New Democrats, Progressives and Liberals: battle for control of the party

[Q]

- The new, 'improved' version 1.1

- The 'political climate' after 9-11 was created by two main factors coming into play: 1) the storm trooper tactics of the Neocons and the hostile takeover of the America media by the zealots and fanatics that make up the Bush* Republicans. 2) the lack of fight, conviction and political bravery by their Democratic opposition. The New Democratic Leadership and their supplicants have conceded on so many issues and refused to demand investigations into so many Bush* scandals that they've virtually blended WITH the Republican party. Both parties hide behind nationalism and patriotism to cover their trail of blood, complicity and war profiteering.

- The DLC didn't 'save' the Democratic party by their refusal to 'rock the boat' for the last three years. Dems have been in the minority since 94 and the Dem president between the Bushes got himself impeached by a rogue congress and was forced time and again to concede to the Republican 'revolution'.

- The DLC shouldn't take credit and count the last election as a 'win'. It's not actually 'winning' until and unless you get your hands on the grand prize. Many (grass roots) Democrats are convinced to this day that Gore would be president if he had received the support of his party leadership the way Republicans supported Bush's* fanatical push for the white house. The facts and the truth were on the side of the Democratic party...but they failed to follow through and take the Bushies head on in a fight for the direction and future of democracy.

- It's well-known that liberal candidates are attacked, marginalized and smeared by BOTH the conservative left and right/ It's strange how conservatives continue to insist that 'liberals' can't win elections...as they do everything they can to shun them and keep them from being considered as serious candidates. DLCers should already KNOW why liberals and progressives have a difficult time getting their leadership into power. The progressive ideology is the antithesis of the corporate state and the desires of the ruling class. This makes them the political leper to the conservative Left and Right and those greedily feeding at the government and corporate teat.

- What's the 'ruling class'? Bush* and his cronies, flunkies and apologists who belong (or want to) belong to the small group of wealthy people in this country (and abroad) who own nearly everything. It's three or four percent of the population at the very most. They're the ones who, once they get in office, auction off the government piece by piece to their fellow fat cats. Up to now they haven't been in a position to own the national treasury, resources and the American workforce...but they're close to achieving that goal with the cooperation of the 'new' Democrats.

- Liberals have been out of power in the Democratic party since at least the 80s. Even today...there's no more than a handful of liberals remaining in both houses. How then would one expect them to fight the 'GOP smear machine' and the 'vast right wing conspiracy'? Any power liberals had...any voice they had...was driven from the party by the same DLCers who now insist that only they can win elections.

- Democracy's very existence depends on the sharing of power. That's why we have a two-party system and not a one-party government. Republicans don't want to share power with Democrats and the New Democrats don't want to share power with progressives and liberals.

- The New Democrats insist that the only way we can win elections is to unify behind one leadership and whether or not we happen to agree with their politics is supposed to be secondary to winning. Power and winning have become everything as both parties abandon the Little People for hundreds of millions in campaign cash in exchange for laws, bills and legislation favorable to those who possess the most gold.

- We 'liberals' have been informed that winning is everything and that principles, values and the people have to wait until those who have taken control of the party win back a majority. We're still waiting. Meanwhile...don't fret if we protest and complain about those things the party is giving up for the sake of 'winning'.

- Comments?

[lastknowngood]

1. Until the democrats get a set of balls between the so called

leadership the shrub and his minions will continue to destroy my country. The DLC in complicit in the crimes against civil rights workers rights and our basic freedoms. They are supporters of the shrub and his evil empire. The DLC has hijacked the party and is in control of it that is why they destroyed Dean because Dean was getting his money from Americans and not corps so the DLC and their owners would have lost control if they lost control of the money. I suggest the so called Democratic Leadership Council provide a list of rights and ideas which they are willing to fight for and willing to stand for. As far as I have been able to see they stand for nothing and fight for nothing they are just complacent pawns in the repug destruction of my country. And it is My country and I surrender it to no one and especially those without the backbone to stand and fight for basic beliefs.

[CharlesGroce]

2. agreed

Establishment Democrats are part of the problem, and in fact may be the worst part of the problem, with their refusal to stand up to the Republicans and the corporate class. Worse still they get to wear the garb of populism, even though it isn't in the least sense true, that is, among establishment Democrats.

Well my principles aren't waiting for next year, or for another 4 years of Bush while establishment Democrats try to come up with some strategy to 'win' elections rather than actually connecting with the American people to 'attain' leadership.

[ShaneGR]

3. Ok, can we wait until after the election to have your war?

We've got a chance here to get rid of Bush, spread chaos and have your fun after that's accomplished. I don't care what problems you have with Democrats, if you're still spouting that garbage that the Dem Party is no different than the Repugs, you're clearly delusion.

[CharlesGroce]

7. what does it mean to be no better than the Republicans?

I'm not talking about 'better' or 'worse', I'm talking about 'clearly often not in the interest of the American people but in perpetuating itself (the Democratic establishment) in government.

Like take the Medicare bill. $14B was given to the industry, GIVEN! The government lost negotiating power with the pharmaceutical companies, and oh I don't know what else. Where was this better-than-the-Republican Democratic establishment representing you or me when this happened?

$14B to the corporations, yet my tuition is risig $900 next semester. What kind of government do you want, this kind?

[Q]

15. Distorting someone else's position...

...isn't the proper way to debate. Why is it spreading chaos to discuss reality? I understand what's at stake and will vote accordingly. But how is what you're asking us to do any different than what the RWingers demand of their voters?

- My 'problem' is not with 'Democrats'. It's with the DLC and the current party leadership. You're suggesting that anyone complaining about the status quo must not be a 'real' Democrat. But I've always thought that Democracy and American politics was about participation...not falling into lockstep on command.

- Perhaps this is why the DLCers seem to dislike progressives and liberals? Is it that dissent and disagreement can no longer be tolerated in either party? Have we no say in the direction of the party? Is there no room for compromise between the DLC party bosses and progressives? I'm not talking about the type of compromise we see in DC...where the RWingers demand concessions from Democrats and we get nothing in return.

- Liberals/Progressives want the restoration of the Democratic party as the party of the people. America already has a party that caters to the ruling class and their industries. It's called the Republican party.

[Warpy]

4. the DLC has been a sure loser for years.

The Democrats should have had a great midterm victory in 2002. They didn't. Candidates were afraid to speak out against Bush, afraid to rock the boat, afraid to stand up to the DLC.

Kerry was going nowhere while he was getting DLC advice. All he could seem to do was join the circular firing squad attacking Dean, who had done an end run around the DLC and amassed a sizeable grassroots organization. Kerry dumped his DLC guys last fall, hired Kennedy's guys, got on topic, and took off in the polls.

The DLC wing of the party has simply got to be pushed out of power. They have had a stranglehold on the party too long, abandoning grassroots organizing in favor of whoring after coprorations and abandoning all labor issues, including universal health care. They have alienated their working base, and have given fuel to Naderites who claim there is little or no difference between the two parties.

Get rid of them. If they won't go quietly, THROW THEM OUT.

[corporatewhore]

5. The DLC would be for against civil rights so they wouldnt lose the rural

southern white male vote if this was different time imho

[Christ was Socialist]

6. Dems are afraid to think for themselves

Just read any post on this board, and see the vote for kerry or you are the devil threads. There are more status quo lovers in the dems than repubs. Repubs want a new world order c corprate-theocratic state. While dems just wan ABB. Even IF kerry wins, in 08' it will be "But Kerry can't be too liberal because we must win in 08'. They are scared of change, they are only liberals due to social stances for the msot part, otherwise the are rabid poseurs. If this were slave times they would most likely side with that Scumbag overrated shit Lincoln.

[markomalley]

8. I wish that the country's needs were not so desperate this election cycle:

...because I'd be one of those that say "it's not progressive enough." But, I cannot picture Kerry being 1/10th as purely evil as * has shown us in the past 4 years, not in my worst nightmares. I truly don't want to do what I am going to do this Nov., but I see no choice in the matter. Truly a case of country before self.

[Christ was Socialist]

10. then what happens in 08?

if bush runs again or Jeb. Or robertson. Or any right wing fundie/fascist what about
12?
16?
20?
24?

[markomalley]

12. Yeah, I know...

...hopefully we can get our acts together enough to start wielding some real power within this party by that time...otherwise, I don't know. The 2-party system stinks. Because if you want to have some kind of influence, you have to work within one of those two parties. And, the corporations and other big money donors only have to buy off two groups of leaders (no accusations made, just imho). I would really like to see more viable political parties. But, it just doesn't seem to work out that way.

[Kanary]

24. And that's precisely the dilemma the DLC wants us to be in.

[dusty64]

9. I can add little as

I agree with everything said. Corporate influence has got to be stripped from the government and media and its gonna have to be done by the People dragging the politicians away from the money trough. This country wasn't meant to be run by corrupt career politicians, they envisioned a citizen Congress, but that of course would require an educated and interested populace. I don't see it happening anytime soon I'm afraid, only when things get extremely worse may it (although it may be too late by then).

[comsymp]

11. Comments? Only that...

once again, you're exactly right in your appraisal... sadly.

[KoKo]

13. As usual I agree with what you post, and this paragraph from your post:

- The DLC shouldn't take credit and count the last election as a 'win'. It's not actually 'winning' until and unless you get your hands on the grand prize. Many (grass roots) Democrats are convinced to this day that Gore would be president if he had received the support of his party leadership the way Republicans supported Bush's* fanatical push for the white house. The facts and the truth were on the side of the Democratic party...but they failed to follow through and take the Bushies head on in a fight for the direction and future of democracy.<\i>

[Q]

14. You can see the influence...

...of the new democratic way of thinking here on DU: DON'T ROCK THE BOAT. Don't make waves or make yourself a target of the RWing media and their owners. And for God's sake don't talk about 'conspiracies' and corruption in high places.

- Bush* just might be the most hated man on earth and still has half of the population willing to vote for him. Why? Because the people are offered no real alternatives beyond what they see today.

- The Bush* Neocons have set in motion horrible changes in our government that will take generations to repair. It's too bad that many on the left won't recognize the true danger of appeasing Bush* until it's too late.

[Mattforclark]

16. Winning IS everything.

Not literally everything, of course, but you can't do anything if you don't win first. Politics is the art of compromise, and victory is the prerequisite for the upper hand in that compromise.

[Q]

17. Winning is not everything if you become what you used to oppose...

- Actually it's not true that you 'can't do anything' unless you win. It seems that many Americans and Democrats in particular have accepted Bush's* spoils and winner takes all system of government.

- But all one has to do is read the Consitution to see that representative government is not as much about compromise as it is SHARING power. Our government was set up so that the minority party has a voice and a say in the rules of governing. That's the way it's been for 200 years UNTIL Bush* came along and told the Dems to take a hike and bullied them into submission.

- When GOPers were in the minority they fought every step of the way to guarantee they had a voice in government. After the Clinton years there was just enough CONSERVATIVES in the party to allow Republicans the upper hand and compromise turned into concession.

- These concessions to the GOPers have drastically weakened the Democratic party. The opposition perceived this weakness after stealing an election and has used it to their advantage ever since. The Dem party has been steamrolled and made irrelevant in both houses of congress. They still haven't quite figured out that the opposition considers bipartisanship as a form of 'date rape'.

[KoKo]

19. Again...two paragraphs from your post..should be burned in our brains...

The Party heirarchy doesn't want to hear this. They want to keep doing things the way they've done it and lost before. No charismatic Clinton or down home folksy Carter is going to save their butts this time. They are relying on Bush bringing down Bush. We have to pray that "the strategy" works. Many here say it will. I've posted that it probably will, but in the end who will Kerry be beholden to? Not those of us who know what's wrong with the Party and what's wrong with the Bush/PNAC/Corporate philosophy. No, in the end...it's "business and compromise as usual." As you said "Q" "when you stand for nothing you become nothing."

My gripe which I and others have complained about on DU over and over and over....is in these two pragraphs. Every time someone said the Dems can't fight back because the Repugs run everything, I rememebered how the Repugs fought to get where they are. How could we accept there was "nothing" they could do? We had to think up conspiracy theories to explain their lack of spunk. So many of us thought it was the "Anthrax" that scared them off. They had been threatened by a GOP so powerful it was like the Hoover days. Maybe there's truth to that, maybe not. But, we lack for any logical excuse for the "spinelessness" so we grasp at straws for explanations.

Quote from you:
"When GOPers were in the minority they fought every step of the way to guarantee they had a voice in government. After the Clinton years there was just enough CONSERVATIVES in the party to allow Republicans the upper hand and compromise turned into concession.

- These concessions to the GOPers have drastically weakened the Democratic party. The opposition perceived this weakness after stealing an election and has used it to their advantage ever since. The Dem party has been steamrolled and made irrelevant in both houses of congress. They still haven't quite figured out that the opposition considers bipartisanship as a form of 'date rape'."

[Q]

25. You and Kanary bring up good points...

...but I'm afraid many Dems are focused on November and can't or won't see the forest for the trees.

- It should go without saying that everyone here prefers a Dem to win over ANY GOPer. Republicans have screwed us and our country since before Nixon. But the Dems had a majority in congress for a VERY LONG time...and still we got a renewed 'war on drugs'...a 'defense' budget that sucked us dry and corporate welfare outpacing social welfare by a large margin.

- America simply can't survive without two distinct political parties...to keep each other honest and within the boundries of our Constitution and representative government. Two parties with similar goals can lead to only one thing: a one-party government.

[Kanary]

23. How much are you willing to compromise, Mattforclark?

Do you see any limit beyond which you would not go?

Complete destruction of the safety net?
Overturning of Roe v Wade?
Overturning civil rights laws.... in fact, overturning of the Bill of Rights?
Environmental protections?
Overturning all laws pertaining to protection of consumers against corporations?
Declaration of war anywhere the corporations want control?

Is there *any* line which you deem necessary to protect?

Kanary

[Q]

18. On the defense...

- The Dem party has been on the defense for a decade now...responding to the RWing's charges and accusations instead of attacking them at THEIR weak points. (and they have many).

- We complain and post threads about Bush's* many misdeeds and scandals...but never stand up and demand that we be treated as equals under the Constitution. Those Democrats who DO speak out are chastized and marginalized and told not to 'rock the boat'. How many of you have taken the time to read and understand the recent speeches of Byrd, Kennedy or Gore? How many have noticed that these speeches are a 'call to arms'?

- My concern is that the current Dem leadership isn't doing enough to confront the Bush* government..giving them an upper hand and the ability to take credit where credit is not due. Bush* is destroying America and the invasion/occupation of Iraq looks more and more like a fascist war of aggression. Yet...the Dem response to this is that 'we could do a better job'...not what needs to be said...that Bush* needs to be impeached for crimes against the state and humanity.

[KoKo]

21. Problem with Impeaching Bush is that it isn't just him. It's his whole

administration and most of the Repug Leadership and the PNAC that need to be impeached.

If Bush is impeached, (and I've signed every petition since Sel. 2000, that has called for it) we are left with Cheney. We would have to impeach both Bush and Cheney and Americans would never stand for it.

Sadly their whole philosophy will have to be shown for the danger it is to our country. And, that will take a long time. We are past the point of impeachment. Their crimes are so many in number at this point where would one start to find the one thing which would bring them down.

[Q]

22. Impeachment itself is never the end goal...

...the more important thing is to get the ISSUES ON THE TABLE and before the American people. Who in their 'right' mind would have ever thought the rabid right wingers could have impeached a president over a sex scandal? They accomplished it with their PASSION and CONVICTION...never relenting or giving up.

- There needs to be a dialogue in the public forum about what many want to hide until 'after the election'. Those in charge of this country are more than simply inept or incompetent...they're criminals and they shouldn't be allowed to continue this charade that they're a legitimate government.

[CWebster]

20. How true, Q

Glad to see your view is still as acute as ever.

[Christ was Socialist]

26. The Moderates and appeasers keep handing elections to the right

I'm beginning to wonder if there is a true democrat in the elite. Shit we need more bernie sanders like minds.

[revcarol]

27. Bernie and Kucinich, both champions.

BOTH with enough backbone left over to fill the Democratic Party.

[Q]

28. Or we could continue to BLAME it on the media...

- Granted...the American media has experienced a hostile takeover by wealthy right wing ideologues...but can we blame the media for our own inability to get out our message or provide momentum to keep Bush* scandals on the front page?

- Bernie and Kucinich are prime examples of the kind of politicians conservatives on the left and right don't want to establish a foothold in our government. They would wreck the status quo and expose how we're being duped by an administration more beholded to corporations than THE PEOPLE.

- It wasn't just the RWingers who trashed the left-leaning candidates during the primaries. Conservative democrats joined in and made them appear 'extreme' and outside of the mainstream. But that's not the case at all...they represent the mainstream moreso than the 'popular' candidates...those the party bosses of the two parties have forsaken for campaign cash and a seat at the table of power.