The DLC continues its obsession with Dean bashing.

[ECH1969]

Al From: Joe Lieberman happens to be a personal friend of mine, but the DLC didn't have a candidate in the primary election. To me, the central issue in the primaries was whether or not we were going to continue and build upon Clintonism, or whether we were going to reject it. The main thing for us was we had one candidate, Howard Dean, who wanted to reverse Clintonism, who wanted to go back to a base-only strategy. Kerry personally has had a long history with the DLC.

http://tinylink.com/?Bnqh5hjpY7

Non-religious Democrats need to "simply stop saying things that alienate or offend people of faith." Sullivan cites Gov. Howard Dean's famous stump speech line expressing annoyance at southerners who care about "God, guns and gays" as a good example of what not to do

http://tinylink.com/?pVvPh1PI61

Will Marshall, in an analysis of how Democrats arrived at their present optimistic state, notes that the failure of Howard Dean's campaign teaches the salient lesson that running against the legacy of Bill Clinton is a doomed strategy. Voters know they had it good in the 1990s; they prefer the radical pragmatism of centrist-leaning politics to the ideological purism of those who still believe the myth of the hidden (liberal) majority, writes Marshall.

One of the key parts of his stump speech earlier in the campaign was a lament that Southerners have for too long cast votes based on "God, guns, and gays." The phrase was catchy, the basic sentiment on-target, but the message flawed. It's hard to imagine that too many voters would support Dean on the basis of that statement, but it was easy to identify the voters he had unnecessarily alienated.

While Bill Clinton in 1992 campaigned against his party's past failures, Dean seemed to relish attacking those responsible for its most recent successes. Yet Dean embraced that hardy perennial of left-wing fancy: the myth of the hidden majority.

http://tinylink.com/?DZkHExjLnw
http://tinylink.com/?1QDR83wUNM
------------------------------------------------

Come on guys the primaries are over. It is time for unity, we need to stop the sniping and attacking other Dems.

[Gman]

1. More of the boogie-DLC man paranoia

some people have no life and don't understand the Democratic Party and politics in general.

[Alerter_]

the DLC is irrelevant now

The corporations that own the DLC now have to deal with the more establishment Kerry/Kennedy axis. Their golden boy Clark turned out to be a dud, and Lieberman is the most hated Democrat in the party, except for maybe Zell. Groups like MoveOn and TrueMajority allow the grassroots liberals to fund ourselves, and we don't need bagmen like McAullife anymore. It's now the grassroots talking directly to the old-line liberal establishment. Neo-liberals need not apply. Democracy, it works if you work it. :)

[Forkboy]

93. I know,that's why those people dwell on things like Nader

[AntiCoup2K4]

2. Why aren't these treasonous pigs in Leavenworth federal prison

And why are so many "Democrats" taking orders from neocons without question :grr:

[redqueen]

3. Will Marshall makes me sick

Too bad they're supported by CORPORATE MONEY... I wish that whole group would just slither back over to the other side of the aisle where they belong.

:puke:

[Warpy]

4. C'mon! The DLC are GOPers in Dem drag!

Dean threatened their stranglehold on the party by forming his own grasroots organization! They're typical of conservatives: petty, mean spirited and vindictive, so of course they won't let it go!

Know your enemy, folks, and those right wing weasles throttling the core of the party are them.

[freetobegay]

8. Speaking of someone who won't let it go.

[bigbillhaywood]

20. DLC-- archenemy of the American worker, friend of the corporation

[freetobegay]

22. Yep

Let's forget that we have COBRA because of Clinton, lets forget that we have the Medical Family leave act from Clinton & the list goes on. Oh BTW he's DLC. :eyes:

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[redqueen]

28. Don't forget the Telecom Act

It's why ClearChannel is the monster they are today.


And for congressroaches (incl. MoselyBraun Lieberman and Feinstein, to name a few), they overturned Clinton's wise veto of the Securities Litigation Act. Which is what many of the corporate scandals were enabled by and protected from prosecution with.

[IrateCitizen]

31. Those two things are largely unaffordable for most

Have you ever been unemployed and found out how much it costs to do COBRA? I did for a short period of time, and the costs in the late 1990's for a single-person coverage ran close to $400 per month.

