Interestingly, the only time Gore made any progress in his campaign was

when he was ignoring the DLC ideas and waging, as they called it, "class warfare." Had he continued to do so, he most likely would have been inaugurated.

[Q]

7. Can we have a dialogue with the DLCers/ Moderates/Centrists?

Please read this entire article and the links provided in the posts. It covers many of the issues of concern to 'non-centrists'.

Perhaps we can discuss this issues and centrists can tell us why they support the DLC positions and why they're superior?

[F.Gordon]

13. Is that what you really want? A dialogue?

I doubt it. I can't support every DLC position but I will tell you why they are superior. They are organized. They are focused. They are consistent. And they help get Democrats elected on the local level and the national level. Name one 'progressive' or 'leftist' group that can make this same claim.

(CBS) The top-giving corporate political action committees didn't hedge their bets in the fall elections despite the narrow division between the GOP and Democrats in Congress. They favored Republican candidates 10-to- 1.

Of 268 corporate PACs that donated $100,000 or more to presidential and congressional candidates from January 2003 through the middle of last month, 245 gave the majority of their contributions to GOP hopefuls, according to an analysis released Wednesday by the nonpartisan Political Money Line campaign finance tracking service.

CBS News November 26, 2004

Kerry lost. If it makes you feel better to direct your angst towards the DLC.... got for it. Personally, I think it's an exercise in futility, but that's just me.

What class warfare? Even in the $200K plus income group Kerry pulled 40% of the vote. I'd say that's pretty good for the "most liberal Senator".

This attack on the DLC was sooooooo predictable. You want a "dialogue"? I seriously doubt that. Instead of attacking the DLC why don't we discuss why the fuck the 'progressives' can't accomplish shit.

I'll start....

It's because they draw this line in the political sand that they won't cross. No compromise. No action. Just an ideology that they won't budge from. Oh, there is focus. Any association with Corporations or people making more than $50,000 a year is....baaaadddd. Very baaaadddd. And they do stare at the line in the political sand. They are focused on not crossing it. Oh, and they are focused on writing articles telling us how bad the DLC is. :eyes:

What did I learn from this election? It's very easy to hate. It's very easy to find someone to blame. The hard part? Coming up with an agenda that will appeal to more Americans. I'm pro Gun Control. I'm pro Abortion. I'm all for using federal tax money to fund social programs and help the poor. I'm for higher taxes. I'm for funding public education. I am anti-War. (any War) But.... I will compromise. If I have to give up an item or two on my "political grocery list" to acquire a couple, then so be it. I'm willing to do that. Are you?

[wyldwolf]

14. wow! blistering yet so true

95% agreement.

I'm hesitant to call anyone superior (except my wife.)

I'll just say the DLC has been more successful.

[F.Gordon]

17. LOL. You too?

You aren't doing the "get down on your knees" thing are you? With your wife? I'll rub her feet with oil and throw flowers in front of her when she walks but I refuse to get down on my knees....
:evilgrin:

[wyldwolf]

18. I worship my wife...

knees are useful for kneeling.

[Forkboy]

38. "knees are useful for kneeling."

That would make a good motto for the DLC.

:thumbsup:

[wyldwolf]

40. good. So learn it

[Forkboy]

41. No thanks

fellating isn't my style.

[Q]

21. I wouldn't have asked for a dialogue...

...If I didn't want one.

But I see that it's the DLCers who don't want to talk about the direction THEY want to take the party. Don't blame the mess the party's in on the progressives or the liberals. They haven't been in power since the new friggin deal.

Some of us seemed to have learned something quite different from this election. The first thing we learned is that the DLC has more control over the party than any of us had suspected. They took a supposed liberal like Kerry and made a mushmouth out of him. They gave the Kerry campaign the same message that they gave Gore: tow the DLC line or you won't get any cash or support from the party machine. That Gore became a populist (too late) is the reason he was exiled...by the order of the corporate wing of the party.

Don't confuse 'blame' with wanting our party back. If the DLCers want a 'centrist' party then let them start their own to rival that of the GOP. "Coming up with an agenda to appeal to more Americans' has never been the point of the DLC. Their support of Bush* policies and corporate whore agenda is something that most Democrats don't want to see.

You're right. It's virtually impossible to have a dialogue with the so-called centrists. But remember this one thing: it's not your 'moderate' policies that are pissing us off so much as the DLC's support and appeasement of the most corrupt government in our history. We simply won't accept it if they continue to sleep with the enemy of the Democratic party and America.

[madfloridian]

32. Sounds like you will compromise on anything and everything.

SNIP..."What did I learn from this election? It's very easy to hate. It's very easy to find someone to blame. The hard part? Coming up with an agenda that will appeal to more Americans. I'm pro Gun Control. I'm pro Abortion. I'm all for using federal tax money to fund social programs and help the poor. I'm for higher taxes. I'm for funding public education. I am anti-War. (any War) But.... I will compromise. If I have to give up an item or two on my "political grocery list" to acquire a couple, then so be it. I'm willing to do that. Are you?..."

Sounds like you just put your finger on what the hell is wrong with the DLC....they have no values because they compromised them away.

[St. Jarvitude]

35. I'll address one point of your post

I'm kind of exhausted, so I won't tackle the rest.

Name one 'progressive' or 'leftist' group that can make this same claim.

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/

Specifically, DFA's "Dean Dozen". Look at this:

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/features/2004/11/17/dean_dozen_success_stories.php

[madfloridian]

36. That line in the sand you mention? Guess what.

A lot of us have drawn our own line in the sand. And we will refuse to cross it. We are not compromising anymore.

Could you please explain how we lost the presidency, lost more seats in congress, and we are still winning? What did we win? I forgot.

Please, tell me that.

[Q]

42. There indeed is a line in the sand...

...and there is no logical reason to cross it and continue to vote against our own interests.

The DLC's Pro-corporation agenda means opposition to an increase in the minimum wage and defense of unions and worker's rights. Their continued support for the phony war on terrorism in Iraq means less tax dollars to support programs that benefit ALL Americans.

If our refusal to support the corporate wing of the Democratic party means losing a few more elections...then so be it. But I have a strong belief that just the opposite will happen if we once again become the 'champions' of the classes that the Republicans have long ago forsaken and the New Democrats are trying hard to abandon.

[paulk]

46. one lie

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=252942&kaid=127&subid=900056

"In contrast to the Bush administration, during which more than 4 million Americans have fallen into poverty, New Democrats will finish the job of welfare reform by making sure everyone who can work does so -- by expanding child care; increasing the Earned Income Tax Credit and the minimum wage; and requiring absent fathers who owe child support to go to work to pay it. "

[Wind Dancer]

9. Great article!

The DLC is destroying the core of the Democratic Party. They are as guilty as the Republicans by representing corporate interests instead of the people.

[OneBlueSky]

10. rather than right, left or centrist . . .

which define a horizontal dimension of politics, the Democrats should identify themselves as populists opposed to corporate control of our government and our country (a vertical dimension) . . . the New Populist Majority, if you will . . .

want to get their attention and achieve massive public support at the same time? . . . make our motto "Corporations are not persons!", and our platform revoking corporate personhood and ending corporate governance . . . the amount of corporate largesse we'll lose will be more than compensated by the millions of new individual contributors who are tired of seeing our country in the clutches of unregulated corporations . . . this is a HUGE issue that the Democrats can ride to victory in coming elections (assuming, of course, that the voting process is taken out of the hands of . . . corporations!) . . .

[OHdem10]

11. Bayh-the Third Way--voted with Bush

on every piece of his legislation in the first term. Voted for Bush Taxcuts, both times. Voted for the horrible Medicare Bill--you name if Bush wanted something Bayh was champion roll-over artist. He assists in keeping Republicans in office. On all Bush' legisltation Republicans refused to vote with him. Bayh and his ilk voted with Bush. The
Republicans who refused to vote with Bush went home and happily told
their consituents (who hated Bush's legislation)) --Hey, I did not vote
for that bill. Elephants in Donkey's clothing???

All of you have given great arguments. If the DLC is so great why do we continuously lose elections at all levels. I sy we lose becasue
as Harry Truman put it--"Given the choice between a real republicn and a fake republican the American will chose the real thing everytime.

The article was excellent--thanks.

[Q]

29. So what's the excuse for voting WITH Republicans?

...And not hold Bush* & Company accountable? The centrists will tell you this is part of the 'third way' strategy to get Red Staters and those shadowy swing voters to vote for them. But don't believe this for a minute.

They vote with the Bushie Republicans because THEY AGREE WITH THEM and support their agenda. From the Patriot Act to the Tax cuts for the wealthy to the aggressive war against Iraq...they're of one mind on these issues.

[paulk]

47. another lie

"New Democrats will make the middle class America's engine of economic growth again. The Bush administration has the same wrong answer for every economic problem: Cut taxes for the wealthy. New Democrats have a very different vision of economic growth: that the American economy will grow faster if every American has the chance to get ahead. When workers have more of a stake in prosperity, their companies and our economy will grow faster. When we demand responsibility and punish rather than ignore those who break the rules, it won't just make our values stronger, it will strengthen our markets. When we reward hard work, no citizenry on Earth is willing to work harder.

New Democrats will equip working Americans with the tools to get ahead.


We'll reward work, not just wealth. The current administration's economic values are bad for America. It is morally wrong that billionaires now pay a lower tax rate on what they own than their household help pay on what little they earn. The very wealthy should not pay lower taxes on the stocks they trade than middle-class and working Americans pay on the hard work they do. That's not class warfare; it undermines the work ethic that is the cornerstone of our economy and the foundation of our middle-class society. "

[pmbryant]

15. Sirota mischaracterizes DLC positions

See this other thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1436734

A very disappointing effort from Sirota. If one is going to criticize Democrats, one should at least criticize them for positions they actually hold.

--Peter

[itzamirakul]

16. Why is the DLC

attacking Michael Moore instead of attacking Republicans and their position on privatizing Social Security?

Pro-DLCers keep accusing people of demonizing the DLC but isn't the DLC guilty of the same thing? Demonizing Michael Moore for doing the job THEY should have done but didn't?

How much do the DLC members get personally from these big corporate donors? How much toward their own personal re-election? How many favors do they get PERSONALLY that do not trickle down to the rest of us? How many free trips? How many of their wives, children, brothers and sisters have great, high-paid jobs with the corporate donors?

Why should the DLC care if we win or lose? As long as they are in charge of the Democratic Party, they win anyway - on a very personal basis.

[pmbryant]

20. The DLC is not in charge of the Democratic Party

That should be obvious. If they were, Joe Lieberman would have been the nominee. Instead, he finished in what, fifth place?

If Al "irrelevant" From or whoever it was wants to demean Michael Moore and MoveOn.org then that just proves how irrelevant he is. Let's not fall into the trap of criticizing the wrong people.

Keep the fire focused on the Bushies where it belongs.

--Peter

[Q]

23. I'm not sure I agree with your logic.

The DLC may be corporate shills...but they're not stupid. I'm sure that even THEY understood that Lieberman could never win.

We've had our attention focused on the GOPers and Bushies for a very long time. I'm sure that's what the New Democrats want us to do: watch Bush* while they sell us out behind the scenes.

No...it's also our responsibility to watch our own party and to tell them in no uncertain terms when we think they're screwing up. Don't like the criticism? That's supposed to be one of the things that separates us from the RWingers. But now it seems that even that is out of order in a party that's becoming difficult to distinguish from the other side.

[itzamirakul]

49. The hell they aren't!

The DLC has a stranglehold on the DNC, which is the "voice" of the party, why else is Al From suddenly crawling out from under a rock and making tv show appearances when he did none of that during the campaign? He is more virulently vocal about Michael Moore than he has ever been about the "Bushies."

Remember when Lieberman was running with Gore and the tv cameras caught him laughing and chatting with his opponent, Cheney, like they were best buds? Lieberman knew he had a snowball's chance in hell of winning the democratic primaries this year with his past record of chumming up to the Republican Party.

You are right about keeping the criticism focused where it should be - but you are preaching to the choir when you tell ME that. Perhaps you should visit From at the DLC's website(www.ndol.org) and tell Al From what you are advising ME to do- to stay focused on the Bushies and leave Michael Moore out of the equation. Why not suggest that instead of wasting valuable tv talk show time lamblasting Moore, that he might instead lamblast the Social Security Reforms?

[paulk]

48. can you substantiate any of these charges?

"How much do the DLC members get personally from these big corporate donors? How much toward their own personal re-election? How many favors do they get PERSONALLY that do not trickle down to the rest of us? How many free trips? How many of their wives, children, brothers and sisters have great, high-paid jobs with the corporate donors? "

These are pretty serious charges to make - do you have any proof of this sort of misconduct?

[itzamirakul]

50. Do you know the difference

between questions and charges? Do you deny that a lot of "favors" are done in DC? Do you deny that a lot of politicians have family members who work as lobbyists or in other favorable jobs? There is an atmosphere of "political incest" in our government on both sides.

Can you answer any of my questions - truthfully?

[paulk]

56. LOL

nice try...

well, not really.

pretty weak, actually.

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

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

[zaj]

19. This isn't debunking "Centrism"... it's "Debunking the DLC"

You may not be able to be in the DLC without being a corporate shill, but you can certainly be a moderate centrist without being a corporate shill.

[quaoar]

22. To be more precise

It is debunking corporatism.

[Wind Dancer]

24. Thom Hartmann discussing article now.

http://www.radiopower.org/talkradio/

Archived will be www.whiterosesociety.org

[paulk]

25. Mr. Sirota's article is an answer in search of a question

John Salazar won his Colorado House seat
primarily because he opposed a water bill from the 2002 election that would have sent western slope water to the eastern side. His opponent had supported the bill. It was a local issue. It had nothing to do with the DLC or "economic populism", whatever Mr. Sirota means by that.

On Ken Salazar - once again, I don't even understand what Mr. Sirota is arguing - in his article he attacks the "Third Way" DLC offshoot group - yet, Ken Salazar, who he uses as one of his primary examples in support of his argument, is an honorary chairman of the Third Way group!

http://www.third-way.com/news/salazar.htm

????????????????


Mr. Sirota may have some valid points to make... I don't know. The two articles of his on the DLC that I have read are so faulty in their basic assumptions that I can't even take him seriously.

[Q]

31. Faulty in basic assumptions? How so?

He takes what polls and surveys show that a majority of Democrats want as a 'platform'....such as 'universal health care', no privatization of SS, no tax cuts for ONLY the rich, non-support of the Iraq invasion, etc. and shows how the DLC Centrists vote against their interests.

In plain words...the DLC is voting and supporting positions against the will of the MAJORITY of Democrats. I believe at least this part is very clear.

[wyldwolf]

51. which polls and surveys?

[Q]

54. Well...you could start with the 'polls and surveys'...

...of the delegates of the 2004 convention. Add to that the recent national poll that concludes that MOST Americans want to see abortion remain legal.

My position is not entirely about polls...for they can be slanted in any direction the polsters want.

I take issue with so-called 'centrists' because in today's political climate, anything that helps the Bush* Junta harms our country. That they publicly support many of his policies also hurts the Democratic party and weakens our resolve on making the Bush* WH accountable.

[wyldwolf]

55. I'm following you to certain extent...

of the delegates of the 2004 convention.

The delegates are typically the activists of the party. They're not totally representative of the Dem populace. Doesn't mean is isn't an indicator. The delegates could be 90% against the war in Irag whereas only (hypothetically) 55% of dems as a whole are.

Add to that the recent national poll that concludes that MOST Americans want to see abortion remain legal.

Only the hard right wants it illegal, anyway. Even pro-life dems still want it to remain legal.

[Q]

26. Does anyone else remember...

...when the 'true' conservatives in the Republican party were complaining that the Neocons and Religious Right was trying to take over their party in the 80s and early 90s? They warned that the last of the moderate conservatives would be gone by 2000.

The GOP is a good example of what happens to a party when one faction takes over and shoves everyone who opposes them out of power. The DLC is doing the same thing when they lay claim to the party machinery and determine the agenda without the input of the progressives or liberals.

