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 All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

merrily

(45,251 posts)
Wed Feb 11, 2015, 12:51 PM Feb 2015

Hillary, DLC/Third Way, Neocons, PNAC, Etc. [View all]

Preamble

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&quot 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 started as a group of forty-three elected officials and two staffers, Al From and Will Marshall, and shared their predecessor's goal of reclaiming the Democratic Party from the left's influence prevalent since the late 1960s.......

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[2] and Third Way.[3]


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


The model for the DLC was Coalition for a Democratic Majority ("CDM&quot , a group formed in 1972 in which cold war warriors/war hawk neocons predominated.

http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=coalition_for_a_democratic_majority_1; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_M._Jackson

(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:


Today, many of the ideas that comprise the core of the Democratic Party's agenda come from work done under From's leadership at the DLC. National service, an expanded Earned Income Tax Credit, welfare reform, charter schools, community policing, expanded trade and re-inventing government were all championed by scholars and analysts at the DLC before becoming public policy.[14]

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.[16]

......

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.[18][19]


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


The DLC gave strong support for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Prior to the war, Will Marshall co-signed a letter to President Bush from the Project for the New American Century endorsing military action against Saddam Hussein. During the 2004 Primary campaign the DLC attacked Presidential candidate Howard Dean as an out-of-touch liberal because of Dean's anti-war stance. The DLC dismissed other critics of the Iraq invasion such as filmmaker Michael Moore as members of the "loony left".[14] Even as domestic support for the Iraq War plummeted in 2004 and 2005, Marshall called upon Democrats to balance their criticism of Bush's handling of the Iraq War with praise for the President's achievements and cautioned "Democrats need to be choosier about the political company they keep, distancing themselves from the pacifist and anti-American fringe."[15]


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

(Lately, it is not only Birchers or Marshall echoing the lie that criticism of a President is anti-American.)

Will Marshall is one of the founders of the New Democrat movement,** which aims to steer the US Democratic Party toward a more conservative orientation. Since its founding in 1989, he has been president of the Progressive Policy Institute, a think tank affiliated with the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC).

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.


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


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.)

In a January 2009 interview with the Associated Press, Dean indicated he would enter the private sector after 30 years in politics. Dean told the AP he would deliver speeches and share ideas about campaigns and technology with center-left political parties around the world. ......Dean is a contributor to the news network MSNBC in shows such as The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell. He has also guest hosted Countdown with Keith Olbermann and The Rachel Maddow Show. He is on the board of the National Democratic Institute.[68]

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.

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/blog/865-final-results-draft-elizabeth-warren-87-6-vote-yes

**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?
529 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I guess we can start calling stuff like this what is Gman Feb 2015 #1
Yeah, don't let all those direct quotes and links fool ya! Which fact do you claim is erroneous? merrily Feb 2015 #2
you have a couple of errors, omissions and subjective opinions in your OP wyldwolf Feb 2015 #20
of course she does. Phlem Feb 2015 #29
Thanks again, Phlem. merrily Feb 2015 #115
What are friends for. Phlem Feb 2015 #121
aw, ya called me friend. thanks. merrily Feb 2015 #201
Great. List them. (nt) jeff47 Feb 2015 #32
He tried. Please see my Replies 28, 79, 84 and 93. merrily Feb 2015 #137
Next! Phlem Feb 2015 #123
You have a subjective view of errors and there is a heading in my OP in bold and underlined, merrily Feb 2015 #124
Let's repeat again. wyldwolf Feb 2015 #131
I am curious whether you think that name calling is a real response? rhett o rick Feb 2015 #11
Thanks. If the poster had a real response or refutation, he or she would probably have posted it? merrily Feb 2015 #14
I think trying to guess why people support HRC is an interesting topic. rhett o rick Feb 2015 #51
IMO, she's obviously been the anointee since 2012, if not earlier. I've never seen anything like it merrily Feb 2015 #117
they benefit from the status quo. nt antigop Feb 2015 #118
Yep. merrily Feb 2015 #125
what name calling? wyldwolf Feb 2015 #76
It's the only response most of them know. villager Feb 2015 #77
+1 merrily Feb 2015 #202
Go ahead and try to refute it then. HappyMe Feb 2015 #12
+1 joshcryer Feb 2015 #19
You calling merrily a right winger? n/t cui bono Feb 2015 #92
Nope. joshcryer Feb 2015 #101
Because you reponded to someone who referred to the OP as "Hillary truther" by saying cui bono Feb 2015 #107
The grand right wing conspiracy is powerful. joshcryer Feb 2015 #206
So you *are* calling her a right winger and using word salad to justify it. cui bono Feb 2015 #251
I don't know that. joshcryer Feb 2015 #260
Of course, you totally do know what you were implying. And you also know it's bs. merrily Feb 2015 #412
Hahaha, cluelessness. joshcryer Feb 2015 #415
And you have the gall to claim MY posts are substance free personal insults? Project much? merrily Feb 2015 #423
"FOX News Hillary Clinton" joshcryer Feb 2015 #426
Nail joshcryer on one thing and he'll change the subject. Again and again. Bet on it. merrily Feb 2015 #445
Anything to add? joshcryer Feb 2015 #460
Did you really just say: "Anything to add? Other than personality insults?" cui bono Feb 2015 #475
You're either calling her a right winger or saying she doesn't know anything. cui bono Feb 2015 #474
Thanks. merrily Feb 2015 #411
Yw. Thank you for all the info you provide. cui bono Feb 2015 #476
They have nothing but snarky comments. No substance. nm rhett o rick Feb 2015 #144
Which part are you disputing? Hillary is NOT a Third Way candidate? The Third Way doesn't exist? sabrina 1 Feb 2015 #205
All these responses sound like the same things Gman Feb 2015 #215
Are you claiming that HRC isn't aligned with the DLC/Third Way? Or is name calling all rhett o rick Feb 2015 #228
The DLC has been gone for many years Gman Feb 2015 #235
You may be right that HRC will be the next president. The common folks will have a hard time rhett o rick Feb 2015 #238
That is so very naive to say that about her vote for the IWR Gman Feb 2015 #241
To claim that Hillary isn't a corporatist and supports American workers is what is "trutherism"... cascadiance Feb 2015 #248
You nailed that lyin corporatist again. We need to keep exposing Hillary. Go Bernie! InAbLuEsTaTe Feb 2015 #459
You've got nothing. Maedhros Feb 2015 #287
Got nothing? Gman Feb 2015 #290
Apparently, he or she does have a new talking point. So there's that. merrily Feb 2015 #318
"Naive"?? I would welcome your attempts to justify or rationalize HRC promotion of the IWar. rhett o rick Feb 2015 #462
Yes, naive Gman Feb 2015 #481
So your best rationalization for her selling out her party is that she just wanted to "get it over rhett o rick Feb 2015 #486
Clearly you don't care about facts Gman Feb 2015 #488
She has the backing of the Oligarchs so she will probably be the next President. rhett o rick Feb 2015 #489
Absolutely Gman Feb 2015 #496
And there it is. Those with principles are responsible for the hundreds of thousands of rhett o rick Feb 2015 #499
I am what we call a yellow dog Democrat Gman Feb 2015 #504
Can never forgive HILLIARY for her IWR vote - that's when she lost me. InAbLuEsTaTe Feb 2015 #458
"It's her turn." wildbilln864 Feb 2015 #240
It is because we want it to be Gman Feb 2015 #244
we shall see. n/t wildbilln864 Feb 2015 #245
Which "we" are we talking about, is the we you are identifying with the 1%? cascadiance Feb 2015 #252
Yeah, we know they are no longer using that name Mnpaul Feb 2015 #246
+1 Boom! And transitioning to Hillary's campaign advisors, even as we speak. merrily Feb 2015 #414
Most Americans aren't paying attention Mnpaul Feb 2015 #425
Most never heard of Third Way. I keep telling this story, so pardon me if you've read it before. merrily Feb 2015 #427
OMFG ROFLMFAO OMG Caretha Feb 2015 #258
I thought only the Republican Party did the "whose turn is it to be POTUS" nonsense. merrily Feb 2015 #416
It's her turn 2 line the pockets of the 1%, yes, includin her own. Bernie will Xspose Hillary 4 who she really is-can't wait! InAbLuEsTaTe Feb 2015 #461
The OP covered both those points. You might try reading something before you post canards. Or not. merrily Feb 2015 #413
Smear Caretha Feb 2015 #255
Thank you so much. If he had substance, he probably would have posted it. merrily Feb 2015 #417
HAHAHA...Hillary Is As Bas As Jeb Bush billhicks76 Feb 2015 #300
Why would you refer to facts as "truther stuff"? Enthusiast Feb 2015 #319
All the links and direct quotes threw him off. That lot used to fact-free posting. merrily Feb 2015 #418
It's way bigger than any one Clinton. Orsino Feb 2015 #447
Why is any criticism of Hillary, regardless of how well and painstakingly linked, is viewed as hate? peacebird Jul 2015 #528
New Democrat Coalition is their own name for themselves. madfloridian Feb 2015 #3
Thank you. I agree with both you and wiki on that. merrily Feb 2015 #4
article by Thomas Frank antigop Feb 2015 #122
And remember that Hillary chaired the DLC before she last ran for president. DLC funding is from: hedda_foil Feb 2015 #352
Hey there hedda...good to see you around. madfloridian Feb 2015 #359
Even better to see you, madfloridian hedda_foil Feb 2015 #362
How many years... madfloridian Feb 2015 #364
Very long time, mf. I've been posting since 2001. hedda_foil Feb 2015 #366
2002 for me. madfloridian Feb 2015 #373
I'm afraid I never got into twitter. hedda_foil Feb 2015 #389
Who you calling mf? She's a great poster. Why, I oughtta.... merrily Feb 2015 #419
Excellent post! Kermitt Gribble Feb 2015 #5
Thank you and you are welcome. merrily Feb 2015 #6
Let's also not forget that the Koch Brothers also helped build up the DLC in its earlier days... cascadiance Feb 2015 #7
Yep. Right about the time they conceived of the Tea Party, too. (Do we know they stopped donating?) merrily Feb 2015 #9
The Koch Brothers had representatives... bvar22 Feb 2015 #167
Wow. I did not know that. I bookmarked. Thanks. Nice photo of Hills on "the DLC team" too. merrily Feb 2015 #203
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Feb 2015 #8
Thank you for the compliment and the rec. merrily Feb 2015 #10
President Jeb Bush has a nice ring to it, huh? JaneyVee Feb 2015 #13
The primary hasn't even begun yet, let alone the general. merrily Feb 2015 #15
And Hillary hasn't even announced, yet... JaneyVee Feb 2015 #16
Disgusting and low comment about an OP that is full of links, but I won't alert. merrily Feb 2015 #18
Full of links that you've intentionally misquoted wyldwolf Feb 2015 #21
Another low and disgusting comment. The quotes are copied and pasted. The links are there. merrily Feb 2015 #39
then you make assumptions about the links wyldwolf Feb 2015 #74
Again, if you have refutation of anything in the OP, I'd welcome it, especially if (a) it merrily Feb 2015 #79
I've already refuted several things. Pretending I didn't doesn't mean I didn't. wyldwolf Feb 2015 #80
LOL. No, you mentioned 3 things per the description in my reply 79 and were wrong on all 3 per my merrily Feb 2015 #84
Let's repeat again. wyldwolf Feb 2015 #129
Sure. See Reply 149 again. Even better, Reply 155. merrily Feb 2015 #153
Your spin wyldwolf Feb 2015 #161
Alert for what, pointing out the strange DU obsession with... JaneyVee Feb 2015 #23
People bash the President all the time. HappyMe Feb 2015 #33
You won't find me reccing those threads either. JaneyVee Feb 2015 #37
No, for your low down and utterly baseless comparison to a lynch mob. But, you knew that. merrily Feb 2015 #52
Disagreeing with Hillary Clinton and pointing out the reasons why are bashing? davidpdx Feb 2015 #313
The OP is about how HRC is in league with the 1%. Can you refute that? rhett o rick Feb 2015 #127
Hillary is probably a member of the 1%, merrily Feb 2015 #135
Yes Hillary's current wealth makes her a member of the 1%, which is remarkable since she was broke rhett o rick Feb 2015 #141
Nice to have a chance to interact with you. I don't think I've done that in a while. merrily Feb 2015 #208
How could HIllary be a 1%er? bvar22 Feb 2015 #207
As you know, "dead broke" to the 1% does not mean the same as "dead broke" to the merrily Feb 2015 #212
I think the Clintons held a benefit. Some brought casseroles, some second hand furniture, rhett o rick Feb 2015 #227
I bet you didn't even try to connect her with a food pantry, too. merrily Feb 2015 #420
She was already signed up for meals on jets. nm rhett o rick Feb 2015 #451
She doesn't fly commercial. merrily Feb 2015 #452
Why are people peeved about the facts? HappyMe Feb 2015 #22
I'm all for facts, but you're preaching to the choir. JaneyVee Feb 2015 #25
She's not the candidate yet. HappyMe Feb 2015 #27
I said viable candidate. JaneyVee Feb 2015 #31
Ah yes, the President Bush!!1 threat. HappyMe Feb 2015 #35
Now I'm "threatening"? Nope, just living in reality. JaneyVee Feb 2015 #40
I would like someone other than Hillary from our side. HappyMe Feb 2015 #44
Me too. Someone else. Enthusiast Feb 2015 #327
^^^Being correct on social issues is no longer good enough.^^^ hedda_foil Feb 2015 #354
what tripe. merrily Feb 2015 #46
Nope Caretha Feb 2015 #266
+1 davidpdx Feb 2015 #314
She's more than viable for the primary because the fix seems to have been in for years, best I can merrily Feb 2015 #421
I think she'll lose the general. merrily Feb 2015 #41
I'm all for a wide open primary... JaneyVee Feb 2015 #49
Too bad you think stating facts is smearing. It isn't. You comments about me, however, are smears. merrily Feb 2015 #54
Well put davidpdx Feb 2015 #315
ah, yes, the good ole "TeaLeft" talking point lie. merrily Feb 2015 #333
That TeaLeft howling HappyMe Feb 2015 #334
Yep, two of the board bullies davidpdx Feb 2015 #395
What facts? HRC supports don't state any facts. Here's a fact, HRC not only supported rhett o rick Feb 2015 #234
Lives needlessly lost. HappyMe Feb 2015 #332
Hillary's Turd Way leanings are well documented. InAbLuEsTaTe Feb 2015 #95
Yes. Thank you. And founding member of the DLC = more than a Third Way leaning. merrily Feb 2015 #128
Yup yup. Hillary's Iraq vote doomed her in '08; will be her undoing in '16. InAbLuEsTaTe Feb 2015 #178
There's no reason to believe that is impossible with Clinton as our candidate. jeff47 Feb 2015 #55
The thing is that nobody, absolutely nobody who votes alligns with the pit. hedda_foil Feb 2015 #360
How did Obama beat Hillary, huh? cui bono Feb 2015 #150
Oh please - not this again. 840high Feb 2015 #213
I found two 'errors' in your cut and paste analysis almost immediately wyldwolf Feb 2015 #17
This entire post is easily refuted. joshcryer Feb 2015 #24
Then refute it. merrily Feb 2015 #42
Not a chance in hell. joshcryer Feb 2015 #89
Lol, right. BeanMusical Feb 2015 #94
LOL! It would have been more credible if you stopped at the subject line. merrily Feb 2015 #106
That was pathetic. /nt Marr Feb 2015 #163
lmao!!! Yeah, so you used it to imply that merrily is a right winger in that vast conspiracy. cui bono Feb 2015 #311
Not going to get into circular 3 day long spats. joshcryer Feb 2015 #312
Interesting as well that apparently anyone not as progressive as Bernie Sanders is now a "rightist" brooklynite Feb 2015 #26
bs straw man merrily Feb 2015 #48
No, but the person that is to the right LondonReign2 Feb 2015 #70
+1 Marr Feb 2015 #165
No but those to the right of Sen Warren are clearly conservative. 30 years ago HRC would have rhett o rick Feb 2015 #230
The policies Bernie promotes are dead on centrist. He is right where the American people are. Enthusiast Feb 2015 #329
No. My link said Coalition for a Democratic Majority. merrily Feb 2015 #28
WyldWolf will always have an issue with anyone critical of Hillary. Phlem Feb 2015 #34
I know and I'm fine with his having issues. Not so fine with his attempts to smear me, though, but merrily Feb 2015 #58
Let me quote you AGAIN wyldwolf Feb 2015 #67
This is why I don't bother. joshcryer Feb 2015 #90
"a circular argument... refuting the dishonest false portrayals of things" Funny thing about history wyldwolf Feb 2015 #132
That circle would start with refutation which you have not accomplished, except that you proved merrily Feb 2015 #142
Let's repeat again wyldwolf Feb 2015 #145
Repetititon does not alter the fact that those points, though immaterial, have been responded to merrily Feb 2015 #149
They have been spun wyldwolf Feb 2015 #164
Absolutely not. But, prithee, to what end would I spin something that has nothing to do with merrily Feb 2015 #177
No, Josh. His refutations, though immaterial, have been refuted and you don't have any. merrily Feb 2015 #136
Let's repeat again. wyldwolf Feb 2015 #146
Sure. See Replies 149 and 155 again. merrily Feb 2015 #157
Your spin wyldwolf Feb 2015 #158
Do you not realize that posting the same thing over and over again ... ieoeja Feb 2015 #353
Do you not realize wyldwolf Feb 2015 #377
Seems thuggish, bullying and intentionally disruptive, doesn't it? Especially when Cryer joins in. merrily Feb 2015 #424
Yes. I was somewhat shocked at his response to me. I was not expecting a total dick. ieoeja Feb 2015 #472
You seemed to have missed the point too One of the 99 Feb 2015 #477
Ah, you are quibbling wholly immaterially over "model" vs. "embodiment" and claiming a deception. merrily Feb 2015 #93
Just a heads up. Lordquinton Feb 2015 #105
Thank you! But no alert or objection from this alerter on a poster merrily Feb 2015 #109
Oh my! HappyMe Feb 2015 #110
Words matter. facts matter. Historical accuracy matters. Errors by omission matter wyldwolf Feb 2015 #147
Do words and facts really matter to you? Because I told you that I would change "predecessor" merrily Feb 2015 #155
The fact it was there at all shows shoddy research wyldwolf Feb 2015 #159
No. The only source either you or I needed on that one was the wiki I cited. merrily Feb 2015 #166
You had a preconceived notion wyldwolf Feb 2015 #172
And you pulled that right out of your ear. Untrue and stinks of earwax to boot. merrily Feb 2015 #175
The McGovern "disaster" could not possibly have been due to active support of Nixon by eridani Feb 2015 #59
irrelevant wyldwolf Feb 2015 #72
lol! Look who's talking about "irrelevant." merrily Feb 2015 #170
Another irrelevant reply from you wyldwolf Feb 2015 #174
LOL. merrily Feb 2015 #176
Lol wyldwolf Feb 2015 #180
They'll reply for DAYS. joshcryer Feb 2015 #263
Fortunately I have a few days off. wyldwolf Feb 2015 #265
Pretending only one person continues to reply, Josh? Typical. merrily Feb 2015 #326
Is this one of those times? joshcryer Feb 2015 #328
Yep, this is one of those times, but not before I thank you for proving my point. merrily Feb 2015 #331
Guess not! joshcryer Feb 2015 #340
Yep. Also Eagleton combined with a short run (RFK assassination), early opposition from Ted merrily Feb 2015 #139
hillary is Obama 2 for the most part. if you love obama you will love hillary nt msongs Feb 2015 #30
Why debate that? Obama will never run again. Hillary seems as though she might. merrily Feb 2015 #50
And if you hate Obama ... you'll spend 8 more years complaining about Hillary on DU. JoePhilly Feb 2015 #53
Doubtful that she will win the general so probably much closeer to 8 months than 8 years. merrily Feb 2015 #60
As we say goodbye to the middle class. Why don't you guys admit you support the 1%? rhett o rick Feb 2015 #232
A little honesty from them WOULD be refreshing. Dragonfli Feb 2015 #299
Except with bigger cajones AgingAmerican Feb 2015 #126
Most excellent post merrily. Phlem Feb 2015 #36
Thank you, Phlem. merrily Feb 2015 #61
You have to excuse the 'centrists' and their lack of evidence to refute your OP. Rex Feb 2015 #38
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Feb 2015 #47
Thanks, Rex. So far, they seem to have error and ugly smears. But, I always hope for substantive merrily Feb 2015 #62
spot on, Rex annabanana Feb 2015 #96
Leopard can't change it's spots, no matter how many corps they dissolve. HRH still 3rd way / DLC on point Feb 2015 #43
KnR nt benz380 Feb 2015 #45
. stonecutter357 Feb 2015 #56
Well I just watched Hillary's Iraq war speech. zeemike Feb 2015 #57
The flag burning amendment is usually red meat (R)'s throw to their base, so I agree. merrily Feb 2015 #66
What does 'Etc.' stand for? Everyone else who disagrees with you? randome Feb 2015 #63
Does your post even make sense? merrily Feb 2015 #64
Possibly not. randome Feb 2015 #69
All the blathering from the Left is not going to matter one iota in Hillary's decision to run. Beacool Feb 2015 #65
My OP was full of quotes and links. And the right has proven its "blathering" skills often. merrily Feb 2015 #71
psst, merrily....... antigop Feb 2015 #116
Thanks! My, my I wonder if her state has an open primary? merrily Feb 2015 #160
New Jersey? antigop Feb 2015 #295
No clue, but thank you. merrily Feb 2015 #297
Oh, the insulting PUMA term. Beacool Feb 2015 #303
Which term would you prefer? merrily Feb 2015 #322
So, all Hillary supporters are PUMAS? Beacool Feb 2015 #368
Speaking of bull, I never said, and never would say, that all Hillary supporters are PUMAs. merrily Feb 2015 #428
Neither am I, sweets. Beacool Feb 2015 #479
how many PUMAs actually voted for Obama? nt antigop Feb 2015 #336
No clue. I think a lot of the so-called PUMAs were Republicans to begin with, but I als know some merrily Feb 2015 #341
Psst, genius...... Beacool Feb 2015 #302
"I cringe to think what would happen to the country if the Republicans get to control Congress AND LondonReign2 Feb 2015 #73
The OP is full of FACTS, not blathering. HappyMe Feb 2015 #78
I see a few facts then a lot of innuendos and bullcrap. Beacool Feb 2015 #304
Of course you don't see many facts. HappyMe Feb 2015 #330
Laugh all you want, but if Hillary runs she will win the nomination. Beacool Feb 2015 #370
Speaking of bullcrap, if you imagined you saw it in my OP, you probably should merrily Feb 2015 #429
DLC-style politics has already created a mountain of shit for us to clean up. jeff47 Feb 2015 #140
Electability is supposed to be the justification, but has anyone compared merrily Feb 2015 #148
IMO, it worked well in the 80's and 90's jeff47 Feb 2015 #190
Hatred of the left oozes from every comment by Hillary supporters. Marr Feb 2015 #169
Hatred of the left, while accusing the left of being the right. merrily Feb 2015 #198
No, we don't hate the Left. Beacool Feb 2015 #301
Another straw man. No one said she has no right to run in the primary, not the OP, not a single post merrily Feb 2015 #430
Something of interest for you. BlueCaliDem Feb 2015 #379
Thank you. Beacool Feb 2015 #382
A lot of Anti-Hillary people on DU these days. They'd rather have a Republican win BlueCaliDem Feb 2015 #473
The fact that so many here equate a Hillary presidency to that of a Republican one Beacool Feb 2015 #480
It would require an enormous suspension of disbelief! I know that anyone who is to the right of BlueCaliDem Feb 2015 #483
Thank you for that list. Beacool Feb 2015 #487
I just want t go on the record: I was not the alerter. merrily Feb 2015 #432
I never said or implied that you did. Beacool Feb 2015 #482
"her "racially tinged" 2008 campaign against Obama"???? McCamy Taylor Feb 2015 #68
You think its going to be a surprise to anyone? It was all over media in 2008. merrily Feb 2015 #75
Oh yeah, the media is always so fair and accurate. Beacool Feb 2015 #305
Except it was 2008 and there was audio and video of all the events that got to me. merrily Feb 2015 #321
Yeah, it tore at your delicate sensibilities. Beacool Feb 2015 #371
Wow. But not at yours? Not even enough to believe that it tore at mine? merrily Feb 2015 #376
Yes, let's look at it. AtomicKitten Feb 2015 #86
There is more. merrily Feb 2015 #100
yep, that's only for 2007/early 2008 AtomicKitten Feb 2015 #111
Thanks, Atomic. I appreciate the confirmations. merrily Feb 2015 #119
There is no denying they did the race baiting, it was wrong and it didnt help them, it hurt them. randys1 Feb 2015 #209
No, you don't have to believe that. And, it's pretty unlikely that she is going to make any merrily Feb 2015 #363
A corporatist by any other name... valerief Feb 2015 #81
Odd you choose to spend so much time on defaming and not promoting your candidate. great white snark Feb 2015 #82
None of this is defaming anyone, it is just the facts, and they are imporatant. Exultant Democracy Feb 2015 #87
Holy smokes! HappyMe Feb 2015 #88
You would think progressives are hip to the idea of having a choice. Rex Feb 2015 #102
They started a year and a half ago, HappyMe Feb 2015 #108
Who has called for unwavering support... brooklynite Feb 2015 #112
Chuck Schumer (D-Wall Street) MannyGoldstein Feb 2015 #501
I see -- so 1 person = "they" brooklynite Feb 2015 #505
I noticed it IRL before Obama even got re-elected. merrily Feb 2015 #156
I did too. HappyMe Feb 2015 #162
Yes. I was told that it was simply that she was just that likeable. merrily Feb 2015 #171
lol! Yeah. HappyMe Feb 2015 #179
How dare you have fun with this! (Me, too) merrily Feb 2015 #194
Facts are not defamation-but your claim I defamed might well be. And she is nobody's candidate yet, merrily Feb 2015 #103
The Clintons have given speachs about the virtures of third way politics. It is a dirty word Exultant Democracy Feb 2015 #83
For distinction, are true progressives supposed to adopt a new label/term? Hope not. appalachiablue Feb 2015 #85
I know. The terminology thing is a bear. merrily Feb 2015 #152
But, as the ultimate "not as bad" candidate she shines. K&R Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2015 #91
LOL. and Thanks, Tierra. merrily Feb 2015 #173
K & R LiberalLovinLug Feb 2015 #97
Even if all of this OP is 100% correct and true, billh58 Feb 2015 #98
Is there really a difference between getting shit on jeff47 Feb 2015 #143
The primary hasn't begun. merrily Feb 2015 #181
I understand that we aren't even billh58 Feb 2015 #195
Posting is not campaigning, but campaigning against several Democrats is exactly what should happen merrily Feb 2015 #204
Your OP and your opinion billh58 Feb 2015 #225
Again, that comment applies to the general, not the primary, let alone the pre-primary. merrily Feb 2015 #226
The worst part is, Hillary isn't even electable. Marr Feb 2015 #308
That is my belief as well. Additionally, I am coming to think merrily Feb 2015 #316
You know, I think you've just nailed it on the hallowed cause of "electability." hedda_foil Feb 2015 #356
Dimson's administration and war may have done more to elect Democrats in 2006 and 2008 merrily Feb 2015 #369
Agree. I am coming to think electability is a shibboleth for some. merrily Feb 2015 #317
DSG turbinetree Feb 2015 #99
Great Source. Yeah, Ross Perot hailed Clinton as proof DLCers could win elections, too. merrily Feb 2015 #185
There are Democrats, and there are progressives. Hillary is not a progressive Democrat. leveymg Feb 2015 #104
Parry: Is Hillary a Neocon-Lite? antigop Feb 2015 #113
I've heard it referred to as "Neo Liberalism", I'm Phlem Feb 2015 #138
I don't know about that. As the OP states, the term "progressive" is not necessarily a synonym of merrily Feb 2015 #114
To further complicate things, there are "liberal internationalists" and "humanitarian interventions" leveymg Feb 2015 #120
You are way above my head. merrily Feb 2015 #186
great thread, merrily. The Third Way sycophants keep kicking it. nt antigop Feb 2015 #130
kick to show 'progressive' sycophant's disregard for historical accuracy wyldwolf Feb 2015 #134
Kicking rather than debating. cui bono Feb 2015 #151
I am NOT a progressive. merrily Feb 2015 #188
If it quacks like a duck... wyldwolf Feb 2015 #197
DU's right often quacks like Republican ducks, but never mind that. Define "progressive." merrily Feb 2015 #200
And anyone who posts like you do and denies being a 'progressive' lives in a fairy tale. wyldwolf Feb 2015 #257
So, no definition? Anyone who pretends the definition of "progressive" is self evident lives in a merrily Feb 2015 #259
I just gave you one - from your OP wyldwolf Feb 2015 #264
No that simply says "progressive" means different things to different people. merrily Feb 2015 #269
I love when right wingers try to make progessive a dirty term LondonReign2 Feb 2015 #242
Thanks, antigop. (Flailing and failing, it's been.) merrily Feb 2015 #187
Amazing! Geronimoe Feb 2015 #133
Thanks, Geronimoe! merrily Feb 2015 #189
No more centrists, no more Clinton/Bush....progressive candidates please. nt mother earth Feb 2015 #154
no more money reddread Feb 2015 #338
Note: PNAC isn't dead. It just morphed into the Foreign Policy Initiative. KamaAina Feb 2015 #168
Thanks KamaAina. merrily Feb 2015 #191
K&R ReRe Feb 2015 #182
i would like to see you spend as much time on the positive aspects of the Democratic party as what Thinkingabout Feb 2015 #183
!? Phlem Feb 2015 #184
I fucking love the Democratic Party, which is exactly why I reject DLC/Third Way. merrily Feb 2015 #192
Your love is insufficient. It must be unquestioning. neverforget Feb 2015 #298
I was, for a while. merrily Feb 2015 #323
Hilary, unlike Bill, has never been working class. hedda_foil Feb 2015 #365
Hillary's family may have been upper middle class, she and Bill was not in the upper middle Thinkingabout Feb 2015 #375
Attorneys are considered professional class, not "working class" And two attorneys working, even merrily Feb 2015 #433
How does attorneys get paid, by having clients, if you do not have a client base then you do not get Thinkingabout Feb 2015 #468
Did Hillary adopt a pit bull? Or open an Olive Garden? KamaAina Feb 2015 #193
The Third Way shut down the DLC after... Oilwellian Feb 2015 #196
Thank you. The calculation of how much the world's 1% profited from repeal of Glass Steagall is merrily Feb 2015 #199
They just changed the name from DLC to 3rd Way or New Democrats. bvar22 Feb 2015 #210
Also, No Labels, founded by a Bushite and a bunch of Clintonites. merrily Feb 2015 #218
Just like Blackwater -> Xe Services (2009) -> Academi (2011) cascadiance Feb 2015 #243
Yep. Haliburton, too. And grifters. merrily Feb 2015 #270
DLC derangement syndrome at its worst One of the 99 Feb 2015 #211
You didn't read the OP very well, if at all. It addressed dissolution of the DLC very early on. merrily Feb 2015 #214
Yet you are still using the DLC One of the 99 Feb 2015 #216
Again, you might try reading the OP before flinging around accusations. merrily Feb 2015 #217
I've read it One of the 99 Feb 2015 #219
If you read it, then you would know it's factual. merrily Feb 2015 #220
I know she was associated with the DLC. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #229
The DLC/Third Way/New Democrats are working to help the corporations steal the wealth from the rhett o rick Feb 2015 #237
No One of the 99 Feb 2015 #253
Do you have any evidence that HRC favors the 99% over the 1%? nm rhett o rick Feb 2015 #283
Never said that I did. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #285
perhaps you do not see DonCoquixote Feb 2015 #343
Never said that I didn't One of the 99 Feb 2015 #347
Sporting a Union avatar while championing the anti-Worker Third Way? n/t ieoeja Feb 2015 #361
Again never said that I did. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #374
there is one hundred percent DonCoquixote Feb 2015 #391
This is not about Hillary. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #393
"other people's ideas" in this case are to move the Democratic party LondonReign2 Feb 2015 #247
So you prove my point for me. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #254
You are having some comprehension difficulty LondonReign2 Feb 2015 #256
No difficulty at all. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #262
You don't want reminders that Hillary is Third Way. merrily Feb 2015 #268
No One of the 99 Feb 2015 #271
The purpose of the post was to show Hillary was Third Way. merrily Feb 2015 #275
Wasn't me. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #277
Politics is about ideology and, again, stating a fact is not demonizing. merrily Feb 2015 #279
Politics is about many things One of the 99 Feb 2015 #280
No, rejecting Third Way is having my own political viewpoint, not demonizing. merrily Feb 2015 #282
Yes it is One of the 99 Feb 2015 #284
Sigh. Another demonization of me from one of the blinded. merrily Feb 2015 #288
Weak comback. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #291
While your reply is potent? LOL! merrily Feb 2015 #293
While reply is potent????? One of the 99 Feb 2015 #294
do you consider it slightly ironic DonCoquixote Feb 2015 #345
When did I say I support the Clintons? One of the 99 Feb 2015 #348
there is compromise DonCoquixote Feb 2015 #400
Again you prove my point. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #404
LOL. You think it is ideological rigid to say that the Democratic Party should LondonReign2 Feb 2015 #385
Not the point I was making. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #386
Those advocating continuing to move the Democratic Oarty to the right to be LondonReign2 Feb 2015 #390
That's not what I'm advocating. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #392
Why would I keep an open mind about those advocating that the Democratic Party LondonReign2 Feb 2015 #396
Again that is not what I'm advocating. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #398
it is not blinders DonCoquixote Feb 2015 #401
It is blinders One of the 99 Feb 2015 #402
what IS my ideology? DonCoquixote Feb 2015 #406
Whatever it is you're lost in the weeds. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #439
and you miss an even greater point DonCoquixote Feb 2015 #508
No that's the smaller point One of the 99 Feb 2015 #510
Then what is it you are advocating? You seem unable to say LondonReign2 Feb 2015 #455
I have to repeat it because you're still not getting. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #463
Circular spambot LondonReign2 Feb 2015 #467
If that's the case One of the 99 Feb 2015 #470
Again, there was no demonization. She is associated with the DLC/Third Way. It's a fact. merrily Feb 2015 #267
So it is the board's fault??? One of the 99 Feb 2015 #272
Huh? Can you link me to posts of yours that solve problems? merrily Feb 2015 #273
Could have fooled me One of the 99 Feb 2015 #274
So, no link to posts of yours that solve real life problems? merrily Feb 2015 #281
You keep changing the subject. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #286
No, I simply keep trying to hold you to what you posted. And again, you are flinging accusations merrily Feb 2015 #289
How are you holding me to what I posted? One of the 99 Feb 2015 #292
"A true progressive is not threatened by other people's ideas." Another absurd statment Exultant Democracy Feb 2015 #384
Only absurd to those blinded by their ideology. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #387
Your blanket statement married to a true Scotsman fallacy make it absurd, Exultant Democracy Feb 2015 #409
And so you too resort to insults. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #440
Circular argument spambot LondonReign2 Feb 2015 #456
More insults? One of the 99 Feb 2015 #466
Once again not an insult, just a factual note on style and rhetoric. Exultant Democracy Feb 2015 #485
What facts have I called lies? One of the 99 Feb 2015 #490
Acorn was assasinated, the DLC metastasized.You stament is either stupid, misleading Exultant Democracy Feb 2015 #383
And you resort to insults One of the 99 Feb 2015 #388
Or people that can't abide stupidity and lies. Exultant Democracy Feb 2015 #394
More insults One of the 99 Feb 2015 #397
You compared ACORN to the DLC, there is no arguing logically with that type of nonsense. Exultant Democracy Feb 2015 #408
So you missed the point again. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #441
It is a laughable comparison, one of the dumbest I've ever seen. Exultant Democracy Feb 2015 #484
But it's not a comparison of the two organizations One of the 99 Feb 2015 #491
You seem not to understand I know what you are tyring to do, your just wrong in every way. Exultant Democracy Feb 2015 #493
You don't know what I'm trying to do. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #494
Pot. Kettle. You insulted me mindlessly again and again and never made any argument at all, merrily Feb 2015 #434
I made an argument against blind demonization. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #443
No you didn't. You just kept accusing me of having demonized Hillary, which was pure 100 proof bs. merrily Feb 2015 #450
But wasn't that the whole point of your OP One of the 99 Feb 2015 #464
You my friend, have the patience of a saint. I don't know how you do it. There's not Guy Whitey Corngood Feb 2015 #497
Thank you for calling me a friend! I consider you one as well. merrily Feb 2015 #498
Not disingenuous One of the 99 Feb 2015 #500
Right back at 'cha. Not to take anything away from Skittles and risk her wrath. But Guy Whitey Corngood Feb 2015 #506
Aw. Thanks. Sometimes, I do lose my patience. Then I take a break. merrily Feb 2015 #507
Litmus test DonCoquixote Feb 2015 #399
Thanks for proving my point. nt One of the 99 Feb 2015 #403
by stating that some of us DonCoquixote Feb 2015 #405
Once again this is not about Hillary. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #444
Here's a clue -- you HAVE no fucking point LondonReign2 Feb 2015 #457
Now you resort to cursing. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #465
Too fucking bad LondonReign2 Feb 2015 #469
I want them to be open minded about solutions to problem One of the 99 Feb 2015 #471
You prove my point. Your ideological blinder keep you from being open minded LondonReign2 Feb 2015 #478
This is not about specific policy points and never was. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #492
Nothing is wrong with litmus tests. merrily Feb 2015 #435
Yes there is. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #446
depends on what you want DONE DonCoquixote Feb 2015 #509
Have fun playing the victum One of the 99 Feb 2015 #511
it is not "just as unreasonable" DonCoquixote Feb 2015 #512
You can't see the forest for the trees. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #513
the greater point DonCoquixote Feb 2015 #516
The greater point that you've missed One of the 99 Feb 2015 #517
because DonCoquixote Feb 2015 #518
No, because One of the 99 Feb 2015 #519
if by ideological blinders you mean DonCoquixote Feb 2015 #520
oh and by the way DonCoquixote Feb 2015 #521
This was never about Hillary. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #523
Wow you still don't get it. One of the 99 Feb 2015 #522
Brava! MannyGoldstein Feb 2015 #221
Thank you! Yep, you heard correctly. merrily Feb 2015 #222
Well Done merrily.. 2banon Feb 2015 #223
Thank you so much. merrily Feb 2015 #224
Bottom line is ...too many Dems are way too willing to suck up to the 1% oligarchy to win. L0oniX Feb 2015 #231
Also, way too many politicians ARE the 1% oligarchy merrily Feb 2015 #233
Why is it we need Hillary so badly? Yeah, she's had some experience, but where does her loyalty lie? YOHABLO Feb 2015 #236
To the Top of the Greatest Page. woo me with science Feb 2015 #239
recommended Ramses Feb 2015 #249
Thank you! merrily Feb 2015 #250
K & R GoneFishin Feb 2015 #261
, blkmusclmachine Feb 2015 #276
Yep. It's almost time for the Democratic primary to begin. merrily Feb 2015 #278
K&R nt raouldukelives Feb 2015 #296
Excellent OP dreamnightwind Feb 2015 #306
aw, thank you so much! And, yes, we need a number of ideological alternatives in a primary. merrily Feb 2015 #324
Good OP Merrily, It is true of course and facts help inform decisions Dragonfli Feb 2015 #307
I agree as to the fiscal policies. The goal seems to me to have been to get us to focus on social merrily Feb 2015 #320
The DLC has made a class war out of this society since its inception in the mid-eighties mrdmk Feb 2015 #309
It's time the 99% stopped supporting corrupt governments. merrily Feb 2015 #325
Hear, hear, time for the B.S. to end mrdmk Feb 2015 #367
The DLC realized the jig was up so they did what Conservatives do... Spitfire of ATJ Feb 2015 #310
K&R! This post should have hundreds of recommendations! Enthusiast Feb 2015 #335
It should!! RiverLover Feb 2015 #337
You're welcome RiverLover, and thank you. merrily Feb 2015 #349
Ha! Darnit! I was trying to be subtle. RiverLover Feb 2015 #422
Thank you. merrily Feb 2015 #342
It's got 131 recs now. I hope it gets hundreds. Enthusiast Feb 2015 #350
It's fun... sendero Feb 2015 #339
Thank you. merrily Feb 2015 #346
Two political parties picking over bones of the middle class and below. They are never satisfied... whereisjustice Feb 2015 #344
Sadly, I think the bottom rungs are largely ignored. merrily Feb 2015 #351
Lets keep it simple... BrainDrain Feb 2015 #355
Many seem to have voted their personal political ambition. merrily Feb 2015 #357
Moral outrage is a good thing, selective outrage, not so much... DemocratSinceBirth Feb 2015 #358
agreed... BrainDrain Feb 2015 #372
Are they running? I realize both have been mentioned as possibly maybe merrily Feb 2015 #437
The words of a DLC founder. Get corporate money then won't need the people. madfloridian Feb 2015 #378
Translation: fuck unions? merrily Feb 2015 #380
Of course DonCoquixote Feb 2015 #407
Thanks. Unions were huge for my parents when I was growing up and that seems to have gotten them merrily Feb 2015 #410
More madfloridian Feb 2015 #381
What are synonyms for political charades? reddread Feb 2015 #431
I am not sure how to answer because the question went over my head. Sorry. merrily Feb 2015 #436
I'll have to pass, Alex. reddread Feb 2015 #438
. merrily Feb 2015 #442
Did you stumble? madokie Feb 2015 #448
Please see Reply 412. merrily Feb 2015 #449
Naw madokie Feb 2015 #453
Hope it goes well. I sure wish I were handier. merrily Feb 2015 #454
Hillary is to "progressive" what decaf is to Coffee. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2015 #495
500 responses! Holy crap! MannyGoldstein Feb 2015 #502
Thanks. I tend to reply to posters who reply to me, though I've now stopped with several, merrily Feb 2015 #503
kick woo me with science Feb 2015 #514
..... merrily Feb 2015 #515
Recommend.... KoKo Mar 2015 #524
bumping this dreamnightwind Jul 2015 #525
What's up with the headline? HassleCat Jul 2015 #526
I think the OP, if you follow all the links, supports the headlne. merrily Jul 2015 #527
K&R SamKnause Jul 2015 #529
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Hillary, DLC/Third Way, N...