I watched the DLC convention and saw Democrats

[quinnox]

talking about how to win in 2004 and how to attract more voters to the party. Other topics included how terrible the damage the Repubs were doing to the country economically. As I watched, I considered that this gathering of people did not look like some secret cabal that controls the machinations of the political process, like I have read before on DU. I didn't see monsters who wish to destroy the Democratic party, nor did I see shadowy overseers. I reflected how this was quite a disconnect between what some of the posts on DU have to say about the DLC! Can it be that some on DU are just plain wrong about the DLC?? No, it couldn't be, how could I even think this way.

[Bandit]

1. To each their own

:shrug:

[TahitiNut]

51. Yup.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I guess it's much of in what one's used to. When I lived in freeperville, the DLC sycophants looked like the ordinary flipside of ordinary. :shrug:

I'm now watching the RNC "Summer Meeting" ... and I see little difference. Seems to be the same lack of joy, optimism, energy, and vision in the behavior. :eyes:

[Gringo]

2. Anyone who says they are monsters or a secret society is nuts.

They are, however, misguided on how to win elections, and they also are paid-for whores to big business interests. That doesn't make them less than human in my book. Hell, I voted for Clinton.

[hedda_foil]

3. They certainly are not a secret society.

This thread explains why so many of us at DU oppose them.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=110&topic_id=378&mesg_id=378&page=

[Psychoblues99]

4. The convention is back on now, quinox

And I'm like you. I'm not seeing these monsters that many here promise the DLC is comprised of. I see winners for Americans, poor, underpriveledged to the very powerful and rich. I see responsible people trying their level best to see that all the issues are addressed and that our rule of law is upheld. I see a large portion of my personal concerns being addressed.

Psychoblues

Dems Gotta Keep On Truckin'.,.,,.,.,.,.,.,.,,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,.,,.,,..,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,.,.,.,.,.,.,,.,.,.,.,.,.,,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,

[CWebster]

5. Even Bush tries to portray himself as a

"compassionate conservative"

You don't think they're going to stand up there and bar their fangs?

[JNelson6563]

6. this is true

and what I was thinking was, gee when I see a Republican convention I don't see folks who want to put an end to all governement or establish slave-wages for all but their little circle.

But they do.

Julie

[ibegurpard]

7. Fine.

So DLCers are reasonable people who share the same concerns that I do. So when are they going to hold their spokespeople accountable for trying to marginalize other Democrats?

[Psychoblues99]

9. That's right, and when are many here going to stop marginalizing DLCers

Pitiful, just plain ol' pitiful. Kettle, meet pot.

Psychoblues

Dems Gotta Keep On Truckin'.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,,.,.,.,.,.,.,,.,.,,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,

[ibegurpard]

19. You cannot possibly be saying you think that someone like me

has as much influence as Al From?

[Psychoblues99]

20. I'm certainly not saying that at all, ibegurpard

I thought I was clear in what I meant.

Psychoblues

Dems Gotta Keep On Truckin'.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,

[ibegurpard]

32. Your statement:

"That's right, and when are many here going to stop marginalizing DLCers"

I said that DLC members who disagree with the tactics of Al From should stop apologizing for them and hold them accountable...to which you replied with the above statement.

Again: How do the rantings of some peon like me and others on an internet message board equate to the public statements of a LEADER of a Democratic organization like the DLC?

[Madball02]

31. I think you do

Al From is just one person just like you. He's only a big dog within his circle of buddies in D.C. I know him, he's a nice man but he is no more powerful than you or me.

[Classical_Liberal]

79. The fact that you know From shows that you are far from the average

person.

[Madball02]

28. Marginalizing anyone proves they have no facts to stand on

[Madball02]

23. fire them?

Al From is hardly the man in chage. Bill Clinton always ran the DLC, even as President.

I worked in their office once.

[Tinoire]

8. Their actions speak much louder than their words...

If we don't start looking past the rhetoric, we are doomed.

I firmly believe there are very good, sincere people who are part of the DLC, but there are also very good, sincere people in the Republican Party.

I was watching the Republican head of something or other last night on C-Span for a few minutes and he looked, acted and spoke like an angel to whom I would entrust my children (if I had any) but that doesn't make his party any good and it reinforced to me how kind the most evil people can look.

Look how many good, kind people fell for Bush and believed him.

We're only human but we all have to learn to look past the rhetoric.

[chadm]

12. Exactly

Forget the rhetoric altogether. Look at:

- Where the money comes from and who the politician is likely to serve
- Past record

Politicians lie. No, it will not be different "this time."

[sandnsea]

10. The country suddenly decided to watch C-Span today?

I doubt it. I've never seen the DLC referred to as a secret cabal, rather as a group within the Democratic Party that most Democrats don't know exists. I wonder how many more union voters we'd lose if they knew the leaders of the party belongs to a group that actually believes unions are irrelevant these days.

I sat around in confusion during the 90's, wondering where my Democratic Party had gone. Let's see, I went online in 1997 I guess. Before that, I had never heard of the DLC. Did Clinton talk about the DLC in a campaign speech??? Quotes anyone??? He talked about a New Democrat, didn't really explain exactly what that meant. Didn't ask rank and file Democrats for input. Oh sure, they took a 'poll'. Hah. I wonder where they went to get the answers to that 'poll'.

Certainly they aren't as putrid as Bush Neocons, but they aren't the kind of Democrats I remember either.

[Merlin]

17. Clinton gave a speech every year to the DLC during the 90s.

It was and is no "secret."

I was a part of the DLC during the late 80s and early 90s when our party was balls-to-the-wall in trouble; out of power in the WH for 12 years straight, and for 20 of the prior 28 years.

The DLC was relevant and vibrant then. It developed many progressive concepts, including Americorp, the 100,000 new teachers and 100,000 new police program, universal health insurance proposals, and a great many ideas to move the country forward.

The DLC also became the originator of "third way" ideas. These were proposals which answered the legitimate objections of the right but without compromising progressive principals. Tougher law enforcement ("Three Strikes", community funding for 100,000 new cops, the Brady Bill), and welfare reform were part of these.

Most liberals bitch like hell about welfare reform. I'm one who applauds it. I do believe there are serious shortcomings (regarding immigrants) that Clinton was forced to accept. At the time--just before Monicagate--he had every reason to believe he'd be able to push through corrective legislation the following year.

Those liberals who opposed welfare reform absolutely are sadly oblivious to the horrific counter-incentives the old welfare system perpetuated in the underclass. Benefits were better if fathers abandoned their families. The minute a beneficiary took a job, he or she lost all healthcare benefits. There were no graduated benefit reductions for those returning to work. Clinton built all these into the new plan, and he ought to be applauded for improving things and removing a lightening rod for right wing criticism that had been adopted broadly in our society.

Anyhow, the DLC has now, sadly, become a wholly owned subsidiary of Lieberman, and I will not support it. But its meetings still enjoy attendance from a broad group of Democrats, and they are well worth watching.

[sandnsea]

42. the lightening rod isn't gone

They're just moving on to dismantle more programs, that's all. Like EIC, because it's not right to give people credits when they don't pay taxes. As to welfare, I don't have a problem with the idea of improving welfare. But what I really see is people moving from tax funded welfare programs to tax funded work programs. But it's a Democratic 'success' so who is going to criticize it now?
I don't think all of what Bush has done would ever have been done with the Democratic Party of old. In fact, I don't think we'd have a Republican majority at all if we had a Democratic Party supporting the values of average American workers.

Also, I'm not talking about him giving speeches to the DLC, I'm talking about him telling the American people the truth about the DLC and what they really stand for. They slip DLC policies into the Democratic Platform just like Bush slips PNAC policies into the Republican Platform.

The investor class and the servant class. That's what'll be left in 20 years, thanks in large part to the DLC.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

56. Clinton And The DLC Want To Expand The EITC

Also, it was George McGovern who championed the negative income tax in his 1972 capmpaign.

[Merlin]

68. Yes it is.

The welfare lightening rod is indeed gone. You don't hear average Americans of all stripes bitching about it at the tavern anymore. It was eating us alive.

On the DLC, maybe I didn't explain myself clearly enough.

I'm saying the DLC has changed over the years. Why? Because their funding sources have changed. It got started with broad support across the spectrum because the party was in such desperate straights. True, it's always been more conservative than the most liberal voices in the party. So? McGovern, Dukakis, Mondale... Need I say more.

The idea was to dismantle some of the old shibboleths of liberalism that were unyielding in the face of change all around us. Those included the idea that welfare was sacrosanct and couldn't be touched.

As the Clinton era brought many of the early DLC ideas into being, and after Sam Nunn, its original founder, retired, the DLC became less important and lost its funding base.

Today, Lieberman has arranged for its funding through corporate sponsors dependent upon Lieberman's influence in congress.

It's no longer your Father's DLC.

[Madball02]

24. Actually, I disagree

Many union voters know of the DLC and many support them. I worked for the DLC once in D.C and my husband is part of UCFW, local 99. We both agree that while the transition from tarrifs to free trade is hard it'll be better for everyone in the long run. This is exactly what Clinton said to us in 92' or perhaps some of you were too young to remember...

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

30. sure, please outsource your job first

After all, in the long run ("glorious future") it will be better right? Start with yourself, let your kids go without. That is, if you really believe it.

[Madball02]

36. actually

My husband lost his warehouse job and yes it was tough. But we convinced SYSCO to open up a scanning depot in our town. We all got together and promised to go to school and be ready to run the office by the time they had everything setup.

My husband is almost 54 this year and I for one and glad he is in an office and not loading trucks anymore.

[sandnsea]

46. You paid for it yourselves??

Back in the 70's when the textile industry was leaving the country, there was a federal retraining program. There's also one for farmers and I think loggers and fishermen as well. Did you guys get in on that or did you just foot the bill for the corporations yourselves? What are you going to do when that scanning depot discovers some other method to do business in 5 years? Pay for your own retraining again? And again and again?

Let's take one company, Remington guns. Moved to Arkansas in the early 80's and reduced salaries immediately from $14 an hour to $11 an hour. A few years later it was down to $7. By 1988 it was minimum wage. I don't know if they've left the country altogther or not, but I wouldn't be surprised. Taxes have been reduced, many are leaving the U.S. to avoid taxes altogether. Now benefits are being reduced as well. How much more do these corporations need to be profitable? It's a joke.

The investor class and the servant class, that's where we're headed.

[Merlin]

72. Oh, please! Look at the labels on your clothes and towels.

Half of what you buy is made in China or Thailand or India. Why? Because it's cheaper. So you think that corporations should pay more for their products just to keep you happy? Just out of patriotism? That's silly. They do what you and I do. They look for the lowest price. It's human nature, not some conspiracy of the rich.

When you are able to convince the consuming public to pay more money in order to buy products made by higher priced American workers, then come talk to us about this.

[KittyWampus]

81. So You're A Cheap Labor Conservative?

Some how it's okay for laborers in China to make $1 a day working 12 hours in a sweatshop?

Perhaps consumers need to buy less crap... they'd then have more money to spend on the things they REALLY need.
For example, the only reason many people buy new clothes every year is cause the fashion magazines and peer pressure.

Maybe families with children and two working parents should decide which ONE parent should work. If every two parent
family had only ONE working person... there would be so many job openings, higher wages and shorter work weeks.

[Classical_Liberal]

83. Republicans do use the same argumenst against

Unions, Minimum wage, Social Security Taxes, environmental regulation worker safety, child labor, and corporate taxes. How do you keep from falling down that slippery slope? I don't think Corporations are naturally patriotic, and that is why they need regulation.

[Classical_Liberal]

80. Is he still in the Union

Does he make as much?

[sandnsea]

45. Clinton said the DLC supports free trade???

In campaign speeches, he got up and spoke about the Democratic Leadership Council as a separate entity from the Democratic National Committee and its support of free trade??

Don't think so.

[stickdog]

52. So, you are a cheap labor conservative when it comes to free trade.

Right?

[Tinoire]

62. Google = Enron DLC Donations

Might take you a while to research... Plenty of DIRT out there that was hashed out here in the past.

DLC is a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Free trade DLC style is nothing more than the rape and pillage of the 3rd world. Something I will never endorse.

[Tinoire]

63. Google = Enron DLC Donations

Might take you a while to research... Plenty of DIRT out there that was hashed out here in the past.

DLC is a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Free trade DLC style is nothing more than the rape and pillage of the 3rd world. Something I will never endorse.

[Merlin]

70. Wow! You are DEFINITELY an enlighened unionist!

Congratulations on being a true independent thinker. But you would be untrue if you didn't acknowledge that you're one in a hundred in labor.

You are absolutely right. In the long run, everyone is better off doing what they do best. There's proven economic theory to that effect. Yes the transition is tough. But lots more than just union folks have to face it. I'm a techie. In the tech field, your job can evaporate overnight.

You're also right because there's no way to stop globalization. The best we can do is help guide it and control it. Ergo FTW and WTO.

Madball02, I have the highest respect for your outlook.

[Classical_Liberal]

82. Here's the problem

Once you leave that job, the union doesn't represent you anymore, and your white color or sevice industry employer can exploit you as much as he wants. The DLC has done nothing to make it easier to organized service industry employees. Indeed they make the same assumption as many old Union people make. Namely that only assembly line workers need a union.

[Elidor]

11. "How to attract more voters to the party"

Hmmm, let's start by attacking Dean! Isn't that a great idea? No, wait - even better - let's dismiss those who support him as elitist fringe leftists who have no place in "our" party! Woo Hoo! Absolutely fucking brilliant! Yes, sir, it's a winning strategy!

:puke:

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

15. Yep.

[Madball02]

27. please do not curse

It takes away from the debate.

And Bruce Reed and Al From are just two guys who lead the convention and do the fundraising, the rank and file DLC members like my husband and I are not who you desribe.

:dem:

[Psychoblues99]

53. Madball02, First off, WELCOME TO DU!!!!!!! Secondly, I hope you find

this site to your satisfaction. Thirdly, a very broad and colorful conglomeration of lefties, and a few righties, are here and many tend to "curse". I'm sometimes guilty. We're adults, correct?

I do understand exactly what you meant in your admonition and I agree wholeheartedly with you on that issue. You will find there are some here that just can't communicate any other way. And you will find those that will totally embrace your warning. You will also find that many here will totally hate you, as they do me, for being a moderate Democrat. That's a fact, not a warning. But many more will look forward to your views and your reasoning.

Go to the lounge, if you haven't been already, and have a refreshment on Psychoblues and intro yourself there. I'm certain you will find a warm welcome there!!!!!!!!! Thanks for your contributions to DU!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Psychoblues

Dems Gotta Keep On Truckin'.,.,.,.,.,,.,,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,.,,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,.,,.,.,,.,.,,.,.,,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,..,.,.,.,

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

13. Corporate wing of Dem party.

dino's

[goobergunch]

16. I'll say...

I just caught a bit where the commissioner of Montgomery County MD was talking about the happy relationship between his county and some big corporation that moved in.

[Madball02]

29. Corporate is not neccisarily bad

Exxon is bad but not all corporations are bad. State Farm gives millions of dollars back to the community , especially for Hispanics.

You should not take them for granted, they fund many community projects the state and local gov't may not.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

47. Corp.'s aren't necessarily bad....but

when a political party gives undue preference to Corporate interest over the interests of the public at large...............

That's the DLC.

[mandyky]

14. I got a chuckle out of watching

because to me it seemed they were describing Howard Dean (when they were describing positive traits to win), except that Dean was against the invasion of Iraq and needles the Congressional Presidential hopefuls about voting for it.

Personally while all the people seemed nice, what winning elections boils down to, is not so much discussing issues, but getting people you want to vote for you to believe that you will do what you say you will do when you get elected.

I am a bit biased against the DLC, since they dissed the candidate I support - but no they are not 2 headed monsters.

[GreenArrow]

33. "not two headed monsters"

Uh, how about one-headed monsters then?

[robbedvoter]

18. How dare you prop the favorite DU straw man?

DLC is pure incarnate evil - and its destruction excuses everything - even keeping bush in power. Because you see, the more bush is in power, the more people will understand the evilness of DLC (I don't get it either, but I'm sure many can 'splain it to you). Some see bush as some galant adversary in some sports'like confrontation while DLC is the real enemy - the one that chockes them with anger and contempt. I won't go in the ulterior motives since they are quite clear.
As a Democrat I consider that I have more in common with the DLC than with the people I described before. For one, the common desire to unseat bush.

[CWebster]

21. Judging by some of their past advice and actions

I'd have to seriously wonder about that.

[Madball02]

38. I am not pure incarnate evil

:)

hehe, i like your writing.

[Madball02]

22. I used to intern in their office many, many years ago

they are very nice, truthful people.

I'm not sure about this attacking that Dean fellow, but aside from that, they are nice people.

You should subscribe to BLUEPRINT, its only $25 if you pretend your a student *shoosh* :)

[goobergunch]

26. link?

What's "BLUEPRINT"? I've never heard of it.

[charlie]

35. Their house mag

Instead of subscribing, you can just read it online at http://www.ndol.org .

[Madball02]

39. It is a magazine for the DLC-link

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=251910&subid=193&kaid=132

[sandnsea]

48. Blueprint quote, that's why I disagree!

http://www.prospect.org/print/V12/7/dreyfuss-r.html Look, I'll most likely vote for Kerry. I just do not agree with the DLC.

"I listened to Gore's speech at the convention with incredulity," says William Galston, a longtime DLCer who served as domestic policy adviser to President Clinton and who is currently a special consultant for Blueprint....

After his populist turn, Gore surged in the polls in August and early September, and many analysts credited his fiery attacks on pharmaceutical companies, HMOs and health insurers, Big Oil, and George W. Bush's tax cuts for the rich. "When I came on in July, Gore was already beginning to move in a populist direction," says Stan Greenberg, Gore's pollster for the last few months of the campaign. Brought in to replace Mark Penn, the chief pollster for both Clinton and the DLC, Greenberg helped move Gore to the left, targeting the candidate's message to recapture white working-class voters in the $30,000-to-$50,000 income range. On the ground, the AFL-CIO, the NAACP, and other components of the Old Democrats' traditional voter base--organized labor, African Americans, Hispanics, abortion rights activists--conducted intensive voter education and the get-out-the-vote drives, and these groups now take credit for delivering Gore's popular vote victory.

But the DLC is having none of it. While acknowledging the importance of the old Democratic Party base, after the election Al From blasted Gore for alienating upscale "wired workers" in the new economy, the swing voters in comfortable suburbs who, he says, were turned off by Gore's populist message. In a special issue of Blueprint entitled "Why Gore Lost," From issued a scathing broadside against his former New Democratic ally. "By emphasizing class warfare," wrote From, "he seemed to be talking to Industrial Age America, not Information Age America."

Key to the DLC's political strategy is its belief that American workers are no longer attracted by the Democrats' support for the New Deal and the Great Society because they are entering the upper-middle class in droves. "You can't have class warfare without classes," says Peter Ross Range, the editor of Blueprint. "All these guys have boats in their backyards."

[SoCalDem]

25. ....THEY HAVE GOT IT ALL WRONG......GRRRRRRRR

The guy with the "poll" is on now and they still just don't GET IT.. Polls Schmolls.. Until we "fix" two things, we can kiss it all goodbye..

1. MEDIA COVERAGE
2. VOTING IRREGULARITIES (putting it nicely)


It does not matter one BIT if the polls say we are the best, ....If we have no control over our "message" and our candidates are ridiculed daily in all media...and then when we DO vote, our votes are mysteriously "morphed" into Republican votes.... well there ya go..


I wish they would spend some money and some time on the two things that HAVE to be right...without those two things, nothing else matters..:grr:

[On the Road]

34. I Am Outraged by From 's Attack on Dean

but in other ways, the DLC is a group of centrist democrats, many of whom are too beholden to corporate interests and politically afraid to stand up for what they believe.

Not all. Dean, Gore, and Clinton are all DLC, and they are all fighters.

[Madball02]

40. exactly

Then who are these "shadow" warriors everyone speaks of?

I worked for them in 95 and I have never seen them?

Now if you want to talk about that NDN, New Democrat Network. Well those guys are awful. They put their big nose into everyone else's business and I think its horrible.

But the Democratic Leadership council is just an office that does a lot of e-mail. Trust me, I answered a lot of it once :)

[ThorsteinVeblen]

37. THE DISCONNECT IS BETWEEN THE DLC AND THE BASE.

X

[Madball02]

41. Actually, 53% of the rank and file call themselves "moderate"

Please remember that. There are conservative democrats out there, like myself :)

Liberals do not hold all sway in this party.

[ThorsteinVeblen]

49. I consider myself moderate

Fiscally and when it comes to gun control.

I believe the DLC is not representative of my views.

The DLC believes that somehow invading Iraq is being "strong" on defense and national security which proves that they are incompetant, corrupt and idiotic.

Invading Iraq, like invading Vietnam, only hurts America. That said, I supported the invasion of Afghanistan and I would support a full scale arresting of the Saudi Arabian elite backed by massive military force if needed. I would also support military action in Israel as the two parties involved have shown they cannot be trusted to make peace.

These things will make us safer. Invading Iraq has done nothing except prevent Saddam from financially rewarding the families of the suicide bombers in Israel.

[Capn Sunshine]

57. Hey, Thorstein

WHERE is the DLC position stating "WE believe invading Iraq is being strong on defense"?

I think I must have missed that memo.
You MAY be referring to Joe Lieberman however, this sounds eerily like what he would say.


Don't forget Lieberman is not the DLC.
There are somein the DLC blatantly pimping him.
Perhaps THIS is the source of your confusion.

[ThorsteinVeblen]

59. Here it is:

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=251785&kaid=127&subid=900056

"Joe Lieberman, John Kerry, Dick Gephardt, and John Edwards, who, like Britain's Tony Blair, backed using force against Iraq on the condition that President Bush challenge the United Nations to do its job. While scathingly critical of Bush's botched Iraq diplomacy, once an impasse was reached in the U.N. Security Council, they did not flinch from going to war with a smaller coalition.

This enraged "peace activists," who passionately and sincerely believe they speak for most Democrats. They are passionately and sincerely wrong: McGovernism is a distinctly minority view in the party, held mainly by left-leaning activists who have disproportionate influence in caucus states like Iowa. Polls show that two-thirds of Democrats (and more than three-fourths of all Americans) approve of the second Persian Gulf War. And lest we forget, McGovern himself suffered the worst landslide defeat in U.S. history, carrying only Massachusetts and the District of Columbia and winning only 38 percent of the national vote against Richard Nixon.

To win next year, Democrats need to return to their real national security tradition -- one that's tough enough to keep Americans safe and smart enough to build alliances and institutions that make the world safer for democracy.

[Psychoblues99]

43. The disconnect is between the far left and the moderates

As I type I am listening to Mark Penn discuss stats and strategies to overcome this propensity. He says statistically Democrats are in the majority. He also says that people that openly claim to be Democrats tend to favor moderate candidates. He goes on to say that those that openly claim to be pukes favor ultra conservative candidates. In the middle are the moderates that both parties are trying to reach. He says in several ways how the far lefties are being heard but are how they are not in the receiving mode. 10-4?

Psychoblues

Dems Gotta Keep On Truckin'.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,.,,.,.,,.,.,.,.,.,.,,.,.,.,.,.,.,,,

[ThorsteinVeblen]

50. I am in no way "far left" and I oppose the Iraq war.

The DLC is lying like the media and the conservatives when it says that only the far left opposes the Iraq war.

The DLC is as corrupt and idiotic and bigoted as the media.

[Psychoblues99]

54. Okay, you are against the war. So am I.

We are not in the majority on this issue.

Psychoblues

Dems Gotta Keep On Truckin'.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.

[ThorsteinVeblen]

60. The people who opposed the Vietnam War were not in the majoirty either

but History proved them to be right.

Vietnam and America both would've been better if the Vietnam War would've never happened.

We lost the war. Communism did not take over. The advocates of the War were stupid and wrong.

McGovern was right. Period.

The questions to ask yourself is "am I moral"? "Am I willing to support an evil war if it will help my political party to win?" "Do the ends justify the means?"

[Psychoblues99]

64. As a Viet Nam veteran I find it difficult to answer you. But I repeat

I am against this war in Iraq. So are you. Reality says we are there. Can we continue to wage our legitamate wars against this illegitamate Washington regime or do we just shoot each other in desparation?

Psychoblues

Dems Gotta Keep On Truckin'.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,..,.,.,.,.,,,

[nolabels]

44. It's not what they say or what they look like, its what they do.

The illusions of civility can be dangerous, yes indeed. Black widows, pythons and alley cats look tame till its time to devour the prey. Watch a few nature films and come on back to relate some of the parallels.

[kentuck]

55. how come only 37 people there ?

I know they were so boring that they would have a problem getting their own mothers enthused to vote. They make white bread look exciting. I'm not going to say we don't need them because we do. But they don't seem to think they need us. So they can go out and lose a close election then say it would have been much worse if we had run a more progressive candidate. In that respect, they do sound like Repubs.

I'm trying to look at the bright side here. If the war takes a turn where we all look like fools for opposing it, and one of those Democrats that voted for the war wins the nomination and we have to choose between that candidate and George W Bush, at least we haven't put all our eggs into one basket. We still have the DLC option. And I suppose most of the posters here would vote for that candidate regardless of how much they disliked him. The DLC would have our votes.

The question then arises, what would the moderates do if the war goes even further south and someone like Howard Dean wins the nomination and they have compared him to George McGovern, will they support the candidate that they disagree with or will they move to the Repub Party or just not vote? Will we be a united Party, regardless of who wins the nomination? If they held their noses and voted for Howard Dean, could we hold our noses and vote for Joe Lieberman? Is that the direction we are headed?

[Capn Sunshine]

58. I have noticed thatthe most vocal anti-DLC ones here

are motivated by their percieved defense of Organized labor.
Not one to stir the pot, but as I stated before, this paranoia about the DLC seems to have its roots in a slew of articles written in "The Progressive" , which is big labors house organ.

I must emphasize I hold no ill will towards unions,their purpose, their struggle, nor all the good they have done for society , and in fact for the world, in the 20th century. I have even participated in Unionizing some shops, and getting the UFW certified.

However, I maintain (and boy, do I get the letters from Union offices when I do this!!) That the leadership of many unions is bloated, fat, corrupt and would sell their membership down the river for a chance to remain in power. Refusal by many unions to acknowlege THIS as the reason for losing rank and file to the republican party, and lessening influence in DC as they frequently dine with the corporate lobbyists, is at the root of the issue. The anti-DLC rhetoric is a convenient straw man, rather than look in a mirror to see what the trouble is.

okay. flame on.

[Psychoblues99]

61. You are wrong on two accords, Capn

The most vocal of the anti DLCers have yet to show up hardly at all. You have obviously bought the repuke propaganda that the union leaders are in bed with their corporate masters. Exactly as planned.

Psychoblues

Dems Gotta Keep On Truckin'.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,

[Terwilliger]

65. like the Democratic party leadership

I think we should overhaul the WHOLE damn thing

[poskonig]

66. Interesting. I watched the DLC convention and saw Republicans.

Are you sure we saw the same program?

[Psychoblues99]

69. Would you care to name just one?

Maybe the cameraman, but certainly not any of the speakers were republican. Or are you just kidding and not exposing your ignorance of American politics?

Psychoblues

Dems Gotta Keep On Truckin'.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.

[davidinalameda]

71. here are some of the "Republicans"

Evan Bayh, U.S. Senator, IN
John Breaux, U.S. Senator, LA
Maria Cantwell, U.S. Senator, WA
Tom Carper, U.S. Senator, DE
Kent Conrad, U.S. Senator, ND
John Edwards, U.S. Senator, NC
Dianne Feinstein, U.S. Senator, CA
Bob Graham, U.S. Senator, FL
Tim Johnson, U.S. Senator, SD
John Kerry, U.S. Senator, MA
Herb Kohl, U.S. Senator, WI
Mary Landrieu, U.S. Senator, LA
Joe Lieberman, U.S. Senator, CT
Blanche Lincoln, U.S. Senator, AR
Zell Miller, U.S. Senator, GA
Bill Nelson, U.S. Senator, FL
Ben Nelson, U.S. Senator, NE
Mark Pryor, U.S. Senator, AR
Debbie Stabenow, U.S. Senator, MI
Tom Allen, U.S. Representative, ME
Joe Baca, U.S. Representative, CA
Brian Baird, U.S. Representative, WA
Chris Bell, U.S. Representative, TX
Shelley Berkley, U.S. Representative, NV
Marion Berry, U.S. Representative, AR
Earl Blumenauer, U.S. Representative, OR
Lois Capps, U.S. Representative, CA
Dennis Cardoza, U.S. Representative, CA
Brad Carson, U.S. Representative, OK
Ed Case, U.S. Representative, HI
Jim Cooper, U.S. Representative, TN
Bud Cramer, U.S. Representative, AL
Joseph Crowley, U.S. Representative, NY
Jim Davis, U.S. Representative, FL
Susan Davis, U.S. Representative, CA
Artur Davis, U.S. Representative, AL
Peter Deutsch, U.S. Representative, FL
Cal Dooley, U.S. Representative, CA
Rahm Emanuel, U.S. Representative, IL
Anna Eshoo, U.S. Representative, CA
Bob Etheridge, U.S. Representative, NC
Harold Ford, Jr. , U.S. Representative, TN
Charles Gonzalez, U.S. Representative, TX
Jane Harman, U.S. Representative, CA
Baron Hill, U.S. Representative, IN
Ruben Hinojosa, U.S. Representative, TX
Joseph Hoeffel, U.S. Representative, PA
Rush Holt, U.S. Representative, NJ
Mike Honda, U.S. Representative, CA
Darlene Hooley, U.S. Representative, OR
Jay Inslee, U.S. Representative, WA
Steve Israel, U.S. Representative, NY
Chris John, U.S. Representative, LA
Ron Kind, U.S. Representative, WI
Nick Lampson, U.S. Representative, TX
Jim Langevin, U.S. Representative, RI
Rick Larsen, U.S. Representative, WA
John Larson, U.S. Representative, CT
Zoe Lofgren, U. S. Representative, CA
Ken Lucas, U.S. Representative, KY
Denise Majette, U.S. Representative, GA
Carolyn Maloney, U.S. Representative, NY
Jim Matheson, U.S. Representative, UT
Bob Matsui, U.S. Representative, CA
Carolyn McCarthy, U.S. Representative, NY
Karen McCarthy, U.S. Representative, MO
Mike McIntyre, U.S. Representative, NC
Gregory Meeks, U.S. Representative, NY
Michael Michaud, U.S. Representative, ME
Juanita Millender-McDonald, U.S. Representative, CA
Brad Miller, U.S. Representative, NC
Dennis Moore, U.S. Representative, KS
Jim Moran, U.S. Representative, VA
Grace Napolitano, U.S. Representative, CA
David Price, U.S. Representative, NC
Silvestre Reyes, U.S. Representative, TX
Mike Ross, U.S. Representative, AR
Steve Rothman, U.S. Representative, NJ
Loretta Sanchez, U.S. Representative, CA
Max Sandlin, U.S. Representative, TX
Adam B. Schiff, U.S. Representative, CA
David Scott, U.S. Representative, GA
Brad Sherman, U.S. Representative, CA
Adam Smith, U.S. Representative, WA
Vic Snyder, U.S. Representative, AR
John Spratt, U.S. Representative, SC
Charles Stenholm, U.S. Representative, TX
Bart Stupak, U.S. Representative, MI
John Tanner, U.S. Representative, TN
Ellen Tauscher, U.S. Representative, CA
Mike Thompson, U.S. Representative, CA
Jim Turner, U.S. Representative, TX
Tom Udall, U.S. Representative, NM
Robert Wexler, U.S. Representative, FL
David Wu, U.S. Representative, OR


Now how many of these "Republicans" are praised on this site on a daily basis for how great they are?

[MisterP]

75. daily? by the majority? three: Kerry, Landrieu (weekly?), and Edwards

(P.S.: DU is heterogenous)

[bpilgrim]

67. well i think some apply powerful adjetives to a group that is pro-corp

anti-liberal and eliteist.

but hey that's what makes du 'special' ;-)

peace

[CWebster]

73. Front page story on DLC in today's Philadelphia Inquirer-

"Robert Borosage, a prominent liberal organizer, groused, 'The party has been mobilizing itself with increasing energy against Bush - and here's the DLC, lobbing memos, trying to rip our skin off, trying to discredit certain candidates before the primaries even happen. It's name-calling and blah blah blah, and it's totally divisive. It's also a sign of their weakness.'

Some analysts say the DLC is spooked about losing influence; after a stint as a '90s insider (when Clinton co-opted GOP issues such as welfare reform and a balanced budget), From was an outsider during Al Gore's autumn 2000 campaign, when Gore moved leftward, with populist attacks on corporations. From wound up on the other campaign plane with his centrist soulmate, vice presidential candidate Joseph I. Lieberman.

One veteran Washington observer, a nonpartisan who is normally sympathetic to the DLC, said privately: 'It seems like Al is taking Dean's progress as a personal repudiation of everything the DLC stands for, just sort of lashing out with no regard for whether it's helping the party. It seems to have gotten very personal.'"



http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/front/6398905.htm

[Capn Sunshine]

74. FYI- From the DEAN Website

This was posted on Dean's Blog, and I didn't want anyone to miss
it, because
it clearly shows the DLC "membership" views vs From & Reed -
fascinating!
==========
OT - Just wanted to share an experience we Dean supporters had
here in Philadelphia last night. The DLC is having its annual
National "Conversation" in Philadelphia this weekend. Last night
Philly4Dean hosted a Dean rally in Love Park for local
supporters - and we invited every elected official in the DLC to
join us. "A Midsummer Night's Dean" brought out 200 Dean
supporters and at least one or two DLC members to celebrate our
grassroots movement and to hear Governor Dean call in to the
rally - live! He was great, of course, and really got the crowd
going.

After the rally, one of our members suggested we go to a local
Irish pub for some drinks - imagine our surprise when we realized
that was the same pub hosting a late night DLC event!! (wink)
Needless to say, we weren't sure what kind of reception we would
receive. We got a table in a back room that was empty when we sat
down, and within 15 minutes the room was filled with DLC members -
coming to ask questions, tell us how much they love Howard Dean
and find out if we had any t-shirts to sell. (We didn't, but not
one of us was wearing a Dean pin when we left - and many DLC'ers
were!) There was quite a buzz throughout the restaurant about our
presence - the DLC members organizing the party bought our group a
round of Tequila shots and later in the evening we even got a
mention from the band! (DLC members themselves of course)

It was an amazing night all around. To me the best part was who
was MISSING at the pub - supporters for any of the other
candidates. And once again, Dean supporters showed themselves to
be passionate, articulate and engaging - and not the least bit
elitist. GO DEAN!

Posted by Jen in Philly at July 27, 2003 11:46 PM

[farmbo]

76. Yep...Dean supporters can drink the DLC'ers under the table!!

:beer:

[w4rma]

77. Yup, it's the DLC *leadership* that's the problem, not rank and file (n/t)

[Classical_Liberal]

78. It's like Jerry Falwell testifying that the Christian Coalition Convention

is filled with normal folks just like him! Sorry.