But unlike the real conservatives...liberals and progressives don't have to allow this to be their party's fate. We must stand in the DLC's way at every turn, refuse to vote for their Bush* Doctrine enabling candidates who join with the other side in lying to the American people about waging a 'war on terror' in Iraq.

[quaoar]

27. But the difference in those scenarios

Is that the religious right had the motivated shock troops on the ground to carry out their takeover of the Republican Party.

To paraphrase Joe Stalin, how many divisions does Al From have?

[Q]

37. Al From had Clinton...

...so he didn't need 'shock troops'. They used the 'slow frog boil' to gradually take over the party from within. They wanted just 'small' concessions at first...like NAFTA and the telecommunications bill. And they never told the Democratic rank-and-file what these bills would mean for the party and their future.

A coup doesn't always involve guns and blood. The Bushie Neocons and their RR friends took over their party and then this country without a shot fired. The DLC has done the same to the Democratic party. Of course they're not going to come right and say they're in control. They'll just assume control, and like Boy George*...say they have a 'mandate'.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

28. Centrism="Just throw SOME Jews in the ovens. See? Moderation!"

Left, Right, Center comprise a FALSE VOCABULARY TO CONFUSE THE ISSUE
OF KILLING PEOPLE FOR MONEY.

Some people get the scam and some don't and enable it creating a very confused American public
1) Those who kill people for money and hide the evidence
2) Those who don't and fight to expose the evidence

This polarity of awareness within the two main political parties alienates some who choose to sit between murder and justice and call this 'Centrism.' But denying justice is not moderation, it is STILL INJUSTICE.

"Because I don't trust the 'radical fringe' who want to either
1) throw all the Jews in the oven (right wing)
OR
2) throw none of the Jews in the oven." (left wing)

"Yes, all things in moderation. So the right answer is in the middle.See? Politics is all about...compromise.
-Compromising your values." (DLC/DNC)

The Tactic We Must Deal With Or Die:
Psy-ops culture war tactics of Orwellification-
'Weaponize the good, demonize the outraged liberals who protest this.'

This is the way the domestic culture war (psy-ops propaganda to intentionally stir people up and chill dissent) works:

Take something, like the US government, do terrible things with it.

Then, when liberals criticize the terrible things, claim they are criticizing the good part and so 'liberals must be bad.'

"They hate us for our freedom."
"They are jealous of our virtue because they are sooooo bad."
Amazingly, this really resonates in A MASTER RACE MENTALITY!

OR:

Neo-cons put a baby in hot water.
Liberals accuse them of abuse.
Neo-cons claim that 'liberals hate babies.'

Christmas has been weaponized the exact same way.

Neo-cons use religion to kill people with the New Crusades.
Liberals cite First Amendment separation of church and state.
Neo-cons claim that 'liberals hate God, Jesus, Santa, etc.'

Neo-cons use our children as troops to kill for oil.
Liberals scream bloody murder.
Neo-cons claim 'liberals hate our troops.'

That last one is the most dangerous because it will lead to a Tienanmin Square situation where our own troops will be called in to stomp on 'enemies of the state' or PROTESTERS.
http://museums.cnd.org/June4th/massacre.html
(Photos of Tienanmin Square Massacre of Protesters)

The Inaugaral parade will see Bush* literally hiding behind our troops so that the hostility of the protesters will be used to claim that liberals are against the troops 'just like the Fallujan insurgents.'

Unh-oh. Orwellification of 'save our troops from war' into 'kill our troops by not supporting the war.'

January 20, 2005 is the next big psy-op event to create a Brown Shirt movement in this heavily armed and polarized country.

SO...

Re-Orwellification OR Flipping the Polarity on Evil Back to Good:

The Master Race mentality of American Exceptionalism Saving the World and the Christian-Inanity of being the wrathful smiting 'Chosen Few' are the binary agents of American Fascism.

There's no time to back up 358 degrees to explain to the public how the democratic humanity of 'We the People'+'All God's Children' has been perverted into American fascist 'Divine King Stomping out Satanic Infidels.'

