Here is the message I get from listening to all those neo-Dems who won

[wholetruth00]

including Lieberman: We will be Republican lite. We will sacrifice the traditional base of the party (minorities, women, poor, elderly, mentally ill)by making their spokepeole sit on the sidelines and STFU! We will support "small business" until we make them as greedy and crafty as "big business." Civil rights, affirmative action, scholarship and financial aid for the poor (including rural children) is off the table, as is any thoughts of impeachment or charging anyone in the Bush administration. The only thing we will do to satisfy the base is MAYBE fight to bring the troops home soon but we will spare no opportunity to go to war again to protect our oil or Israel. We will continue to scorn the democracies developing south of the border and continiue to paint Cuba as part of the new triaxis of evil in Latin America. The media will continue to define us and we will bow to their definition. The base is out and the blue-dog moderate (Republican lite)Dems are now in power. Thanks, traditional base, but we don't need you any more. And remember, you have no place else to go so STFU

Suddenly, I have a new nightmare facing me. What about the rest of you?

[Warpy]

1. Not me. Often the rhetoric is quite different form the record

and I don't think the GOP is going to know what hit them.

I fully expect Stupid to veto most of what crosses his desk.

[Skidmore]

2. I'm really uncomfortable too.

I posted the other day that if Dems take this course, they will lose me as a member of the base next time around because they will have turned their backs on their backs the individual to maintain the status quo.

[msongs]

3. ...or not. nice "opinion" piece however. missing links or substantiation nt

[Zensea]

4. If this is new to you, you haven't been paying attention

Not that I disagree that there are strong elements of Republican lite in the Democratic Party.
I just disagree that there is anything at all new about it.
It's been around for some time. Even before Bill Clinton.
In its modern form at least since McGovern's defeat in 1972.
"Scoop" Jackson comes to my mind as an example.

[skipos]

5. I think I'll wait until they are in control before I judge. nt

[madmusic]

6. Blame it all on the wingnut propaganda machine...

As long as they can define the issues, they don't even have to win elections to win.

[still_one]

7. Really, tell me what is wrong with the Democratic first 100 hour plan?

Increasing minimum wage
Repeal laws that give companies tax incentives to ship jobs over seas
implementing the 9/11 commision recommendations, including having cargo checked at the ports
Bringing back the Pel loans for college, at reasonable interest rates
Bringing forth the Murtha plan for Iraq
Keeping social security and medicare from going private
Government support for stem cell research

and much much more

There is NOT just ONE view in our country, it is made up of many views, NOT as limited as you would like to convey

It is really amazing this victim mentality. If people want change then they work within the party for it, but there are many views, some that lean to the left and some that lean to the right in the party, and that is what compromise is all about. In fact that is what life is all about

[Frances]

9. I support every item on your list

These are all things the Repubs were against when they were in power. I think the Repubs know that these are things that the majority of people want so they are changing the label for these items from liberal to conservative and pretending that they supported them all along.

If anyone on this board is against one of these items, I'd be surprised.

[still_one]

13. and I agree with you assessment also /nt

[ben_thayer]

8. It's all so tragic...

What on Earth is there to celebrate? Might as well bring back Santorum, Allen and Rumsfeld. It must be ALL OR NOTHING

[dmosh42]

11. Last I heard we won't be in control until Jan., 07

Seems like we're doing some 'wedge' thing here!

[derby378]

10. There's "blue-dog Democrats," and then there's Lieberman and Zell Miller

I got nothin' against blue-dogs who are still loyal to core Democratic values.

[still_one]

14. zell miller IS NOT A BLUE DOG democrat, or any democrat

as bad as Lieberman is, he is NO ZELL MILLER, and is more progressive than Miller on many social issues

Miller started his career with leser madox, and full fledged racist, Lieberman's rise to power came as a result of his stand against Viet Nam. Ironic isn't it

[leftofthedial]

12. the corporate lackeys are saying that wall-to-wall

but the reality, especially in the House, will be quite different.

I hope.

After all, most of the Democratic swing was progressives, not moderates, being elected. The repuke lite candidates overwhelmingly lost.