Pelosi taps DLC to develop party's Innovation Proposal

[wyldwolf]

Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi recently called upon the New Dems, as most call the group, to help develop the party's innovation proposal, a plan to fuel investment in the development of new technologies and education in related fields... the New Democrat Coalition... will grow from 47 members to 62 (possibly 66) after the newly elected legislators take office in January.

http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/nation/16036136.htm

[leveymg]

1. Consolation Prize.

And now a big hand of applause for Miss Collegiality.

[wyldwolf]

2. consolation prize prize for what?

[leveymg]

4. For losing control over the Democratic Party

[wyldwolf]

6. when did they have control over the Democratic party?

[leveymg]

7. About 2 weeks ago things shifted.

That change has been going on for a while, of course.

[wyldwolf]

9. Really? How so?

[leveymg]

11. Two years ago, when the Party had hit bottom, the DLC was in charge.

With Dean at DNC, and a 50-state strategy, the Party's come back. Do you deny that? Or, do you really think nothing's changed?

[wyldwolf]

12. HOW was the DLC in charge? I know you're saying it, but you're not showing it

[leveymg]

13. If you don't acknowledge there's been a change, I can't persuade you. eom

[wyldwolf]

14. All I'm asking is for you show HOW they were in charge two years ago.

IS that so hard?

What key positions did they hold that they don't hold now?

[independentpiney]

16. The search function and the googles are your friends

If you're not familiar with the DLC/ New Dems. What you're asking for is not obscure information.

[wyldwolf]

18. DU is the only place where people who make claims expect others to prove them

Sorry - it isn't my responsiblility to prove leveymg's claims. And until such a time comes where he/she/you provide the evidence, the claim will remain factually inaccurate.

[independentpiney]

25. Quick explanation....

DLC/ New Dems represent the center-right wing of the party. Bill Clinton is DLC and up through 2004 DLC'ers held most influential party positions. Terry MacCauliffe who headed the DNC is DLC, Howard Dean who succeeded him is not. The Congressional and Senate members who have led the calls to stop the bleeding in Iraq and executive overreach and corruption at home are not DLC. So along with losing key party positions, they lost control of the agenda.

The main issue the various party caucases agree on is the need for alternative energies and other technical innovations, which has always been a top DLC talking point. So this gives them something to keep them busy and happy while other issues are dealt with. Smart move in my opinion

[cmkramer]

39. Wrong

The DLC is center-left not center-right. If you ever go to their website, you'll find that there is almost no agreement between the DLC and Republicans. And even in the few cases where there is agreement, there is disagreement about how the GOP or the Administration went about implementing it.

[wyldwolf]

41. not so fast

DLC/ New Dems represent the center-right wing of the party.

Yes they do.

Bill Clinton is DLC

Common knowledge, yes.

up through 2004 DLC'ers held most influential party positions.

Let's see. In the Senate, Harry Reid was first Minority Whip in 1999, Majority Whip in 2001, and elected Senate Democratic Leader and Minority Leader in 2004. Reid is not DLC. In fact, sinse the DLC's creation, only one member has served as Democratic Leader.

In the House, Nancy Pelosi is not DLC. Richard Gephardt was at one time DLC, but wasn't a member at the time he was the Dem leader in the House. Before Gephardt, there was Tom Foley, also not DLC.

Terry MacCauliffe who headed the DNC is DLC

No, he isn't. To be DLC, you either have to work for the organization or be elected. McAuliffe was neither. He was close to the Clintons, though, which is where the assumption arises from.

The Congressional and Senate members who have led the calls to stop the bleeding in Iraq and executive overreach and corruption at home are not DLC.

There are two falsehoods within that statement. #1, calling for the end to Iraq, executive overreach, and corruption does not make one an "influential party leader." Further, the DLC practically invented the term "culture of corruption" 20 months ago and gave 10 ways to correct it.

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=132&subid=193&contentid=253344

In addition, their views on presidential overreach are well known, and you would know them if you bothered to read their site.

