DLC advocates and supporters @ DU invoke Joe McCarthy to combat criticism.

[Free the Press]

Notice the analogy invoked by DU DLC advocates and supporters in response to legitimate criticism of the DLC?

The Joe MCCarthy crew.

With pictures and all!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2445397&mesg_id=2446693

The idea is to portray the DLC as the victim of a wrongful attack on the scale of the Joe McCarthy communist hunt.

Have any of you seen, heard, or in any way come across any actions by a US Senator that frame the DLC in the same context that Joe McCarthy framed the communist influence on the Untied States?

Of course not!

Have any of you seen, heard, or in any way come across any US Senate or US House of Representative hearings that specifically seek to identify the DLC'ers in this country in order to eradicate them?

Of course not!

Sorry, Joe McCarthy had nothing to do with rooting out right-wing corporate neoconservative influence over the US Government, though this country would have been a better place if he had!

Communist and right-wing corporate neoconservative influence over the US Government and this nation are not related at all, except where the DLC advocates and supporters @ DU invoke such a false analogy.

These political and economic entities result in opposite effects: Communism and totalitarianism.

No US Senator will use their power to bring DLC supporting corporations or individuals to their knees on the floor of the US Senate.

To suggest this is so is PURE nonsense.

No US Senator will conduct a DLC hunt, in the way that Joe McCarthy sought to hunt down Communists in this nation.

To suggest that there should be concern that the DLC or its advocates or supporters will become victimized by this type of action is PURE nonsense.

The DLC is not the victim that DLC advocates and supporters @ DU portray it as.

To suggest that the DLC is being victimized by its opponents just as alleged communists were victimized by Joe McCarthy is PURE nonsense.

Instead, this analogy is Orwellian, because it is exactly the opposite of the truth.

In fact, it kind of reminds me of a lot of the Republican use of Orwellian expressions in recent times, though I am not trying to state that the DLC advocates and supporters @ DU that invoke this false analogy are Republicans.

No, I would never do that!

But I will say this:

The DLC represents more of a real threat to the government and the people of this country than the so-called communists that Joe McCarthy hunted.

The DLC advocates and supporters @ DU may be cluing the rest of us in on something.

Perhaps the DLC is guilty of some as yet unrealized evil wrong that inspires its most ardent supporters to use McCarthyism as a shield against criticism of the DLC.

There must be a reason that such a deliberate Orwellian use of such a false analogy is continuously employed @ DU, right?

You be the judge!

[Crazy Guggenheim]

1. The DLC is too damn sensitive to criticism considering the crap they

throw out at more liberal Democrats.

[Free the Press]

2. But by invoking McCarthyism as a defense, are they acting Orwellian?

If so, then why such a defense?

A bit extreme, IMO.

In all of my years, in all of my discussions with persons of different political perspectives, despite any and all arguments that may have ensued, it never occurred to me that I would invoke such a defense.

I never encountered such a preposterous line of thinking or standardized false analogy as a response to political argument.

It is bizarre, to say the least.

It also merits a closer look, IMO.

Why would a Centrist or Moderate be utilizing such an Orwellian method of defense?

It almost seems as though no person claiming to be a Centrist or Moderate would even associate themselves with such a false analogy, doesn't it?

Motive anyone?

[acmavm]

3. The DLC is useless. Hell, just elect repubs. Same thing. They're as

beholden to the corporate gravy train as the republicans. And they sure as hell don't give a shit about the 'common man/woman/child'. And as long as their kids are safe, they'll vote for war. No skin off their noses. And they stand for nothing. Nothing at all. Oh well, if anything than it for maintaining the status quo.

Screw the DLC. As I said, they're worthless.

[Free the Press]

5. We need to differentiate between corporate and DLC backers.

There is a difference.

The DLC seems to be a creation sprung from neoconservative corporate money and intellectual influence.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2445516

It is an oversimplification and a gross underestimation to say that the DLC is backed by corporations, when the DNC is as well.

There is a different analysis that needs to be applied.

The DLC has at its roots neoconservative intellectual capital as well as corporate money.

Corporations can be made to lean politically to the left or right, as well as toward the CENTRIST political organizations. (lexicon in use).

However, a corporation by definition does not require neoconservative intellectual capital.

The argument I made in this thread was not wrong, but it needs to be further refined.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2438061

Something is right in it, but something more right is hidden in it, IMO.

It will take some effort to realize the distinction.

Feel free to lead the way.

I'll be back later.

[punpirate]

10. No, there should be no distinction made between...

... any entities which depend upon corporate contributions of any measurable size. DLC, RNC, or DNC.

To take money is to be compromised. That the DLC or RNC take more and depend to a greater degree on corporate contributions should mean little. Big money has corrupted the entire system. Period. Anyone who believes otherwise is self-deluded.

Self-deluded. Say it after me: self-deluded. Why do corporations donate money to political candidates? To get what they want, often in contradiction to what the people want. It's simple. Money is not speech. If it weren't, then everyone, Democrat and Republican alike would happily settle for $5 contributions from anyone as the law of the land, rather than $5000 contributions.

The election system has been corrupted by money, and anyone who believes that some distinction can be made amongst corporate interest groups by who they give money to and by what amount is missing the essential point.

It's a rotten system. Rotten to the core, and there's only one way to correct the problem--take all corporate money out of it, permanently and forever.

Cheers.

[Free the Press]

14. Another important distinction you make, but ...

The DNC is a corporation itself.

Yes, only individual donations should be allowed.

However, the DLC is more than a beneficiary of corporate money.

It seems to be a neoconservative brain trust created from neoconservative corporate and individual seed money from neoconservative foundations, wealthy individuals, and think tanks.

It is ideal to think of removing all corporate money from candidate funding and political contributions, but it is real to seek to better understand the actual system currently in use, which is unabashedly based on corporate money, so we need to look more closely at the composition of the DLC's money and brain trust.

Why differentiate?

The American Public is virtually ignorant of the DLC's existence.

The notion that the DLC could be exposed as a Neocon organization is far-fetched at this point, and proof of that assumption is not in our hands.

One of the reasons, I suspect, is that our own understanding of the money, brain trust, and historical understanding of this organization is very overgeneralized and confused.

Yes, we all know something is rotten. with the DLC, and the cast of neocon characters that many DU'ers know are involved with the DLC, but what we are lacking is something that ALL AMERICANS can understand: concrete facts simplified and presented as indisputable proof.

The reason we don't have it is because our own understanding of the DLC organization is unclear and lacks sufficient information, which is not readily available .

We need to organize to do the research and discover the details and create a database of knowledge on the DLC. Wiki is great, but we need a very fact based and comprehensive database.

Then we can simplify it in a way that it will resonate with common people, by using our knowledge of the DLC as power.

Then we can control the nomination of our candidates for public office free from the arm-twisting of the DLC, and in real opposition to the RNC.

There is no cohesive plan, currently, for explaining the DLC to the American Public.

There is no cohesive database of information that incontrovertibly lays out the basis for such a publicity effort, IMO.

Simply saying the DLC is supported by corporations is just too insufficient, though it leads to the next step in defining the DLC more clearly, IMO.

[acmavm]

18. I don't care what you say they are. I'll let you define 'em if you insist.

Neocons, corporatists, what the f**k ever. THEY HAVE TO GO.

[Free the Press]

22. Agreed. But can you stop the DLC from hijacking Democratic nominations?

It is sure easy to blame the corporate money, but the DNC has plenty as well.

How, then, are the DLC candidates being forced on the registered Democrats of the DNC?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2438061

The answer, I believe is Public awareness.

The Public needs simple, accurate, indisputable, and hard evidence explaining to them what the DLC is and what the DLC does and how the DLC does it.

Only then can the blame sincerely be limited to hijacking the vote using e-voting.

As of right now, the DLC is posturing to pick up the slack for the scandal ridden Republican Party.

To most of America it will look like a big victory for the people, but to those who understand the DLC it will be just a pit stop on the road to totalitarianism.

The DLC is just a back-up plan for the Republican Party, just in case the Republicans fail to coerce the American Public to keep them in office.

The DLC will pass the WH and the Congress back to Republicans in a heartbeat, given the opportunity.

They have done it before and will do it again if allowed to have the opportunity.

[punpirate]

19. You start by saying DNC...

... but talk about the DLC. They are different.