SO FIGHT FIRE WITH FIRE! CHANNEL THE PASSION FOR VENGEANCE INTO
A PASSION FOR JUSTICE! People WANT to be part of a dramatic movement in their lives which have been turned into a movie script starring Arnold Schwarzenegger and Indiana Jones.

Fight propaganda with...PROPER-GANDA!!!
I recommend pushing forward just 2 degrees USING those so so deeply entrenched-through-propaganda attitudes with a campaign of renewed reverence for

1) The Bill of Rights and US Constitution
2) Jesus' teachings about caring for the poor and needy.

These are the tenets of liberalism and we must flip the polarity of these ideas back to caring for ALL people instead of Republican Eugenics that justifies death by both poverty and war as being necessary 'collateral damage' for the greater good of the herd.

[BrklynLiberal]

33. Standing ovation for you JOM!!!!!

A question for the "Centrists"... Explain in detail to me, the difference between the DNC and the NEOcons,cause I can't see it. I don't see any difference between Leiberman and Mitt Romney. DLC=Repugnant Lite....
As Lakoff said in a quote by Arianna Huffington:
Let's stop questioning ourselves, and what did we do wrong.
As was quoted on another thread yesterday:

"As cognitive psychologist George Lakoff told me: "Democrats moving to the middle is a double disaster that alienates the party's progressive base while simultaneously sending a message to swing voters that the other side is where the good ideas are." It unconsciously locks in the notion that the other side's positions are worth moving toward, while your side's positions are the ones to move away from. Plus every time you move to the center, the right just moves further to the right."

From this article:

THE NEXT DNC CHAIR: WHY YOU SHOULD CARE

Arianna Huffington, AlterNet

ANOTHER FAMOUS QUOTE:
"First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out.
Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists, but I was neither, so I did not speak out.
Then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew so I did not speak out.
And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me."
Martin Niemoller

[Q]

39. Thank You...

...for your very insightful post.

As I've said before...the grievance with the centrists is not so much their moderation on the issues as it is their undeniable complicity with the most dangerous group of extremists that have ever 'ruled' this country. I'm baffled at their complete lack of concern and inaction.

Anyway...thanks against for your post.

[evolvenow]

45. Is Murder a Family Value?I'm with you JOM! Beautiful.

The Life or Death Party...
I have been saying for years, that the only real division is:
people against killing
or for killing people.

If this was made exceptionally clear, with an emphasis on educating young people, and the people who are recruiting...it could eventually impact the individuals willing to do the killing.
That is until they get the robots up to speed.
Is Murder a Family Value?

[itzamirakul]

52. BRAVO!

Thank you so much for putting some very important things into perspective for me. I would like to share your post with others if I may.

[bread_and_roses]

58. Oh, Right On, as we used to say!

I have seen you post this in other threads, I think? Widely applicable, do keep posting it!

[Geek_Girl]

43. Ok this is just a rambling thought or theory

So please don't flame me. What if the new dems or DLC Dems have the same agenda as the Neo Cons? Would that make the paleo-cons or old school conservatives closer to the progressive values?
:shrug:

There is a Senator in my state, who I actually like and he's a republican. He voted against the war in Iraq and went against the Bush adminstration on other issues. He's not progressive or liberal but there are some things I strongly agree with him on.

[Senator Lamb]

44. i want to make it clear

every test i take puts me to the center but on economic issues im a populist, on other issues im moderate. does this make me DLC? no. DLC believes centrism is moving right on all issues. no thats not the case. appealing to red states involves populist themes wrapped up and presented in a certain way; a candidate of humble roots, plain spoken, with a commonsense approach. JohnKerry didnt have that presentation,, John Edwards kind of did. what im getting at is we are giving up the one issue a majority of people support; economic change. thus if we concede it, we are once again playing on the gop terms.

[PurityOfEssence]

53. Jim Hightower put it best: "The only things in the middle of the road...

...are dead armadillos and yellow stripes."

We can win huge with class warfare, and we need to use the term. They're scared to death of it; if we say that the right is engaging in class warfare against us, we can capture the term and use it against them.