Did Kos ever implement his plan to crumble the Democratic Party?

[LoZoccolo]

I thought that was supposed to happen this week or something, but I can't find anything about it. Maybe he realized because of the hurricane that there are more important things than whatever it was he wanted to do.

[FrozeUp]

1. More background please?

[LoZoccolo]

2. Link here.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/8/22/41845/1251

[RallyInDC]

3. dlc? vs the left?

there is more mainstream opposition on the left than there is in DLC, I have heard alot of people want to get rid of DLC and start over....

[LoZoccolo]

5. Nope.

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=240

[AtomicKitten]

4. Nope -- Kos plans to topple the DLC.

Different entities entirely. He talked about it with Randi on Air America.

[LoZoccolo]

6. That's like saying you want to topple the levy...

...but not flood the city.

[tkmorris]

7. No. It isn't

The DLC for some reason thinks they speak for the Democratic Party. They do not. Their attempts to make the Democratic Party the equivalent of a minor league affiliated team for it's big brother Republican Party serve no one, least of all the PEPOLE out here who call ourselves Democrats.

The DLC's vision of what the Democratic Party should stand for is increasingly out of step with what most Democrats actually think. It's time for them to realize that.

[LoZoccolo]

8. Look at how many DLC elected officials we have.

Even Joe Lieberman gets 60+% approval ratings. If Kos gets people crabbing about anything they shouldn't to the effect of putting the Republicans in power, he'll be in trouble with me.

[tkmorris]

12. Perhaps you've failed to notice but.......

Republicans are more in power right now than they have been for a LONG time. Democrats of the DLC type continue to offer only token opposition and have been getting picked off one by one.

Whenever the Reublicans offer up more of the gibberish they call policy good Democrats stand up and yell "HELL no!" and can look you in the eye and tell you why. DLC Dems timidly say "Well maybe, let's discuss it."

As long as Republicans have a majority and DLC Dems offer them nothing more than token opposition there IS no Democratic Party. That's more or less where we are right now and it's time to take our party back.

[Pushed To The Left]

57. We need to concentrate on defeating the right wing

I've been very critical here of Democrats who have taken some right-wing positions that have really angered me. However, that doesn't mean I would rather have a conservative Republican in their place! One good way to handle the problem of many Democrats not being progressive enough on some issues is to support civil liberties groups like the ACLU, People For the American Way, Americans United, and the Southern Poverty Law Center. Civil liberties groups take important issues to the Courts, where they have a much better chance of being decided the Constitutional way than they do with politicians who are worried about losing right-wing votes. As far as elections go, my rule of thumb is to always vote for the most progressive candidate who has a chance of victory. If we want more progressive Democrats, we should handle that during the primaries.

[jackbourassa]

58. LoZoccolo

Lieberman is from Conneticut. Any democrat would be at 60% in CT.

No one gives a rats ass about the DLC. They are the most useless organization on the face of the planet. The reason they need to go is because they are a disruptive force within the party. We are stagnate and they are to blame.

It's time for fresh blood.

Want to hear a joke?

What would happen if Al From fell from the top of a 20 story building?

Answer: Nothing.

Why? Because no one would care.

The DLC make themselves into these indispensible figures within the party, and people like you buy into it. But they are nobodies. Period.

However, I was wondering the same thing about Daily Kos. I remember them saying that something was up for around Labor Day. But as of yet I haven't heard anything.

But whatever it is they're up to. I'm in. Big time.

P.S. You, and your DLC buddies, are living in denial if you think opposition to them is from "fringe" members. It's wide spead and vast.

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

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

[Larkspur]

102. Lieberman's poll numbers are a bubble, like Bush's. If he was really

challenged by a competent challenger, those poll numbers would sink, like Bush's. Many in CT don't pay attention to Lieberman's antics, like his voting for cloture on the bankruptcy bill debate so that it will get to the floor of the senate and pass to benefit his campaign contributors and then voting against the bill so he can say that he is progressive and appeal to progressive Dems.

If these poll numbers are real and not just a bubble created by inattentive citizens, then these CT citizens better shove themselves and their kids into the military because Lieber-bush wants to increase the size of the Army so that they can be cannon fodder in Iraq and in other Middle East wars he would want launched.

Lieberman also has more support form Repukes than Democrats, so I don't expect a Repuke challenger or one that is actually viable to challenge Lieber-bush in 2006.

And this CT citizen will not vote for Lieberman in 2006. I haven't decided at this point who to write-in.

[LoZoccolo]

116. Then you admit that it's not the DLC vs. the people...

...as the anti-DLC people frame it, seeing as the people vote for Lieberman, in the primary and general election.

[Larkspur]

117. Like the Repukes, the DLC counts on sheeple, not people

[LoZoccolo]

118. Oh, so anyone who doesn't agree with you are "sheeple".

I imagine your idea of "people" is probably a very small part of the population, so any notions of "democracy" you might talk about should be taken with a grain of salt. This starts to sound like vanguardism.

[I_am_Spartacus]

14. DLC's money gives them power out of proportion to their

democratic support .

Corporations are so dominant in the political landscape and it's ridiculous that there is a "Democratic" organization on the "left" that thinks it's important to give them MORE help in getting their ideology (of greed) more seats at the table.

I say, go Kos. I got your back.

[AtomicKitten]

19. I'm Spartacus

[salin]

48. Is this the original

I Am Spartacus? If so - I was thinking about you last week.

If not, welcome to DU.

[I_am_Spartacus]

54. Answer:

When I signed up, "I am Spartacus" was taken, but I figured, if any name should have multiple registrants, it's that one. So, with slight modification, "I_am_Spartacus." I am not (the original) "I am Spartacus."

[salin]

74. Thanks for your response

and welcome to DU. :hi:

[AtomicKitten]

90. I was quoting from the movie.

"I'm Spartacus."
"I'm Spartacus."
"I'm Spartacus."

I'm AtomicKitten. Nice to meet ya.

[mopinko]

105. i'm sparticus

[salin]

38. I thought DLC defenders contend that it really isn't that important of an

entity - eg it isn't the party. That analogy is a rather strong statement of the strength and importance of the DLC.

To me - its a group of politicians and political strategists - they promote policy and pr. They have waned in influence in recent years.

Please note the "inside the beltway" band of strategists gets very insular/insulated be it the current DLC crew or those that were operating in the mid eighties when I did a stint at one of the outfits under a former DNC deputy chair at his outfit.

[LoZoccolo]

42. Nader isn't the party either, but can still be a dangerous nuisance.

It only takes a sliver of people working against their own interests, or a small fraction of gullible people to fall for a lie such as the idea that there is no difference between the parties, to destroy progress (or even just make things worse, as we saw with the floods last week).

[salin]

44. huh?

Why bring Nader into this?

Unless there is an attempt to assume that anyone who finds the DLC weak and increasingly irrelevant must be assumed to be a Nader person? Odd, that.

[LoZoccolo]

46. You have people in this very thread using the "no difference" lie...

...to justify attacking the DLC, the same lie that basically led to the Iraq War and the poor response from FEMA, killing thousands. It is the same propaganda which could have the same effects.

[IndianaGreen]

53. The DLC supported and still supports the war in Iraq

That makes them our enemies!

There is no difference between Bush and Al From. They are both insane and pose a danger to the Republic.

[jackbourassa]

60. salin, don't you understand

These DLC apologists (and the DLC itself) believe that only the fringe hate them. What they don't realize is that probably the majority of Democrats hate them (if they even know who the hell they are).

I would love for there to be a poll done on this. Just one. I think DLCers would be shocked by its results.

Case in point:

The DLC ran three candidates for the chairmanship of the Party - combined they won what - 7%?

The DLC candidate in 2004, Joe Lieberman, came in what? Fifth place in New Hampshire and seventh in Iowa. This was the party VP nominee only four years before.

People hate these jerks.

[Nederland]

73. People hate these jerks?

Got any proof to back up that assertion? I didn't think so.

Bill Clinton was the quintessential DLC candidate and everyone LOVES Bill Clinton.

[ulysses]

82. everyone?

Not everyone. :)

[Nederland]

114. Touche

I should have said merely twice as many people as the current president :)

[jackbourassa]

59. Democratic DLC members...

Take these figures with a grain of salt, we all know how the DLC like to take credit for victories they had nothing to do with.

Of the 210 elected Democrats in the House of Representatives: 26 are DLC. (10 of these are from California alone)

Of the 44 elected Democrats in the US Senate: 18 are DLC (incidently, 10 of those are from VERY Democratic states like MA, NY, CA and CT). These are mostly Dems with national aspirations (Kerry, Clinton, Lieberman, et al).

Of the 23 elected Democratic governors: 8 are DLC. (With four of these polling below 45%, ie Jen Granholm and Ed Rendell).

So not very impressive. They are "strongest" in the Senate, for reasons I stated above.

But compare this with a couple of years ago and their support is actually waning.

[IndianaGreen]

37. The DLC is NOT on our side of the barricades

They are the peddlers of a watered down version of Reaganism. They are warmongering pukes! They are not Democrats, but country club Republicans pretending to be on the side of the workers.

[LoZoccolo]

47. Well, I guess you'd think neither is Kos now...

...because I imagine he realized that it's not good to throw stones in glass houses, seeing as how the idea that there's little difference between the Republicans and Democrats perpetuated by Green Party candidate Ralph Nader in 2000 helped drown hundreds of people last week.

[IndianaGreen]

52. Your beloved DLC told Dems in Congress to vote for war!

As such, they are as criminal as the Bush cabal and should be prosecuted for their crimes.

[FightinNewDem]

106. Ironic, isn't it?

Now we have an admitted member of a third party lecturing us on who is a good Democrat.

Sorry. It's our party, too. If you want to wag the finger, become a Democrat, and maybe we will take you seriously.

[autorank]

9. With KOS, it's all about KOS. Who cares what he threatens.

He and his side kick threatened to throw everybody off KOS who believed in election fraud (like who wouldn't now) and then a KOS user ran a survey on election fraud. 82% said they believed! haha...

So what's he going to do to DLC, stage a rally, occupy their offices.

I happen to agree with him that DLC is neither "Democratic" nor do they represent the "Leadership" of my party. However, I'm not sure I understand what the grandstanding and threats are about.

Why now just keep peeling the bark off of them as some of the KOS users do so well.

KOS is a resource beyond KOS. He can't just say frog and expect them to jump.

He's starting to look ridiculous when, in fact, there is a very high quality to some of the work over there. Why not just do it the smart way. Engage them in debate, don't make it personal, and blister them with intense critiques and comparisons. DLC can't stand the day light.

[DoYouEverWonder]

20. Looks like KOS was just trying to get some more attention

Which he is usually a lot better at then we are. It always bugs me when KOS gets credit for stuff we turned up here first. Most people in this country have no clue about DU but they know about KOS. I guess it pays to advertise yourself? Especially when the media is hellbent on ignoring DU no matter what.

[autorank]

39. And if he's going to swipe our ideas, then he ought to do it right.

Not rant like a child denied his pablam. Lord.

He gets twice the its we do daily but our's stay longer and use it more. Kind of like Faux versus CNN.

This type of ego flames out. The rantings about election fraud, the humiliationof kidOakland for disagreeing with KOS, people notice.

We'll just do our thing and the right people will catch on and carry the ball over the line.

[President Jesus]

10. Just ask the any of the Kos Dozen how effective his support is

They all have tons of free time on their hands, seeing as how none of them won (not even close) the seats they were seeking.

How many states did Dean win again?

[autorank]

11. Now was that nice?

:rofl:

[tkmorris]

13. Dean runs the DNC, not the DLC

The DLC can't stand the good doctor. He has the unfortunate vice of telling the truth, boldly. The DLC would sooner wet their pants.

[jackbourassa]

61. How many did Lieberman win again?

Um...I'm thinking...real...hard...


Oh ya. None.

[President Jesus]

63. and that's relevant how?

criticizing Kos automatically makes me a Lieberman supporter? Gee, why stop there...make me a Dubya supporter.

No offense, but that logic is retarded.

Ok, offense.

[Larkspur]

104. Lieberman is DLC. If you support the DLC then you support Lieberman

Lieberman was once chair of the DLC.

[Larkspur]

103. Lieberman did not win CT. At least Howard won his home state

And Howard won his home state after he had bowed out. Just shows that Vermonters liked Howard more than Nutmegers liked Lieberman.

And if it wasn't for the dirty tricks that the Gephardt and Kerry aides pulled, and the shortened primary season, Dean would have comeback against Kerry in NH.

[thebigidea]

15. as if ivory tower elitists like From and Marshall = "the Democratic Party"

[WildEyedLiberal]

16. I don't like the DLC, but

What I like doesn't really matter. And what Kos likes doesn't really matter. Who we need to fight are BUSH AND THE REPUBLICANS. Not Democrats who are more conservative than us. Kos is an arrogant asshole who is merrily skipping along towards irrelevance.

[AntiCoup2K4]

17. If Kos is an "arrogant asshole skipping towards irrelevance"...

Then what the Hell would you call Al From and Will PNAC Marshall?

[thebigidea]

18. salt-of-the-earth working class Americans we could all relate to?

If ever the RNC smear "elitist" ever applied to anyone in this party, it would be for those thinktank clowns. They operate in some crazy dreamworld that doesn't exist for normal people. As if "normal American" concerns lie with the PNAC.

[TankLV]

41. Fighting the DLC IS "fighting the repukes".

They are repuke moles and worse.

Call them Vichy Dems.

They are scum.

I hope and pray they "crumble" so the Dem Party can finally grow and move on to victory instead of appeasement.

[LoZoccolo]

45. Nope. n/t

[TankLV]

95. The DLC is scum. Plain and simple.

They do not represent my values or fight for what I believe in - in fact they are almost now different from repukes.

[LoZoccolo]

98. The DLC is AWESOME!

:bounce:

Al From, Will Marshall, yeah!

The people who are against the DLC are RUINING the Democratic Party! :grr:

[IndianaGreen]

115. Al From, Will Marshall (the DLC scum) support the war in Iraq

The DLC want to turn the party of Roosevelt into the party of Eisenhower!

:grr:

[chaska]

76. We can't fight the pugs because the DLC (our leadership) won't let us...

It's that simple.

[Don1]

97. Conservative Democrats

Some conservative Democrats are okay. I admit it and if anyone is hard on the Democrats here on DU, it is me.

However, some of the alleged conservative Dems, are actually neo-cons like Al From, Zell Miller, and Joe Lieberman.

We need to look at this question objectively. We need to decide roll cal votes and actions that matter to all of us. Then, look at the records.

You might be surprised to see that some Democrats are actually Republicans, so risking losing them actually does not matter.

For example, Lieberman was chairman of the committee that confirmed Michael Brown.

[spaniard]

21. KOS decided not to climb that mountain

He's backing down from his threat - just as most knew he would.

Update: Some people are asking about the DLC thing. Well, there are actually more important things right now than that. Katrina has center stage, and will for a while.

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/9/7/12344/93363


Can I again repeat what "making the DLC radioactive" would entail?

The following would have to be defeated and/or discredited:

Bill Clinton
Hillary Clinton
Mark Warner
John Kerry
John Edwards
Evan Bayh

... and several other popular senators, house members, and governors.

Some of these seats would fall to the GOP.

DLC-friendly pundits and writers like Al Franken and Joe Conason would also have to be shown the soup line.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

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

[Pepperbelly]

25. it did not surprise me at all ...

same ... EXACTLY the same shit Nader said in 00. It seems as though some people still believe it.

[Q]

27. Perhaps you can't tell from these typed words on a screen...

...but many of us lifelong Democrats are very pissed off. I've never voted third party in my life. I wouldn't vote for a Republican for any reason. But I and many others will simply NOT vote for anyone supported or promoted by the DLC.

Our only hope is to find and support a progressive candidate and FIGHT the DLC and the smear machine they use against fellow Democrats.

[Pepperbelly]

29. Perhaps you cannot hear either ...

how angered I am by people who allege that they are Democrats who would be happier with a gop elected to a seat than a Democrat because the Democrat's ideology isn't quite pure enough for those people. They are entitled to their opinion.

They are NOT entitled to pretend that only they have the perrogative to decide who is and is not a good Democrat and their willingness to see a motherfucking gop elected instead. And each time I read one, I am forced to ask: why do you want the gop elected?

Since you are an all or nothing kind of person, since you can't get all, you get nothing. Tell me about these millions of progressives who are on your side AFTER you manage to elect a Senator somewhere.

Exactly, you cannot hear my tone either.

[jackbourassa]

66. Pepperbelly

What you have to realize is that we didn't win anything with Bill Clinton.

Nothing.

We were the ones who made all the sacrifices (Welfare Reform, NAFTA). Not too many republicans on welfare. How about all those manufacturing jobs sacrificed to China or Mexico? Who benefitted? Corporations. The rich.

The Dems lost Congress for the first time in what 50 years?

Then that wasn't good enough. We got stuck with Bush, who threw away all our sacrifices (which resulted in a surplus) and gave it all to more rich people and started a war none of us supported.

Bye-bye surplus. Hello bigger deficits.

What did we win again with Clinton?

Team Clinton think that they are these political superstars...but here's some reality for you:

Team Clinton (1992) did as well as Team Dukakis (1988)

Team Clinton (1996) did as well as Team Gore (2000) and Team Kerry (2004)

Team Clinton are not half as good as they think they are. The DLC make it seem like they are the end all and be all of the Democratic Party. They have basically been in charge since 1991/1992. Yet, since then, we have lost every election where Ross Perot was not a candidate.

That's a fact, jack.

Any Democrat who - after commanding loyality from us for nearly 20 years even though we didn't support half the things they were doing - abandons us now because we want new leadership. Is not a real Democrat anyway.

[Pepperbelly]

79. LOL

MY people gained tons during Clinton's years and I care far more about their well-being than a list of what you believe were shortcomings (which, btw, I do not necessarily agree with you on any of them).

BTW, your sophistry regarding election results, while interesting, is something that needs to be examined in detail at the Dukakis, Gore and Kerry Presidential libraries.

And, on edit, why I would possibly give a shit about what Kos might or might not do is also beyond my humble comprehension.

[LittleClarkie]

85. Considering what an immature asshat he can be sometimes

who's site owes as much to the people who go there as it does to he himself, I would agree.

The gestalt nature of his site doesn't deter him from systematically pissing off various constuencies as he goes, most recently the "hippy dippy anti-war people". Before that it was the feminists. God knows who will be next. He often has a good case of "foot in mouth" disease, and is quite good at inserting the other one and making matters worse.

He buys into stereotypes way to much, and as the old adage says, he formed a conclusion about some things and, thus, has stopped thinking about them.

He performs a good service, and often has good insights and info. But still, he can be an immature asshat.

I would wager he has less influence than he thinks he does.

[Nederland]

120. jackbourassa

What you have to realize is that we didn't win anything with Bill Clinton.

Really?

I suppose the longest economic expansion in history was nothing.

I suppose the highest homeownership rates in history was nothing.

I suppose the lowest unemployment rates in 40 years was nothing.

I suppose two solid liberal judges in the SC and dozens elsewhere was nothing.

I suppose a federal surplus for the first time in 30 years was nothing.



God. It's amazing how people forget so quickly how good things were under Bill Clinton...

[Q]

26. What's the difference between a Republican and a Democrat who acts...

...like one?

I was just ruminating that you would take that one sentence and use it to smear my post...just as I would expect from those who want to keep the status quo.

The Democratic party can't survive the DLC. Our party went from being the oldest, most respected party in the US to a laughing stock because the DLC was able to fool enough Democrats into voting for their RWing policies. Their 'era of big government is over' bullshit is nothing more than neoconservatism in disguise.

It's time we threw away this 'ABB' thinking and fight for progressive candidates. We simply don't believe the DLC when they say that only their candidates can win elections. Progressive candidates CAN WIN if we stop falling for the DLC's corporate propaganda.

The Democratic party has lost more seats and power since Clinton took office than any time in history. Coincidence?

[mhr]

32. "rewarding weak and ineffective leadership"

Is at the root of all our problems with the Democratic party.

This includes Hillary Clinton for her support of the Iraq war!

How many more stolen elections will go uncontested before the broader Democratic party understands?

[jackbourassa]

65. Nonesense

You take cut off the head and the others will come back in line.

You telling me that any member of Congress/Senate which supports the DLC will suddenly stop being Democrats if the DLC were suddenly to disappear?

As if Clinton would stop whoring himself and his wife if Al From were suddenly to jump into a lake and not return.

Or any other member you mentioned?

First of all, DLC members are much fewer than you give them credit for.

Second, half or more of their members are former politicians - now working in Washington Lobby firms or law firms.

Third, if the DLC were to disappear - those remaining would remain Democrat. It would just mean that we'd have new leadership within the party.

That's it.

This idea that without the DLC the party would fall apart is plain and simply ridiculous.

P.S. I don't think we should be attacking Daily Kos. They are on our side. A liberal blog attacking another liberal blog only weakens us.

[unfrigginreal]

81. Hogwash! Destruction of the DLC does not mean destruction...

of the candidates that you mention. Everyone is entitled to see the error of their ways. We're a forgiving bunch.

[FightinNewDem]

107. Taken to the woodshed?

Kos desperately wants to be considered a "mainstream" Democratic party elder. I suspect that he was smacked upside the head by people like Simon Rosenberg and Tom Hughes who understand that the netroots are an essential part of politics, but also realize that Markos' increasingly silly antics are an embarrassment. If Markos wants to be a serious player, he needs to ditch his silly "purge the heathens" schtick.

[Q]

22. Thanks for giving us another opportunity to talk about the DLC...

...the Democratic party's version of the Neocons.

The f**king United States is falling apart at the seams. The rich are not only richer...they have taken control of 'our' government.

Bush is now an imperial president...a divine right of kings...where he can do or say anythng he wants without consequence.

There is no active political opposition from the Democrats. Those few brave Dems that do speak out are quickly marginalized, ridiculed and silenced.

Writing a 'policy statement', taking a poll or promising legislation has replaced action and deeds of an opposition party.

To top it off...the DLC has taken the leadership of a party that controlled both houses of congress for 40 years and turned it into an irrelevant minority.

And we're supposed to have some kind of confidence that the DLC will do better next time? That they'll stop trashing the working class left or allow THEIR candidates a shot at leadership?

I don't even know who 'KOS' is...seldom read his stuff. But I DO know that 2008 won't be a repeat of 2004 and 2000. No more votes for candidates that don't EARN them by representing our best interests and opposing the anti-democratic forces that have taken power.

No more.

[welshTerrier2]

28. DLC says anti-war = "un-American" but 75% of Americans say "end the war"

the quicker we get these right-wing hawks out of OUR Party, the sooner we can start the climb out of the deep hole the DLC has put us in ...

[Q]

30. It's not 'our' party anymore...and YOU know it...

...but that doesn't mean that we should consider quitting our fight to restore the Democratic party and give it back to the people.

The 'third way' has replaced everything that was good about the Democratic party. And if we can't find a way to stop it...there will be two Republican parties and no one to represent the interests of the 'commoners'.

But the most important point is that we'll never be able to stop the Bushies if the DLC retains power over the Democratic party.

On edit: It's telling that the thread author made the Freudian slip in suggesting that 'KOS wanted to 'crumble the Democratic party' instead of the DLC. Are we to believe that the DLC 'IS' the Democratic party and that they represent the majority view?

[FightinNewDem]

110. Source?

Since you used quotation marks, I guess you have some documentation to back up your claim.

Let's see it.

Or is this just more baseless bloviating?

[Douglas Carpenter]

31. are you still going on about this??

American doesn't need two Republican parties...We will never, never never and again I say never build a progressive majority lead by anti-progressives... This is a 30+ year failed strategy. More, importantly--it means the end of democracy itself. But, frankly, I'm tired of arguing about it. There is far more important work to be done.

[deutsey]

33. Isn't that like going to Italy today with a plan to sack the Roman Empire?

All you'd find are some relics and ruins.

:shrug:

[Douglas Carpenter]

35. well put -- the DLC is making itself irrelevant

[NMDemDist2]

34. Hi everyone. dKos runs his site, we run ours, ya know? n/t

[LoZoccolo]

36. He had some plan that would affect the Democratic Party.

I think it's as relevant as discussing any other group or person who would want to do that.

[TankLV]

40. It's to SAVE the Democratic Party - they want to crumble the DLC

NOT the same thing.

I want to crumble the DLC.

The DLC is NOT the Democratic Party - they are repuke moles or worse.

[LoZoccolo]

43. Even he tacitly admits there's a risk involved.

Appeals to party unity will fall on deaf ears (it's summer of a non-election year, the perfect time to sort out internal disagreements).

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/8/22/41845/1251

He knows that there is some risk, and that's why he's choosing "the summer of a non-election" year to do that, to try to minimize the risk.

[nvliberal]

62. Maybe...

he found he wasn't getting enough donations to take down the "evil" DLC.

:)

[TankLV]

96. Their idea of "unity": My way or the highway.

I'll take the highway - and kick them out on it.

[Mass]

49. Was your week-end that boring that you needed to reactivate this war?\nt

[LoZoccolo]

50. Something was supposed to happen Wednesday...

...and now Wednesday's been passed. I believe it was before Wednesday that people were talking about this.

[Mass]

51. Did you miss that people for once recognized who the ennemy was?

I could not care less about kos, but, at least for now , he recognizes who the ennemy is.

[VADem11]

55. You mean the DLC?

Toppling the democratic party would be a bad thing don't you think?

[Placebo]

56. You rock LZ.

:D

[FreedomAngel82]

64. What a loser

Why doesn't he just leave the party instead of destroying the oldest political party in the country? :eyes: Isn't he a major Dean fan? So why is he doing this to Dean? :eyes:

[AntiCoup2K4]

67. The losers are the DLC

They lost Congress in 1994. They lost the Senate again in 2002. They lost the White House in 2000 and 2004. Assist from widespread fraud notwithstanding, it was their platform that both Gore and Kerry ran on, and their stooges restraining both candidates. Gore regrets it. Kerry, who knows?

The DLC is about to lose us the Supreme Court. Keep track of how many of them vote for a partisan piece of shit who's barely been a judge for 2 years to become Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

How much more are you willing to lose at the hands of these spineless cowards?

[LoZoccolo]

68. They did not lose congress in 1994, been debunked for a long time now. nt

[Douglas Carpenter]

69. baloney

[LoZoccolo]

70. Oh now I'm convinced. n/t

[Douglas Carpenter]

71. ok then its all just a coincidence that when the Democratic Party stood

for something it dominated the political scene for decades. When it adopted the Republican lite strategy in the late 70's it's been loosing ground ever sense.

[LoZoccolo]

72. Part of what it stood for was "states rights" (i.e. segregation)...

...and the habit of racist voters to stick with it benefitted them, and if you'd read the analysis of the 1994 election that wyldwolf had to put in his sig line because people keep repeating the myth that it had something to do with the DLC so often, you'd know this.

[Douglas Carpenter]

99. well, the simple fact is kos did NOT implement any such program as

you described and you know that. And you also know or should know that progressives were the dominant force within the Democratic Party from the early 30's until Strauss put an end to it in the mid to late 70s.
As far as wydewolf's signature line -- well, I just don't agree with an analysis based on RNC talking points.

And for the record if it matters, I am not among those who think the DLC should be purged. If push comes to shove I will vote for almost any Democrat over almost any Republican. I have even given modest contributions to some DLC types when it involved a close and key race.
I just don't think that corporate interest should be running the Democratic Party at the expense of ordinary working people. As long as the public has only the choice between two corporatist candidates -- not only will building a progressive majority be impossible -- we don't have much of a democracy.

[AntiCoup2K4]

78. Your idols From & Marshall took full credit for it.

They even called it a "liberation" (funny how neocons love to misuse that word).

Being the loyal DLC'er, I'm sure you have a copy of Blueprint magazine from Janaury 1995, or know someone who does. Look it up.

[spaniard]

83. I have a better (and more fair) idea

Since you made the charge that From and Marshall took "full credit" for the '94 losses, why don't YOU provide the proof?

I predict either silence from you, some snarky unrelated and irrelevant reply, or a bone headed contention that you don't have to prove your points...

[AntiCoup2K4]

84. I'm not a DLC'er, therefore I don't subscribe to their shitty magazine....

It's not my fault the greedy bastards took it offline so they could sell the back issues to new puglites in training.

[spaniard]

89. you chose "some snarky unrelated and irrelevant reply"

[FightinNewDem]

109. Don't think when you can bloviate!

OK, I've had it with your nonsense.

Answer a few questions for me, Anti-Coup:

When was the last time you donated money to a Democratic candidate?

When was the last time you volunteered for a Democratic candidate?

When was the last time you went to your state house/city hall and lobbied for progressive legislation?

When was the last time you ran for office as a Democrat?

When was the last time you attended a meeting of your local Democratic Party?

You spend a lot of time badmouthing other Democrats. I want to see if you walk your talk.

Oh, and by the way, quit lying about the DLC's "Blueprint" magazine.

It hasn't been taken offline.

The first issue came out in 1998, and it (along with every issue since then) can be found here:

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ka.cfm?pagenum=2&kaid=132

[LoZoccolo]

87. You forgot this part which puts it in context.

Now that the legislative machinery is controlled by their opponents, the President and his party are free to go back to the future--to articulate a new governing philosophy rooted in the broad values and interests of average working families rather than the narrow demands of pressure groups.

You quoted one word. One. word.

Yes, it's offline now, but if anyone wants to look it up its called "A Liberating Election" by Al From and Will Marshall

[AntiCoup2K4]

93. Again, I don't have the article...

but I distinctly remember that their context for "liberation" was from the legacy of FDR and the New Deal, among other things that MADE this party great.

Which is why I find it so laughable now to hear the DLC'ers acting as though FDR is their hero.

[LoZoccolo]

88. P. S. If you're sick of Dean being quoted out of context...

...and having his words twisted, I suggest you be part of the solution.

[LittleClarkie]

75. As has been pointed out before here, the DLC is not a DNC organization

Hence, it is inaccurate to say that Kos has declared war on the Party as a whole.

[Zodiak]

77. I came up with a way....

to score how often a Democrats votes along with Bush Republicans and posted it here over the weekend, but the thread predicatbly sank like a stone, but I will post some of it again here, just so we know which Democrats the DLC are and how they vote. Here it is.

Here are the issues I used (party unity index also indicated..higher index makes for more agreement between DUers and the Democratic senators as a whole):
1. Rice confirmation (inept) 2.7
2. Gonzales confirmation (torturer) 8.3
3. Class action lawsuit bill 5.91
4. Bankruptcy bill 5.7
5. Negroponte confirmation (criminal and murderer) (0.5)
6. Cheney's Energy Bill (1.6)
7. CAFTA I (7.8)
8. CAFTA II (two votes for it (votes changed), + important issue) (7.5)
9. Election Reform (object to Ohio vote, 5 pts for speaking out, 10 for voting with a conscious) (0.6)
10. Confirmation of radical RW judges (0 pts for voting for one of the three judges, 5 pts for being one of the 7 senators in the compromise, -10 pts for voting for TWO of these judges ) (8.5)
11. Firearm manufacturer immunity from legal liability (6.7)


Here is the list of Senators starting with the most DU-like. We can call it an anti-Bush index or a DU rating. Whatever...just pay attention to who falls out where. Note that I allowed a senator to go with Bush on ONE issue without penalty (b/c of a total of 110 pts possible). This is to not make the rating so harsh as to DEMAND ideological purity.

Harkin (Iowa) 95
Boxer (CA) 90
Lautenberg (NJ) 90
Akaka (Hawaii) 80
Corzine (NJ) 80
Dayton (MN) 80
Durbin (IL) 80
Feingold (WI) 80
Kennedy (MA) 80
Kerry (MA) 80 - DLC
Levin (MI) 80
Dodd (CN) 70 - DLC
Leahy (VT) 70
Mikulski (MD) 70
Reed (RI) 70
Sarbanes (MD) 70
Shumer (NY) 70
Wyden (OR) 70
Clinton (NY) 65 - DLC
Obama (IL) 65
Bayh (IN) 60 - DLC
Biden (DE) 60
Dorgan (ND) 60 - DLC
Stabenow (MI) 60 - DLC
Byrd (WV) 50
Inouye (Hawaii) 50
Murray (WA) 50
Reid (NV) 50
Rockefeller (WV) 50
Baucus (MN) 45 - DLC
Bingaman (NM) 40
Cantwell (WA) 40 - DLC
Johnson (SD) 40 - DLC
Kohl (WI) 40 - DLC
Conrad (ND) 35 - DLC
Feinstein (CA) 35
Carper (DE) 30 - DLC
Leiberman (CT) 30 - DLC
Landrieu (LA) 20 - DLC
Lincoln(ARK) 20 - DLC
Nelson (FL) 20 - DLC
Salazar (CO) 20 - DLC
Pryor (ARK) 15 - DLC
Nelson (NE) 0 - DLC

So there you have it.

I will take the senators that are rated above 50, although I would like to point out that going along with Bush 50% of the time still hurts Americans immensely. Harkin rates the absolute best, and I think that we should all give him a round of applause for it.

I wonder if he wishes to run for President, because as far as this index goes, Harkin is practically a DUer. All those Kerry supporters are right...Kerry scores very well on our side. Not bad for a DLCer, if you ask me.

Using this system, 13 DLC senators are rated below 50% and 6 are rated above. Of the 13 worst senators in DUers eyes, 12 are "New Democrats".

[AntiCoup2K4]

80. While that's a pretty good scoring of recent votes.....

...if you were to re-score the list back to 2001, you would probably drop the scores of a few Senators. And I believe that's important, to rate their performance as a whole, against the Bush Criminal Empire.

[Zodiak]

92. yeah, this is only for the last Congress

I only had one Saturday morning to dedicate to this.

[AntiCoup2K4]

94. It's all good. No rush.......

.......but it would be a great thing to look at in the 2006 primaries ;)

[Douglas Carpenter]

101. Excellent--thanks for this post

[crispini]

91. Still goin' after it, eh?

:popcorn:

[Guaranteed]

100. I'd sure as hell take on his task. I just don't have website

or the readership.

The man was on the right track. I hope he goes ahead and beats the shit out of the DLC.

[Name removed]

108. Deleted message

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

[IndianaGreen]

111. This thread is based on a strawman. Kos never said what OP claimed!

OP must be delighted at the response his smear of Kos has engendered. Kos merely attacked the DLC, which as we all know advocate Republicanism without fundamentalism.

Congratulations OP on doing a DU version of "blonde missing in Aruba."

[LoZoccolo]

112. Again, even Kos tacitly admitted there was a risk involved.

Appeals to party unity will fall on deaf ears (it's summer of a non-election year, the perfect time to sort out internal disagreements).

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/8/22/41845/1251

He knows that there is some risk, and that's why he's choosing "the summer of a non-election" year to do that, to try to minimize the risk.

[Name removed]

113. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

119. Deleted message

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

[Moderator]

121. Locking

Asked and Answered, no reason to keep beating this old horse.