Nevertheless, it doesn't matter. Big money corrupts. Therefore, a system which allows (and begs for) big money to be introduced into the election process is corrupt, regardless of the recipient.

If any group can influence the election process by the introduction of corrupting funds, all can. The DLC, the DNC, the RNC only have influence with the public because of corporate wealth which pays for radio and tv time and phone surveys.

I've been living in the same place for fifteen years. I have yet to see any national candidate in my neighborhood, wearing out shoe leather, asking for my vote. Corporate money and the money of the wealthy pays for the media time so that those candidates don't wear out shoe leather. Why should I trust anyone not willing to eschew corporate money and use shoe leather to convince me they're worthy of my vote?

Database, schmatabase. I don't even get honest answers to my emails from current politicians, and emails are cheap and easy.

I want to see earnest people, working for ordinary people, pounding the pavement instead of taking checks from lobbyists and their clients. That's what I mean by saying that it doesn't matter who is taking money.

Cheers.

[Dunvegan]

4. DLC too sensitive. Yes. Now...who does that remind us of?...

...just askin'.

[Free the Press]

6. Who? Republicans?

[Dunvegan]

7. And especally Neocons, I believe.

[Free the Press]

9. My feeling as well. On post #5, do you agree? n/t

[Dunvegan]

12. Yes, in the most part I do agree.

On the "Greed and Privilege Scale" the DLC does seem far closer to the side of the graph the Necons occupy than to the side where the DNC lives.

[Free the Press]

8. Side bar: Help needed to create a section in the research forum for DLC.

In the research forum, we should put together the most correct analysis, history, funding, and other research that DU can muster together on the DLC.

I would like to contribute a lot of research to this effort so that future efforts against the DLC can be smarter and more likely to succeed.

First, the DLC knowledge database needs to be created. The resources on the internet are too disconnected presently. Also, it is very difficult to attack an opponent, the DLC, when one's data is so disorganized and dispersed.

Anyone want to help?

[Dunvegan]

13. I'm Interested.

Sign me up. :)

[Free the Press]

15. lol, OK, just a soon as I can figure out how to do that!

[Dunvegan]

16. lol...please send me an e-mail...

...when you start organizing the project. Thanks.

[Free the Press]

17. Yes, I will certainly do that. Thanks!

[Free the Press]

11. Why such a deliberate and dogmatic use of such a false, Orwellian analogy?

What reason could one give for a DLC advocate and supporter @ DU to construct a defense of the DLC using the framework of the Joe McCarthy communist hunt and persecutions?

Why would any Democrat even consider such a bizarre and Orwellian defense analogy?

It seems to defy logic and to lack any basis in any rational argument over Democratic politics, despite the rather large tent all Democrats are under.

There is absolutely no explanation that I can think of that justifies use of such a false and utterly exaggerated Orwellian analogy in the context of a discussion between Democrats.

[jackbourassa]

20. The DLC are sad and pathetic

Not only do they consider themselves "victims" all the time, but they twist and rewrite history to suit their purposes. Reminds me when they called us all "the elite."

[thebigidea]

21. in fairness its just the fringe lunatics doing that.

DLCers like Bayh/Vilsack/etc. would never go for such a crazy comparison, it would rightly brand them as fringe paranoids with persecution complexes.

You'd never catch Al From or Joe Lieberman whining hysterically about McCarthyites trying to enforce ideological purity...

so its not so much the DLC making the comparison as it is a few marginalized paranoids with poor social skills and little knowledge of history.

[Free the Press]

23. There are so few DLC'ers, even a few is a large percentile of the DLC.

Even if it is correct to say that the lunatics are the ones who use such Orwellian analogies, what does that say about the organization itself?

Certainly, something is wrong with use of such methodology in political argument by proponents of a CENTRIST organization.

This does mirror the extreme right and neoconservatives though, and not the alleged far left of the Democratic Party.

When I get stuck on this analogy, it is because of the trademark neoconservative stamp all over it.

Thus I want to find out more to either prove or disprove my opinion on this.

Is the DLC a neoconservative organization operating from within the DNC?

What are the implications, if so?

And, how soon can we eradicate it, if so?

[Moderator]

24. locking

Do not start a new topic in order to call out another member.