WRT the Family Medical and Leave Act, all it does is mandate that mothers have a certain amount of time off from work. For the vast majority of mothers who are below upper middle class (and therefore, dependent on their paychecks to survive), this act does nothing for them, because they still have to go to work.

Contrast that with the plan in Sweden (which, admittedly, would not currently fly here in the US) where all women are guaranteed a year of PAID maternity leave. The Swedish plan states the importance in the first year of a child's life, and the value that they place on future generations. The US plan falls woefully short in this area, instead offering a primarily symbolic plan to the majority of families.

IMO, both acts were pretty good first steps toward solving problems, but that's about it. Where the DLC is disingenuous is in proposing that such measures are the full solution themselves. There's nothing wrong with adopting an incremental approach, so long as you keep your eye on the end goal. Stopping after just taking the first small step and declaring the problem "solved" is not a beneficial strategy, IMHO.

[freetobegay]

36. No one said they are full solutions.

Clinton had a republican Congress & when Hillary was on the road trying to get Healthcare reform, the way she was attacked was disgusting! I am in that part of the book right now (living History where she talks about health care reform)

They tired health care Reform & all they got for there efforts was an Impeachment!

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[freetobegay]

40. Someone needs education.

And a bar of soap.

[redqueen]

48. I'm not even going to bother

Suffice to say that it would be a DLCer making that sort of mistake.

[lastliberalintexas]

54. Probably very smart of you!

I mean, if someone is going to dispute the fact the we held Congress during the years 1993-1994 and yet try to lecture you on "facts", s/he's probably beyond reach. :-)

[redqueen]

57. For anyone who still doubts reality

http://www.house.gov/budget_democrats/analyses/dem_success/dem_success1.htm

Reading is fundamental!

(And this is a GREAT PAGE, btw.)

[bigbillhaywood]

59. uh, I think lastliberalintexas is agreeing with you. n/t

[lastliberalintexas]

62. Yes, I was

Redqueen probably thought she was replying to some *other* poster! (I hope)


Love your moniker btw. We need a few more like him- and throw in a few like Mother Jones, and we might actually get real labor reform in this country.

[redqueen]

63. LOL yes -- I hadn't noticed the name...

what I get for assuming! *blush*

[Eloriel]

91. Here's some education for ya

LINKS - What every DUer and every Dem needs to know about the DLC
http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=4443&forum=DCForumID22&archive=

Let's be REALLY honest about the DLC
http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=23262&forum=DCForumID60&archive=


Outing the "New Democrats" -- Pukes in Progressive Clothing.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=1435&forum=DCForumID34

Everyone who is a fan of the DLC, needs to read this post,
(Devils Advocate NZ's post is included)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=11323&forum=DCForumID60#114

Kerry, the New Democrats, and American Military Hegemony
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=326015#326061

I dare ya to throroughly read the material in the links in these threads. I would start with this one because what DevilsAdvocateNZ shared is extremely important to understanding the DLC (and New Labour and a whole host of other things):
Everyone who is a fan of the DLC, needs to read this post,
(Devils Advocate NZ's post is included)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=11323&forum=DCForumID60#114

And when you're finished with all those, here's some education on PNAC (some of these are redundant):
PNAC - The Links Archive
http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=3021&forum=DCForumID12&archive=

NEW: PNAC Links Archive (Redux)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=110&topic_id=80

New to DU? Here's your =======> Intro to PNAC (Stephanie)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=301411

A repost thread: New to DU? Here's your =======> Intro to PNAC
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1069536

[charlie]

38. FMLA passed in 1993

It was a Democratic Congress then.

[IrateCitizen]

39. But the DLC seems to think they're full solutions!

Since I don't hear or see them proposing new ideas in these areas, I can only conclude that they think that they're full solutions.

I guess they're too busy cranking out papers on how we can "stay and win" in Iraq. I read one a while back in which they essentially advocated sending in more light infantry and armor for "policing" duties. Their lack of grasp on military matters would be laughable, if it weren't so dangerous.

[freetobegay]

41. What's going to win this election for the Democrats?

Talking about health care reform or Iraq?

ON EDIT: there is not much you can do when you don't control any of the seats of Government.

[IrateCitizen]

46. Tell me how the DLC's plan on Iraq differs from the neocons, then

After all, Will Marshall was a signatory to PNAC.

