Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

enough of the DLC rightousness.. Howard Dean speaks for me

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
mitchtv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 03:08 PM
Original message
enough of the DLC rightousness.. Howard Dean speaks for me
I am so sick of the invertebrae wing of the Democratic party chasing the "undecided" vote and ignoring the base. The pukes spoke to their Base and they won. The GD dams ran around chasing the 3-5% of "undecideds" (spoiled dimwits) and totaly ignored Labor Dems like me and the tru anti war Dems who dominate this party:note the convention; Good riddance Tom Daschele and the rest of the pink tutu crowd that has to go. "If I knew then what I know now , I would still have voted yes" J. Kerry WTF????. How about running as a Democrat?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
eleny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 03:10 PM
Response to Original message
1. Dem Liability Central


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissMarple Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
2. Populist and progressive the DLC is not.
Edited on Wed Jul-27-05 03:15 PM by MissMarple
Too bad for them, the heartland doesn't need pandering to, it needs jobs and health care and an end of an ill advised, badly run war against nebulous enemies.

And, to edit, the reference to ending the war does not include a precipitous packing up and abandoning a country in a civil war we fostered. God, what a mess those idiots have made.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchtv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. well put
terse even.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissMarple Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Thank you.
But I added another comment. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carolab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
5. They didn't win.
"The pukes spoke to their Base and they won."

But, the grassroots Democrats carried Kerry...and they know it, but STILL they try to IGNORE the base!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MisterLiberal Donating Member (442 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
6. Not only that
but in chasing that 3% of undecideds, they disenfranchised the BASE.

You are right; the repukes work from their BASE; anyone else onboard is icing.

We seem to tell our base to shut up and vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oge Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
7. DLC and Hilarious
Exactly, mitchtv. Hilarious Rodham is sorry-to-say. She also, sorry to say, is dragging a good number of well-intended dems right over to the DLC camp, while further alienating the rest of us. If she could take her eyes off the goal of first woman in white house long enough to think about what is best for the party---and ultimately her own selfish self---she would be smoking the peace pipe with Howie right now, not sucking up to the DLC and the corporate whores.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenPartyVoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Welcome to DU
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oge Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. thanks
GPV, for the friendly greeting
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenPartyVoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. You bet. :^)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchtv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. she'll find out!
just wait till primary season
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stray cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 03:22 PM
Response to Original message
8. I wish dems could quit fighting each other and fight for people instead
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchtv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. who's fighting?
there are Dems and there are DINOs
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oge Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. i wish so too
but what do you do when you have one small treacherous group that hijacked the party with a lot of corporate backing and basically turned into repuke lite?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
welshTerrier2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. therein lies the rub !!
welcome to DU, oge !!!

congratulations, you've hit the nail on the head ... fighting for party makes no sense when the party is not fighting for what we believe in ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oge Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 05:27 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. thanks
...for the welcome, wT2.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. but that is what Neo Cons did to the GOP.
almost symmetrical, but without the true evil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oge Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. the symmetry is scary
even without the obvious evil, but what is it when the neodems support NAFTA and CAFTA and hand you over to the corporations?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. whoever came up with the idea that we can win by being more like them
was an idiot.

I am not saying that the DLC is evil. Or a collection of idiots. But they have lost the connection with core voters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eloriel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #19
23. No, not an idiot at all -- one of THEM
The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves. -- Lenin

Here's just one link for ya, a very worthwhile tho long article:

How the DLC Does It, Robert Dreyfuss, TAP
http://www.prospect.org/print-friendly/print/V12/7/drey...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 06:40 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. many thanks for the article.
I shall peruse it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #16
26. Actually
there are the neo-liberals & the neo-conservatives and maybe they aren't all that different. But both groups are anti-progressive and anti-fair trade.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism

"Neoliberalism is a political-economic philosophy that has had major implications for government policies beginning in the 1970s and increasingly prominent since 1980 that de-emphasizes or rejects government intervention in the economy (that complements private initiative), focusing instead on achieving progress and even social justice by encouraging free-market methods and fewer restrictions on business operations and economic development...."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism_in_the_Uni...

"But domestic policy does not define neoconservatism; it is a movement founded on, and perpetuated by an aggressive approach to foreign policy, free trade, opposition to communism during the Cold War, support for beleaguered liberal democracies such as Israel and Taiwan and opposition to Middle Eastern and other states that are perceived to support terrorism.....

Many clustered around Sen. Henry "Scoop" Jackson, a Democrat derisively known as the "Senator from Boeing," but then they aligned themselves withRonald Reagan and the Republicans, who promised to confront charges of Soviet "expansionism."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oge Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-28-05 07:54 AM
Response to Reply #26
34. The Problem with These Groups
...is that in practice it's never free trade, because they use government to the advantage of the globalist corporations. The second problem is that the allegiances they forge politically, such as that with the christian fundamentalists, end up imposing regressive domestic policies.
Both ideologies reject the traditional American values of the Republic and lead toward Empire, that is, war and totalitarianism. You just can't get around it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coexist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 06:19 PM
Response to Original message
20. Give 'em hell Howard!
Howard speaks for me - DLC wimps need not apply for that job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eloriel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 06:24 PM
Response to Original message
21. After reading your first sentence


I am so sick of the invertebrae wing of the Democratic party chasing the "undecided" vote and ignoring the base.


I just might have to propose.

Wait! No, I'm already married. But if I weren't, I'd certainly have to consider it. :evilgrin:

Great rant, especially for such few words.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchtv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #21
31. why thank you, a girl like you might cause
me to go straight
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cocoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 06:25 PM
Response to Original message
22. Howard Dean is not bashing the DLC
he's attacking the republicans, going to the red states and speaking out against Bush and the republicans.

He's being a uniter, uniting the party and the country.

The people that are trying to get us preoccupied with the DLC are doing the opposite, trying to exacerbate the divisions we all know about.

Go ahead, keep pushing that wedge, but don't do it in Howard Dean's name.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleClarkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 06:40 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. And John "Pink Tutu" Kerry has been helping Dean
with fundraising and donations and his own grassroots efforts.

He doesn't deserve this shit. Neither does Daschele, who was smeared enough from Gannon, and doesn't need it from us as well. I bet the Native Americans in his state miss him, or aren't we concerned with them.

Look at the picture of Dean and Kerry in my sig. Do these two men look like they have issues with each other? We should be working together, not looking for reasons to tear each other apart. Nor labeling someone who is much too liberal for the DLC a "pink tutu." Neither Kerry nor Edwards, who is working on poverty issues even as we speak, deserve that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cocoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. and Daschle had a role in the Rove case
the "12 hour gap" is news to a lot of people, but Daschle is among a handful of senators that jumped on it back in 2003.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/printer_101103A.shtml

t r u t h o u t | letter
From Senators: Tom Daschle, Joseph R. Biden, Carl Levin, Charles E. Schumer
To: The President / The White House

Thursday 09 October 2003

The President
The White House
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

We write to express our continuing concerns regarding the manner in which your Administration is conducting the investigation into the apparently criminal leaking of a covert CIA operative's identity. You have personally pledged the White House's full cooperation in this investigation and you have stated your desire to see any culprits identified and prosecuted, but the Administration's actions are inconsistent with your words.

Already, just fourteen days into this investigation, there have been at least five serious missteps.

First, although the Department of Justice commenced its investigation on Friday, September 26, the Justice Department did not ask the White House to order employees to preserve all relevant evidence until Monday, September 29. Every former prosecutor with whom we have spoken has said that the first step in such an investigation would be to ensure all potentially relevant evidence is preserved, yet the Justice Department waited four days before making a formal request for such documents.

Second, when the Justice Department finally asked the White House to order employees to preserve documents, White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales asked for permission to delay transmitting the order to preserve evidence until morning. That request for delay was granted. Again, every former prosecutor with whom we have spoken has said that such a delay is a significant departure from standard practice.

Third, instead of immediately seeking the preservation of evidence at the two other Executive Branch departments from which the leak might have originated, i.e., State and Defense, such a request was not made until Thursday, October 1. Perhaps even more troubling, the request to State and Defense Department employees to preserve evidence was telegraphed in advance not only by the request to White House employees earlier in the week, but also by the October 1st Wall Street Journal report that such a request was "forthcoming" from the Justice Department. It is, of course, extremely unusual to tip off potential witnesses in this manner that a preservation request is forthcoming.

Fourth, on October 7, White House spokesperson Scott McClellan stated that he had personally determined three White House officials, Karl Rove, Lewis Libby and Elliot Abrams, had not disclosed classified information. According to press reports, Mr. McClellan said, "I've spoken with each of them individually. They were not involved in leaking classified information, nor did they condone it." Clearly, a media spokesperson does not have the legal expertise to be questioning possible suspects or evaluating or reaching conclusions about the legality of their conduct. In addition, by making this statement, the White House has now put the Justice Department in the position of having to determine not only what happened, but also whether to contradict the publicly stated position of the White House.

Fifth, and perhaps most importantly, the investigation continues to be directly overseen by Attorney General Ashcroft who has well-documented conflicts of interest in any investigation of the White House. Mr. Ashcroft's personal relationship and political alliance with you, his close professional relationships with Karl Rove and Mr. Gonzales, and his seat on the National Security Council all tie him so tightly to this White House that the results may not be trusted by the American people. Even if the case is being handled in the first instance by professional career prosecutors, the integrity of the inquiry may be called into question if individuals with a vested interest in protecting the White House are still involved in any matter related to the investigation.

We are at risk of seeing this investigation so compromised that those responsible for this national security breach will never be identified and prosecuted. Public confidence in the integrity of this investigation would be substantially bolstered by the appointment of a special counsel. The criteria in the Justice Department regulations that created the authority to appoint a Special Counsel have been met in the current case. Namely, there is a criminal investigation that presents a conflict of interest for the Justice Department, and it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside special counsel to assume responsibility for the matter. In the meantime, we urge you to ask Attorney General Ashcroft to recuse himself from this investigation and do everything within your power to ensure the remainder of this investigation is conducted in a way that engenders public confidence.

Sincerely,

Tom Daschle
Joseph R. Biden
Carl Levin
Charles E. Schumer
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mandyky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 08:16 PM
Response to Reply #24
29. No, Kerry has been trying to help himself
That picture was a photo op. Kerry and the DLC crowd sandbagged Dean in Iowa. Dean just loves the party enough not to hold a grudge.

Kerry never spoke to or for me, except maybe the one comment about the GOP "being crooks and liars" which he backtracked on. Kerry is incapable of talking to "regular folk". I love his pedigree but listening to him is like sitting through a root canal.

As for Daschle, he, geppie and lieberman did not do well in 2004 did they? All the Rose garden photo ops supporting the idiot cowboy did not invigorate the grassroots of the Party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleClarkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 08:43 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. Do you mean painful or boring re: the root canal
Kind of changes my opinion of the comment depending.

As for what you say about him helping himself, I figure some folks will say that no matter what he does or says, so fuck it. I have my opinion of the guy, you have yours. I happen to think I'm right, but I'll not be convincing you of that any time soon. I almost wish he'd announce that he's not running for President, just to yank the rug out from under the "He's only doing (blank) because he's running in 2008" meme.

As for talking to regular folks, I don't need to have a beer with the guy. I just need him to be qualified and have integrity.

But then again, I want him to run in 2008, so if he's working toward that, cool beans by me.

As for sandbagging Dean, bah. Hello, and welcome to politics 101. Bush was the advanced course. If you flunk the first, you sure don't belong in the second.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mandyky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #30
33. both painful and boring
i try to look at things the way the guy off the street does, so i worry when i can't stand the way some one speaks. I am not talking about having a beer type talk, I am talking about getting to the point and staying there. hemming and hawing and using "big words" does not impress me. being authentic, even with an occassional gaffe is what is important to me. I liked McCain for that but he has shown he'll kowtow so he lost my respect.

All that said, I think Kerry won the election and we were robbed once again. And Kerry conceded. Another thing I am not sure I can get over. When someone says they "have you back" and then don't fight is not reassuring.

It's all water under the bridge now, but hopefully we get voting machine issues under control and our next presidential candidate can resonate with "Joe and Jane American" a bit better.

If we go the way the DLC wants us to go, labor and liberals will not be happy. We'll see what happens, I suppose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jacobin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 07:24 PM
Response to Original message
28. Ad me to the list.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lojasmo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 09:12 PM
Response to Original message
32. Howard Dean speaks for me!
And a damn fine job he's doing, too!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 17th 2014, 06:01 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC