The DLC is still going after "Dean's folks". "Negative" "rarified"

[madfloridian]

Someone asked tonight for the progressives and the conservatives and moderates of the party to be at the table. The problem is what I have been pointing out for days...it is not our doing. The problem is they don't want us at the table.
When Al From and company quit making statements like this about the DNC, Dean, and us...calling us the "internet activists", then there might be less problems and griping from us.

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=253471&kaid=86&subid=84
Mr. From:"That raises a critical question: How could the Democrats lose ground to the Republicans when the GOP is performing so badly? The answer, according to Stanley Greenberg, who took the poll, is that voters believe Democrats have "no core set of convictions or point of view."

In short, voters don't know what Democrats stand for. Why should they? For the most part, congressional Democrats, DNC Chairman Howard Dean, and the party's new Internet activists have delivered a largely negative and pessimistic message -- talking more about what's going wrong than how to make it right."

(Al From just blamed us for losing ground. His group lost the presidency, the Senate, the House, and he blames us. Go figure.)

(No, Al, he is not allowed to give the message, remember...and we are not considered important.)

And these remarks from Mr. Peter Ross Range, editor of the Blueprint:
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=253348&kaid=127&subid=170

He calls us the "cultural divide".

"If we didn't know it already, one critical fact was confirmed by the recent Pew Research Center survey of Howard Dean's 2004 campaign activists: There is a cultural divide in America. What's troubling is that it's inside the Democratic Party.

The Pew study, while focused on 11,500 Dean supporters, nonetheless opened a revealing window on the thinking of liberal activists in the Democratic Party as a whole. One thing it told us is that the party's most active wing lives in a rarified universe of what Pew calls "a different kind of Democrat."

(How snide and condescending, Mr. Range.)

(And another thing, Mr. Range, I am not the problem. I intend to be part of the solution. Your way lost. Want to work together? Then don't talk to me in an insulting way about "rarified".)

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

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

[Montauk6]

14. Now now now.... no fatwas... self-inflicted or otherwise

Let's leave it to the experts, shall we?

[fujiyama]

34. Who is the guy on the bottom?

I can recognize all the others but not him.

On edit: I found out it's Jim Jones. I know about Jonestown, but hadn't seen his picture. A bit before my time.

[DemInDistress]

2. what happened to the DNC

Why do we have a DLC? Have we divided? If thats the case a "divided party" I smell Karl Rove somewhere..
Why can't we Democrats make "verifiable voter paper paper trail" in 2006.Without the confidence of a pure vote what good are health,education,defense,deficits issues.Our main focus should be a guaranteed "fair vote" records will be kept and open for public inspection....

[madfloridian]

6. The DLC was formed to get more money from business.

They did not want to rely on the base.

I am very open-minded about all groups, but they have to want to include me as well.

I think we should declare them the third party, and go on from here. LOL 1/3 of their group is called Third Way.

Hey, I'm willing , but it takes two.

[AtomicKitten]

42. The base never

ponied up the buckage til the grassroots organizations showed how it's done. Ironically now the DLC can't compete with the grassroots groups, and that's what I call power of the people. The real people.

[me b zola]

56. What happened to the DNC? A coup.

The repubs are defeating us from within. The DLC desperately wants the base to leave the party. This is why they constantly taunt us. They know that we are the most informed of Democratic voters, but they continually thumb their noses at us. The DLC are just as guilty as the repubs of making Liberal a dirty word. Why would they do that?

[AntiCoup2K4]

3. Kicked and recommended

I'd frame it and hang it on the wall if I could.

THIS is why the DLC is a cancer on the Democratic Party.

THIS is why they must be brought down.

They are willing to lie and slander us as much as the Republicans are.

And the evidence of Will Marshall and Marshall Whitman proves that they ARE those Republicans. They ARE neocons. They ARE PNAC'ers.

There is no future for this party if it's left in their hands.

[CrispyQ]

97. Here! Here!

"There is no future for this party if left in their hands." I couldn't agree more!


DLC: Wolves in Democrats' Clothing

http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/views04/0105-07.htm

snip...

I'll bet not one American in 200 knows, or cares, who Al From is. And (let's go double or nothing) I'll bet not one in 20 knows, or cares, what the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) is.

I know ... now ... because I looked it up last week. And both From and his council are powerful influences in this year's presidential campaigns.

Mr. From would argue with my description of him, but I'd describe him as a kind of agent provocateur, a plant inserted by the Republicans into the leadership of the Democrat Party. His goal: Wreck the party, turn it into the Republican Lite Party.

If that's his goal, he's doing a fine, fine job. And he's using the DLC to do it. He founded the DLC, a collection of Democrat politicians, in 1985, apparently out of fear that the Democrats were done as a political party. After all, they had not had a president for five full years.

In Al From's world, any Democrat who thinks like a Democrat is an extremist. A Democrat who thinks like a Republican is a centrist.

===
(text bolded by me for emphasis)


Some other good articles about this insidious group:

http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/headlines03/0621-06.htm


http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/views05/0727-32.htm

If people only have Republican or Republican-lite to choose from, well of course they are going to choose Republican. Arghh! How long will they continue to stick to the same losing strategy before they see the light?

[wli]

4. time to eject the DLC from the Democratic Party

If they want to be Republicans, they can do it on the RNC's dime.

[Writer]

5. I'd appreciate my thread, nor my views, being called out and wrongly

recolored. I never said the "DLC." I said centrists and conservative Democrats. I'd appreciate that you not, yet again, resort to yet another divisive thread.

You are doing nothing less than what you accuse the DLC of doing. It takes two to unite the party - who's first?

[Guaranteed]

7. I think the faction that is responsible for us losing so much ground

should give up.

As a hint, Howard Dean is not a member of that faction.

[Writer]

8. Centrists and conservative Democrats form a "faction?"

And what, pray tell, are they supposed to give up. Party membership? Are you suggesting that we limit the party?

[Guaranteed]

10. You said "it takes two."

Who's the other?

And, no, what I'm saying is that they should give up the leadership of the party and the misconception that the things that they do and say are actually helping us.

[Writer]

16. I think they have helped us in times of peace.

And it is my opinion that all "factions" of the Democratic Party help and hurt us.

[xxqqqzme]

74. dear writer take a look

at Public Policy Institute ppi - the PNACers of the DLC - what they advocate is NOT peace!

http://www.dlc.org/ - click ob the PPI tab

The DLC is trying to replace the DNC which is why they R busy headline grabbing of late. The DLC hates Howard Dean and will never miss a chance to try to margibalize him. They view the 'democratic base' with contempt cuz their masters R korporate kontributors. The DLC are dino-dem fascists and the sooner we accept that and treat them as such the better off we will be.

[madfloridian]

15. They, you, whoever....have already limited the party...with us outside.

I have fought many battles these past few years. I have talked to more senators and congressmen than ever in my life before.

Each time, their minds were already made up on their votes. They wanted the war, their minds were made up.

I called every one of my own reps, then I called all the presidential candidates before the war vote, then I called about the pictures in the Norweigian paper of our soldiers running naked Iraqi men through the street. That was in April 2003.

I called Bill Nelson's office and sent the pics. I called Bob Graham's office and sent the pics. I got NO response. None.

Same thing on CAFTA, the bankruptcy bill, the Medicare drug bill.

Their minds are made up.

[Writer]

18. But who votes them into office?

State voters vote them in. Colorado state voters, for instance, voted for conservative Democrat Ken Salazar over Republican Pete Coors. They did this because Coors supported same-sex employee benefits. That's a no-no to conservatives.

When they serve their state, they do so with their constituents' political tastes in mind. Some states lean more conservative than others, and thusly, so do their representatives. That means that some Democrats are more conservative than others. Why does Democrat Zell Miller of Georgia still retain his seat? Other than being a screaming jackass (yes, my words) he represents his conservative, Deep South state. So they vote for him.

You can press representatives, but unless the groundswell of political change doesn't occur at the state level, you won't so easily sway these congressmen to pay attention.

[madfloridian]

23. I don't know about other states...but I never had much choice.

I adored Bob Graham, and he was pretty fair about the war. He was just not powerful enough in speaking out. When I look back now, Governor Chiles was very conservative a lot of things. I just was not looking for the same things, the same issues.

You see, I never realized we were going to take over the middle east and become an empire. Now that I know it, I can fight it.

[fujiyama]

36. I understand that democrats

from red states have certain electoral demands, like those having to do with local industry or perhaps a somewhat socially conservative constituency...so I'm not expecting them to vote the way I want them to 100% of the time.

But I'm tired of hearing these insults from From and Marshall. They've been continuous in the last several months. Basically when he refers to us, he paints as a cariciture no different than Rush Limbagh or Sean Hannity.

I'm more than willing to work with moderate and even conservative Dems, but I would appreciate if they didn't insult me. I can understand the right spewing this crap, but I won't take it from so called democrats.

Oh and I just wanted to point out that Zell retired. His spot was taken over by another republican, Isakson (though I know what you meant).

[tnlefty]

85. And another so-called dem, Mike Snow, helped in the NW GA

area to get that SOB Isakson elected. I know some dems in that area who warned Mike Snow (2 yrs. prior to the '04 election) about being such a DINO and they told him that they would get rid of him in the GA House even if it meant having him replaced by a puke for 2-4 yrs. Snow had even stated that he didn't want any of Majette's signs or campaign literature coming into that district! He had fellow dems out removing lawn signs. Snow wanted nothing to do with the Kerry/Edwards ticket either.

Those dems didn't have a candidate ready to run against him yet, so they started a campaign to vote for a duck instead of Snow or his repug (like that was even necessary) opponent. Snow is gone! They have since found a woman who they hope to run during the next election.

Many dems in the south want better candidates and better representation than the choices we often get.

[RBInMaine]

90. HERE HERE!

My good friends on the left/far left, I emplore you to think a bit more inclusively. Look, here is one thing Al From has said that is absolutely true: electorally, the R's are now the majority party in this country. Period! They have taken over. They the White House, Congress, and a majority of Governorships. If we are going to come back into the majority we need a large united tent with liberals, moderates, and even some conservatives. That means some compromise from all sides. We CAN unite around core values and policy ideas. I don't agree with everything in the DLC agenda, but I agree with many of the ideas (see their site). I also agree with many of their ideas about expanding the electoral map and finding ways to win again in the south and west. Let's face it,
a far-left agenda just won't work in too many places. I didn't agree with Bill Clinton on some issues, but I found common ground with him on about 80% of the issues as did the center-left coalition he formed to WIN, TWICE! That's what we need to do!

[Guaranteed]

117. We need leadership, not triangulation. nt

[OzarkDem]

112. Your ignorance astounds

Where do you get off assuming you are the only centrists or conservatives in the Dem party?

[ChiciB1]

80. I'll Vote For That.... Even

if they say it's a losing strategy!!

[madfloridian]

9. Well, I changed the first paragraph to be very fair.

I think a lot of us who supported Dean and others are pretty moderate folks, I know I have always been.

As I say, I am willing, but they don't seem to want to dialogue.

They are setting their own agenda, as they did at the convention. That means they think they are forming the agenda.

Meanwhile, back at the DNC ranch, a fall meeting is being held next month to form the party agenda. Go figure.

I am a very moderate person in all things, always have been. I am only rarified and lefty fringe when it comes to women's rights. That is because I see us as being the scapegoats this time.

I am willing, but they are still defending the war. Whenever Howard Dean does speak out more, like he did on FTN..then he gets undermined or ignored by the party DC folks. He may be in DC, but he is not accepted by them. He should be. We should be.

[Guaranteed]

11. We ARE the party, Mad.

What's left of it, at least.

[Writer]

12. I understand. I don't support individual members of the DLC

fighting liberals in the party. But at the same time I do defend their right to exist and participate as a part of the Democratic Party. Note: only a PART. If the majority of Democrats would prefer a more liberal platform, then that's how the party will go. The DLC is there to push their agenda, whether one agrees with that or not.

[madfloridian]

25. We pretty much agree on that part.

They just don't get to do it without those of us in the DNC.

[tsuki]

35. Then push your platform at the party level, not the media level. Every

time I hear from Fromm

We've got to repudiate, you know, the most strident and insulting anti-American voices out there sometimes on our party's left... We can't have our party identified by Michael Moore and Hollywood as our cultural values.
—Al From, CEO, Democratic Leadership Council NY Press

"What activists like Dean call the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party is an aberration; the McGovern-Mondale wing, defined principally by weakness abroad and elitist, interest-group liberalism at home," From and Reed wrote in a fiery memo titled "The Real Soul of the Democratic Party" on May 15, 2003. Four days later, after Dean won the endorsement of the 1.5 million-member public employees union AFSCME, the DLC denounced the union as "fringe activists." Common Dreams

In the Dec. 2, 2002 issue of Blueprint, the magazine of the DLC/PPI, Dr. Barry Rubin was brought in to "sell" the Iraq War to the Democrats and neutralize their opposition, with an article called "Why Saddam Should Go First." The article was used to reinforce the lie that Democrats had been crushed in the 2002 Congressional and Senate elections because of their questioning of the Iraq War policy in the October Congressional debate. In the same issue, Al From, DLC's Chief Executive Officer, raved against Democrats who opposed the war: "Democrats need to get the big things right. That means national security.... The President's first responsibility is as commander-in-chief.... Our nominee in 2004 must convince voters that he'll keep them safe. If he doesn't, nothing else will matter."

--------

The more I read about Al From, the more it sounds like sour grapes. He will never get over the unwashed masses in the grassroots rejecting him and voting for Dean.

[Cha]

63. How many members of

from's family have joined the military? Or is it just for the "great unwashed masses"?

Why aren't they asking young dlc types to join up and get themselves over to I-raq to help replace bush's fallen Soldier's?

I Smell Hypocricy to the INTH DEGREE!

[tsuki]

75. This is my problem. The DLC does not want bloggers, the

internet, Michael Moore, liberals, progressives, anti-Bush's War people, George Soros, Howard Dean, union members, or anyone that is not a resident elitist of the beltway.

[Eloriel]

77. So true -- Yet they say WE are the elitists

Hmm, something just popped out at me:

One thing it told us is that the party's most active wing lives in a rarified universe of what Pew calls "a different kind of Democrat."

Listen to the numbers: Among these liberal faithful, only 1 percent are black compared to 22 percent in the rest of the party. Of those polled, 79 percent have college educations; in the Democratic Party, only 25 percent have college degrees. In this activist community, 29 percent have annual family incomes above $100,000; that's nearly three times the percentage among Democrats as a whole. Fully 38 percent of the activists say they have no connection to organized religion, and don't go to church. In the Democratic Party, that figure is only 10 percent.

Maybe we're the LEADERS? If we're the self-chosen most active wing, perhaps it's because we care the most, we have the most vision, we have the resources (time, money - a little, and talent), we have the INTEREST, etc.m, etc.?