In order for Iraq to be an issue, there has to be a discernable difference in strategy. From what I've heard from the DLC and their "progressive internationalism" (which is certainly NOT progressive, and it is only slightly more international than the current policy) bullshit, there isn't too much light between them and Bush on Iraq.

[bigbillhaywood]

49. Yeah, focusing on each election like it was the end of the world

and engaging in no long-term strategy, organizing or risk-taking is what got the Democrats in a minority status to begin with. The Democrats need to spend fewer resources on strict electioneering and more on party-building and grassroots organizing. They will likely see short-term losses as a result, but in the end it will pay dividends, just like it did for Repugs.

[bigbillhaywood]

56. Here's the problem with the DLC...

Your post:

"Contrast that with the plan in Sweden (which, admittedly, would not currently fly here in the US) where all women are guaranteed a year of PAID maternity leave."

"Currently" is the key word there. Through consistent, strategic and tireless organizing I think it could fly, but the DLC is not interested in that. They want quick fixes, band-aids. The DLC exists for one reason and one reason only-- to marginalize the influence of labor and progressives and ensure that both parties are controlled by corporate interests.

[IrateCitizen]

68. It's good to see my point wasn't lost on all...

If you note in my post, I said I had no problem with incremental change -- so long as it remains focused on what the end goal is, and is not accepted as the ultimate solution. My gripe with the DLC is that it DOES present such baby steps as full-fledged solutions.

The DLC exists for one reason and one reason only-- to marginalize the influence of labor and progressives and ensure that both parties are controlled by corporate interests.

You forgot that they also exist to simply perpetuate their own power.

[lastliberalintexas]

74. Yes, but

the current DLC leadership is trying to tell us that even the incremental change is unworkable and/or an impossible dream in our country. I agree with you wholheartedly otherwise.

[Cheswick2.0]

42. DLC sucks

let's not forget that we also have Nafta and Bush because of Clinton. Lets also not forget that we have lost both the house and the congress due to the idiots in the DLC.
No one elected them to ruin my party and I plan to spend as much time as necessary to get rid of them.

[freetobegay]

45. So the Democrats as a whole had nothing to do with losing?

:eyes:

[Cheswick2.0]

52. where did I say that?

:eyes:

[freetobegay]

60. You didn't say that I did.

" Lets also not forget that we have lost both the house and the congress due to the idiots in the DLC."

It sounds like to me your blaming only the DLC when in fact it was the whole Democratic party.

[bigbillhaywood]

44. Never said no DLC candidate has never done anything good

Clinton also tried for universal health care, raised minimum wage, and refused to invoke Taft-Hartley against the 1997 UPS strike. But he also did some very nasty pro-corporate and anti-worker shit that other posters on this thread have pointed out. We can do better than Clinton or his policies, what makes the DLC so dangerous is they try to convince Dems that Clintonian policies is the best they can hope for.

Just nominate moderates and they will get elected. Bullshit. The Republicans nominate right-wing extremists who get elected? Why? Because conservative Republicans have managed to move the center of this country to the right (economically at least), and they have a well organized and disciplined base. They did this through long-range strategic organizing, calculated risks, ideological and organizational discipline, and battling out ideas in the culture.

The DLC prevents this sort of long-range strategic approach from happening in the Democratic Party. They are strictly reactive, not progressive.

[lastliberalintexas]

51. Big deal

We also got the ADA out of Bush Sr- that doesn't mean he's a friend of labor either.

Clinton did many good things- but (greatly) benefiting our workers was not among them.

[SCDem]

55. excuse me but COBRA is crap

[redqueen]

58. You're exactly right

For many, many middle or lower income workers, health insurance is barely affordable WITH the employers' contribution.

[freetobegay]

61. Ok so ask Bush to give you Universal health care!

See how far you get.

[redqueen]

64. Oh I love the false dichotomy!

We'll ask REAL DEMOCRATS, after we've ENDED the DLC's REIGN OF STUPIDITY.

[janx]

9. I don't think this even has anything to do with ideology.

It's about ego, money, and power.

[Warpy]

13. Yes, it is

...and Dean threatened their grasp.

[ECH1969]

67. Yes

That is my feeling on the matter

[bigbillhaywood]

5. What pricks. nt

[Demobrat]

6. The DLC will never be done bashing Dean.

Dean scared the crap out of them.

[janx]

7. These guys are going to have to come to the realization

that times change. They can't stay in their Clinton world forever, can they?

[redqueen]

10. With corporate fatcats sending huge checks

they can stay that way until the evil idle rich give up their quest to kill the liberal Dem spirit in this country.

[Individualist]

19. and DLC

serves its corporate masters well! :puke:

[redqueen]

24. Would they get those fat checks if they didn't?

Well-paid whores are well-paid for a reason.

[denverbill]

16. Absolutely.

What bothers me the most is that some of our most pressing problems today can be traced back directly to the Clintonism that reigned in the 90's.

Clinton may have given us a few minimum wage hikes, unlike Shrub. But like Shrub, he passed an enormous tax cut that applied mostly to the wealthy (the capital gains tax cut in ??96??). Like Bush I, he supported NAFTA and WTO, greatly to the detriment of American workers, but to the joy of his corporate contributors. His corporate WTO strategy led directly to giving one of his contributors authority to allow China to launch a satellite for the US to save themselves money, but in the process, the Chinese stole technology which allowed them to build better guidance systems for weapons.

The problem is that on way way to many issues, the DLC and Republicans on in complete agreement, and that agreement completely blows off the American worker.

[NashVegas]

80. I Put it to Reagan, Not Clinton

There were so many things that went down under Reagan where the Dems couldn't get it together or didn't care. Specifically referring to corporate and media consolidation. That's where it began, in the early/mid 1980s.

The 1996 Act was just the final nail in the coffin.

[IrateCitizen]

81. Reagan started it, but Clinton finished it.

I agree that Reagan started the deregulation insanity. But it was ultimately through the embrace of such twisted logic by Democrats like Bill Clinton and the DLC that it went as far as it did.

Rather than provide a counterweight to this mania in the opposite direction, the decision was made to embrace it, just to appear not as overzealous on it as the Republicans.

Remember "triangulation"?

[NashVegas]

84. Yes, It Hurt

I'm generally ambivalent towards Clinton. There was good, there was bad. It just seems like much of the good has been easily turned around by Bush, and the bad has been built on. Were we so happy to have a social progressive in the White House that we turned a blind eye to the things that continued the flight from democracy towards a technocratic oligarchy?

[IrateCitizen]

88. The answer to your question is yes.

Were we so happy to have a social progressive in the White House that we turned a blind eye to the things that continued the flight from democracy towards a technocratic oligarchy?

Yes, absolutely.

Personally, I view Clinton as a holding pattern. Things got a little worse than Reagan/Bush in some areas, things got a little better in others, but mostly his two terms were just a plateau, overall.

Hopefully we've learned from our mistakes, and will keep the pressure on Kerry once he's in office.

[denverbill]

89. Reagan instigated it. Clinton made it worse.

You expect Republicans to pass crap to benefit their corporate masters. You expect Democrats to attempt to undo the crap. When Democrats not only don't undo the damage, but pass laws that even Republicans couldn't get passed, that's bad.

NAFTA would've NEVER gotten past a Democratic Congress if it was Bush or Reagan pushing it. Clinton got it passed, over the objections of most Democrats.

In hindsight, the changes in media ownership rules were probably one of the worst things to happen. The consolidation of the media has become an extremely serious problem.

[blm]

11. It was always about strategy differences, not policy differences.

Because Dean never rejected Clintonism, in fact, he was even more of a centrist than Clinton and governed with a strong alliance with the Republicans in Vermont. He just saw an opening to court the base in the primary and took it, just as any politician looking for primary traction would.

Some members of the DLC chose to punish Dean for his strategy. Dumb and dishonest allaround, imo.

From is being punished having to see Kerry as the nominee. Kerry was the furthest LEFT of the DLC membership and not a particular favorite of From.

[Cheswick2.0]

50. your misunderstanding of Dean continues

He never claimed to be anything but centrist. He does claim to be anti -DLC , those two facts are not mutually exclusive.

[blm]

65. Hah...you wish.

Point out where he was antiDLC as an organization in 2002 when he was already well into establishing his candidacy.

Seems to me he had nothing bad to say about the DLC until a few idiots from the DLC decided in May 2003 to ridicule him on his campaign tactic started in early 2003 to appeal to the left .

[ECH1969]

82. Well Dean is unhappy about where

the DLC has taken the party that much is pretty clear.

[freetobegay]

12. The New Democrat Credo

Read it, you might learn something.

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=86&subid=194&contentid=3775

[Warpy]

15. All I learned

Was that their credo used the word "progressive" without defining any of it. Otherwise, that credo could be lifted and put on any GOP site.

It's platitudes, covering the fact that New Democrat = Old Repuglican.

[freetobegay]

17. Dean was DLC

He couldn't get around them so he left them. His supporters still can't get over that fact, or the fact that he lost. He has why can't you?

P.S. thanks for calling me an old Republican, I'll remeber that in future posts.

[IrateCitizen]

21. You're totally off-base on Dean's falling out with the DLC

See blm's post above for a more accurate explanation.

And the DLC stands for most of the things that Rockefeller Republicanism stood for 30 years ago -- socially liberal, fiscally conservative, hawkish foreign policy. Whether you like it or not doesn't change the reality of it.

[freetobegay]

25. Heres a dose of reality for you

The DLC is going to put Kerry in the White House.

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[redqueen]

30. No, that would be the voters

The DLC will wave their flag around and pretend to be important, but they're really just sad and pathetic.

[indigo32]

72. Yup

[Demobrat]

32. Well, in that case,

he won't be needing my vote.

[IrateCitizen]

33. Wrong. Backlash against Bush's insanity is going to.

If anything, Kerry will win in spite of the DLC. The DLC may have served a useful purpose at one time, but they have chosen instead to devote their energies solely toward maintaining their power and influence, and trashing anyone who gets in their way.

ON EDIT: Did you actually read blm's post? Or did you just spout off something that had nothing to do with the points being raised?

[NYCGirl]

34. I wonder if the DLC could put someone in the White House...

if they weren't running against someone named Bush?

[ECH1969]

83. Your right

If the DLC was facing McCain I would hate to know the outcome.

[Individualist]

35. Just as they did the mid terms?

Shrub's crimes and attempts to destroy our nation will put Kerry in the White House.

[Demobrat]

18. Sounds like the mission statement I just wrote

for a huge credit card company with an image problem.

[redqueen]

27. Is that more funny than sad?

Or more sad than funny?

Gaaaah... I loathe these repub lites!

[mrgorth]

14. Are they disavowing Liebermania?

WTF?

[IrateCitizen]

23. They're disavowing Liebermania, but embracing Joementum (nt)

[truthspeaker]

43. base-only strategy my ass. Dean is a centrist

So being business-friendly and pro-gun is a base-only strategy? Dean's only "lefty" position is his support of civil unions for gays. Basically From is saying we should cater to gay-bashers as an election strategy.

Dean's opposition to the Iraq war was never a "liberal" position, it was a pragmatic one based on his belief that there was no reason to go to war and the war planners had their heads up their asses - which we now know to be true.

[Jacobin]

47. What do they want from the man?

He energized the party, brought it back from near death, rallied the troops, raised millions for Dem causes, speaks the truth, made it "ok" to criticize that "popular wartime president" lost the nomination, endorsed Kerry, IS RAISING MONEY FOR KERRY, stumps for Kerry, and they piss on him.


Fuck them all in the ear.

[ibegurpard]

53. to crush him into oblivion

he continues to work on energizing the people who supported him to run for office and to take the reigns of the local party apparatus. This would mean a loss of influence for these people.

[ECH1969]

66. The DLC won't be happy until Dean is out of politics

That is my view on the matter.

[Gman]

69. That would make me happy

Dean's a party liability. EAAAAAAAAAAGHGHGHHGHGHHGHHGGGGHHHHHH!

[Forkboy]

71. I know huh?

damn him for raising millions for Kerry.

What a liability!

[redqueen]

76. Yeah... raising MONEY... from PEOPLE, not CORPORATIONS!

Damn that Dean! Damn him to helllllll!!!!!

:crazy:

[Forkboy]

78. The simplicity of some people's thinking is scary

isn't it?

[redqueen]

87. Scary, yes

and unfortunately, very destructive as well, as all empirical evidence demonstrates.

[dansolo]

86. He is also raising money for others

The DLC wants a president and Congress that is beholden to them. Dean, with DFA 2.0, is focusing on spreading money around, and getting average people to contribute to candidates at all levels, all of whom believe as Howard does. They are afraid of Dean, and any future influence he may have in the Democratic party down the road. They want to squash him now before he establishes a "beachhead" in Congress and local governments across the country.

[dorktv]

73. How so? He brought millions into the party, he got a TON of

press for us, he raised MILLIONS of dollars for himself, and many others and he has gotten a lot of good people to run for office that would otherwise have not run. One scream that the media forced on us is NOT A LIABILTY. Use your head.

[redqueen]

77. Use our heads?

For what? The media said Dean's scream was bad! Baaaaaad for the party! Baaaaad for Democrats! Need we really bother with thinking for ourselves? It's so haaard!

[janx]

70. Then they won't be happy. Tuffski chitski. He still maintains large

support--from the people. It's ironic that these DLC leaders can't deal with that.

[Q]

75. The DLC outright admits they have abandoned the Dem base...

...for the 'swing voters'. The DLC also dismisses a need to represent the base...expecting them to vote the party line no who is the nominee or what policies are implemented. They have for far too long taken advantage of the base...expecting their votes without even trying to earn them.

- Gore AND Dean represent a danger to the DLC...afraid that their grassroots/populist campaigns would catch on and make the 'new' Democrats irrelevant.

[ECH1969]

79. Your right

Gore is now part of what they consider the Wackadoo wing of the Democratic Party along with Dean. I am sure From was not happy at all with his speech, it was just too loud, too emotional, too rabble rousing.

[charlie]

85. It's kinda interesting

that a rift between the DLC and the NDN, a DLC offshoot founded by Lieberman, has broken into the public eye lately. Seems Simon Rosenberg, NDN chairman, was quite taken with Dean's populist campaign and excited by the potential of his use of new technologies to connect directly with constituents and activists. His organization has also enjoyed notable success with campaigns targetting Latinos. Both actions, sidling up to the Devil and race-themed politicking, gave the DLC leadership a case of the shits. That the Marshall/From wing are cheesed at their New Democrat cohorts for merely venturing outside their austere "third way" groove lends credence to the charge that they're hidebound has-beens.

[MisterP]

90. and, of course, if they dare the "third of a third" to leave the Party,

since they're no longer needed, and their loss would be well outnumbered by "moderates" joining in and freepers having the "wind taken out of their sails," and the "far left" takes that advice they howl and howl and howl!
Those who work the hardest to erase the differences between parties are the ones that scream the loudest when it's pointed out...

[Darranar]

92. "Recent successes" such as the 2002 elections? n/t

[madfloridian]

94. "A third of a third"

This op ed from the DLC does NOT define liberal. That is what bothers me.

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=131&subid=192&contentid=251861
SNIP..."As a front-page article in today's Washington Post indicates, the Democratic Left is feeling its oats these days, all full of energy and anger and populist swagger.

The self-conscious Left
SNIP..."The idea, however, that the Left has some inherent superior claim to Democratic tradition or principle, as self-appointed representatives of the Democratic "base," is questionable at best. Most actual rank-and-file Democrats, as a matter of fact, don't view themselves as aligned with the self-conscious Left.

SNIP..."The Gallup Organization, which has been measuring the partisan and ideological self-image of American voters longer than anybody, recently published a survey showing that among self-identified Democrats, 33 percent consider themselves liberals, 43 percent consider themselves moderates, and 23 percent consider themselves conservatives. Self-identified liberals, in other words, represent a third of a party "base" that in turn represents about a third of American voters. That's a lot of folks, but it's a far cry from a majority, and no matter how excited, energized, stoked and psyched you are, you only get to vote once.

"Yelling out on issues where the president is right??"
And "drawing sharp lines" between the parties on every conceivable issue will be self-defeating if we don't have a compelling positive agenda of our own, or if we insist on yelling the loudest on issues where the president is right, like the use of force in Iraq."

WHAT? Drawing sharp lines on issues where the president is right? Really, is he saying the president is right on the use of force in Iraq? WHAT? Who are the "swaggering populists?"