DLC blogger Bull Moose goes after Murtha, Pelosi, and the Dean brothers.

[madfloridian]

Kind of all in one breath. Wow, this is a very cross Moose this week. In his post today I noticed that he said if we did not like it not to bother to link. So I am linking to the post from December 10, instead.

http://www.bullmooseblog.com/2005/12/listen-up-democrats.html

Listen Up, Democrats!

Listen Up, Democrats

Dr. Moose offers some tough love for the donkey.

There is only one force that can save the Republican Party and it is called the Democratic Party. The truth of that axiom has been reinforced over the past three weeks. When the President was plummeting in the polls, the Democratic cavalry came riding to the rescue. Rather than calling for a success strategy in Iraq, the donkey opted for pessimism and defeatism. The Democrats overreached and now the President is rebounding.

Perhaps, Karl Rove will send Leader Pelosi, Chairman Dean and Leader Reid delicate and finely-crafted Christmas ornaments. Gratitude demands it.

Here's another insight for Reid, Pelosi and Dean - you are the minority party. You control nothing in this town. And it is unlikely that you ever will or should control anything as long as you apply a litmus test on prominent elected officials. Get used to the smaller offices with the poor view.

But, there is irony and mirth in all of this. In a week that the Chairman of the Party played into the hands of the GOP by suggesting that we could not win in Iraq, his brother launched a crusade of criticism against Joe Lieberman. It appears that the entire Dean clan is committed to ensuring that the Democrats remain in the minority. What a scream!

So, listen up Democrats, you do not enjoy the luxury of contracting your ranks. If you want to expand the party, a purge is not what the doctor ordered.

Seems like the Bull Moose does not especially want us to fight with George Bush about anything at all. In his posts this week he is advocating not questioning Bush about Iraq or eavesdropping.

I do not "hate" the DLC, I disagree with their adherence to Bush's policies. I think they have hurt our party doing this. Iraq was their project, too. They called us "anti-war fringe activists."

On Edit, here is the link to the DLC blogs. No attacks, just using their own words to make my point....that they are not wanting us out of Iraq. That they are not wanting us to question Bush's eavesdropping.
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=252975&subid=900094&kaid=86

[vi5]

1. I'm all for big tent....

I strongly support and strongly endorse pro-life democrats such as Harry Reid despite my disagreements in that area.
I strongly support and endorse hawkish senators such as Kerry, Clinton, etc despite my dsiagreements in that area.
I'll even give some benefit of the doubt to corporae-ish dems such as Biden despite my disagreements in that area.

Because those people don't bash their own and ultimately they support the democratic party of which I am a member, over the republican party who I think are destroying this country.

An opposition party needs to act like an opposition party. Oppositions parties need to oppose. They need to point out what is being done wrong and say how they would not do it wrong. They need to point out even what is being done right in theory but getting fucked up in the process and detail how they would AVOID fucking it up.

And the Bull Moose or anyone else who at any point wants me or any of the elected members of my party to fall in line with any of the members of the party responsible for this debacle we find ourselves in today, can go take a flying leap as far as I'm concerned.

I don't hate the DLC. I hate cowards who insist that we have to play nice when after years and years and years the other side has proven that they fight dirty, will continue to fight dirty, and will stab us in the back as soon as they'd shake our hands. If any member of the DLC fits that bill then so be it. But it's got nothing to do with being DLC or not being DLC. It's got to do with being a political coward.

[madfloridian]

3. I support many of them as individual congressmen and women.

I just do not like the way their pro-business policies have affected our country.

I disapprove of the way they are pushing us to support Bush. They make it sound as though we are going to be better off if we do.

Not true. We have gone along too much with things Bush wanted. Now it is time to hold him accountable as much as we can.

I do not attack this group, and I don't attack individual Democrats. However, I will use their words to show that their ways have hurt us a lot.

I think Murtha, Pelosi, and Dean deserve great credit for taking the stand they did. I don't see any more talk of leaving Iraq now though. I guess they had a good talking to.

[LynneSin]

9. The biggest assholes of the DLC aren't even elected to an office

The DLC will never be accepted until they clean house starting with Al From. I mean, I respect that it's a group for democrats who tend to lean a little bit more moderate and look at the big picture in a different way than others. But assholes like this will continue to create a riff in the party.

I mean, I've been the biggest DLC 'defender' in here and this asshole makes even me look bad for doing it.

[Douglas Carpenter]

2. well yes, that's the kind of thing that pisses me off with that ilk

I will do my best to point out the more positive side of the voting records and positions of some DlC members like Clinton or Lieberman.

But this ignorant bibil-babel by Moose is just sooo typical.

If people are old enough to have any memories, it was War that destroyed the Democratic Party. LBJ did not lose his popular support because he was seen as militarily week. He lost it thus breaking the Democratic Party and ending what could have been the greatest Presidency in American history because of war and wanting to stay the course.

Nixon did not win in 68 on because he promised victory in Viet Nam. He won because he promised to end the war and bring peace, just as Eisenhower had several years earlier with Korea.

I can make one solid prediction for 2006 and 2008 that I can be 100% confident of coming to pass no matter who wins. If we win -- they will say it was because of them. If we lose -- they will say it is because of liberals and progressives.

[madfloridian]

4. That group is advocating winning in Iraq. That bothers me.

It sounds good. However, we can not win there because we have already lost.

I think their policies are hurting the people of the party a lot.

[Douglas Carpenter]

5. I agree 100%

And what happens if we do win in 2008 and they keep trying to win in Iraq? It will the a catastrophe for the party all over again just like in the 60's.

Gov. Dean was right the first time and everyone who knows anything about the Middle East knows it.

[madfloridian]

6. And if I find something positive, I will post about that as well.

I am sure they do a lot of good things. However, they hold an inordinate amount of power for so small a group at the leadership level.

There were at one time 40 in the office of the DLC/PPI combined. They shared a secretary.

The membership is larger than that of course, but it is the ones in the leadership I question the most.

[madfloridian]

7. If the DLC website and bloggers continue to take Bush's side....

then I feel I have a right to continue to point it out. I feel a little funny about all the posts here lately about DLC haters. It is a silly thing to do and say.

This blogger has a lot of influence, and he is quoted by our lefty blogosphere quite often. If he continues to criticize Democrats who really care about our country, then we have a right to question him.

In yesterday's column he is defending Bush on the spying, defending him 100%, not just a little. He questions the senators who were told about it, and says they should have called a special secret session of the senate. (I don't know that they would have dared to do under the climate in this country at that time.)

Yesterday's column: Unreasonable.

http://www.bullmooseblog.com/2005/12/unreasonable.html

Those Republicans were as wrong about "tagging" of explosives and the Second Amendment just as some liberals are wrong about the Bush Administration eavesdropping and the Fourth Amendment.

It was not an "unreasonable" search and seizure for the NSA to detect international phone calls of terrorist suspects. The key factor is that we are at war against a foe that is seeking to kill us. Congress passed a force resolution authorizing the President to defend the nation against Al Qaeda. Agility and speed was essential to exploit the information that was obtained from intelligence sources. It is now clear that the FISA law was an anachronism that was intended for Cold War espionage - far different from the post 9/11 era.

The Moose will not join this festival of Bush rage. While he has profound differences over W's domestic policies, winning the war against terror and preventing future attacks are far more critical than scoring partisan points. In the nineties, the Moose defended the Clinton ordered attacks on Al Qaeda, Iraq and the Balkans when some of his conservative colleagues suggested that it was just a "wag the dog" attempt to divert attention from his personal problems. He was no more a shill for Clinton then than he is an apologist for Bush today.

If that makes the Moose a "Republican plant" in the eyes of some puerile cyber-commissars, so be it. If the Moose offends the reader's liberal or libertarian sensibilities, please, please do us both a favor and don't bookmark this, don't read this and don't link to this . Moosketeers are a rare and hearty breed.

The Moose has no desire to win the acclaim or favor of the fever swamps of the right or the left. It is far, far more important to defend America against Jihadist terrorists who seek to do us harm than to slime a President.

I do not consider questioning the president makes one a member of the "fever swamp."

I figure that as long as they are trying to make us act more like Republicans...then guess what...maybe that is what some of them are.

Link to the DLC and its blogs, where there are some thing I agree with but mostly not.

Blogs
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=252975&subid=900094&kaid=86

Website of DLC
http://www.dlc.org/

[thebigidea]

12. thebigidea finds people who refer to themselves in the third person funny

[madfloridian]

15. The Moose is always third person.

Funny is a nice word for it.

[thebigidea]

23. how about "insufferably pompous?"

[Douglas Carpenter]

18. the very fact that he thinks warrants are an anachronism is scary

[Cha]

21. This bullmoose character could

be karl rove..

"The Moose has no desire to win the acclaim or favor of the fever swamps of the right or the left. It is far, far more important to defend America against Jihadist terrorists who seek to do us harm than to slime a President."

Is it "sliming" if it's true? I'm sure rove and his little chicken monkey puppet loves your logic, bm.

[AntiCoup2K4]

28. Karl Rove has probably worked for LESS Republican hate groups...

..than Wittman has. Actually, KKKarl's pretty much been on the Bush Criminal Empire payroll since the Nixon administration as far as I know.

(Except for the two times Poppy fired him)

[radio4progressives]

8. Isn't Bull Moose aka Al From?

Whoever Bullmoose is also known as, that blinded individual should be made aware that at this very moment - Iraq is a FAILED POLICY. period.

We ignore that fact to the peril of our own nation's socio-economic and democratic welfare.

I'm reminded of this in the press every day, but again on this very morning while listening to a reporter in Baghdad on the Thom Hartmann show, who is keenly aware of the political underpinnings in the region, said that we have to call it a victory now and go home - or face a catastrophic military and geo-political backlash on a level we have not yet had to face to date.

i'm paraphrasing his remarks so this is simply my summary interpretation of what he said in this very intriguing interview.

Someone should send a link of this mornings radio program to Al Fr..., uh, i mean BullMoose to contemplate before issuing his next ignorant screed.

[madfloridian]

16. This is Bull Moose. His bio.

http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=10110

"You Can Go Home Again
Marshall Wittmann’s political odyssey from Robertson to the DLC offers different slant on the values war.
James D. Besser - Washington Correspondent

Democrats need to reclaim the issues of morality and religion in American politics, says a leading Jewish political thinker.

But this is no rallying call to the faith-based juggernaut that seems to be reshaping the nation. Marshall Wittmann, formerly chief lobbyist for the Christian Coalition, has been there and done that, and now he thinks he’s seen a different kind of light. And that light has a distinctly centrist Democratic cast to it.

Wittmann, 51, has just signed on as a senior fellow at the Democratic Leadership Council — the centrist Democratic group once headed by the man most despised by the Christian right, former President Bill Clinton.

Wittmann’s odyssey from left-leaning union worker to Rev. Pat Robertson’s political operative and back to the Democratic fold, with a few stops in between, offers a different slant on the growing clash over the role of religious values in American public life. "

[AntiCoup2K4]

27. Marshall Wittmann might even be a bigger piece of shit than Al From.

As impossible would seem. This guy's resume contains every right wing lobby and "think tank" from Washington DC to Hell and back (too bad they - and he - didn't stay there) and it's incomprehensible to me that anyone can believe for one minute that this traitourous fuck is even remotely a "Democrat".

[guidod]

38. This guy has to be

working for Rove, and all of this is a republican coo. NO WAY is this guy a democrat! I think he's trying to destroy the party. Somebody please tell me one liberal statement this asshole has ever made.

[rman]

10. The DLC has a small tent....

while proclaiming Democrats should have a big tent.

[Cha]

22. Who does sound like?..

Yes, the cheney gang.."do as I say not as I do".

The demonic loser's club can proclaim all they want ..they need to proclaim themselves out of existence.

[LittleClarkie]

11. What, no Kerry?

You can't have a Dean and a Murtha without a Kerry if you're going to talk defeatism and such, doncha know.

[blm]

13. Bull Moose has his facts wrong - Dean supports a 2yr withdrawal plan

drafted by Lawrence Korb.

How is that defeatism?

And Murtha's plan was mischaracterized as cut and run, when it actually uses provisional language with the optimistic goal of withdrawing in 6months. Pelosi supported that plan.

WHERE is the defeatism?

[madfloridian]

14. You got it. He is just making stuff up, pulling it out of his.....

whatever.

As long as they misrepresent our Democrats who are not afraid to at least offer something before they get slammed...then I will continue to point out the hypocrisy of criticizing people for doing things they are not doing.

[blm]

17. See how damn hard it is to fight the media when even left media has the

facts wrong?

[Pithy Cherub]

19. Be clear. The "moose" wants to be seen only from the *right* media

while righteously promoting him/her/it self in the third person. Anybody who writes like that is fully capable of having a me/myself/I pity party all alone in their little DLC tent. :evilgrin:

[AX10]

32. You got it right. Bullshitmoose again take the side of the GOP.

Murtha and Dean are right on Iraq.

[Cha]

20. Ah, but bullmoose,

fuckhead didn't say why Jim Dean went after lieberman..did he? It's all black and white to them..get under the elephant and SUCK AND SUCK HARD..no mr. in-between.

[RazzleDazzle]

24. If he doesn't want links he shouldn't bother to post

don't coddle and appease the bastard.

[Dr Fate]

25. Dean's "controversial" comment is basically forgotten.

We were told it was going to be a "big deal" and that it would "blow up in our face" by the DLCers & Ken Melman. Didn't happen.

The man on the street said "So what? He is right."

Murtha? So This Bullmoose character prefers Jean Schmidt, I presume?

Bullmoose? I don't know who these people are. Who are these people?

[madfloridian]

26. The right wing bloggers' heads are still exploding.

They can't let it go, because it goes against their world vision and national vision of Bush the wonderful, Bush the conqueror.

Unfortunately, as I pointed out before....the left bloggers never say Dean's name except to point out that he and Murtha might have slowed down Bush's falling momentum. And that was from Liberal Oasis...pretty close to exact statement. Surprised me. Pointing out the truth should never be wrong.

The DLC/New Dem group pretty well have a lock on the blogosphere on the left side of the dial. It is an odd thing if you really pay attention. The sort of unofficial/official Democratic voice on the radio..Schultz..seldom has a good word for Dean on any topic at all.
If you don't know what I mean, find Randi's interview on C-Span and watch it. She covers it pretty well.

So we have a plethora on the right piling on Dean and Murtha. And we have a dearth on the left of anyone defending. Diaries may be about him, or posts, but not front page...not on any blogsite.

[mmonk]

29. It's funny listening to the DLC mouthpieces

talk about how certain democrats hurt the party when speaking out against bush or neocon policy. Isn't that on its face IDIOTIC?

[IndianaGreen]

30. DLC = GOP = war mongers = enemies of freedom

A rightwinger Republican like Bob Barr is on our side of the barricades in opposition to Bush's imperial Presidency, while Democrats like Al From, Hillary, and Lieberman stand solidly on the side of Bush's power grab and infringement of our liberties.

[AX10]

31. If the DLC and blogMOBSTERS continue to take Bush's side non stop...

then I will continue going after them. "Bullshitmoose" and the DLC are no more the enemies of freedom than Bush is. This crap has to stop.

Shame of them for attacking a veteran of war (John Murtha), shame on them.

("Bullmooseblog" = Neo Con)

[Clarkie1]

33. I think you are mistaken.

"In his posts this week he is advocating not questioning Bush about Iraq" (your words)

"calling for a success strategy in Iraq" (his words)

I don't read this blog you are referring to, and I am only responding after having read your OP. I just noticed a discrepancy.

Calling for a success strategy is Iraq IS questing Bush about Iraq.

Edit: I am not advocating anything this "bull moose" says, just pointing out a discrepancy between your words and his.

[madfloridian]

34. No, you are wrong.

Calling for a success strategy in Iraq is asking for the hopeless.

As I said in another post, we are not going to have a success there. We have killed too many innocents and lost too much of our own to have success.

Going to war on a lie should not be defended, and it should not be kept up until the corporations get their "success."

[Clarkie1]

35. We really don't disagree much on this.

Like Clark, I'm not optimistic a political solution in Iraq can be achieved, and there is only a 4 month window to do so when the current constitution can be modified.

The solution in Iraq has to be a potitical one; there is no military solution.

I disagree with you that calling for a better strategy now is defending going to war on a lie. There is no connection between the two any more than there is a connection between Iraq and 9/11, and trying to make a connection that doesn't exist doesn't help Democrats, the poltical situation in Iraq, or anything else.

There is a danger in Democrats looking more concerned with with the political situation here and seeing Bush fail than suggesting everything possible to help improve the poltical situation in Iraq.

For that reason, it is my opinion that even Dems who disagree there is the slightest chance of improving the situation ought to be grateful to those Dems they disagee with for putting forth potentially constructive criticism of the current approach. It can't be said enough: we aren't the ones setting the policy, anyway.

Those Dems you disagree with are helping to win votes in 06', because they are shaping an image of a Party that cannot be labeled "defeatist" (at least not totally so) while they are in it. So let's just put the disagreements aside for now and let Democrats support fellow Democrats.

[madfloridian]

36. No, I won't put it aside anymore. Let them use the label "defeatist."

Let them use any labels they want. They will do it anyway. I do not want any more lectures about letting our Democrats keep on trying to please the right wing and the GOP. The harder we try, the more they humiliate us.

I say we stand up and say what we think. What have we got to lose?

Remember how many of us stayed on board last year? We were sick inside from the pounding we took, but we stayed. We supported Kerry, we donated, we did what we were supposed to do.

Well, times are changing. So in a way we are saying some things alike, but not the main things. I think we owe it to our country and the world to criticize Bush and this war in any way we can.

I am not willing to listen to lectures from Al From and the Bull Moose as though I were a naughty child. Enough is enough.

[Clarkie1]

37. I agree you shouldn't have to listen to lectures from anyone.

You are a good Democrat. However, to be honest, I am glad that all Democrats are not of one mind on Iraq. In fact, I'm glad they all aren't of one mind even if they all agreed with me!

Yes, let's stand up and say what we think. I applaud John Murtha for doing so, even though the devil is always in the details (which we may disagree with, and that's O.K.)

This is the most important thing we agree on:

"I think we owe it to our country and the world to criticize Bush and this war in any way we can."

Murtha is doing that.
Dean is doing that.
Kerry (not my favorite candiate, but I supported him just like you) is doing that.
Clark is doing that.
Feingold is doing that.
Kucinich is doing that...I think you get my drift.

Keeping speaking out, and say what you believe; diversity makes our party stronger not weaker, and it is my conviction that there is far more that unites us, particularly re: Iraq, than divides us.

IT'S THEIR (THE NEO-CONS) WAR, WE AREN'T THE ONES SETTING THE POLICY!