The Democrats 2008 Choice: Sell Out & Lose, Or Stand Up & Win by David Sir

[Douglas Carpenter]

by David Sirota

his blog: http://www.davidsirota.com/

posted by permission of Mr. Sirota
___________________


The Worst of Both Worlds

In business, if you have a policy or a strategy that brings you the worst of both worlds, then you will likely change course. For instance, if you are making a product that both hurts the environment and is losing gobs of money, you will probably stop making the product and do something different. The question for Democrats is whether that kind of commonsense will be a part of their political decisions in 2008?

COMMENTS: Go to Sirota's Working Assets site to comment on this entry

posted by David Sirota @ 3:49 PM

Bowing Down to Those Who Undermine

More food for thought about the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) and the future of the Democratic Party...Can you imagine if an organization existed that purported to speak for Republicans, yet whose entire premise undermining the conservative base of the Republican Party? Do you think GOP presidential candidates would be flocking to address that organization's meetings? The answer, of course, is no, they wouldn't - and you can bet the GOP leadership would crush that organization before it ever got off the ground. But on the Democratic side, the story is far different.

Democratic presidential contenders go suck up to the DLC, an organization whose for the last two decades has done everything it can to undermine the Democratic Party - even going to great lengths to attack Democratic presidential candidates it doesn't like. Then, hilariously, these same Democratic politicians who genuflect to the DLC claim to be shocked - shocked! - that the public has no idea what the Democratic Party stands for anymore.

Just look at this Knight-Ridder story detailing the agenda the DLC rolled out yesterday - it reads like Republican talking points:

- Topping the agenda wrote with former Clinton White House adviser Bruce Reed were several proposals on national security. "It's a toughness issue. We have to prove we're willing to pull the trigger," From said. In other words, the DLC argues that Democrats must show they are willing to indiscriminately bomb, kill and maim people in order to win elections, even though the public now fully opposes what we're doing in Iraq.

- The DLC wants to "allow military recruiters unrestricted access to college campuses." Again, the American people oppose what we are doing in Iraq, and the DLC's response is to push for more militarization and to push for more recruitment of young people to send them off to fight overseas in wars based on lies that the DLC helped justify.

- The DLC wants "to cut the federal budget deficit, they proposed cutting congressional and nondefense government staff by 10 percent." Cutting "nondefense" is a nice way of saying cutting things like health care, labor rights enforcement, housing, etc - cuts the GOP is already proposing. In other words, instead of talking about wasteful spending in Iraq, the DLC wants the budget debate to focus on plans to hack into the social progress that Democrats have fought for over the last fifty years.


And remember, this says nothing about the DLC's willingness to continually undermine every Democratic Party effort to make sure trade policy starts working for ordinary Americans.

I'd like to believe that the Democratic presidential candidates who came to make nice with the DLC yesterday only did so because they didn't want to be attacked for not kissing the Beltway gliterrati's rings. Because, frankly, the DLC has become the poster-boy for unprincipled stand-for-nothingism. Because of that, the DLC is becoming more and more of a political liability to candidates for national office, especially with the rise of the populist Democrats and the rise of alternative fundraising sources that allow candidates to circumvent the DLC's high-roller political donors.

Sure, the DLC will technically exist forever - there are always corporate funding sources available to preserve an insular Washington, D.C. organization that shills for Big Business and the Republican Party agenda. But politically, the DLC - and its constant undermining of the Democratic Party - is on its way out in terms of real relevance.

_______________________________________________________


A True Voice of Opposition
--A Voice for Working People
--Not the Elite--
http://www.bernie.org/issues.asp

Who is Congressman Bernie Sanders?

Read this article and watch the short video clips:

http://www.davidsirota.com/2005/04/who-is-bernie-sanders.html

[Son of California]

1. There is a big difference between what you say and do

and you can say a lot of things to get elected, and then kinda forget them once you get the power.

remember a lot of these odd sounding suggestions are for one purpose, striking a pose that will get more Dems in office -not just in the WH but in the Congress to -this means a little shift to the center so be in. So really, the DLC can say all kinds of weird conservative sounding things, but I'm not that worried by it, at this point, whatever can get the neocons out of power is what we should be doing.

has anyone every seen the Dave Chapelle bit, 'When Keeping it Real Goes Wrong?" We can keep it real, and champion every issue percieved by the public as far left, or we can tell them what they want to hear and bide our time till we have enough seats to do what we really want on the sly. That's what the repubs did and do with Bush so I say: Fight Fire with Fire.

[dbonds]

2. DLC is part of neocons.

What the do is far worse than what they say. They just do it under the umbrella of being a democrat. They pretend to be more populace, but are paid for by the same group the funds the neocons.

[BillZBubb]

3. The DLC will continue its destruction of the Democratic Party.

That's what the corporate interests want, so they'll do their job.

Sadly, people are more correct than not when they complain that the Democratic Party doesn't stand for anything anymore. The DLC's attempt to make us Repug Lite just backfires every time.

Even more sad, I don't see any way out of the death spiral other than a major economic meltdown that once again FORCES progressive solutions on the corporations and sheeple.

[paulk]

4. more nonsense from David Sirota

if he spent half as much time going after the real enemy (Republicans) as he does going after the DLC, he might actually become more than just another lefty hack.

But, hey... it's a good gig, and it sure beats actual journalism.

[martymar64]

5. So, you think being Repub Lite is a good idea?

Everything he said is right on. The DLC claims they got Clinton in, but even if they did, that was 13 years ago! What have they done for us lately, besides lose elections, of course? They are the Grima Wormtongue of the Democratic Party. Who's side are you REALLY on?

[paulk]

6. More of the same divisive rhetoric

Repub lite, my ass. I'm sick of it.

The DLC are Democrats. Whose side are you on?

[depakid]

7. DINO's are the real enemy

At least in the evidence based world- where the Dems have lost six election in a row thanks to the likes of the DLC and their constant pandering to the right. Why would anyone vote for a Dem? Because they're not Republicans?

Hey- at least Republicans give the appearance of some courage to stand up for their twisted convictions. The Dems roll over, and cower and backstab their own!

Until the Dems clean their own house- until they start standing for Democratic priciples again- they'll remain irrelevant- and DESERVEDLY so.

[paulk]

8. more empty rhetoric

from the black and white world.

[depakid]

9. Join the reality based community

Rhetoric is an art- a skill intricately tied to politics that goes back thousands of years.

In the reality based community- we look at the principles of rhetoric (Lakeoff is a good modern day proponent) we look at the evidence, and we make rational decisions based on a goal.

Now, if your goal is to further far right policies- then the DLC is for you- based on the evidence of their "acheivements" over the past 12 years. That's not manichean thinking- that's just a series of simple, straightforward observations.

As to public perception, the matter can sometime seem muddled- as focus groups wil only tell you so much (and lot of that is inaccurate). The Dems have a serious image problem- marketers would call it branding- and the way that their "leadership's" been acting, only serves to reinforce those negative images.

Essentially, the Dems are wishy washy at best and and cowardly at worst- that's what much of the public sees- and that's why Bush made both of those the central memes of his campaign.

So, my advice to the Dems would be to wake up and smell the coffee- and maybe start acting assertive like winners and leaders, instead of mimicing the learned helplessness of battered women.

[paulk]

10. Lakoff is the flavor of the month

and his is an unproven theory on how to win elections - hardly an advertisement for your "reality based world".

My goal?

My goal is to see that POS Bush and his band of neocon thugs frog marched out of the White House. And I believe articles like Mr. Sirota's don't help in that effort. I believe anything that promotes this internecine warfare between the DLC and the left is counterproductive - and stupidly so. We dance on the precipice of fascism while Sirota and his kind argue about what color shoes to wear.

Your "simple, straightforward observations" on the DLC costing us elections is no more valid that Mr. From's blaming Michael Moore for the same.

[yurbud]

12. the DLC types HELP the Bushies far more often than obstruct them

[depakid]

13. Welp, if you've something substantive to offer

I'm all ears- but it seems to me all you've got in your arsenal is "conventional wisdom" and cliches, whereas I'll offer you evidence and multidisciplinary analysis.

Lakoff, btw- is a professor of linguistics at UC Berkeley who's been studying semantics and the application of cognitive linguistics to politics, literature and philosophy for 35 years- so I suspect he may be a little more versed than a flavor of the month.

If you really want to get rid of Bush and relegate the Republicans back to the fringe (where they belong) it might behoove you to listen to the man, and learn to put the principles he talks about into action... something the DLC most assuredly fails to do.

[yurbud]

11. you are right about muddled message--but DLC are the muddlers

they dilute progressive values and avoid saying anything that will offend their corporate donors. They aren't going after moderate voters--they are hoping big business will sick of the religious baggage with the GOP and pick them.

The worst thing about the DLC is not that they favor business friendly solutions, but that they avoid pointing out and trying to fix the most serious ways big business is screwing us. For example, when Hillary did her big medical hoohaw with Newt a while back it was about computerizing records, which is NOT the heart of the problems. The problem is for profit insurance companies charging what they want then withholding the treatment people paid for them to cover until their customers literally die. It's the same thing with perscription drugs. We give them billions to develop new drugs, but we don't ask for a bargain for medicare and medicaid--or the rest of us for that matter. I would have more respect for the DLC if they skewered a pig like this, which would serve a business friendly purpose--the health insurance industry is screwing every other business that tries to provide benefits to their employees.

You said the democrats appear to be cowards. Do you mean in the face of the Bushies boogie men of Third World dictators, or in the face of the very real forces that are seeking to destroy our middle class here?

I don't think we could win with the DLC, but even if we did, it would be a pyrrhic victory.

Hillbilly Hitler art:



Blog: