If Republicans try to claim they are the party of religion, family values, patriotism (really jingoism), defense, etc., try to beat them at their own game (as they defined it).
So, the DLC encourage Democrats "not to hide" their faith. And, when asked why Kerry lost the Presidential, Clinton pointed out that Obama had begun his Senatorial campaign with his pastor at his side. (Yes, we know how that turned out, but this was right after the 2004 election.) And, after Kerry lost he reportedly said something like "I got the religious thing wrong, didn't I?"
Obviously, Democrats can go only so far with religion, without bumping into anti-abortion and homophobia. But, apparently, they can bring their disciplines along for mixing church and state, semi-deifying the military, being "strong on defense," etc.
Meanwhile, increasing sanity on the issues of choice and equal rights has been prevailing throughout the nation, among both rank and file Republicans and rank and file Democrats, esp. in the younger demographics, though the war is far from won yet.
I am going to be interested to see what happens when those cease to be the lines in the sand between the parties as a whole.
Seeking to equate liberals with the right is false equivalency at its worst and laughable. And transparent.
On a related topic, liberals are not the Democratic counterpart of teabaggers :
The splinter group within the Democratic Party are the so called centrists, who sought to leave the main body of the Party behind. Hence the name "New Democrats." First, they wanted to disassociate themselves from the Party as much as they could without losing the benefits of the Party (much as Teabaggers did), then they wanted to pretend they ARE the Party.
It is no accident that the Koch brothers donated to the DLC and "served" on its Executive Council, and conceived of the Tea Party at about the same time (the 1980s).
http://americablog.com/2010/08/koch-industries-gave-funding-to-the-dlc-and-served-on-its-executive-council.html (DLC info)
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/08/30/covert-operations (Tea Party info).
One is the right wing of the Republican Party and the other is the right wing of the Democratic Party. Fostering both helps the Koch brothers ensure that the nation goes further right.
Of course, you know New Kids on the Block's Danny Wahlberg and his brother, Mahkee Mahk Wahlberg. They are only two of the nine Wahlbergs. An older brother, Paul, has always dreamt of having a restaurant. (Or so the intro to their reality show says.)
His more famous brothers are helping make his dreams come true, big time, with the Wahlburger's franchise. And that real life saga is being reflected in the reality show, Wahlburger's, on A & E.
Yadda Yadda, Mayor Walsh has a cameo on the February 11 episode, which I am half watching via On Demand as I am typing this post.
Not long ago, a DUer chastised me for having "labeled" Hillary as "Third Way." Other DUers have criticized other DUers and me for referring to the Democratic Leadership Council ("DLC" or DLCers, on the ground that the DLC corporation dissolved (giving its papers to the Clinton Presidential Library).
One of the purposes of this post is to show that the legal technicality of corporate dissolution of the DLC far from ended the spirit, philosophy and influence of the DLC, which is amply represented within the Democratic Party by New Democrats, some of whom call themselves progressives, and also represented in Democratic think tanks like the Progressive Policy Institute, Third Way, No Labels, etc. And, the legal technicality of corporate dissolution of the DLC erase the history of who was and was not a DLCer and who did or did not embrace the DLC philosophy and goals.
Another purpose of this post is to show that referring to Hillary as Third Wayer and/or a DLCer is both factual and consequential.
I hope that this post also at least implies why references to "progressive" Democrats and "progressive" policies may not always mean what seems to be frequently assumed: "Progressive" is not necessarily a synonym for either "liberal" or "left." This is relevant to Hillary because she has sometimes referred to the policies that she supports as "progressive" policies.
Now, a disclosure: I decided in 2007 that I would support Obama in the Democratic Presidential primary. Among other things, I thought Obama was the one likeliest of the 2008 primary field to win a general. Obviously, I thought an African American would have to overcome biases (and so does a woman). Nonetheless, I thought all others in the field, including Biden and Hillary, were more vulnerable than Obama. (I thought Hillary vulnerable because of Iraq, the Clinton baggage and other reasons.)
Since then, it seems to me that a lot of money and power has been put behind insulating Hillary from primary challenge. However, nothing can insulate her from challenge in a general. I believe her to be even more vulnerable now in a general than I believed her to be in 2008, including because of her "racially tinged" 2008 campaign against Obama. So, although I do not yet know whom I will support in the next Democratic Presidential primary, I do know that I will not support Hillary in that primary.
Facts and Observations
(All bolding is mine.)
The DLC's affiliated think tank is the Progressive Policy Institute. Democrats who adhere to the DLC's philosophy often call themselves New Democrats. This term is also used by other groups who have similar views on where the party should go in the future, like NDN and Third Way.
The model for the DLC was Coalition for a Democratic Majority ("CDM" , a group formed in 1972 in which cold war warriors/war hawk neocons predominated.
(Google for images of Hillary with Kissinger through the years, if you are interested.)
Ironically, the history commons article linked above states that the CDM paved the way for the "disastrous" McGovern candidacy, while DLC historians claim that the "disastrous" McGovern candidacy paved the way for formation of the DLC. (IMO, New Democrats rejected a hell of a lot more of the Democratic Party than only McCarthy and the 1960s.)
The wiki of the Democratic Leadership Council once named both Bill and Hillary among the founding members of the DLC, along with Lieberman, Gore, Robb, Warner and others. (Predominating among the DLC's founding members were Southern white males, many of whom had, or have since, been named in connection with possible Presidential runs.) However, a search today of the DLC's wiki, using Mozilla's "Find," could not pick up that fact about Hillary and Bill. Either I missed it, or someone has edited relatively recently.
I did, however, find in Al From's wiki a description of Hillary's unique role in the DLC--as of this morning, anyway. (Perhaps it, too, will soon be edited?) Much of the material in Al From's wiki used to appear on the DLC website, almost verbatim, so I assume From had, at a minimum, some role in writing it:
In 1998, with First Lady Hillary Clinton, From began a dialogue with British Prime Minister Tony Blair and other world leaders, and the DLC brand known as The Third Way became a model for resurgent liberal governments around the globe.
In April 1999, he hosted an historic Third Way forum in Washington with President Clinton, Prime Minister Blair, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, Prime Ministers Wim Kok of the Netherlands and Massimo D'Alema of Italy.
From is a controversial figure in the Democratic Party, drawing criticism in liberal circles and from blogs like DailyKos.com and MyDD.com among others. In 1991, the Reverend Jesse Jackson called the DLC Democrats for the Leisure Class, and in 2003, former Democratic National Committee Chair and Vermont Governor Howard Dean* sharply criticized From and the DLC as the Republican wing of the Democratic Party.
(Lately, it is not only Birchers or Marshall echoing the lie that criticism of a President is anti-American.)
He served on the board of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, an organization chaired by Joe Lieberman (I) and John McCain (R) designed to build support for the invasion of Iraq. Marshall also signed, at the outset of the war, a letter issued by the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) expressing support for the invasion.
Given the above, it is not necessarily surprising, though it may be shocking, that Hillary gave a speech urging support for Bush's invasion of Iraq, and without reading the 90-page NIE. (In fairness, she was far from alone in not reading it, which I find physically nauseating, given all the blood and treasure and unintended consequences that hung in the balance.)
*Howard Dean, not only once dubbed the DLCers the Republican wing of the Democratic Party, but also identified himself as belonging to the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party. However, there is money to be earned, politicians evolve and Dean is now a professional spokesperson, pundit and lobbyist, and has already endorsed Hillary for 2016. (He recently explained this on TV as people being worried and therefore likely to want someone familiar. The flip side of that, of course, is Clinton fatigue and also that, yes, we are all too familiar with Hillary.)
Dean has also spent time as a Senior Strategic Advisor and Independent Consultant for the Government Affairs practice at McKenna, Long & Aldridge.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Dean ; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McKenna_Long_%26_Aldridge
However, Democracy for America, which Howard Dean founded and turned over to his brother Jim once Howard was named chair of the DNC, has been urging Senator Warren to run.
**Note: "New Democrat Movement," not "New Democratic Movement." A DUer once called me out for using "New Democrat Caucus," rather than "New Democratic Caucus." However, New Democrat Caucus is indeed the correct name of the New Democrat Caucus and I am not the one who named it. So, for example, when I emailed MSNBC to chastise Chuck Toad for referring to the "Democrat Party," I knew, but did not spell out, that my position is not as strong as it might have been, sans the New Democrat Movement. But, I guess, if you are going to lead what Howard Dean once called the Republican wing of the Democratic Party, why not use "Democrat" the way Republicans do when they are trying to insult Democrats?
The instructions for bestowing hearts on your favorite DUers say something like "just find a post" by the DUer to whom you'd like to give a heart. That is not easy, especially if the poster has not posted recently. The search function may not help either, especially if the poster's screen name is a commonly used word.
For those who have as much trouble figuring out this kind of thing as I do:
Go to your inbox. In the space beside "Send DU mail to:", type the name of the poster you are seeking, or as close to it as your memory allows. Then, click "Find Member."
At that point, you will see the number of screen names like the name you searched. Click on that and a list of posters' names will appear. Find within the list the name of the poster yu seek, then click on it. That will get you to the poster's profile.
In the poster's profile, under "Statistics and Information," you will see a link to the poster's most recent post. Click on that. Voila!
1. Is there a place on this board that has answers to FAQ about donating to DU, buying hearts, etc?
If there is, and it covers my other two questions, you need not answer anything but Question 1.
Question 2. Does buying someone a heart also give that post star membership?
Question 3. If not, is it possible to give someone star membership anonymously?
Question 4. What is the minimum amount to spend to make a poster other than oneself a star member?
These questions have probably been asked before and I apologize for that.
Profile InformationMember since: Wed Jun 20, 2012, 01:49 AM
Number of posts: 45,251
About merrilyhttps://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5664118; https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5664129
- 2016 (123)
- 2015 (422)
- 2014 (70)
- 2013 (1)
- June (1)