Divided we fall.

[StudentOfDarrow]

The purpose of this post is to call an end to the mindless infighting between centrist and leftist Democrats. The beauty of the Democratic Party is that we don't all have to agree on every issue. We are the Party of Inclusion. The Republicans are the Party of Exclusion.

The word "liberal" comes from the Latin word "liber," which literally means "free." Liberalism is the belief that all humans should be allowed to think freely. I think it's time the leftists on this board practiced a little more True Liberalism.

I realize that I'll probably be branded as a Freeper in disguise, but I assure you that this is nothing more than a simple call for civility.

[Adelante]

1. Thank you

I agree with you.

Yes, you will be called a freeper and worse, a DLCer!!

[marbuc]

2. I totally

agree, and yes, I have been called a Freeper, DLCer, troll, and more.

[uppityperson]

3. How about "all practiced a little more True Liberalism"

Since DUers from the whole spectrum have been fighting. Thanks.

[Adelante]

4. That's a good edit

:)

[deutsey]

62. Agreed. Why single out leftists? Everyone's fired a gun in this

circular firing squad.

[Gildor Inglorion]

5. Leftists practicing True Liberalism has led us to *....

we have agreed, apologized, turned the other cheek, gone along to get along, accepted being all back of the bus and shit, and where has it got us? Zell Miller, Joe Lieberman, the DLC, DINO's, and so forth. There comes a point when sweet reason and civility do not work. I am certain that you are not a freeper in disguise, and I honor and respect you as my fellow Democrat, but when are we going to stop cringing and begging? Our economy is shot to hell, our international reputation is in ruins, democracy is threatened, the Bill of Rights is under attack, and we're supposed to smile and say, "Thank you" to the enablers of fascism? I love inclusion, I truly do. But when you see where we're headed, that if nothing prevents the slide down the slippery slope, were going to be Guatemala with nuclear missiles, the time has come to knock a few heads together and tell the conservative and centrist "Democrats" to SNAP THE FUCK OUT OF IT!!!!

:rant: :grr:

[Eloriel]

6. That's kinda where I'm at

For me, it's not so much a question of everyone being entitled to their own opinions, but rather too much of what they believe being WRONG FOR AMERICA and its people. :shrug: Why should I be tolerant of that?

[electropop]

29. I think DLCers became Dems because they love America.

They do need to be shown why enabling and apologizing to America's Fascist enemies is not a good strategy for success.

[StudentOfDarrow]

35. Exactly.

This is what I've been saying all along. Thank you for being the voice of reason.

[StudentOfDarrow]

15. I don't think you understand.

I truly believe that the Bush Administration is evil incarnate. I do not, however, reflect that belief on all Bush voters. I am suggesting that we should simply explain to these voters, in reasonable terms, why we are better. As much as I love Howard Dean, his Iowa shrieks cast the Democrats as the pary of Unreasonable People in the eyes of many moderates. We need less of that, and more of Clinton's and Kerry's diplomatic style of campaigning. This isn't even about ideology. I am an extremely liberal person. I do, however, realize that there are people who disagree with me on some issues, and that these people need to be respected. When I meet those people, I speak calmly and rationally to them about why I take the positions I do. I have always gotten the best responses by respecting them. I do not tell them to "snap the fuck out of it" and I really don't think that will work. I agree that Miller, Lieberman, and the like are traitors. They actively help Bush push his policy through. But there are moderate Democrats who will fight against Bush every step of the way. It's not about the ideology. It's about being both civil and strong. That is why people are drawn to Wes Clark and Russ Feingold. They are strong leaders, but they're not raving lunatics.

[I concur]

30. You are absolutely...

...Right!

[SeanQ]

56. As I try to state below

you seem (as many here appear to do, on both sides) to confuse the desire of many of us to get rid of the DLC as being against centrist/moderate Democrats.

"I agree that Miller, Lieberman, and the like are traitors." - Assuming you mean traitors to the party (and not something more dire), than I would say you agree with those of us that think the DLC (again, the specific organization, not 'centrist Democrats' in general!) DOES NOT BELONG in the party. IMHO it is THEY who are dividing us, by *claiming* to speak for moderate Democrats while insulting a huge, active portion of the party's base.

...

BTW, Dean's 'Iowa shrieks' were actually just one, a punctuation to a speech. And the original recording of it was of little note as I recall - until the media cleaned up the background noise and cheering to make it a more ... notable sound clip. I'm sure the >$100 million the GOP spent in Iowa to stop Dean also had no impact there.

[wli]

7. the DLC are not centrist Democrats, they're an AEI/PNAC fifth column

Centrist Democrats are fine, and in fact that's all that exists outside the DLC. The DLC is taking the Democrats to the right wing outright.

[Writer]

10. So much for civility. n/t

[wli]

11. That's right. The time for tolerance is over.

Zero tolerance. Never forgive. Never forget.

The only thing "compromise" is getting us is an endless push to the right.

[Cronus Protagonist]

24. tru dat

werd.





http://brainbuttons.com/home.asp?stashid=13
Buttons for brainy people - educate your local freepers today!

[Writer]

40. How mature. n/t

[StudentOfDarrow]

16. The DLC are centrists.

They are acceptable on social issues, but fall short on economic issues. They are between the the left and the right, therefore they are centrists. The problem is that they are WEAK. Do not mistake my post as a call for further compromise. The DLC represent a civil and WEAK party. I am calling for a party that is civil and STRONG.

[rman]

60. They certainly don't like liberalism

unless there's only very little of it in the Dem party.

[Nite Owl]

8. Those of us on the left have been giving in

we have compromised. Too much. The so called center needs to start doing a little of that listening and show some cooperation with those on the left. I would truly like to have been wrong about things but we haven't been. I would like to be saying that well they were wise and knew better but they haven't and yet they want their way and only their way. Time comes to stand up and say that they need to listen to us.

[StudentOfDarrow]

17. Read post 16. n/t

[Writer]

9. We are all different shades of the same color.

And should all fight to recapture Congress next year!

[StudentOfDarrow]

18. Thank you!

I totally agree.

[kerrygoddess]

12. Thank you! N/T

[StudentOfDarrow]

13. Revision.

The editing period has expired, so I'll put this here. The third sentence in the second paragraph should be changed to "I think it's time all of us practiced a little more True Liberalism."

[preciousdove]

20. You leave your abusive husband you don't tolerate.

[StudentOfDarrow]

22. Um..I don't understand the metaphor.

Who is the abusive husband?

[preciousdove]

72. The so called "centrists" of the DNC

In 2000 a small unorganized group of previously not politically active people showed up at Paul Wellstone's office to beg him to get the party to disallow the illegal Florida and Texas electors. Before that I had written "get along" messages myself for the Clinton Congress.

After our evidence and valid arguments were presented, being fairly honest for political people, they told us that a deal had been made to spare the attempted prosecution of Clinton. Our side of the deal was not spelled out except to say that "no Democratic Senator would oppose the electors." We pointed out that Clinton was innocent, loved a good fight and would prevail but we were told that the decision was made at the National Party level. In other words we were sold out because the Democrats were not going to fight the good fight. They said that "they could work with moderates in the Congress." They were grey in the face themselves when they told us this.

I have never been so shocked and shaken since I found out that they killed Kennedy because he threatened the rogue intelligence community, actually believed in Social Justice and was planning to cut off the golden goose for the MIC, Vietnam. I was 16 researching a paper and only using our school library MSM sources and listened to my Dad my whole life who described himself as a "Goldwater Republican". I didn't have anyone "sell" me on that idea.

So our "centrists" worked with their "moderates" and they haven't stopped any of the fascist steam roller that has taken over our country and still will not fight the good fight to take back our country. The DNC contains the abusers, they hold the purse strings and the endorsements. They picked Kerry over Dean against the will of the people and lost the election again because Kerry is Skull and Bones and could not and would not stir the populist self-preservation that is in every American and the key to winning elections as Demorats. And they don't intend to as long as folks like you keep writing that "getting along" is going to stop fascism.

Bottom line the centrist DNC keep hurting us for "our own good."

[Imagevision]

14. The Bush cartel devided the country, so what else is new?

[The Backlash Cometh]

19. Nice thoughts, but the reality is that some of the people who want

to keep Sibel Edmonds gagged ARE Democrats. How do you reconcile that? The reality is that you'll have to be vigilant and be prepared to recognize when you're being misled by a turncoat.

[StudentOfDarrow]

26. Again, I'm not calling for a weaker party.

Just a more reasonable one that makes an effort to appeal to all Americans. We can't afford to forfeit one single voter to the Repubs.

[inthebrain]

33. That's the problem right there

This party needs to forfeit MORE voters!!!!

Not just any voters, the RIGHT voters. Politics is a rift and there is no such a thing as a party with a BIG tent. Unless you seriously believe that property owners, big business and big media all share the same common interests.

Winning elections requires that you piss off a certain amount of people. For Democrats, they need to piss off the right people in order to gain the votes of more working class people. There are a good reason why a lot of those midwestern states went to Bush. None of them having to really do with gays, guns and god.

Everything with it having to do with Democrats advocating Welfare Reform, NAFTA, WTO and media deregulation. Thats what a big tent party gets you as well.

[StudentOfDarrow]

38. By forfeiting voters, we weaken our base.

The Democrats need to run on a pro-civil rights, populist, "common sense" platform. We need to explain to every voter why our plan is good for America, and how a stronger America is good for them. If some voters choose to not listen to us, it's not our fault, it's theirs. This way, at least, every voter who would possibly even consider voting for Democrats hears our message. Democrats lose because the Republicans are the ones telling the public what we stand for.

[The Backlash Cometh]

54. He's right about conflicts of interests between voters.

Believe me, property rights nutcases don't want regulation. They're all in favor of small government. The Dem local leaders in my area do not run on a platform of civil rights. They run on a platform of economy & development of commercial areas, and they're usually lawyers who are tied to law firms that have been steadily developing the area for decades in a manner that would shock you -- because you wouldn't be able to tell them apart from a Republican.

We'll take their votes, but if their campaign donations are buying access, we really don't need them at all.

[ElectroPrincess]

69. The republican wing of the Democratic Party (DLC)

doesn't give a shit about the base. They are very similar to the neo-cons especially in their tactics and LOVE for pumping up the Military Industrial Machine.

I'd like to know how many DLCers are heavily invested in multi-national corporations, especially those supporting the war machine?

No, I would rather lose honestly than vote for a pseudo-democrat (a DLCer). These folks should be honest with themselves and move their organization to the republican party.

I held my nose and voted for BOTH Gore and Kerry, but NO more. It's time to come clean and truly represent the Average American NOT those withing the Upper Middle class and Wealthy Democrat.

I went to a wealthy acquaintance's Christmas party who also worked within our local democratic party. However, walking into their house, the DECOR was dripping with wealth. Ostentatious wealth, shameless bragging disgusting - statues in the middle of the room. These people are picture perfect representatives of the Democratic Elites within the DLC. They have NO idea of what it's like to be part of the "working class" when they peep into our local party meetings to slum with us "little people"

I will NOT ever again vote for a corporate DLCer. I compromised my principles twice ... no more!

[SeanQ]

58. But we don't need the republican voters!

The _real_ Democratic party represents the majority of Americans! And if the party (and it's "leadership") would just be STRONG (as you suggest) most of middle America would be with us.

We DO NOT NEED to be republican light. I do agree with you that we need to be civil. But you can be civil and still bite! How do you reason with liars and crooks? You don't! Being reasonable, in this case, means calling them liars and crooks, while pointing to the evidence as such. Being reasonable in this case is saying we will not go along with absurd policies that will hurt America in the long run, and point to alternative policies and the reasons we think they are better.

Please note that one of our biggest problems here is the media. Although I think Kerry could have been _much_ stronger, both on offense and defense, without being 'unreasonable' or uncivil, he was hampered, as is most of our party, by the fact that we do not get fair, unbiased exposure in the media. When we have people able to put forth strong arguments, well spoken and with facts, the national media rarely provides them a venue. But if they get a sound clip or such of something they can spin (like the Iowa shriek as you referred to), they play it over, and over, and over again.

[sellitman]

21. The time to disagree is NOW.

Once we have picked a candidate then and only then is it time to mend fences and unite.

[StudentOfDarrow]

23. Exactly.

I'm saying that we need to ALLOW people to disagree with us. Too many are in favor of a lockstep Democratic platform that excludes the moderates.

[sellitman]

27. Civility is need at election time.

Now is the time to let it out.

my .02

[ElectroPrincess]

71. No the DLC has the MONEY and POWER and are attempting

to disrespect and disenfranchise those of us who are left of center. You may have all the money for influence peddling but, for once, your Ads have no effect - You've screwed us over so bad on a financial level, the working class will NOT believe any more of your LIES. Even your threats and intimidation can NOT force people to vote for your Corporate candidates.

You sound like AEI talking heads sometimes, "oh bogey bogey! You can't let those *evil commie leftists* have an influence on the democratic party!

Ten years ago we were considered "the moderates." Yet still, I personally consider myself a moderate because I don't let the RW, DLC nor the Corporate USA news media make THE RULES of what constitutes "a moderate" ... even in BushWorld.

[electropop]

31. Fight during the primaries

then unite behind our choice. At that stage, even a wimpy Dem is better than a rabid Puke.

[meganmonkey]

25. If people who call themselves Democrats still support this war

then tell me where the 'civility' is coming from on that side?

This is a war of brutality, and if people calling themselves Democrats can support it, they are NOT civil, they are corrupt liars just like the Repubs. That's where I draw the line.

I know your post wasn't specifically about the war, but whether it is the war, or CAFTA, or the bankruptcy bill, the Dems who voted with the Repubs sold this country out, they screwed the people who elected them and who they are supposed to work for. They DO NOT work for Halliburton, or MBNA, or Lockheed Martin.

So you want us 'leftists' to give these 'centrists' the freedom to create legislation to inhibit other people's freedom :crazy:

Sorry, can't do it.

[StudentOfDarrow]

34. Again, people are missing the point.

So you want us 'leftists' to give these 'centrists' the freedom to create legislation to inhibit other people's freedom.

I never said that. The Democrats who are selling out to the Republicans do not count as centrists in my book. Those Democrats are traitors. But branding all moderate Democrats as the enemy is ignorant and divisive.

Addressing the war, there are people who sincerely want to stay in Iraq for the good of the Iraqi people. These people are not nutjobs, they are not lunatics. They are misinformed. They should be treated reasonably.

If you want to run someone who calls pro-lifers "fundies," who calls centrists "corrupt liars," go ahead. They'll end up with about 25% percent of the vote.

I'll say it again: A REASONABLE AND CIVIL PARTY DOES NOT HAVE TO BE A WEAK ONE.

[meganmonkey]

36. If this many people are missing your point,

then maybe you need to make your point clearer. Apparently I don't know who it is you consider 'centrists' or 'moderates'. Putting people into labelled boxes doesn't come naturally to me.

:shrug:

[StudentOfDarrow]

39. Basically, "centrists" to me are

the reasonable people between the left and the right. The UNreasonable people, such as Zell Miller, fall into the category of "sellout."

[quiet.american]

28. If the DLC would take their foot off the neck of the Democratic base --

-- we might get somewhere.

The DLC gives the impression that the rank-and-file Democrat is a nuisance they'd rather not have to deal with, and they'd love it if the Democratic party consisted only of genteel haves and have mores.

Every time one logs onto their site, one of the first things to be read is a scornful putdown in one form or another of liberal Democrats.

The next thing to be read is their whining about how Democrats have to look tough on defense, and never an actual breakdown of the facts that demonstrate that Democrats do defense, Republicans fake it.

If the DLC would get their heads out of their elite buttocks, and take a look at what the Democratic party really is, instead of how they want to create it in their own fantasy world, maybe there could be a chance for some real progress.

That said, we are spending way too much time on the DLC lately. The real tests of where the party stands will come soon enough during the presidential primaries.

[malachibk]

32. Well, I'm not sure I 100% agree with this, but I won't call you a freeper

I strongly believe that Democrats need to coalesce around the principles that separate us from our repub counterparts -- and not only coalesce, but be PROUD in our beliefs.

I am proudly pro-choice
I am proudly pro-civil rights/equality (inc. gay rights)
I am proudly pro-tax the rich
I am proudly pro-national healthcare
I am proudly anti-Iraq war
I am proudly pro-environment
I am proudly pro-campaign finance reform
I am proudly pro-separation of church and state

I do not think there is much wiggle room here. It becomes more and more clear every day that DEMS WILL NOT WIN any election if we hedge to closely to the "center" (in quotes because the center is now solidly on the right).

We need to present strong, proud, succinct, unabashed leadership and offer the American people candidates that DIFFER SIGNIFICANTLY from the SOB's who are ruining our country.

The infighting is not "mindless". Not at all. It is vital. If centrist Dems want to add more troops (Hillary) or maintain the status quo, F**K THEM. Those are not winnable ideas and will be the death knell for the Dem party.

The Repubs did not take over congress during the Clinton years by pretending to be Dems. They presented a clear, solid set of oppositional, radical rightist ideas/ideals and were proud to do so. That kind of no-BS talk resonates with the American people.

Why "centrist" Dems and our "esteemed" leaders in Congress (especially the Senate who seem to have their mouths zipped shut and heads shoved firmly up their own asses), don't get this is beyond my ken.

[StudentOfDarrow]

41. I agree with most of what you are saying.

My ideal Democratic Party would have exactly the platform you outline here. I am for a liberal Party. We need, however, to reach out to those sitting on the fence and explain to them why we believe our ideas are better. I believe that many of them will join us. We need to make the LEFT bigger, by persuading more voters to move in that direction.

The infighting is not "mindless". Not at all. It is vital. If centrist Dems want to add more troops (Hillary) or maintain the status quo, F**K THEM. Those are not winnable ideas and will be the death knell for the Dem party.

I should have been clearer. I am for civil disagreement inside the party. I do not, however, condone the too common practice of calling anyone who disagrees with you a Freeper.

[malachibk]

43. Instead of reaching out to fence sitters

we should energize the 70 million people who don't vote at all. By putting forth ideas that resonate with traditionally disenfranchised voters, we can position ourselves for prolonged success. Whereas by appealing to "fence sitters" who should KNOW BETTER, we make no lasting inroads, just a fickle association with people who don't necessarily agree with a liberal platform.

If I can put 2 more cents in, I think that we could do both (appeal to new voters and the fence-sitters that I will always disparage) by spinning our platform in such a way as to make opposition to it seem dastardly. For example...

"I believe every American has the right to own a gun for hunting and self-protection, if necessary. However, I don't see the need for semi-automatic assault rifles."

Or "I will never, ever, tell your church or temple or mosque whom to marry or unite. That is up to your faith as it sees fit. However, I ask that your church or temple or mosque not tell my government whom to civilly unite. That is the business of the state."

Make people defend lax gun laws. Make them defend forcing their religious beliefs on all Americans. Make them defend leaving environmental standards up to corporations. We need to TAKE CONTROL OF THE CONVERSATION and hold up the neocon platform for all to see.

[StudentOfDarrow]

48. We CAN do both.

By framing the issues. I fully, 100% agree with every word of this post.

[Vickers]

37. Please define "mindless infighting" and link to an instance on DU

And please tell me which side of the "mindless infighting" you stand on in the instance you link to.

Thanks in advance.

[StudentOfDarrow]

46. Mindless Infighting-

is unreasonable debate, i.e. name-calling. I can't find a link, but an instance is the common insult of "freeper in disguise." I stand on the side of the so-called freeper.

[Vickers]

52. If someone accuses someone of being a freeper, alert on that message

:shrug:

What's so fucking difficult about that?

I stand on the side of law and order, Skinner-style.

[StudentOfDarrow]

42. Revision Again.

I'm revising my Call for Civility to exclude the DLC. I know there are good people in the DLC, but having just read about their accusation of anti-war critics as being "anti-American," I no longer believe that they should be treated as reasonable moderates. This is not to be read as a condemnation of all moderates.

[corkhead]

51. I see. I responded further down the thread before I had seen this

I think the DLC Repug-Lite Corporatists are repelling a lot of people from the Democratic party by making a lot of people think there is no difference between the 2 parties. I think they should go join the repugs where they belong and we stand to gain a lot of non voters and non elites who have voted repug against their best interests

[SeanQ]

59. :) Reading this and a few other posts I now can

happily say I agree with you!

Thanks for the thread! I've been watching (and partaking) in these debates for a few weeks now, and I think more people are coming to realize that the pro/con DLC debate is NOT a left/center or non/liberal debate. And as I don't see the conflict over the DLC going away anytime soon, I think it is VITAL (in, I think, general accordance with your original point as I now understand it) that we all make sure we are clear when we are talking about the DLC we are NOT talking about moderate Democrats in general.

:toast:

[whometense]

44. Thanks for sticking your neck out.

I couldn't agree more. The bickering around here is a waste of energy and a drain on morale. It's reached such a din recently that it makes me think Rove might well be involved in a divide-and-conquer action.

It's a pointless diversion from our common goal - to take down every republican currently holding public office. Eyes on the prize.

[corkhead]

45. the lines need to be redrawn

Corporatists vs real Democrats. DLC seems to represent the Corporatists at the expense of what I'll loosely call the "working class", what I thought the Dems were supposed to represent, IMHO

the bankruptcy bill is just one example.

I'd be glad to lose a few corporatists to gain a bunch of working class people who either vote Republican for a bunch of dumb reasons, or don't vote at all.

[StudentOfDarrow]

47. I don't disagree.

I'm calling for the Real Democrats to band together.

[corkhead]

49. to be fair to you, I should mention that I edited my post

while you responded to it, for the purpose of clarification of my position. do you still agree? If so, I would be interested in you elaborating.

Thanks for the response. I get the impression we are on the same side....
:toast:

[StudentOfDarrow]

53. I do still agree. n/t

[welshTerrier2]

50. how to build unity

first, a couple of important disagreements with the BP ...

1. "mindless infighting" - this very badly fails to understand that a REAL RIFT exists ... the fighting is anything but mindless ... Unity is critical ... if we fail to achieve it, not by pretending we actually have it but by creating a process for healing, we will surely all regret the results ... and
2. "we are the Party of Inclusion" - again, like it or not, this also badly fails to understand what all the fighting is about ...

Let me be very clear about UNITY: we have no choice but to achieve it ... but let me be even clearer about where we currently are: UNITY has to be earned; it cannot just be insisted upon ... got that? a process of healing needs to be developed ... UNITY is exactly the right GOAL; but whining about those who don't believe the Party represents them is exactly the wrong PROCESS ...

so what has to happen?

frankly, and i am rapidly growing skeptical this can happen or at least that it can happen in time for the mid-terms, we have got to "re-democratize" the Party ... absent a real intra-Party dialog on who we are and what we want our elected reps to fight for, UNITY cannot, and will not, be achieved ... we have a situation in this country where a majority of Americans, let alone Democrats, wants this war to be brought to a rapid conclusion ... does this mean immediate withdrawal? not necessarily ... what it does mean is that our elected representatives are out-of-touch with what most Americans believe ... that is not a good recipe for UNITY ...

the only path to UNITY is a reawakening of democracy starting in the Democratic Party ... to refer to the fighting that is going on NOW as "mindless" argues that fighting for a voice to be represented, after years of being not just unrepresented but attacked by the DLC, makes no sense ... that is just plain WRONG ... and arguing that we are the "Party of Inclusion" turns its back on those who don't feel that way ... it says all are welcome here when most of us know that is just not the truth ... that's exactly what all the fighting is about ...

the Democratic Party needs to heal its wounds before it goes to battle with the republicans ... the current situation is untenable for all Democrats ... when respect and understanding sit at the core of how our Party conducts business, then calls for UNITY will start making sense ... again, the GOAL is good but it is rendered meaningless without a process to achieve it ...

[SeanQ]

55. I agree - but your post supposes that the current

debate is between centrist and leftist Democrats. I don't think that is really the case. I think it is about the DLC. A specific organization that _claims_ to represent centrist Democrats, but seems to support moderate conservative and pro-business agendas and tries to pretend that is centrist by constantly slaming and insulting the left.

If the majority of the party thinks we were lied to to get us into Iraq and are against prolonging our engagement (with a wide range of opinions on exactly how/when to get out), and the DLC call's anyone who speaks out against the war as anti-American, are they really representing the party membership?

[MadHound]

57. Oh that's just too precious

Make me:puke:

Look friend, it isn't the leftists who hijacked the party, it isn't the leftists who are running 'Pug lite candidates who are nothing more than corporate whores. It isn't the leftists who seem to be on the wrong side of every issue from the IWR to the Patriot Act to welfare "reform".

It's the leftist who year in and year out give their all to the party, only to be called traitors and worse when we ask for even the tiniest scrap off the DLC table. We have been marginilized, demonized, neglected and all but kicked out of the party, and yet you have the fucking gall to imply that we're the one's who aren't being inclusive? Fuck that! I'm sorry, you may be a nice person in the real world, but this scapegoating of the left is absolute and utter bullshit. It isn't the left that lost Gore the election in '00, nope that would be the very centerists Gore and his DLC handlers. Nor would it be the left that lost Kerry the election in '04. You may not have been around then, but there was a huge push for all sides to call a truce and vote ABB, which is what the left did. But no, once again it was a centerist candidate and his DLC handlers that snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. And yet you have the utter gall to scold the left? Sorry, but you are just either outright delusional, or have some sort of agenda. Either way, you're completely out of touch with reality.

You want unity within the party, then go tell the party leadership to do something that they haven't done in over two decades, feed the left a bone, something, anything. They need to take one of the left's pet issues, peace in Iraq, UHC, something, anything, and make it a prominent part of the party plantform, and key to this, follow through on this promise once in office. It is called compromise, which the left is called on to do all of the time, without any return. You get the party leadership to accept this sort of compromise, and you will have your party unity. Until then, the DLC, corporate Dems and their centerist enablers can all go rot in hell, for I'm done putting out and putting out for the party, only to receive nothing in return. Is that clear enough for you?

[StudentOfDarrow]

61. Don't confuse the DLC with the moderates.

The DLC are the turncoats. They support the corporations. But Moderate Democrats more or less hold the same platform as the Leftists. They just may differ on an issue or two, or maybe not feel as strongly about their positions. But treating fellow Democrats like the enemy will be our downfall.

[MadHound]

66. The trouble with that theory

Is that the moderates, not wanting to be painted with the "whacko left" brush side time and again with the DLC. And thus they join in on the chorus of those demonizing the left. I've seen this too many times, both here and in the real world.

You lay down with dogs and you will get up with fleas. Until the moderates join with those of us on the left in utterly repudiating the DLC, moderates are going to be counted as part of the problem.

[ElectroPrincess]

65. What MadHound wrote

I'd be proud to be a part your team. :yourock:

[Mark E. Smith]

63. Amen!

People need to keep their focus on the real enemy.

[ElectroPrincess]

64. Yes there are differences between our enemies ...

That is, the Right Wing Republicans stab us "through the heart" while looking us straight in the eyes. However, the DLC disrespects it's base while stabbing it's non-wealthy supporters "in the back."

By jove, I think I've got it! :hi:

[Mark E. Smith]

67. Kind of reminds me of something we all heard in 2000

"There is no difference between Al Gore and George W. Bush. I'm voting for Ralph Nader."

All this DLC bashing is just the same old shit in a different year.

[ElectroPrincess]

68. You know, I was pissed at the Nadar-ites for years ...

But NOW I'm beginning to realize ole' Ralph WAS RIGHT. Not enough to ever vote for him, but they DO make a valid point.

Especially if we let the DLC degrade the liberals and run rough shot over the Democratic Party.

Right now the DLC has us "Republican Lite" but we can disown these bastards and, once again, bring honor to the term "Liberal Democrat."

We're now ready for your next INSULT because attack and belittle everyone who doesn't agree with their pro-corporate positions is seemingly the DLC's favorite tactic?

Can we say this "one trick pony" (DLC) assalt on the liberals, is not only getting old and tired, but beginning to fall on deaf ears?

[lateo]

70. You can still fall...

What you fail to see is the illision that the Democratic party has unity. It doesn't and hasn't for quite some time. We have already fallen...it is time to jetison the corrupt dead weight of the party so we can lift ourselves up again.