WHY would you want to run off the most active wing? Why would you want to eradicate or severely curtail their influence? Why would you want to dumb down the party? It's not like we're pushing for communism or even full-blown socialism; unlike the RNC's "most active wing," what we propose is not BAD for America.

Plus, we have 2 viable parties in this country, which means basically the voters have 2 choices, or a non-choice. SOME of them are going to have to make some concessions between matching their politics with one of the two parties. The GOP doesn't seem to have a problem with this idea, and as a result have steadily pushed the country to the far, fascist right since Reagan's term. You don't hear them bleating about whehter or not they occupy the correct place on the political continuum to attract enough voters -- altho it is true that they fix that problem by lying about who they are and what they're up to (not a viable or ethical option for us), AND try to make themselves look and sound more like Democrats in the process.

I'd say Fromm, et. al., need to get a clue, but they know exactly what they're doing: it's our very own 5th column, frankly.

[sendero]

38. You know...

... I think what you are saying is good in theory but it ignores reality.

The DLC is not the DLC because their constituents want them to be, they are because their donors do. That is a crucial difference that cannot be ignored.

How do you know what the constituents want when they are not even given a choice? They can vote Rep or for a Dem that votes like a Rep. Where is the choice in that?

IMHO, the ascendency of the DLC has ushered in the neutered Dem party we are experiencing right now. A Congress that cannot stop Bush** from doing anything, and that has put us in the position of being almost indistinguishable from the Reps.

Please explain to me how this is a good thing.

[Eloriel]

67. Well, I'm not willing: I don't party with fascists. Period.

And the DLC are fascists and fascist enablers. And that's a fact.

It's one thing to want to get along and try to compromise with people of genuine good will, people who will negotiate in good faith, people who are also interested in a win/win situation.

But NOTHING we have seen from the DLC -- other than some pretty words whch some of the DLC apologists like to trot out now and then but which are contradicted by the DLC's UGLY words and its actions -- indicate that this applies to them. I've seen NOTHING that they add of a positive nature to what the Democrats stand for, and AFAIC, having this Range guy say getting elected is more important than standing up for principle (when the alternative to said principle is simply WRONG -- like selling out gay rights, and no doubt women's rights) demonstrates my point.

I will NOT accept "winning is the only thing" politics from anyone in my party. I simply will not -- and will leave, if I have to, instead of accepting that. But the good thing is: I don't have to. That style of politics is -- all together now -- for Repugs, not Dems. We have right and truth on our side. They don't, and never will.

[pberq]

44. "Centrists and conservative Democrats"

What this refers to is those Democrats who work for the interests of corporate America over those of the millions of Americans in lower income brackets.

[LittleClarkie]

96. Or it might refer to other things

I would prefer the centrists and conservatives tell us themselves what it means to them.

Hell, around here, even moderates are lumped in with them, though I consider us to be some where between liberal and centrist.

Of course, depending on who's looking at me, I have also been called a liberal, a socialist and a communists. Depends how far to the right or left you're standing as you look at me.

[Hidden Stillness]

13. They are Only "Nice" When They are Losing, as a Strategy

Beautiful thread, on target, and of course their attacks against Democrats continue, as you provided proof of. Remember, they will act "nicely" toward us, until they sense an opportunity, or if they believe their own numbers are going up or people have forgotten the controversy. Then, it is back to "neo-left McGovernites," "too liberal for America," and a total lack of response to our (non-corporate, middle class, women, etc.) concerns. Too snide to answer a question of ours, about the nature of their corporate club, but always there to give orders or attack us all with the same language Republicans use.

[Al-CIAda]

19. Yes sir. nt

[Cha]

17. What "negative message"?

That "We Want Our Country Back"? That it is we who have to POWER?

That's probably what gets his goat..that it is We(who)Have The Power!

The dlc have done nothing but lose and if they're so concerned about "negative messages"..why are they supporting this misbegotten WAr On Iraq..calling for more troops on the ground? Where are those troops going to come from..thin air. Why aren't they calling for Dems to enlist to support those numbers? How Negative is that?


Edit~grammer

[madfloridian]

24. Yeh, the country back thing. They want to keep it.

:hi:

[Dr Fate]

20. Kerry ran a relatively "positive" campaign- and so did the '02 Dems....

...and arguably Gore did too. We have not really ran any negative campaigns that I know of- at least nothing on par with the GOP.

What is he basing the idea that pointing out the failures of the GOP is why we lost the last 3 elections?

I wish the DEMS were as negative as they say they are- at least we would be getting something out of it, since they say it anyway.

[LittleClarkie]

21. We reserve it for each other

I wish we'd turn the cannon around and aim it at a few Repubs. But mostly I smell politics and jockeying for position.

[Dr Fate]

22. Yeah- it needs to stop somehow.

I guess I'm as guilty as anyone.

[LittleClarkie]

26. Yer heart's in the right place

And I don't think you're out to be divisive. This stuff, though, reminds me of the Israelis and the Palestinians. "You started it!" "No, YOU started it!" "You attacked us!" "Well, YOU attacked us first!"

Sort of Heckle and Jeckle, if you know what I mean.

So no, I think at least you have a goal in mind that you want Dems to do. If From or Bayh said something about DSM on tv, I don't think you'd gripe about how they were DLC. You'd rejoice in the exposure. Right, or no?

[electropop]

53. Right, we would welcome DLCers espousing Democratic positions.

It's not that we want the people gone, we just want them to see that acting like Republicans is not helping the ordinary people of America, and it is not helping their own party. Democrats have a big tent, but we need (as From says) to remember our core values, which are pro-worker, not anti-worker.

[Dr Fate]

68. LOL!

You generally will never hear me even say "DLC"- I take these things issue by issue & candidate by candidate.

[madfloridian]

27. From included congressional folks as being negative, too.

That was very confusing. Kerry ran a very positive campaign. And now Dean's job as chair is to push the GOP buttons, which he does well. Pointing out their faults is his job.

[ChiciB1]

83. Totally Agree... And WE Are Going To Have To UNITE!!

I'm sorry, but even Feingold couldn't get enough support from the "elite" Democrats!!!

The Democrats actually have the GOP in the cross hairs, however NO ACTION!! Just a bunch of weenies for the most part! Time to spit in their eye's, not sit on your BUTT!!

[karynnj]

41. Kerry ran a positive campaign, but it wasn't perceived that way

Some of the polls indicated that people thought Kerry was more negative than Bush. This mystified me, because I remembered the negative advertising that Bush and the 527 threw at Kerry.

Kerry expressed a vision and his rallies were positive. In talking to some Bush people - they actually thought Kerry was being negative when he spoke of Iraq being a mismanaged war of choice. I had previously thought that just as I combined the SBVT with the official Republican ads they might be criticising Kerry for the Democratic 527s, but it seems there were still a large group of people who bought the Republican line of "you can't criticize the President in a time of war". (so Bush is positive because he talks of what he is doing in untrue, but positive terms; Kerry was negative because he was saying Buah was wrong.)

I realize that I equated negative with dirty. Bush ran a dirty positive campaign, while Kerry ran a clean, mixed positive(vision of what could be)and negative (what Bush is doing)campaign.

[Dr Fate]

70. Well, he did better than the "me too" '02 DEMs.

Who did NOT criticise the "war on terror" or Bush's handling of it at all.

[Douglas Carpenter]

28. let's remember that in the late 70's the GOP went through a similar fight

Sometimes, I think the right wing is more clever than us. Remember when Barry Goldwater lost by a humiliating landslide in 1964--the right wing didn't just give up. Yet, to this day we hear the right wing of the Democratic Party point to the McGovern campaign as proof that the Democratic Party cannot be successful as a genuine progressive party. Some of them would say the same thing about the Mondale and Dukakis campaigns. However, I cannot imagine what they are talking about. What uber-liberal positions did they advocate? Check the record and you will see that they were running on a watered-down DLC-lite program.

In the mid to late 70's many in the right wing of the GOP wanted to purge the liberals and moderates from their party. Some on the right wanted to form a third party and run Reagan on that. Very serious figures like James and to some extent William F. Buckley were talking about this all quite openly. But instead they organized and built the infrastructure to not only transform the GOP into a distinctly right wing party--but have managed to gain control of all three branches of government and the media as well.

I think that progressives need to learn from this. Organize and build the necessary infrastructure to transform the Democratic Party and to build a progressive majority. I simply don't see either the third party option or purging the dino's as a feasible option. If progressives would seize the opportunity--I suspect we could follow the example of the right. Then the DLC and their likes will cease to be relevant. It will take work and time. But something tells me that the forces of change are on our side. One thing is clear, we will never have a progressive majority with anti-progressives leading the Democratic Party; no matter who wins the elections.

[flpoljunkie]

43. Thanks for your analysis. Make the DLC irrelevant sounds like a good plan.

[Burried News]

55. I agree, a historical lesson is right in front of us as to how to do it.

It is a sound strategy and it need not be totally implemented for 2006, but it would seem like it would have to be underway befor 06. Nice post.

[kerrygoddess]

29. Kevin Drum Points Out What Democrats Need to Do

http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=341

[Adelante]

47. Yup

Both sides have to give or we're playing straight into Rove's hands.

[tsuki]

30. If Al From would criticize the Republicans like he does the

Democratic Party, we might get somewhere. Why doesn't he just become a Republican. Maybe if he did, he could tell them what is wrong with the Republican Party and leave Democrats alone.

[Cha]

62. Precisely!

I'm sure Dean would welcome them to work with but from where I sit the dlc treats him like the freakin' plague(The People :scared:)!



"If Al From would criticize the Republicans like he does the
"Democratic Party, we might get somewhere. Why doesn't he just become a Republican. Maybe if he did, he could tell them what is wrong with the Republican Party and leave Democrats alone." :toast:

[creeksneakers2]

31. From is one of those people

who keeps saying Democrats need positive solutions. The folks who rattle off this GOP talking point never say what the positive solutions should be. They just say we should be positive. In other words, we should LOOK positive.

Then they go on to say that the voters have the perception that Democrats don't stand for anything. Its obvious why. Guys like Al From are trying to set the course of the party based on the success of various GOP talking points. They take polls not to find out where we have support and where we don't, but to count the number of people who say bad things about us. Then they spend all their time trying to not look like whatever negative impressions they can detect. Their idea of the best way to do that is to imitate the Republicans. Everybody sees through it. Al From really doesn't have a soul.

I do agree it would be better to be positive. Here are some positive things we could be for rather than just trying to look positive:

Changing America's world role to one of cooperation rather than military omnipotence.(Polls show Americans prefer internationalism to unilateralism two to one.) Strengthen the U.N instead of trying to destroy it. Save trillions by not creating the science fiction type zap anything on the planet in a second military machine that the Pentagon is constructing. (Lots of people say they are for "strong defense" but its hard to find anybody who says they like America being the world policeman.) Use that money to balance the budget and for other needed initiatives.

Use a large part of the money saved from the Pentagon to create energy alternatives that lower our dependence on foreign oil. The competition would lower gas prices. (Folks would love this one.)

Use the power of government to negotiate lower drug prices for both government programs and consumers.

Get action on Hillary's plan to standardize medical forms and save billions.


Al From will never push anything good. He's too busy repeating GOP talking points. The latest GOP talking point I heard on talk radio was, "Democrats are divided." Why, Al?

[Burried News]

57. Because they have a stealth agenda just like Bush does.

I am responding specifically to your comment because it is on the money: "The folks who rattle off this GOP talking point never say what the positive solutions should be. They just say we should be positive. In other words, we should LOOK positive."

Bush was in office almost three years befor the public began to get wise to what he was behind AND more importantly WHO was behind him. That is the story here too. WHO is behind the DLC? Find that and you find the agenda. Fail to and you have CONtinued CONfusion and CONtrol.

[Cha]

64. Good post, creek!

Yeah, "lower gas prices"! :D

edit~spelled creek wrong :)

[xchrom]

32. al from = rove operative.

[fujiyama]

33. Your last comment sums it up for me as well

"Want to work together? Then don't talk to me in an insulting way about "rarified"."

This is what pisses me off most about this group - the insulting of liberals.

[Q]

37. In reading their website and listening to their rhetoric...

...the DLC's intentions and agenda are abundantly clear: End the New Deal and everything that goes with it. And what can't be ended...must be privatized, co-opted and controlled by business interests.

Although they may throw around a few altruistic catch phrases...they're all about lobbying for corporations not satisfied with the billions in unearned corporate welfare handed to them by a trickle-down government...they want the bucks that go to social welfare added to their Cayman Island accounts.

Some say that the DLC was formed to get 'more money FOR business'. But I submit that it's about so much more. They also want an end to the 'welfare state' and to break away from what they call the 'special interests' of the party: Blacks, affirmative action, unions, worker's rights, living wages, women's rights, choice, separation of church and state, public education, gun 'control', etc.

In other words...they call themselves 'new' Democrats because they don't want to be associated with the 'old' party of the people. Their 'third way' is nothing more than a front for replacing social with corporate welfare. All the markings of a corporate state and, yes...fascism.

Others say that the 'liberals' should simply 'compete' with the DLC and get their principles added to the platform and support their candidates during the primaries. But this is a bunch of bull and the DLC knows it. They have usuped the party leadership and have one of their own in all the top positions in the party. The only exception is Dean...but they have him on a leash and smear him every time he speaks out for the rank and file.

The DLC has the 'democratic process' within our party rigged in the same way the Bushie GOP has our elections rigged. It's no accident that the last three 'nominees' for president were all DLCers...including Kerry. The DLC admits outright that their plan to 'change the philosophy of the party' centers around getting one of their own in the White House.

This is why they spend more time attacking 'liberals' than the Bush administration. They use the corporate media in much the same way as the RWingers to demonize the 'radical left' and promote their own candidates as the only ones that can win. They have literally pushed liberals and progressives out of the running. And they do it by working OUTSIDE of the party as a 'think tank' with unlimited funding from those who also don't want liberals to become the nominee and run a winning populist campaign.

[CrispyQ]

101. Nice summation. I agree with what you say.

They also want an end to the 'welfare state' and to break away from what they call the 'special interests' of the party: Blacks, affirmative action, unions, worker's rights, living wages, women's rights, choice, separation of church and state, public education, gun 'control', etc.

This sounds like the Republican party, not the party of liberals & progressives! I wonder if at some time in the near future, true conservatives of the repub party will join with the centrisits of the dem party leaving liberals & progressives out in the cold. I'm already feeling a chill!

[Al-CIAda]

39. .

[flpoljunkie]

40. "Different" kind of Democrat is DLC talk for "Real" Democrat, Al!

They will do anything rather than stand up and fight for what is right for the American people--choosing instead to weasle and slide around, fearing to speak out and look "negative."

This kind of attitude is what has lost us elections, and they want to continue doing more of the same. At least, the Republicans have the sense to not sh*t on their base. You cannot say this for the clueless and despicable Al From and his DLC minions.

I hope Howard Dean continues to speak out. I would like him to speak out more--stand up for economic justice for the American people and, thereby, tell the DLC to pound sand, with their corporate toadying. Howard, what are you waiting for?

[hootinholler]

45. Different kind of democrat?

Yeah, The democratic kind. Ol Howard summed it up when he said he represented the democratic side of the democratic party.

These guys are so far out of touch they can't even see how far out there they are.

-Hoot

[Mass]

46. Already old and largely commented on on DU last month.

This was during their convention and if you really want something to chew on, you better read their platform.

BTW, dont focus on Dean, they also attack anybody in the congressional delegation who opposed the govt (that would include even a few DLCers) and the Internet Activists.

[madfloridian]

73. They made the focus, not me.....in their own words.

It is about all of us...you tell them not to make it about us.

[Adelante]

48. And "Dean's folks" are going after the DLC

What on earth can you expect? :shrug:

It's a stand-off and the winner is Karl Rove.

[Cha]

65. "Dean Folks"

are We the People. I'm sure Dean would love to work with the dlc but they treat him like the plague..heck Dean is going to all 50 States, isn't he? He wouldn't mind talking to the state of the dlc.

There is a huge dividing issue as far as I can see and that is the misbegotten War On Iraq. The dlc is for it and Progressives could see from the very beginning that it was WRONG. So why isn't from calling for more troops on the ground out of the dlc rank and file?

Because he's a Hypocrite? Just asking.


Edit~spelling

[madfloridian]

71. They are going after him as the chair of the party now.

I am sorry, but your statement fails to show an understanding of what they are trying to do.

They are constantly putting him in the "liberal" camp, using right wing terminology. They then call us activist fringe, etc. They do NOT care about what we, anyone you want to call "we", think about anything.

I would like to think you understood that this was about far more than us Deaniacs. Sorry you feel that way.

[Adelante]

79. "Dean's folks" is from your subject line - that's why it's in quotes

They call you names; you call them names. It's the Republican Party who wins in this fight. I'm a Democrat. I want you and I want them. I want as many in the party as can be had, because that is how we will win elections.

[madfloridian]

81. Don't you see that they are referring to all of the DNC now?

Please don't misinterpret what I said. Why do you think I put it in quotes? Most people got it, you didn't. If you are a member of the DNC then they are including you.

Did you see my last sentence? I am surprised you so misinterpreted it. I used their own words.

[Edgewater_Joe]

49. I Can't Wait For Kos' Plan To Squash The Demo LOSERS Council

They've had their chance and they've made this party weaker than it's been since at least the 1920s.

THEY.

MUST.

GO.

[hnsez]

50. Al From = Hand Wringing Loser

There is only one way to defeat the neocons - head on. Al's ideal Democratic candidate is a half-hearted mealymouthed POS quasi-repuke that will get stomped on Karl Rove's tactics again.

[PATRICK]

51. The GOP does projection better too

it seems. It projects upon its real enemies not any of its weird assortment of cultic allies.

If you are going to ape a GOP vice, do it right, but the DLC never quite gets it. One hopes actually they never do or that they simply jump ship and become the Other.

We could be patient with this identity crisis. They are not good at this hypocrisy thing by nature. By the time they grow up and leave their rarefied thinking, America, of course, will be destroyed and not really a good market for whiny books of fault finding still against "you liberals" unwittingly courtesy of the chortling Newt Gingrich.

Wayward, spoiled, adolescent "new" Dems, set aside your Eisenhower suits and rave focus groups and come home.

[electropop]

52. From says some very true things:

"voters believe Democrats have 'no core set of convictions or point of view.'"
- I couldn't agree more. We need to proudly express our honest, pro-worker liberal point of view and stop spouting mealy-mouthed corporatist DLC BS.

"they don't want us at the table."
- That's right. It's our table and it's for Democrats only. At least he's acknowledging that we are now the agenda setters, and he is marginalized.

[Q]

54. "talking more about what's going wrong than how to make it right."

And the DLC isn't talking 'about what's going wrong' at all.

How can one determine how to solve a problem until it's understood what the problem is?

But okay...let's talk about how to 'make it right'.

Bush should be prosecuted for lying this nation into attacking and occupying a country that posed no threat to us.

There should be a series of full and INDEPENDENT investigations into the events surrounding 9-11.

There should be hearings and investigations surrounding the election fraud and purging of mostly Black voters in 2000 and 2004.

The thing is...the DLC doesn't want to make these things right. They want to cover them up and hide them behind their feel good rhetoric.

[meppie-meppie not]

59. what a cushy job they have. They collect their inflated paychecks,

are guaranteed those wonderful health plans and then will be collecting thier bloated pensions when they leave. They stay in their ivory towers and point the finger at everything but themselves. They don't want the Democrats to win back either houses or the WH because then they would have to come up with solutions. No, as it stands right now, everything is where they like it because they can point to the Repukes for all that's wrong and point to us for why Democrats remain on the back burner. Pretty good scam if you ask me.

[Cha]

66. Bunch of empty suits

who don't mind killing people to get their agenda across.

May it backfire it their collective greedy face.

[meppie-meppie not]

58. when they need money or to get out the vote what does the "leadership" do?

They get on the Internet. Why? Because in the past 2 election cycles the Internet and it's Democratic patrons have been the ones to put money and action to where their words are. I truly believe that you people need to form a third party with some clout (unlike the Green Party). Start fundraisers of your own, start grooming candidates of your own that truly represent you and not the conglomerates and start wooing over those Democratic candidates who have backbone, who are working for the people and the truth. Just like the airwaves are replete with nothing but "media whores" the political climate of today is fraught with "political whores" and it's time to be rid of them!

Edited for a typo.

[Burried News]

60. If the DLC believes in democracy and dialogue - where are they on this

board or on KOS or on other liberal boards. Come out and show us the power of 350 corrupted minds. There are voters right here - make the case DLC. You can't because your agenda is fit only for the shadows AND you don't have the numbers. You are like the wizard of Oz.

[autorank]

61. It's time for "Dean to be Dean"...screw the wimps and naysayers!

Let's get it on. Hackett did that and he won (probably) or almost won in a very Republican District. He called Bush a "chickenhawk) and a "son of a bitch" in public. How about that for rough stuff. The people in the rural areas went for Hacket about 65-35% (very rural Southwestern Ohio, bordering Kentucky counties!!!).

Dean, kick some ass. Fire Brazile and the Mandarins. Do your job or there will be a real third party and it will win.

[Burried News]

69. We must be stronger on defense. We will complete the mission.

[zulchzulu]

72. Al From needs to be FIRED immediately

Do we have a petition going on anywhere?

We need AAR hosts (all of them) to start the drumbeat to oust this STUPID, CLUELESS IDIOT. We need to get the word out that Al From is poison to any hopes of winning in 2006 and 2008. The same with Mr. Range.

Al From speaks like he's in touch with Repug operatives...I certainly question his engaged claptrap..which is frighteningly similar to Repug talking points.

[AntiCoup2K4]

78. As far as AAR hosts go...

I'm pretty sure Mike Malloy and the Majority Report are on board. Possibly Randi as well. All of the above have been critical of the From Scouts lately (Thank God!)

I don't think you would get Al Franken to oppose the DLC though, since he's allegedly one of them. And Jerry Springer is probably going to avoid controversy whenever he can, so his radio show isn't compared to his TV show.

Morning Sedition? Those guys are on too early for me to know where they're at on anything, but one would expect that with a name like "Sedition" they wouldn't be slaves to corporatism.

[bvar22]

84. The DLC is a "private organization" funded SOLELY by large Corporations...

...and created to co-opt the traditional Democratic Party (you remember, the Party of LABOR, the Working Class, the Poor, the disenfranchised). There is no way WE can fire Al From. He is doing a wonderful job and his Corporate masters are well pleased. The DLC is ENSURING that if their Corporate Owned Candidate is NOT elected, that seat will go to a Corporate Owned Republican, and NOT to a Democrat!
The Corporate Financiers of the DLC are pleased with that result. It is a WIN/WIN for them!

Al From and the DLC have NO RIGHT TO SPEAK FOR THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY!!!

The DLC has NO loyalty to the Democratic Party!
The DLC's ONLY allegiance is to their Corporate Financiers!!!



The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[RBInMaine]

76. Slow down and take a deep breath folks. Gotta have both!

Okay okay, Al needs to be less divisive in some of his rhetoric, but this liberal-moderate fight needs to STOP once and for all! Dems are hard-pressed to win nationally without a big tent, and there is no reason at all that we can't have one. Al is admittedly right when he talks about needing to expand the map, a better affirmative message, and as much emphasis on persuasion as GOTV. Moderates and progressives agree, at least in large measure, on the majority of issues. We need to start talking about the COMMON GROUND instead of continuing with all this divisive bickering from BOTH sides. Helping working families, rewarding work and not just wealth, targeted working and middle class tax incentives, energy independence, smarter national defense, greater inclusion, meaningful healthcare reform, etc. are issues where liberals and moderates can work TOGETHER! Let's agree that libs and mods will disagree 10 or 20 percent of the time, but that we need to get beyond that and UNITE around that which we DO agree on if we want electoral success. This is just the plain truth, and it is a GOOD
truth. John Kerry said it right the other day: we don't need to lurch to the right or the far left. We need to explain to working people how we are going to addres their everyday concerns and make their lives better. That's what we need to do!

[madfloridian]

82. They don't want both. That is my point.

They are planning on their own agenda, with Hillary in charge.

If you read my post, I say I am willing...but I won't be talked down to anymore.

[RBInMaine]

88. I hear you, but are you trying to talk to them?

Have you gone to the DLC site and read their "agenda"? Have you called or written to them to express ideas and concerns? There may be pieces in their vision/agenda for the country that you agree with, maybe the majority of the ideas. Look at their site and see all the R and Bush-bashing they do for all to see. Plenty. Look, I don't like the divisive commentaries from anyone in the DLC NOR left of center. My point is that the two sides need to understand that the party as a whole can't win without a big tent coalition and there is room for all of us, liberal and moderate. Look at the south and west. We have lost almost all of it, and we have to stop making excuses and whining about the R's. We need to look at ourselves and find ways to win back some of these red states. We'll do that, I think, by showing up there again as Dean is working on, and we'll do it with new ideas and a compelling affirmative agenda that can win with D's, I's, and yes, even some R's. I credit the DLC with at least putting out some ideas that seek to bridge these divides. A far-left agenda, no matter how principled, will simply not win in many areas. We need a big tent, and both sides need to stop the silly bickering and get back to uniting the party around great COMMON principles and ideas for the people. I urge you to take the higher road and in turn, urge the DNC to get it together with the DLC and work on the common ground. These attacks on From and the DLC are as pointless and counterproductive as anyone else's attacks on Michael Moore, MoveOn, or anyone further to the left.
Let's stand together for goodness sake!

[madfloridian]

92. Have you read my posts using their own words?

I only post things that use their own words. Guess how I found those words...by going through their sites, page by page. The DLC/PPI/Third Way.

There are a lot of good things about them. I post what I find that shows they do not consider us to be part of the party.

I use their own words. OH, and guess who started the Michael Moore attacks...Al From.

Oh, and what made you think I am left wing. What made you think that Dean is left wing? Where are you getting that left wing stuff?

Oh, I forgot...from them.

[RBInMaine]

102. Didn't say you were "left wing"

I didn't say you were "left wing" (and that is a commonly used term that has been around for a LONG time, so NO I didn't get it from the DLC). I said I didn't know you one way or the other, only that someone might assume that if you make comments like "the DLC is radically right wing" which is an unfair charge. I'm glad that you are fair enough to note there are things you agree with them on. Yes, I know From has said negative things about Moore and he shouldn't and I have written to them to stop it. Look, they have a centrist vision for the country, much of which I happen to agree with (though NOT all of it). They think it can help us win again in red states ala Bill Clinton. I don't like everything I hear out of Al From. I also don't agree 100% with Dean, nor do I like everything out of his mouth either. But I worked the Maine people to help him take over at the DNC because I liked his ideas about
50-state party organization, something he and the DLC certainly agree upon. And I'm happy with Dean at the DLC.
I never said Dean was "left wing". In fact, he's actually pretty centrist on some things and even conservative on gun and fiscal policy. (Note his past NRA endorsements.) Again, my simple points are these: 1) We need a big tent to win again in all 50 states;
2) That big tent means uniting all wings of the party around commonalities instead of bickering over the minority of issues where there are differences and continuing these silly power struggles whether it is coming from the center or the left;
3) We must recognize that we need ideas, priorities, and messaging that can over-arch the ideological divides and build the electoral coalitions needed to win. That coalition MUST include liberals and moderates, D's, I's, and even some R's. 4) Finally, if someone feels "dissed" by Al From, take the higher ground rather than sinking to the very levels they are complaining about and take issue with it in more constructive ways (i.e. by reminding the DLC to take the higher ground as well, etc.). You are a Dem, I am a Dem, I bet you and I agree on LOTS of things. So let's say we set an example and start doing that. LET'S ALL OF US START TALKING ABOUT EVERYTHING WE AGREE ON, AND STOP THE COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE BICKERING. LET'S SAVE OUR FIRE FOR THE REPUBLICANS THAT WE NEED TO UNSEAT. That's what I want.

[creeksneakers2]

116. I'm a moderate. Those guys are Republicans

Being a moderate, I often disagree with posters on this board. I've never encountered any hostility like the DLC gets. Its not the far left that is causing this. It the DLC and their surrender first and ask questions later attitude, and the DLC's Republican ideology.

[Cha]

89. It's not "liberal-moderate"!

There's nothing moderate about the dlc..it's radically right wing and lap dog thrown in for good measure.

[RBInMaine]

93. And on what do you base that?

I appreciate your strong feelings, but to use terms like "radically right wing lap dog" makes you sound "radically left wing" which may be just as baseless (or maybe not, not knowing you). I really don't think that Hillary Clinton, Tom Vilsack, Mark Warner, and other DLC Dems are "radically right wing." Look, I appreciate anyone's ideology and standing on principle, but attacking the DLC and DLC Dems in this way does nothing to unite a political party which MUST have a broad tent if it wants to be the majority national party again, which we must admit we are NOT. The R's have the White House, the Congress, and a majority of Governorships. Let's stop the bickering, unite around the 80% of issues and principles we can agree on, and urge the DLC, our respective local parties, and
left-leaning and center-left organizations to work together on common ground. I have been sending this message to the DLC as well.

[Cha]

94. I feel I am stating the truth and I

am talking about from and his attacks against the activists.

Imo, wanting more troops on the ground in Iraq is right wing especially when you don't have any idea where they're coming from.

There was no reason to start a war on Iraq..saddam could have been contained..this is all bloody senseless killing and the dlc is propagating that.

[RBInMaine]

105. Fine, disagree on that if you must, but agree where you can.

I appreciate your strong feelings on the war. I really do. I'm a vet myself and was against going in too, and Bush's argument that it is about OUR security is bunk! BUT, we're there now and I would just like to see us get the country as secure as reasonably possible before leaving (but within a reasonable time frame) so it doesn't collapse into total chaos and outright civil war.

Otherwise, there are MANY other issues and if you read the DLC policy agenda you may see some things you like, as well as some of the ideas to win again in red areas.

I want D's of all stripes to start talking COMMON GROUND instead of bickering over the differences. WE NEED A UNITED PARTY AND BIG TENT!

[Cha]

109. So I hope al from and

bruce reed are listening to you.

[markus]

124. A message to moderates

You are not the DLC, and the DLC is not you.

Is your agenda to unite with the GOP in the elevation of corporations to a super-citizen status greater than that of individual Americans? Do you support a program of neo-colonial war to expand American interests and markets? Would you favor the complete elimination of access to contraception and abortion? Wide-spread censorship of the media by the government?

Or do you want a country in which the interests of working people and consumer come first before corporate interests? A country which uses moral force before military to lead the world in the direction of peace and prosperity? Would you accept that abortion should be safe, legal and unnecessary? That all citizens should be equal under the law?

If you're a corporate whore who agrees with Paragraph Two, then I understand your reflexive defense of the DLC and everything they stand for.

If not, the DLC is not your friend any more than it is ours. The DLC is about corporate power and influence, and nothing more. They want power so that they can give us a kinder, gentler version of the GOP program. They are not centrists; they are center right.

Moreover, the DLC has lost the Congress and the South. We are never going to get past the racial and religious divides in this country until we make elections about populist economic issues, about structuring an economy that brings prosperity to all and dos not rob the working man and woman for the benefit of an elite.

The DLC started out to be a voice for the moderate Democrats of the South. It's moderately pro-business positions made it easy for the DLC to raise a great deal of corporate money as well. Having lost the South--and everything else--it is reduced to shilling for it's paymasters.

Again, if you're real interest is rigging the system so that you can retire early while all the people around you work 50 hour weeks until they die, they by all means defend the DLC. Please just do so from outside our party. Because neither you nor they belong here.

If you share the concerns of many Liberals about real values issues: the garbage that spews out of my 13-year old daughters radio and having Sex In The City on free cable prime time matter to me (and I think most Americans) more than gay marriage); about making sure people can live decently from honest work and not suffer if they get sick; restoring our moral influence so that America is both a shining city on a hill and an example to the rest of the world, but is still an 800 pound gorilla that tyrants must feat--then join us in repudiating the DLC and in building an agenda that speaks to the majority of Americans.

[JNelson6563]

86. Table schmable

I say we don't need no stinkin' seat at the table cause we're drivin' the bus. Let the DLC sit in their own poop and cry, we keep moving forward in the meantime.

Onward ho!

Julie

[Cha]

91. Right Freakin' ON!

"We don't Need No Stinkin' seat at the table"! :toast:

[AntiCoup2K4]

95. Or as David Lee Roth once said......

SIT DOWN, WALDO!!

[Burried News]

122. Pedal to the metal. Floor it.

[Eloriel]

87. You know, I just have to ask: Who are these fools TALKING to?

Really. Who do they think is their audience? It can only be other Washington beltway types, and some ill-informed politicos around the states who still think being involved with the DLC is a GOOD thing. This kind of article is a perfect example of the kind of stupidity that happens when there's way too much echo chambering going on: one ill-uinformed individual or group echoing what another ill-informed, out of touch individual or group says and both of them pretending as a result that they're "in the know."

These guys don't know shit.

[Cocoa]

99. must be corporate donors

the Orwellian idea that the opponents of the DLC are the elitists might flatter the insurance and banking executives, who probably delude themselves that they are the common man.

[GoneOffShore]

98. OK, are we agreed that the DLC is

the home of DINOS and will ultimately keep the Democratic Party OUT of power? That the DLC is beholden to corporate interests and has no notion of progressive policies or social justice? That they have sold us down the river?

Yes?

(Dissenters feel free to comment but you have better have some verifiable facts to hand)

So, this leads us to a further question: Why not flood the DLC with letters that say that they DON'T speak for us as liberal/progressive voters? Tell them that their tactics are not working, that they have betrayed the base of the party and are merely corporate toadies.
It's all very well and good for us to sit here in the amen corner going 'Tell it Brother (or Sister) Madfloridian!' but unless we make our voices heard by Mr. Range and Mr. From and THEIR supporters, they will continue to believe that they are the guiding force of our party.
Anyone care to join me in a letter writing campaign - and I'm talking about verifiable, paper letters here or faxes, not email, because they can always discount those - letting them know that grassroots Democrats have had enough of the DLC and it's Republican Lite message?

(Cue the creepy organ music, pass out pitchforks and torches and head off to the castle)

[RBInMaine]

104. Sorry, but that is not the way to go.

To win again in all 50 states means needing a coalition of liberals, moderates, D's, I's, and R's. A left/far-left agenda and message won't work in too many areas. If you visit the DLC site you'll see plenty of tough talk against Bush and the R's, and you'll also hear it in many of the DLC commentaries. You may also see some things you agree with in their policy and electoral strategy ideas.
Tom Vilsak, Mark Warner, Bill and Hillary, Evan Bayh, are all good Dems even if they are more moderate/conservative than some further to the left would like. But guess what, THEY WIN which is what politics is all about. This talk of one wing of the party wanting shut out the other is foolish no matter what side it is coming from. THE BETTER OPTION would be a letter drive to urge the DLC to recognize that they need progressive voters as much as progressive candidates need moderate voters, and that we all need to sit down at that table and rally around the common ground, and there's plenty of common ground. I'd also urge a letter drive to the DNC to start working with the DLC and other organizations on both sides to UNITE ALL WINGS OF THIS PARTY once and for all. Talk of kicking ANYONE out of the party will only help us remain in the national electoral minority. (And YES, trust that I have criticismS for the DLC too and I have voiced them, but I WANT COMMON GROUND, NOT TO GET RID OF THE DLC WHICH WE ALL KNOW IS DARN WELL NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. THEY ARE DEMOCRATS EVEN IF THEY ARE MORE MODERATE/CONSERVATIVE. THEY HELPED US WIN THE WHITE HOUSE TWICE WITH BILL CLINTON. MANY OF THEIR MEMBERS HOLD HIGH OFFICE TODAY. WE NEED A BIG TENT, AND ALL DEMS NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT!)

[GoneOffShore]

111. I very much would like common ground

However, it would appear that Al From and his colleagues don't.
They are DINOS - not just moderate/conservative, but Republican Lite. Sure we won the White House with Bill Clinton, and as much as I like the guy, I'm sorry to say that he was not the best friend of progressive politics in this country. He signed the Welfare Reform bill, eliminating the social safety net for millions. He signed NAFTA, insuring that the US manufacturing base would erode, and he was not a friend to privacy by signing the MDCA.

I don't advocate kicking the DLC out of the party, but rather bringing them to heel and making them serve Democrats and not their corporate masters.

[CrispyQ]

106. I'm with you 100%!!

I too have thought a massive letter campaign would be good for them. Although I have little doubt it will change their agenda, it would sure make me feel good to call them out on their sell out of liberal issues. And who knows, maybe it will turn on a few lights.

[enough already]

100. They DLC doesn't want US at the table?

Screw 'em, it's OUR table now!

[LittleClarkie]

103. Moderates should be at the table

If I understand Dean's past record correctly, unless we allow the more conservative Democrats a seat, he won't be able to sit down either.

In fact, I remember a quote from him where he said that if he was considered Liberal, then it just showed how far to the right the Party had gone.

And he also said:
I still want to be the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks. We can't beat George Bush unless we appeal to a broad cross-section of Democrats.
Howard Dean

So I think we need to appeal to that broad cross-section he was talking about. Don't you?

[madfloridian]

107. Exactly right....what I am saying exactly.

I am using the words of the DLC to show that they do not understand who we are. They are the ones defining us...not just Dean, but all of us.

You made my point very well.

[RBInMaine]

108. YES!!

YES!! We need a big tent, new ideas, and ALL Democrats to win again in all 50 states. That means we need liberals, moderates, D's, I's, and even some R's. We need to start talking about the 80% or so of things that ALL Dems can agree on instead of bickering and dividing over the 20% or so where we disagree. That is foolish and a recipe for remaining in the minority permantly.

[Q]

110. Nice words...

...but what if that 20% was a matter of life and death and WORTH 'bickering' over? Should we simply shut up about those things which we disagree if it's about illegal wars, the destruction of the 'New Deal' and a outlaw government that uses OUR Constitution for toilet paper?

Sometimes...in the larger scheme of things...the 20% is more important than anything else. Like Civil and Equal rights. Voting for Blacks and Women.

We can debate issues all day long...but we'll accomplish nothing if the DLC refuses to come to the table. The problem is that the DLC has assumed leadership of the party through the Clintons and other high profile Democrats like Kerry and Lieberman. They are writing OUR platform and setting policy for every Democrat...whether or not they approve. No liberal or progressive or populist was asked for their input.

And incidentally...it's not 'bickering' to enter the debate about the future of our party and country. It's called Democracy.

[GoneOffShore]

113. Thank you for this

And I do agree.
If we allow the DLC to bow to conservative pressure we will see the eventual roll back of social justice programs. I say this because the DLC would have us elect more Zell Millers, Joe Liebermans, et al and then we lose! Roe - gone, Social Security - gone, Voting Rights Act - gone, EPA - gone, Medicare - gone, universal suffrage - gone. And welcome back poll taxes, corporations run even more amuck then they are now, theocracy, segregation or worse, plutocracy as taxes are lowered for the fat cats and raised for the rest of us.
I'm not willing to give up the dream of democracy so that corporate fat cats in the form of the DLC can ransack my rights and my country.

[enough already]

123. Why do I suspect that the 20% are the things most important to us?

Sorry, I just do not trust these DLC types and I never will again.

[Doctor Panacea]

114. Time for a purge

As long as the so-called "moderates" are running things in the Democratic Party, one thing is certain: The Republicans will win every Presidential election. And, I might add, sometimes they might even win legitimately.

[Cha]

115. I just found this quote in a DUer's sig line..

"We are Democrats without prefix, without suffix, and without apology." -Sam Rayburn

And knew right where I should bring it!

[Al-CIAda]

118. .

[Pepperbelly]

119. These guys really need to stop this bullshit.

It is as though they are already trying to get positioned for 08. And if that is what they are doing, they should be ashamed. The single most important thing we can do in the political process at this point is regain control of the Congress --at least ONE of the houses.

These guys are screwing the pooch and they should stop and do it now. If they truly want the party to succeed, they should know that SUBTRACTING support is dumb as a sack of rocks.

[madfloridian]

120. Oh my good Lord, I missed this part.

A lot of people on this thread realized I was not talking just about Dean's supporters being criticized. I was talking about the world view of these men who look down from aloft, and they can not differentiate between liberals, moderates, or anything else..

But then I realized why I was so upset. They don't want to see reality of what we are...that I am a pretty moderate person who went along to get along and voted for what the party said always. I realized they have to define us according to their goals, which do not include most of the regular party members.

Read these paragraphs, then read them again. They are talking about educated people, moderate people, people like Howard Dean who governed as a centrist, people like my husband and me who are just average people in the middle of the road. Then read the paragraphs again, and after that stop pretending this is just another wing of the party.

Again, Range is speaking of the Pew Poll, but then he veers off into civil rights and more. Read it and think. This is the editor of a so-called Democratic magazine, and this does not sound like a Democrat.

"By living to a large extent in a world of academic isolation and activist enclaves (41 percent have post-graduate degrees), the liberal wing is often alienated from many traditional Democratic constituencies -- even the minorities that liberals have always claimed to work so hard for. It's painfully ironic for an old civil rights liberal like me to note that the presence of more blacks in the Pew sample would have made it much more conservative, especially on issues like gay rights and church attendance.

Yet if you've tasted the successes of, say, the Voting Rights Act and the near-impeachment of Richard Nixon, when the liberal view was the winning view, it's easy to keep confusing your beliefs with the popular will. From there it's a short step to the conceit -- which I harbored for many years -- that liberal views on everything from gun control to same-sex unions to suburban sprawl should be the majority view of the Democratic Party, if not of the nation. If you say it long and hard enough, they'll finally get it.

That's wrong. Liberals today are a minority party within a multiparty system known as the Democratic Party. In any other country, they would run separately, and then negotiate a coalition government afterward. In America, we need to negotiate our coalitions before the general election. This requires a readiness to compromise that, alas, is not always a hallmark of dedicated activism.

Indeed, because of the good old days, the liberal wing's instinct is to try to take over the party -- to force its agenda on the other parts of the Democratic coalition -- as we were able to do in the civil rights era. We did it again in 1972, nominating a presidential candidate who was the clear choice of liberal activists -- and was rejected by voters in 49 states in the general election." END QUOTE

Think about it. Think of who he is describing as liberals. I am one here who advocates compromise, often get criticized for that. I have issues I get touchy about, but I have often been critical of those who say their way is the only way.

He is in effect forcing his agenda on the rest of the party while accusing us of the same. His description is not real, it is not sensible.

He is in effect also saying that those whom he defines as "liberals" are the ones who do not have a right to impose their agenda. He is saying that in another country we would have to form our own party. Hey, guy, it used to be my party.

Rather than seek better gun safety laws, liberals seek total gun control. Rather than fairness and restraint in the death penalty, the liberal instinct is to swim totally against the popular tide by trying to ban it. Rather than enthusiastically embrace a strong federal role in school accountability, liberals have let Bush hatred reflexively force them to take the states' rights side of the most important civil rights battle of our time. Imagine that!

If liberals consider themselves progressives, they must take seriously the progress part of the word -- as in change. That means sometimes releasing old dogmas and embracing new ones.

Heaven knows we need our activists, and God bless 'em. Let's just get them engaged in the larger center-left undertaking so Democrats can win elections, not just arguments. The Pew survey strikes a sobering note, and we should take it as a wake-up call.

Excuse me, but Mr. Range, we did it your way last year. I won't go into details, but your guys meddled in the primary. Then you meddled in Kerry's campaign forcing soft-pedaling. Don't imply we need to start our own party. We just might someday.

[madfloridian]

121. The worst thing is that he is making fun of those who are educated...

That is a tactic of the right. I am sorry but that is God's honest truth.

Some countries treasure their educated people, but not this one, not anymore.

Our own party has turned that Pew poll and twisted it to make fun of those who got a good education.

They twisted the word liberal, and made fun of educated and activists.

This is the nastiest sentence in the whole article:
"By living to a large extent in a world of academic isolation and activist enclaves (41 percent have post-graduate degrees), the liberal wing is often alienated from many traditional Democratic constituencies..."

Because we are supposedly well-educated we have alienated those who are the traditional constituencies in the party? Oh God, make this man shut up.

:eyes: :eyes: