Anti-DLC threads - my thoughts on them

[LynneSin]

I don't have an issue with people being critical about the DLC. But starting threads where we whine "VOTEOUTTHEDLCNOWBECAUSETHEYARETHESPAWNOFSATANANDMUSTDIEBUTIDONTREALLYHAVEANYOTHERSUGGESTIONS
OFHOWWECANDOTHISWITHOUTSACRIFICINGPOTENTIALMAJORITYINHOUSESENATEBECAUSETHISREALLYISNOTHINGMORETHANA
REACTIONARYDLCFLAMEFESTTHREAD" is just total bullshit. That's what they are and they are totally
non-productive of how we can not only regain the democratic majority but provide quality democrats we can be proud of.

Connecticut is living proof of what we need to do to get rid of the DLC - have a primary. But there are 2 things I truly believe:

The people elected in DC are meant to first represent the best interest of those in their state and second, those people in the state are the ones responsible for who is elected to DC.

We in other states can help out - but if Connecticut picks Joe Lieberman as their democratic nomination who am I to judge? I'll make the donations to help out; hell I'll travel across the stateline to help campaign but ultimately it is NOT my decision! I live in Delaware and personally I like my senators.

And when we see bizarre actions from some of our democratic senators like Mary Landrieu with the oil industry, Blanche Lincoln with Wal-Mart, and even my senators Joe Biden & Tom Carper with the Credit Card industry - try to get an understanding of the state. If there is a major voting block of people in that state employed by said companies/industries - you think these senators/representatives are going to piss off not just the CEO but CEOs who have a bit of sway over the thousands of employees who work for them. It's kinda of a sucky deal, I'll admit but I consider the voting records of my very flawed democratic senators AND factor in that for 8 years Rick Santorum was my senator - well, I'm ok with who represents me.

So please don't feel like we have to stop being critical of the DLC - just trying to be constructive in what we need to do. Primary season is almost overwith and as far as I'm concerned the democrat nominated is the democrat I support. We'll have 2008 again to fight to replace the senators/representatives we do not like.

But the last thought I will leave with this post is this:

Even if every single senator right now got on board to end the war, approve civil rights for GBLT groups, choice for all women, healthcare for everyone, prescription plans that work and a balance budget - WE WILL STILL LOSE AND THESE THINGS WILL NOT HAPPEN. Hell these things probably won't even see the light of day on the main voting floor because we are not in the majority and we don't have control of the committees. Without those we're really screwed.

[mdmc]

1. In real world politics, I support the DLC

on-line, I vent my anger towards the one party system.

We are all Republicans now.

[wyldwolf]

2. two types of DLC detractors

1. Those who have legitimate policy differences with the DLC. I respect those and often have off-line and/or PM conversations with them on policy issues. But this type is extremely rare and they don't start "I hate DLC" threads.

2. The reactionary types. These hate the DLC because they've been told they're supposed to. The DLC to them is an obstacle to their coming progressive revolution. Facts don't phase them and you can't have policy discussions with them because the organizations they prefer have no in depth policy proposals.

[tulip]

4. Yep

"The reactionary types. These hate the DLC because they've been told they're supposed to."

They will never get it either. There are some policies I agree with at the DLC and some I don't agree with. I shut down when people whine, it doesn't matter what they talk about. I prefer to see an issue they disagree with on the DLC based with supporting research.......those I read but rarely find them here.

[iconoclastNYC]

6. I have a problem with corporate take over of our party

Yeah....I dont care that the DLC isn't wrong 100% of the time.

I care that it's mission is to take over our party and make it the corporatists "plan B"

Look at who funds the DLC. Look at the voting records of the DLC toadies in Congress. That tells you all you need to know.

Millions in Corporate money to buy pro-corporate Democrats who'll sell out consumer, workers, and the middle class every time anytime the Republicans need a couple votes from the other side of the aisle.

[LynneSin]

7. Then that's what we need to focus on

Look at what happened in Humbolt County in California where they basically shut down the corporate funnel (I'm between meetings - google it or I'll post it later).

But simply voting out democrats because they are associated with corporations TODAY means we'll have republicans representing us that not only are associated with corporation but are against us with every single issue we believe in.

Overall I feel that in 2006 we'll need to hold our noses for a view votes this November. But Connecticut has inspired me that we can go after these corporatists and find better candidates. Novemeber is not the time to fix the problem - primaries are and if we tackled one bad democrat in 2006 (Lieberman) then maybe in 2008 we'll be inspired to tackle even more. Personally I haven't seen this in a long time but hopefully it'll be the norm in the future

[iconoclastNYC]

10. We need to restore Democracy

By banning corporate donations to political causes

By passing publicly financed elections

By restoring the fairness doctrine

Where's the DLC's leadership on any of these common-sense ideas?

(Crickets)

[LynneSin]

12. And how will we do any of that without at least trying to get a majority

We can't do shit. Hell someone analyzed all the bills that made it to the senate floor and found that like 95% of them where sponsered primarily by Republican Senators.

We don't see all the bills that get forever lost in the endless pits called committee - many of them wonderful bills sponsered by progressive democrats who had the best interests of the working person at heart. And as long as those committee chairs are held by republicans then this "Vote out the DLC Now at whatever cost" is all nice to shout about on the forums but gets us shit if we use that motto in November.

Lieberman may be a corporate sellout but he's still a +1 to us the overall head count to get the majority AND control of committee seats (many held by some really fucking awesome democrats) Hopefully he'll be gone in the primaries but in November I need a Democrat of any kind in that seat representing the wonderful state of Connecticut.

[iconoclastNYC]

13. A DLC Majority wouldn't pass those policies

And that's precisely the point!

If we let the DLC finish thier take over of our party we won't get any progress when they get into office.

Nobody is saying : "Vote out the DLC"

What we are saying is : "Learn about the DLC takeover of our party. Support progressives in the primaries."

DLC Apologists are saying: "Love the DLC or the Republicans win."

[LynneSin]

15. Joe Lieberman voted against...

The Federal Marriage Amendment
Drilling in ANWR
Sam Alito as a Supreme Court Justice

He was also the chair of the committee that first investigated the California Energy Crisis when they were being gouged in the beginning of 2001. Bush refused to do anything and when dems got controlled of the senate, Lieberman started the hearing (Mind you Dianne Feinstein was on that same committee and was pushing for it). End results - prices came down and a corporation named Enron was exposed.

Does that make Joe Lieberman my favorite democrat? No
Does that mean Connecticutians should vote for Joe in the primary? No
Does that mean if Democrats get majority it'll become the progressive dream team? Hell No
Does that mean maybe we can start taking baby steps to improve this country - Yes

We'll see small victories. Remember this, when we had the majority back in 2001-2 NO EXTREMIST JUDGE EVER MADE IT OUT OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. Screw the filibuster - if you can't get the 11 votes needed for committee approval then you ain't going no where. I'll take a few DLC democrats on that alone ESPECIALLY since Leahy is pretty fussy on who gets a seat on that committee (BTW - there is one DLCer on the Judiciary commitee - John Kerry)


And edit note: RIght now we have very few victories coming out of DC. We can only go up from there if Democrats have the majority (not very far but at least upwards)

[iconoclastNYC]

20. Bush has takens up 12 steps back

A DLC congress would maybe take us 2 steps forward a progressive or traditional democratic congress would take us 6 steps forward.

[LynneSin]

21. Two steps forward is still better than 12 steps back however

I agree - I want like 2000 steps forward.

Everyone keeps saying babysteps and with what we have both dealt with these past 6 years will take what we can get. But once we get control of congress and perhaps a nice non-DLC democratic president I think we can then start making real changes.

I mean, at least when repukes had both the House & Senate under Clinton's administration at least you knew Bill was going to veto some of the shit sent to him.

[Ken Burch]

30. He didn't veto the racist, sexist, punitive welfare bill though.

When Clinton let that one through without a peep, he lost any right to call himself a Democrat. You aren't a Democrat if you ever support anything that makes life harder for the poor. And it didn't gain him a single vote anywhere in the fall.

Democrats aren't supposed to sign Rush Limbaugh's wet dreams into law.

[CTLawGuy]

27. Not letting you get away with #3

"voted against Sam Alito"

Joe voted FOR cloture knowing full well Alito would be confirmed if he got past the filibuster. For all intents and purposes, Joe voted in favor of Alito.

[blm]

9. I fall into category 1 and will take DLC policies on one by one WHEN they

appear to hurt the overall party, as when they target the left with sharp rebukes, like whenever From speaks ;)

I dislike any unnecessary bashing that does nothing to HELP the left and the Democratic party as a whole.

[LynneSin]

14. If I was hired to help promote & improve the image of the DLC...

....first thing I would do is fire Al From.

There are two groups within the DLC - the elected offices and the people who would probably never get elected if they ever ran. Unfortunately too much of the shit we hear coming from the DLC comes out of the mouths of assholes like Al From hellbent on ruining our party.

The concept of the DLC when they first started back when Bill Clinton was a part of it was new ways of dealing with the issues. In 2000, I read an article about the DLC's stance on gun control and I thought - gee, this is something that everyone could agree about. Hell I printed out a copy and gave it to my NRA-card carrying republican stepfather and even he agreed that he could vote for some democrats if that's the way they thought about guns.

But Al From is the asshole that has destroyed the DLC and make it unloveable, unwantable and unacceptable to mainstream democrats. He and the other unelectable members of the DLC need to go first but unfortunately we have no control over that ;(

[benEzra]

22. Huh?

The concept of the DLC when they first started back when Bill Clinton was a part of it was new ways of dealing with the issues. In 2000, I read an article about the DLC's stance on gun control and I thought - gee, this is something that everyone could agree about. Hell I printed out a copy and gave it to my NRA-card carrying republican stepfather and even he agreed that he could vote for some democrats if that's the way they thought about guns.

The DLC was the major force in the 1990's trying to get the party to enact sweeping gun bans--dragging the party TOWARD the gun prohibitionists, not the other way around.

The talk-up-hunting-while-demonizing-nonhunting-guns strategy used so unsuccessfully in 2000 and 2004 was largely the fruit of the DLC obsession with banning nonhunting guns, as I recall.

Dems and the Gun Issue - Now What?

[MrBenchley]

24. Jeeze, Ben, the gun ban you're whining about

is supported by 80% of voters. Even the GOP has to pay it lip service.

[Ken Burch]

29. No one had to tell me to hate the DLC

The DLC's hatred and contempt for all progressive ideas and their obsession with leaving everyone else in the party out in the cold earned my hatred on the merits.

Is it so hard to understand that some of us honestly don't want to be forced to settle for choosing between TWO conservative parties?
TWO war parties? TWO parties of the rich?

What's the big mystery, here?

[acmejack]

3. So basically long as they support the corporations in your state

that is OK. They are your Corporations after all? I understand what you are trying to say, but I submit that Senator MBNA has no more loyalty to the workers of Delaware than to the workers of any other State, he could care less. He cares about the Credit Card companies because they bought his concern, http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.asp?CID=N00001669&cycle=2006

But I agree with your primary premise, lets get our guys elected and work for change between elections. We need to keep the likes of Rahm Emanuel and the DCCC from stuffing their Candidates down our throats when we already have great people running already, right Ms Cegalis?

[LynneSin]

11. And what is it that I don't know?

Alot of that corporate money from the banks is also coming from the employees, like myself, who make donations either directly to the candidates or into our local corporation lobbyist groups.

It may upset you about Joe's relationship with MBNA but have you asked about it with the majority of people who live in Delaware? Was I upset about the Bankruptcy Law? My answer is YES and NO because yes, we needed to have some insurance that those who abuse the credit card system are held accountable but I was disappointed that no consideration was made who have used this same system because of extraordinary circumstances (medical, military, job loss, etc). But I am proud of Joe in many other areas where I feel well represented including environment, choice, healthcare, civil rights and he's starting to loosen up a bit on the war (we're working on it and we would support a timeline to get out of Iraq - I just wish he was a bit more vocal about it).

But ultimately it is NOT your decision on whether Joe Biden says or goes as a senator just like it ISN'T my decision when it comes to Joe Lieberman or even Rick Santorum or anyone else. It is back to the states and what they feel is the best for who they are, what they do and what they need in their own states. We can encourage through money, volunteering & educating but ultimately that's it - we can't pull the lever unless it's our own state. HOWEVER....we do have that ability when it comes to our President. I'm not keen on Hilary and strangely enough I'm not that keen on Joe Biden as my president either.

BTW, you know Rahm Emanuel was on Bill Maher a few weeks ago and actually said we need to get out of Iraq. Not kidding you. I guess even a broken clock is right twice a day.


Just as an FYI - when you work for the corporation in which your senator/representative is supporting you tend to think of things in a different light. I love my job, it pays well and I feel a bit secure in it. I'm thinking that Wal-Mart employees (corporate HQ ones not the minimum wage ones) in Arkansas feel the same way and vote for Blance Lincoln and Oil Industry folks in Louisana do the same thing to Mary Landrieu in their state. It makes no sense to you but it makes a little bit of sense to me - go figure

[acmejack]

16. Excellent point, I become blinded by my personal zealotry.

It is, oh, so easy for me to ignore that important point! In the interest of fairness to Biden, I was ready to vote for Joe at one time in the past. He pisses me off constantly though, because of his timidity, which is certainly due to his reliance upon these corporations for campaign funds to finance a ridiculously expensive run for his seat. We can be sure that the RepubliCons have run up the cost of a campaign and used that as a weapon against us, too. Which is why we need to address Publicly Funded Campaigns as a complement to Election Reform.

I perceive the Democratic Leadership Council as the portion of the Democratic Party which wholeheartedly endorses these Corporate interests, traditionally the domain of the GOP. I see it as an successful attempt to draw our Party to the Right into the embrace of the moneyed interests. Public funding of political campaigns for all seats is a must. No outside influence should be allowed at all. I want the People to once again assume their rightful place as the constituency of the Legislators, not the forgotten people, while they do the bidding of the lobbyists, representing those big donors.

The New Democrats have some great thinkers at the Progressive Policy Institute & many good ideas are put forth there. There is a place for a voice of moderation in the Democratic Party, there is no place for the type of unbridled corporatist governance we are experiencing today.

[LynneSin]

17. I respect what you are saying but please do me a favor

Joe Biden is not a member of the DLC - never has been. So please keep the two separate. If you don't like Joe Biden, I'm ok with that. But please DON'T not like him because you think he's some sort of DLC mouthpiece - he's not even a member. That's our OTHER senator from Delaware who tends to get overlooked who happens to be the Vice Chair of the DLC.

Outside of the Credit Card industry, which we have clearly established is the number one employer of Delawareans especially in the populous northern and definately more liberal part of the state, Biden is actually pretty progressive. I think he's mum about the war because of his position as minority chair of the Foreign Affairs committee but I do know he would support a timeline pull out plan if we could just get one to debate upon on the floor

[acmejack]

18. I had two thoughts going in one thread.

If I ran them together it was in my editing process & me once again demonstrating my inability to multitask. Sorry.

I will definitely keep them apart in the future, definitely don't want any confusion on that score.

[LynneSin]

19. Much appreciated - it really is just a dumb pet peeve of mine

I respect the attitude towards the DLC but people tend to call any democrat they don't like "DLC" even if the person isn't a member of the DLC

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

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

[Kolesar]

8. Bradley foundation funds the DLC ???

:steam coming out of my ears:

[Solon]

23. It isn't just sucky, its illegal...

This is the passage I'm referring to:

you think these senators/representatives are going to piss off not just the CEO but CEOs who have a bit of sway over the thousands of employees who work for them.

You do realize, I hope, that IF said CEOs actually did have sway over their employees votes or political affiliation, that they would be thrown in jail for a LONG time. In fact, I believe this is called voter fraud.

Also, my problems with the DLC are usually with its policies, Lieberman is but an obvious example, but not all members of the DLC, those we know admitted they were members think like he does. Lieberman has shown, time and time again, that he doesn't even LISTEN to his constituents at all, that's probably the reason why he now only has a 49% approval rating among democrats, only a couple of months from the primary.

My problem with the DLC is the fact that they concentrate on FISCAL conservatism, by and large, or half measures of such, while largely ignoring social issues entirely. This is a MAJOR problem, I live in a red state, in a red county, and by and large, most people are fiscally liberal. I remember, what was it, a year or two ago, the most popular political sign around here was "Stop the FTAA!" This is a county that is 2/3rds Republican, largely composed of middle class and lower classed people in mixed situations, from farmers to factory workers to high tech aerospace workers. I have yet to hear ANYONE here in this county sing the praises of ANY free trade agreement. How a DLC Democrat could win here, I have no clue, a Socialist would probably get more of the vote.

[Cascadian]

25. I would love it if we were all united as a party but....

the sad fact that the DLC has been the ones who have divided the Democratic Party. They do this by compromising the party's core principles by selling out to multinational interests as well as their enabling the Bushite agenda in regards to this illegal and unjust war in Iraq and the loss of our civil liberties. I find it very very difficult for me to support those politicians that claim to be Democrats that have voted for the Bush agenda. It has been the progressives and those on the left that have been the true defenders of the Democratic Party and not these DINOs from the DLC. What is truly sad is that the DLC types have the upper hand and are drowning out the true Democrats from the party. How long are we going to put up with the garbage? I know I am losing patience with the Democratic Party. Why do we keep making the same mistakes over and over again?

I still have hope that Howard Dean and people like him and the rest of us can make some desperately needed changes in the Democratic Party but I am afraid the DLC is just holding us back. They are the dividers and not the progressives.


John

[MrBenchley]

26. Well said....

[sendero]

28. The fact is..

... I'm not against the DLC per se. I'm against their ideas and their direction for the party. Even some of their members don't fully embrace their approach IMHO, so being a "member" is not an automatic deal-breaker.

But for sure - I'm not interested in electing Dems who, on financial/economy issues, look exactly like Republicans. And a bunch of DLCers are exactly that. It's as though they have totally bought into the supply-side ideas of the right. They aren't working and they never will and I'm not voting for anyone who thinks they will.