Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

merrily

(45,251 posts)
66. Simple. I refuse to buy into the New Democrats' unfortunate attempt to re-define "liberal."
Sat Nov 15, 2014, 02:55 AM
Nov 2014

Sadly, that unfortunate attempt has been rather successful.

New Democrats recognize that they are not traditional Democrats. Hence, they called themselves "New Democrats," rather than simply Democrats. In so doing, they were saying, in effect, "We're different from all the Democrats who have gone before us. So, please don't confuse us with the likes of FDR, HST, LBJ and RFK, or even Carter."

At the same time, though, they, of course, wanted the votes of the Democratic base. So, they have attempted to refine "liberal" so that traditional Democrats are considered the far left. That makes the center right the norm for Democrats, instead of the center right.

I don't see "liberal" as the direct opposite of Third Way. I see "traditional Democrat" as the direct opposite of Third Way. I am a traditional Democrat.

In the day of traditional Democrats, like FDR, HST, LBJ and RFK, the far left was socialistic, quasi-anarchistic, "tune in, turn on, drop out, etc. (Think, as to FDR, the Hollywood crowd that got blacklisted after McCarthy, and, as to LBJ, Bill Ayers, Timothy Leary, et al. The ones that made the WWII generation go bonkers and turned some of them Republican.)

FDR, HST and LBJ were not liberals. A PBS program I saw a while back said that FDR had actually run to the right of Hoover. Of course, you can't trust PBS anymore, but, deceptively or not, that view was attributed to pundits who commented in the days of the campaign. Hell, FDR even imposed a hefty war tax to pay for WWII. Yes, he taxed rich people more, but everyone had to pay up. That's not liberal or Third Way or Republican, just traditionally Democratic. (Of course, I am traditionally Democratic only on the domestic side, and not all of that. Not at all a fan of Dixiecrats, internment, the Cold War, etc.)

HST was a Missouri farm boy who attended Sunday School and began public school only at age 8, who was so desperate to join the military that he actually memorized the eye chart so he could cheat on his physical exam! Although he integrated the military, earlier, he had also joined groups that he thought would give him votes, including the WCC.

He did not learn of the Manhattan Project until after FDR died, but used the atom bomb twice on a nation that would have been defeated anyway. With people barely over WWII, he started the Korean War without a vote of Congress. Cold Warrior par excellence as well. That was no liberal!

FDR was elected four times and Truman once, despite sinking approval ratings, Strom's challenge and a Progressive Party* challenger. (HST, of course, retired undefeated, supposedly because Bess wanted to get the hell out of DC. For that matter, HST didn't think much of DC, either.)

Strom's "third" party challenge took away many Southern votes from HST at a time when California was still going Republican in most Presidential elections and Democratic Presidential candidates really needed Southern votes to win. (California did go for Truman, I believe, but not by much.) So, yeah, it was a squeaker, but HST did win, making it five times in a row for Democratic Presidents. Those five consecutive wins were not the work of some leftist fringe of the Democratic Party of that day. Traditional Democrats, and, as to HST, maybe even some Republicans, "built that."

After Truman, of course, you had Ike, a World War II hero whom some Democrats had tried to run against Truman in 1948! And, on the Democratic side both times, you had Adlai Stevenson, a brilliant and good man, but not charismatic to most voters of the day and no match for Ike's name recognition and popularity. And that's what it took to break the Democrat's winning streak at the top of the ticket. (Who knows how much bipartisanship may have been involved in that election? Democrats were already going Cold War on steroids and some of them had wanted to run Ike themselves in 1948.)

Read between the lines of JFK's speech accepting the nomination of the Liberal Party for President. He's almost defensive about it. Clearly, he needed every vote he could get, running as, not only a Catholic, but an Irish Catholic, after a long, theretofore unbroken string of WASP males. "No ethnics, including Irish, need apply."

But JFK's speech cleverly and very carefully qualifies exactly what he is accepting, even as he appears to be complimenting liberals. ("If 'liberal' means XYZ, then I'm proud to be a liberal." Implied: "and only then. None of that socialist stuff." )

On MTP (MTP ran the clip on the 50th anniversary of his assassination), while running for President, JFK mentioned that Democrats had saved American capitalism (something he should know about, given his father's role in helping write New Deal legislation so that Wall Street sharks like Joe would be reined in by the new federal securities laws and the new SEC, so ordinary folks could have confidence in Wall Street again).

LBJ also won an election, even though the Southern states had already started going red in a very dramatic way. Also, many among the older generation of the Party were disgusted by the druggies and draft dodgers that their kids seemed to be turning into; and the liberal wing of the Party and other Americans opposed him over the war. Liberals sure "didn't build that" victory, either. Traditional, mainstream Democrats did.

Southern Sunday School teacher and entrepreneur Carter was big on civil rights, but he sure kept that deregulation ball rolling, the one begun by Nixon and continued by every president Democratic and Republican, to Clinton and Obama. Very little remains of the New Deal and the Great Society remain, besides the "Third Rail" programs. Carter is still proud of the deregulation he and his Democratic Congress achieved. Carter is a humanitarian; and I greatly admire him for that. I also admire him more than I can say for not starting a Middle Eastern conflagration over the hostages, just to show Ted Koppel how much spine the Oval Office had. Was Carter an economic or "big government" liberal, though? I don't really know.

In any event, FDR, HST, JFK and LBJ were simply Democratic Presidents, as what the Democratic Party stood for was understood at the time by rank and file voters. Their domestic programs, fiscal, union, equal rights, etc. was what ordinary Democrats thought the Democratic Party stood for.

The mantra of my extended family can be summed up by my mom's response, when my then-teenaged sister asked my parents to vote Republican in one Presidential: "Vote Republican? No, we don't vote Republican. Social Security. Unions. We don't vote Republican." That was the Democratic Party I thought I was espousing, the traditional Democratic Party that took care of people like my family. Then, not so very long ago, I learned about "New Democrats."

Liberals of the 20th century were way to the left of FDR, HST, JFK and LBJ. During the first half of the 20th century, before McCarthy, they were attending Communist Party meetings, even joining up. During LBJ's day, they were throwing bombs into the Pentagon john, etc. Not voting at all in protest.

That's not most people whom the Third Wayers falsely label the far left of the Democratic Party today. That's certainly not me. I am not a New Democrat, but I am not a liberal. I would never have been brave enough to walk at the militia, like the Kent State kids or break into the Pentagon, like Bill Ayers, or go to Vietnam, like Jane Fonda, or even go to jail. I am simply a traditional Democrat on the domestic side (sans the heinous stuff). Just an ordinary hard working, pro-union, pro equal rights, law abiding citizen (though I may be willing to say "fuck that" if a revolution starts) who literally loves voting in every election, even if I have to write in candidates. Just a garden variety, traditional Democrat. (Sorry for the long reply: when meanings of words get twisted, attempting actual communication gets much more difficult for me.)




*not to be confused with the confusing way that the term "progressive" is used today.

An excellent envoy she will be, she would be even better doing her "envoying" from the White House Autumn Nov 2014 #1
Give her a little time. I'd like to see a Sanders/Warren ticket to start. maddiemom Nov 2014 #147
That ticket would be a dream come true. Autumn Nov 2014 #148
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Nov 2014 #2
Anything But Hillary billhicks76 Nov 2014 #153
Hope you're right on this! Kath1 Nov 2014 #3
Dreams are enjoyable....but eventually you wake up brooklynite Nov 2014 #4
shhh! Let the kid dream. wyldwolf Nov 2014 #9
I'm glad she does dream....somebody's gotta do that.... ollie4 Nov 2014 #25
I'd say she joined the leadership and--unlike a lot of people here interested in tearing the party MADem Nov 2014 #26
I predicted that Warren taking the leadership role ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #115
And the fact that she is at the table, working, means she's not content to point and flail. MADem Nov 2014 #117
Yep. eom. 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #120
It isn't about putting other Democrats down. It's about the relevancy to voters of her message. JDPriestly Nov 2014 #136
Sure. More voices, more points of view. I am over the moon at this addition to the leadership. MADem Nov 2014 #139
It's about inclusivity. JDPriestly Nov 2014 #150
The opposites are full throatedly represented by the other guys, they do not need any help here too. TheKentuckian Nov 2014 #137
Just because you claim it, doesn't make it true. MADem Nov 2014 #138
It isn't an opinion but a fact supported by observation. You deny it because it serves your ideology TheKentuckian Nov 2014 #159
Well, your glass isn't half empty. It's broken. MADem Nov 2014 #163
What jug of water are you talking about en route to pretending away the influence of wealth & power? TheKentuckian Nov 2014 #164
I don't think you'll ever be happy. MADem Nov 2014 #166
You seem very happy with the interests of the wealthy, the rich, the military, and the surveillance TheKentuckian Nov 2014 #167
Really? Not sure where you came up with all that, but knock yourself out! MADem Nov 2014 #168
Yep, that's the ticket juajen Nov 2014 #160
Mistake juajen Nov 2014 #161
Post removed Post removed Nov 2014 #88
Not really. She may get to make clear what she thinks the concerns of some of the base are. merrily Nov 2014 #32
Do you mean WITHOUT money? nt tblue37 Nov 2014 #48
Yes, sorry. I will edit. merrily Nov 2014 #50
Just because someone voted a certain way in the past Bohunk68 Nov 2014 #85
Yes, I understand that. I never said she was still a Republican. merrily Nov 2014 #106
What the Dems are most lacking on is economic liberals--Keynesians, if you will. Jackpine Radical Nov 2014 #103
the distinctions between the two largest parties are most clear on cultural issues. merrily Nov 2014 #107
We're not far apart at all. Jackpine Radical Nov 2014 #134
P.S. Here is the article merrily Nov 2014 #108
Warren isn't a liberal in my opinion, but to this liberal she is OK and I support her. A Simple Game Nov 2014 #129
It's not a matter of supporting her, but of whether she speaks for liberals. merrily Nov 2014 #131
I don't care whether she is a classic liberal or not. She is, brilliantly, anti-corruption magical thyme Nov 2014 #132
True, but the rest of the caucus would also have to work with *her*. sibelian Nov 2014 #89
but there is a phenomenon called inspiration, motivation. Voice for Peace Nov 2014 #98
Don't you mean "Behold the new Messiah!" ?? JoePhilly Nov 2014 #101
I wonder why ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #119
Strawman AgingAmerican Nov 2014 #127
Applesauce 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #128
Good point. JoePhilly Nov 2014 #140
Or, maybe ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #142
She is very persuasive. She is quite a debater. She will prevail in any discussion or argument JDPriestly Nov 2014 #135
K&R, my dear Manny...well done! CaliforniaPeggy Nov 2014 #5
K&R Jeff Rosenzweig Nov 2014 #6
Nice blog, Manny. I had a quick look at it. Jackpine Radical Nov 2014 #7
Isn't this a lot of the same bs that TPTB peddled on us to sell Obama? blkmusclmachine Nov 2014 #10
Once burned, a cat Jackpine Radical Nov 2014 #13
Obama was also a phenom MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 #14
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Nov 2014 #15
Can't fool us again? polichick Nov 2014 #20
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Nov 2014 #22
When I learned Caretha Nov 2014 #35
That was the big launch. But it may have been in the works from 2002, when he gave his speech merrily Nov 2014 #46
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Nov 2014 #63
Good. Laughter has a liberal bias. merrily Nov 2014 #68
wow. First time I saw anyone delete "LOL." And over a paraphrase of Colbert, no less. merrily Nov 2014 #169
That is why I hope dotymed Nov 2014 #111
And now, they're peddling Hillary, the one Obama defeated in the primary. Go figure. merrily Nov 2014 #39
Ever heard of Adlai Stevenson? BillZBubb Nov 2014 #112
Yep As a matter of fact, I posted about him twice very recently. merrily Nov 2014 #116
odd question Voice for Peace Nov 2014 #99
That the Democratic Party needs an envoy to its liberal wing speaks volumes. merrily Nov 2014 #33
Spot on. Not running! MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 #45
Good comment and insightful, too. vlakitti Nov 2014 #59
The day the 19th most liberal senator stages a coup... joshcryer Nov 2014 #8
Large political parties don't die that easily. Just ask Reince Priebus, who, less than two years merrily Nov 2014 #51
I'd take Wyden over Sanders. joshcryer Nov 2014 #55
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Nov 2014 #60
Wyden has the distinction of being no holds bar on liberal legislation. joshcryer Nov 2014 #64
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Nov 2014 #65
Throwing Sanders under the bus, already? In favor of someone who does not seem to be running? merrily Nov 2014 #70
Sanders isn't as liberal as Wyden. joshcryer Nov 2014 #73
Bother me" It doesn't bother me in the least. Why would it bother me? merrily Nov 2014 #74
You accuse me of throwing Sanders under the bus? joshcryer Nov 2014 #75
Accuse? LOL! Get a grip. You were being teased. But, you didn't answer my question merrily Nov 2014 #76
Which SNAP votes? joshcryer Nov 2014 #79
Again, I was teasing you. merrily Nov 2014 #82
That's fine. joshcryer Nov 2014 #83
It may not be a matter of rejecting common sense reform, but one of loss of trust. merrily Nov 2014 #84
To everything - spin, spin, spin wyldwolf Nov 2014 #11
Is that Hillary's take on Pete Seeger's Song? ollie4 Nov 2014 #27
PBS did a great special on him and his wife a few years ago. "Wow" is all I can say. merrily Nov 2014 #34
No, SPIN is when you inject an overtone sibelian Nov 2014 #90
Yes this is what drives me nuts about President Obama LiberalElite Nov 2014 #12
Maybe he does see it. Sometimes, not always, but sometimes, people are doing what they want to do. merrily Nov 2014 #36
Sad but true I think. nt truebluegreen Nov 2014 #67
Sometimes, you learn life lessons from the oddest things. merrily Nov 2014 #71
We need a different perspective to understand. Cosmic Kitten Nov 2014 #87
I tend to think the reverse is what happened, but we'll see. ucrdem Nov 2014 #16
Manny I love her too - TBF Nov 2014 #17
Ah, Perfection... WillyT Nov 2014 #18
Could she be the Stevens to Hillary's Lincoln? DemocraticWing Nov 2014 #19
How young do you think Warren is? merrily Nov 2014 #37
Probably Caretha Nov 2014 #21
Meanwhile, the DSCC has put John Tester in charge dflprincess Nov 2014 #23
.... merrily Nov 2014 #38
I hope it is true. We need someone who governs as if people matter. And she does. jwirr Nov 2014 #24
She appears to have continued to demonstrate that she does yes. lonestarnot Nov 2014 #100
Congrats on your new blog. Please include a link to it in your sig line. merrily Nov 2014 #28
I hope you are correct Manny. 99Forever Nov 2014 #29
I'm willing to bet the Third Way® is in agony AgingAmerican Nov 2014 #30
Two years ago, the head of the RNC led an "autopsy" on the Republican Party. merrily Nov 2014 #40
More like her too! Phlem Nov 2014 #31
Respectfully, how did she come from nowhere? merrily Nov 2014 #42
Frame of reference issue MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 #44
I'm not a liberal, just a traditional Dem*. I am not sure I am a political junkie, but I merrily Nov 2014 #47
You're not a Liberal? MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 #53
Simple. I refuse to buy into the New Democrats' unfortunate attempt to re-define "liberal." merrily Nov 2014 #66
Agreed. Phlem Nov 2014 #152
Money, Money aspirant Nov 2014 #57
Progressive Party Credit Union. What a great idea!!!!! I fear it has to be local, though, so Maineman Nov 2014 #58
I have credit cards from two different credit unions. What if we could get a credit card arrangement Maineman Nov 2014 #61
Warren can help aspirant Nov 2014 #69
These posts are usually created out of thin air to shut somebody up. Blue Idaho Nov 2014 #41
I gotta agree with our resident douche nozzles here. You're probably Guy Whitey Corngood Nov 2014 #43
I don't think Dem sellouts feel bad for partaking in closeupready Nov 2014 #49
Not sure what her intentions are, but imo party leaders are likely... polichick Nov 2014 #52
I like her speeches too. She is a good Senator. True Blue Door Nov 2014 #54
Fucking-A, Manny. Brilliant fucking-A, sir! K & R! nt ChisolmTrailDem Nov 2014 #56
The vacuum of leadership and power in the Party had to be filled eventually. kickysnana Nov 2014 #62
"A flock of sheep, imthevicar Nov 2014 #72
:) grahamhgreen Nov 2014 #77
K&R DeSwiss Nov 2014 #78
Or she's been co-opted by the party cali Nov 2014 #80
Tester joined the leadership too--does that mean he's in charge as well? MADem Nov 2014 #92
Manny, I'll tell you what makes me uncomfortable. woo me with science Nov 2014 #81
What the Democratic Party needs most is... Cosmic Kitten Nov 2014 #91
Love this : "... not do what he does best, which is caving in to Republicans before they even ask GoneFishin Nov 2014 #86
You mean the person who doesn't seem to want to be the President? ladjf Nov 2014 #93
In my experience, whenever a leadership position is created Calista241 Nov 2014 #94
as long as she continue to bring it to the people magical thyme Nov 2014 #130
It doesn't make sense to me...... Hotler Nov 2014 #95
Thanks Manny, I am also looking forward to watching her in this new role Voice for Peace Nov 2014 #96
Again Democrats are waiting for Godot og1 Nov 2014 #97
Hey don't be stealing Mineral Manny's "Shtick" . Autumn Nov 2014 #105
Lmao! "Mineral Manny"! n/t Kermitt Gribble Nov 2014 #109
I know, it's so funny Autumn Nov 2014 #110
Thanks for the recognition. MineralMan Nov 2014 #122
I can't help it I crack up laughing every time I see you do that. Autumn Nov 2014 #123
I've pretty much stopped doing that, though. MineralMan Nov 2014 #124
I'm sorry you had a hidden post over that. I have discovered some Autumn Nov 2014 #125
There are a couple (well more than that) of people on this site you can't satirize MineralMan Nov 2014 #126
I'll say the following: If Warren decided to run for President, she'd be financially competitive brooklynite Nov 2014 #118
Thanks, Manny ashling Nov 2014 #102
Just bookmarked your blog Manny. raindaddy Nov 2014 #104
Either that or... kentuck Nov 2014 #113
No, Warren did NOT assume the primary leadership of the Dem Party Larkspur Nov 2014 #114
I hope you stick with your blog Manny Matariki Nov 2014 #121
Thanks Manny. I agree 100%. JDPriestly Nov 2014 #133
I think Elizabeth Warren has rare leadership and ethical qualities that only come around Quixote1818 Nov 2014 #141
So does this mean Andy823 Nov 2014 #143
+1 treestar Nov 2014 #156
Salon owes you some money, Manny! Old Nick Nov 2014 #144
is Manny channeling Elias, or is Elias channeling Manny, or is God inspiring them both? carolinayellowdog Nov 2014 #146
Have you noticed that you never see Manny or Elias posting on DU at the same time? Autumn Nov 2014 #149
I hope that's right but in a country... phaedrus351 Nov 2014 #145
Good point. Sobering, depressing, and rings very true. RiverLover Nov 2014 #155
They should have given her ... Mike Nelson Nov 2014 #151
Great stuff, Manny hifiguy Nov 2014 #154
With Tester heading the DSCC? Uh-uh. Orsino Nov 2014 #157
a kick for Manny's excellent post. navarth Nov 2014 #158
This is good. Rec'd. AlinPA Nov 2014 #162
Bookmarking... SidDithers Nov 2014 #165
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Yesterday, Elizabeth Warr...»Reply #66