[rinsd]

50. I will add that Hoyer became the Whip when Pelosi became Minority Leader (nt)

[independentpiney]

82. Great reply, you're correct on many of your points.

But while Reid was Whip, Tom Daschle was leader and though not a DLC member, there was little difference in his positions and that of the DLC. Dick Gephardt, while maybe no longer a member( I'll take your word and not demand you prove it ;-) ) continued to advocate the philosophy. It was to be expected that following the Big Dogs 8 great years his DLC philosophy would continue to dominate the party for a time. As for Terry MacCauliffe, I think you're really beginning to split hairs. I agree not everybody in the Clinton administration should or can be labeled a DLC'er but like James Carville, Terry is clearly one who is a nominal member based on his words and association.

There are two falsehoods within that statement. #1, calling for the end to Iraq, executive overreach, and corruption does not make one an "influential party leader." Further, the DLC practically invented the term "culture of corruption" 20 months ago and gave 10 ways to correct it.

If you re-read my statement you quoted, i didn't say it made them an "influential party leader". Whether the DLC practically invented the term "culture of corruption" isn't an issue. If they did, good on them. But it wasn't DLC leadership who pushed it forward. It wasn't DLC leadership who came to the forefront to criticize the Iraq quagmire, and regardless of their position they did not step up to lead against executive overreaches.

I don't hate the DLC or consider them republicans in disguise. There's many DLC members I respect greatly and agree on many issues with. And like any other democratic group they're not all in lockstep. The core philosophy is just too pro- corporate and neo-liberal for my tastes.

[mtnsnake]

21. Notice how these people disappear when their posts are revealed as BS?

lol

[wyldwolf]

22. yes I do. The question should be easy to answer if the charge is true, right?

[leveymg]

26. What do you want, a dissertation on the change in the party since 2004? OK

Jeez, where can one start? Oh, how about the top. You tell me, what change happened at DNC in February 2005? Use that Google.

Next, what changes in fundraising were put in place at the top? Google it.

Next, what changes in campaign strategy were put in place at the top? Google 50-state.

Next, what changes have been made in strategic polling? Google Carville.

Next, what changes have been made in Democratic policy toward Iraq - who is the new Party spokesman on that issue? Google Murtha. Who opposed that change? Google DLC.

What issue more than any other contributed to the Democratic victory? Google Iraq.

What's the biggest Democratic causus today. Not DLC. Google Progressive.

I will conceed that Steny is old guard, and that everything doesn't change all at once. Nor should it. I just care about who's really in charge, and that isn't the DLC anymore.

[wyldwolf]

32. No, just how the DLC has been in control

So, how has anything you laid out showed the DLC had any prior control?

How was anything you think has been changed replaced the DLC?

[independentpiney]

34. I think you're just being stubborn now.

[wyldwolf]

42. what? Because I won't just agree with you void of any factual data?

[independentpiney]

44. Sorry, not playing this game anymore

You've been given more than enough information. If someone told you Bill Clinton was President for 8 years would they need to provide links to substantiate that?

[wyldwolf]

46. you mean the game where you get mad 'cause no one will take your word for it?

..but you'll be back.

[jackbourassa]

36. How were the DLC in charge?

Easy...

1990s

DNC Chairmen: Ron Brown (DLC); Ed Rendell (DLC); Terry McAuliffe (DLC)...

NOW it's Howard Dean...NOT DLC.

1990s

Democratic House Leader: Dick Gepthardt (DLC)...

NOW it's Nancy Pelosi...NOT DLC.

1990s

Democratic Senate Leader: Tom Daschel (DLC)...

NOW it's Harry Reid...NOT DLC.

1990s

Vice-President of the United States...Al Gore (then DLC)...

NOW he's not.

1990s

President of the United States: Bill Clinton (DLC)...

NOW Office held by Republicans.

In the 2000 election successful (then-)DLC candidate Al Gore chose uber-DLCer Joe Lieberman as his VP candidate.

This doesn't include Tony Blair in Britain, who although is not a DLCer, is nonetheless in the "Third Way" (DLC philosophy) faction of the British Labor Party.

So basically, by the late 1990s and even into the early part of this century, the DLC controlled everything within the party.

Their candidate in the 2004 election, Joe Lieberman, was soundly crushed. The DNC election in 2005 went to their Nemesis Howard Dean. The House leadership races in 2005 went to non-DLCers (they were forced to settle for sloppy seconds). Same in the Senate, where they don't even have second. Or Committee Chairs, where they are greatly outnumbered. Tony Blair became VERY UNPOPULAR because of the war that the DLC supported, and was forced to announce a retirement date.

The DLC have no bastion of power left.

That leaves the upcoming primaries to decide who we select for the Presidency. Hillary is this years DLC choice, she's got a famous last name and has the "inside track" for the nomination (for now), but if the DLC should lose this again - and its entirely possible - then it will become clear that the once dominant DLC is now only one of several factions within the party. Likr the Black or hispanic caucus.

The problem with the DLC was that when their decline began, instead of adapting to the new realities, they decided instead to start an intra-party war. This only weakened them even more.

To deny this is to deny reality.

That's why Carville lashed out. He lashed out from a position of weakness, not strength. And it seems to have backfired spectacularly.

[wyldwolf]

43. whoah - not so fast.

You left out some important names and have a few factual innaccuracies:

Let's start with the DNC Chairmen in the '90s. Your first name was Ron Brown. Why is he DLC? Because he worked with Bill Clinton? He also worked on Ted Kennedy's presidential campaign.

You also fell into the trap of equating anyone close to Bill Clinton as DLC. Not true.

But after Ron Brown, you didn't list David Wilhelm, Debra DeLee, Donald Fowler, Christopher J. Dodd, Steven Grossman, and Joseph Andrew. All before Ed Rendell. Why did you not list them? Is it because they were not all DLC? Not even half of them?

Their candidate in the 2004 election, Joe Lieberman, was soundly crushed.

The DLC did not endorse Lieberman in 2004. Now did they? But Kerry got the nod. And he is DLC.

[rinsd]

52. Shhhhh pesky facts are ruining peoples' need to rant

[w4rma]

68. The DLC did endorse Lieberman in 2004. Then when it became clear that his polls were failing they

switched to the anti-Dean: Sen. Kerry. Sen. Kerry isn't DLC, per se, but he was the only Democratic presidential contender left who they felt could beat Dean, at that point.

[wyldwolf]

70. No, they did not. Unless you have a link for that endorsement?

[Vincardog]

77. Jack anyone who does not know what the DLC is or who they act for

is at best ignorant and stupid at worst. Luckily Ignorance can be cured.

[Jim Sagle]

102. Don't fuck with the DLC guy. He'll bore you to death.

[Freddie Stubbs]

28. Tell that to Majority Leader Hoyer

[leveymg]

30. Steny won't claim that he's in charge.

That's the Speaker's role.

I'm glad that the other wing of the Party has a leadership role. Can't operate without them. But, the DLC is not making the most important decisions anymore.

[Freddie Stubbs]

33. Pelosi may turn out to be little more than a figurehead

Her unsuccessful backing of Murtha shows that she may not be the one calling the shots. Let's see if they let her appoint Hastings as Chairman of the Intelligence Committee.

[Name removed]

37. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jackbourassa]

40. A figurehead?

Freddie Stubbs, that's wishful thinking.

Hoyer got the support of STRONG Liberals and even those who STRONGLY oppose the war.

You'll see this will be nothing. She's still leader and Hoyer is only Majority Leader. Majority Leaders come and go. Number two doesn't mean anything.

[Freddie Stubbs]

60. Speakers come and go too

Tenyears form now who will be remembered, Dennis Hastert or Tom Delay?

[Name removed]

63. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Kingofalldems]

65. Pelosi won by acclamation

Who's your pick for Speaker? Boehner?

[OzarkDem]

8. For not winning the race

to control the Dem's in the House. Consolation.

DLC is not in charge of Congress. Nancy is throwing them a bone, giving them something to keep themselves busy and show us what they can do vis a vis revising policies that affect energy tech development. Show us what you've got.

[wyldwolf]

10. There was a race to control Dems in the Congress?

I thought Pelosi was a shoo-in from the start. Did I miss some backroom politics?

[OzarkDem]

38. Yes, back room politics are going on now

Jockeying to marginalize Pelosi and the mainstream Dems in the party.

[wyldwolf]

45. There was NO fight for Pelosi's job.

[OzarkDem]

49. Parsing

[wyldwolf]

53. fact. Give us the details if you know better.

[Name removed]

66. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Writer]

71. wyldwolf, it's been a while since I've posted on this ridiculous argument...

but here is the subtext to what I'm reading on this thread. If you will forgive me for paraphrasing:

"We lost in 2000, 2002, and 2004. I do not want to admit that there might have been something wrong with me, my party, or with the state of the American people at that time. I must find an institution to blame. Wait - what's this? The DLC? And they're discussing COMPROMISE? No wonder! That's IT! Oh - and it was related to Bill Clinton? Oh I see now! That compromiser of welfare and telecom law! It's their fault! THEY'RE to blame! It's not simply the state of our society that prevented us from winning - it's THEM! Oh and it's Clinton so they must believe they have control of the party! I will ignore the fact that it's only a centrist Democratic think tank that merely services the greater party. Bah! I MUST BELIEVE that they're in control, because they're the enemy and I need to find something concrete to rage against. It's a comfortable lie in light of so many inconvenient truths. And I must continue to believe, and believe so much that any loss I assign as a defeat for the DLC, and every victory I assign as a win for "my guys," which I have personified in the form of Howard Dean. And there is nothing you can do to adjust or alter my belief. It is what it is for all eternity."

[wyldwolf]

80. I think you nailed it.

[Jim Sagle]

103. Just couldn't stay away, huh?

:boring:

[independentpiney]

15. Bingo. A very smart move on her part

I have really come to love Nancy Pelosi.

[wyldwolf]

17. perhaps you can give the answer leveymg either can't or won't...

Consolation prize for what?

[independentpiney]

19. See reply upthread

[wyldwolf]

20. see reply upthread

[katinmn]

3. Thank the Goddess they will share the national stage with others!

"Pelosi must balance the moderates' agenda with numerous competing interests, such as the Congressional Progressive Caucus and the Congressional Black Caucus."

Both of these caucuses also grew in stature and influence as a result of the elections.

Congressman-elect Keith Ellison (Progressive Dem-MN) is a member of both!

[acmejack]

5. It's a good time to move forward as Country.

Unity is undoubtedly our greatest asset right now. We would probably be wise to recognize that fact.

edit (perhaps?)

[wisteria]

23. Where does the DLC come in here? The New Dem's aren't

necessarily DLC.

[mtnsnake]

31. I think NDC is a creation of the New Dem. Movement that was started by the DLC

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=3869&kaid=103&subid=110

[wisteria]

35. Thanks, but is it fair than to lump all newly elected Dems as New Dems? n/t

[mtnsnake]

54. I don't know. Did anyone do that?

[geek tragedy]

59. A full half of the newly-elected Dems

are joining the NDC caucus.

[wyldwolf]

62. ... the House New Democrat Coalition - the DLC in the House

[wyldwolf]

48. the House New Democrat Coalition is DLC - link in post

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ka.cfm?kaid=103

[AlGore-08.com]

24. I've got a practical question - - why, outside of party politics, is this happening?

Is there a New Dem initiative in place or position paper that proves that they have real leadership in this area? Are there one or more members who are experts in developing technologies?

We need smart investment in new technologies to help reverse global warming. Unwise spending (or using this committee as a feel-good pork barrel) will make us loose even more of our technological advantage - - and money - - to other countries. It's not U.S. companies who developed a marketable hybrid engine or a marketable fuel cell engine. If Detroit had developed them first, the U.S. automotive industry would have been revitalized.

[independentpiney]

29. I think it's all party politics. n/t

[cadmium]

27. Pelosi has been great for fostering young

Dem talent in the house. She was able to get dedicated floor time for young dem congress people (first place I saw TIm Ryan-on cspan) in the Republican controlled House.

I forget what it is called the Thirty-something caucus or something like that.

Ryan's presentation "pick an issue" describing Republican administration bumbling is both accurate and entertaining.

[OzarkDem]

47. Doubt they'll come up with anything useful

They're too busy trying to screw Pelosi over to actually do any work.

They don't have any ideas. Just a lot of hate, greed and jealousy.

[rinsd]

51. So sayeth the fountain of love! The hypcorisy is mind boggling

"They don't have any ideas. Just a lot of hate, greed and jealousy."

[OzarkDem]

56. Show us - what have you got?

More tax breaks for corporations to send jobs overseas and shelter profits from taxes in off-shore accounts? How is that going to contribute to an improved economy and hi tech innovations? How does that support growth of high paying jobs in the US?

More shifting of education funds from public to private religious schools? How does that help us train workers for high tech jobs in the future. Oh, that's right, all the high tech jobs will be overseas, so it doesn't make any difference what kids here learn, they'll be working in service industry jobs at Walmart or the grocery store.

Other than "pay to play" deals for your corporate sponsors, you don't have an agenda for economic development or job growth.

[wyldwolf]

64. sinse the assignment was just made, there are no results to show...however...

...you got plenty embarrassed upthread when you demanded a list of new DLC members... then got it... twice!

[OzarkDem]

69. Means nothing

That's why I asked for it. To show that you have nothing. A list of people, what does that mean?

What is important is that you plan to leverage those people by allying with the GOP to exert your power. Why don't you admit that?

[wyldwolf]

73. A list of people means a list of people.

What? Do you have to see them in some robes at a secret DLC ceremony to believe it?

[rinsd]

72. I am growing tired of slapping you around.

Here are their issues, http://www.house.gov/tauscher/ndc/issues_legislation.shtml

So what caucus do you carry water for or do you just randomly smear whatever is in front of you?

[mtnsnake]

55. "They're too busy trying to screw Pelosi over". How do you know this??

Got proof?

The only "hate, greed, and jealousy" I see is coming from posts like yours where you're just a little more than upset that someone like Pelosi would even dare consider working and benefitting from a faction of the Party that you don't like.

[OzarkDem]

57. Read the news

Start with everything that happened yesterday.

[mtnsnake]

58. Nice non-answer. nt

[wyldwolf]

61. can you see the winning lottery numbers in that crystal ball?

[OzarkDem]

67. Are you really that ignorant

or just dishonest?

The news has been full of DLC hijinks since Dems won. They've spent every waking moment bashing Dems in the news media and twisting arms to take control of the party.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2006/11/sweet_blog_extra_carville_want.html

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/mashekblog/archive/061117/democrats_circular_firing_squa.htm

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2457505,00.html

GOP gloating over DLC goring Pelosi

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15767862/site/newsweek/

Remember, you reap what you sow.

[wyldwolf]

74. no, but you must be to present those links that say nothing to make your point.

In fact, here is a telling quote from your second one:

"Rep. Nancy Pelosi, soon to be Speaker Pelosi, stirred up an unnecessary breach in the party."

[quiet.american]

78. Just curious -- what would you / do you celebrate in having a majority-DLC House/Senate? n.t

[wyldwolf]

81. Seems to me...

That your question isn't relevant to the discussion.

[quiet.american]

85. Hmn. A non-answer. Alrighty. n/t

[wyldwolf]

87. You could have asked me who my cell phone service provider is...

...gone are the days I allow people to enter in irrelevant information in a discussion or allow them to steer the conversation into another direction.

[quiet.american]

91. No need to elaborate on your non-answer.

In looking over this thread, I became curious as to why you come across as being very pro-DLC. I am no fan of the DLC myself, but, because of your willingness to duke it out on the subject, I thought I'd open up a bit to consider why I might be wrong in my perception of the DLC.

There was also a time when I wasn't particularly enthralled with Harold Ford, Jr., but I did notice that he had within DU a very dedicated supporter. In conversing with this DU'er, I wasn't exactly converted in a Ford fan, but the dialogue did change my perspective on him (for the better).

I thought this might also be an opportunity to gain a new perspective on the DLC. Granted, I was wrong.

[wyldwolf]

93. you need to ask a relavent question

I don't feel the need to explain (again) to anyone why I'm pro DLC.

[quiet.american]

95. As I said, alrighty. n/t

[hvn_nbr_2]

75. Do you ever notice how you can tell from the shape of the reply summary...

that there's a lot of bickering and little content in a thread?

[let us vote]

76. Is Nancy DLC?

It looks like 15 to 19 new DLC members have been added to the Democratic ranks in Congress - according to the above posting.

[OzarkDem]

83. No she isn't

That's where the party infighting is coming from. The DLC is making a power grab.

[wyldwolf]

84. The DLC is making a power grab? LOL! You're really grasping

[Robert Oak]

79. H-1B cheap labor lobby

Watch out, the ITAA and the US Chamber of Commerce is now trying to attach the notorious guest worker Visas which
displace US workers, labor arbitrage and are opposed by the CWA, AFL-CIO and the IEEE-USA into these initiatives.

Don't let the Corporate Cheap Labor lobby get these through and further erode US science and engineering careers
under the big fat lie it's about "innovation".

It isn't, it's about cheap labor.

[Cascadian]

86. Right now, there is a power struggle within the party.

And it's looking like the DLC is trying to get the upper hand. My big concern is that the DLC may try to start a purge of their own against those left/leaners and progressives within the Democratic Party. People like myself have been feeling marginalized by those "Republican Lite" Democrats in the last 14 years or so.


John

[wyldwolf]

88. How could they "purge" anyone?

[Cascadian]

89. Well they did a good job with "removing" Howard Dean in '04

There are a lot of things within the hierarcy of the Democratic Party that do not add up. It's sickening to think about. As for Dean getting the nomination for DNC Chairman, the DLC thought they could make Howard Dean shut up and play nice while the DLC shoves their agenda forward, but Dean would not go along and play figurehead. This is why the DLC does not want him as DNC Chair. There is a lot more to what is going on than many think.


John

[wyldwolf]

90. Howard Dean did just fine removing himself.

The rest of your post is pure unsubstantiated paranoid garbage.

[Cascadian]

92. Excuse me but...

Howard Dean was assassinated in character by the DLC as well as the mainstream media. Did you know that CNN showed that so-called "scream" 700 times within a week? Also how do you explain Dean's huge support prior to the primaries. I am also still suspicious about Kerry's surge in the polls. I also recall going my local Democratic caucus and there were people there from the leadership and Kerry's camp that were pressuring people to support Kerry instead of Dean. I stood my ground. It all seemed surreal and odd to me.

No Dean never did anything to undermind his own campaign. That is just garbage!


John

[wyldwolf]

94. Howard Dean obviously wasn't prepared for a national campaign

Obviously no one told him that not everyone was a Deaniac and other people wanted the job.

Was it the same type of character assasination when Dean started their "Wes Clark is a Republican" campaign?

[Cascadian]

97. Yeah. I suppose you're "RIGHT".

That whole internet idea and the idea of universal health care made Dean unprepared for a national campaign! The whole "You have the power!" was an awful idea too. Also, being against the Iraq war did not help him either! :sarcasm: :eyes:

GIVE ME BREAK!


John

[wyldwolf]

98. Well, I am correct

The internet and universal healthcare had nothing to do with it.

Dean and his band Deaniacs were completely unprepared for the rigors of the political process. They were unprepared for competition in the race, they were thin skinned when it came to criticism, (but sure knew how to dish it out) and had no idea how to manage their money. In short, they self destructed.

[LittleClarkie]

101. All those ideas were just fine. But the fact that Howard went belly up

in his bid for the nomination rather proves what Wyldwolf says about him not being ready to go national. Or perhaps the nation wasn't ready for him.

But then, we wouldn't have this really spiffy Chairman of the DNC, so I suppose everything happens for a reason. I think he's doing more good exactly where he is.

[geek tragedy]

96. What happened was Dean and Gephardt beat the crap

out of each other in Iowa by going negative, allowing Kerry to slip in and fashion himself as a war critic.

I think Dean would have been a much better messenger than Kerry (not saying much, I know), but it's not like there was some grand conspiracy.

[wyldwolf]

99. don't ruin a perfectly good "DLC is the root of all evil" conspiracy!

[Zhade]

100. The article basically says nothing about this proposal.

I skimmed it, but unless there's more than...

"Pelosi recently called upon the New Dems, as most call the group, to help develop the party's innovation proposal, a plan to fuel investment in the development of new technologies and education in related fields."

...it leads me to wonder what kind of technologies we're talking about here, and what kind of education.

The article is mostly full of (false) assertions that the 'center' (Old Conservatism) is "in". The truth, IMHO, is that no particular ideology won this; it was a repudiation of b*s* and his policies of crime.

So what does this tasking by Pelosi entail? I went to the DLC's website to review their stance on alternative energies (http://www.dlc.org/documents/Energy_Platform-101606.pdf - increased nuclear energy is one proposal I heartily disagree with) but as this may not be the issue they're concerned with, what is?