DLC == PNAC light!

[SeanQ]

The DLC, claiming to represent moderate Democrats, continue to attack the majority of the Democratic base, for example calling those of us opposed to the Iraq war "anti-American". Huh?!?

Please, DO NOT BE DECEIVED!!! The DLC does not represent the Democratic party or real Democratic ideals. They do not represent moderate Democrats. They represent moderate NEOCONS!

Will Marshall, co-founder of the DLC, is involved in the Project for a New American Century (PNAC). That's right - he is a signatory on documents issued from the same organization founded on the ideals of the likes of Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bolton, Perle and company!

http://rightweb.irc-online.org/ind/marshall/marshall.php
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20050221/vest

We have all seen how harmfully and divisive the DLC's attacks on it's own party have been. These people are not interested in traditional Democratic values. In there own words they want to be 'market-driven'! Does that sound like the goal of a party interested in civil rights, personal liberty, sound labor policy, etc?

Will Marshall is participating in an event (to paraphrase Sirota) only right-wing lunatics should take part in, at the fringe-conservative Heritage Foundation entitled "Did the Progressives Destroy America?".
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2034042

Real centrist Democrats do bring in very valuable input. As a party we have matured and grown over the past few decades. We have become the party of fiscal responsibility, understanding that big government helps no one, and that to achieve our loftiest ideals for the common good we need to implement wise stewardship of our resources and sound long-term planning. We have shown that we are the party capable of winning conflicts - because we only get into them when we need to, and plan to get out as quickly as possible, as opposed to waging wars of opportunity. We do not confuse profit for corporations with national interest!

Most likely some members of the DLC do really mean well, and certainly some of the DLC platform is good-sense, moderate Democratic ideas. But publishing some articles that reflect centrist Democratic ideas, does NOT make them centrist when you look at their entire body of work, nor does it excuse the way they treat to rest of the party. The organization is a poison to our party (indivual members will need to be sorted out). Instead of encouraging liberal and moderate Democrats to work together to develop reasonable, applicable solutions that works toward our shared ideals, they try to disown our ideals so they wont get in the way.

The DLC lost us the presidency, the Senate, and the House. But, in the right-wing tradition of blame-shifting, they blame 'liberals', applying the label to anyone in their own party who disagrees with them (including Dean, who they loved for his politics before they realized they couldn't control him, or his funding)

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!

I've bought my Democracy Bond. Though I don't agree with Dean about everything, I respect him. I made it plain that my support stands only as long as the DNC continues to work on being competitive in all 50 states, and continues to be guided by the parties membership and the countries best interest and not the DLC and it's ilk inside the beltway. If the DNC can find, and support candidates like Paul Hackett, I will do as much as I can to help the party regain control.

If the DLC takes control of our party, and they select more complacent sheep as candidates, they will get no support from me. Some will agree with me and some wont, and that's fine. But for myself, I WILL NOT SUPPORT THE PNAC AGENDA!

[applegrove]

1. You cannot possibly believe that a Hillary who is for health care

where the risk is shared between the generatons is the same or "lite" version of the neocons who want experienced rated medicare even if it acts as a tax on businesses.

They are in no way alike.

[BrklynLiberal]

2. Not identical..but have more in common than you would like to believe.

They are overlapping sets.

DLC PNAC


Hillary is all lovey-dovey with McCain these days. What the hell is that all about?

[SeanQ]

9. Hillary joined the DLC in her ongoing move to look

more centrist. I'm sure she agrees with many of their policy ideas. As I said, not all the DLC's ideas are bad, nor are all their members.

I'm pointing out what some of the more prominent, long term members and the DLC's basic premise' trend toward, by pointing out some things about the DLC's co-founder. Those things I can not support. Nor do I think they do the party an favors by constantly insulting a majority of Democrats, using derisive terms from the right-wings own playbook. IMHO any Democrat of good consience and some backbone would run, not walk, away from the DLC. The better, truly moderate Democratic ideas that come from the DLC could just as well come from a new, more truly traditional Democratic organization, that works with the party general, not against it.

[Totally Committed]

13. More Centrist?

Theses days, the Father of the Neo-Con Revolution is practically her Siamese Twin!

New odd couple: Hillary Clinton and Newt Gingrich
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/05/13/news/clinton.php

Hillary Clinton, Newt Gingrich Team Up on Medical Data Bill
http://www.cnsnews.com/Politics/archive/200505/POL20050512b.html

Hillary And Newt Go Public
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/05/13/opinion/smith/main695090.shtml

Hillary Clinton and Newt Gingrich now hanging out
http://news.phaseiii.org/article5667.html

Gingrich Thinks Clinton Could Win
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2005/04/14/gingrich_thinks_clinton_could_win.html

Hillary and Newt: Making music together
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/calthomas/ct20050516.shtml

How far to the Right does she have to move before it's "Centrist" enough? She joined the DLC because it would give her "cover" and support. I am not happy about this.

[AtomicKitten]

15. come on guys ...

Stop making stuff up for the purpose of Hillary-hatin'. That's so Republican.

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

Hillary and Bill Clinton have spearheaded the DLC since back in the 1980s. They have ALWAYS been centrists. Stop believing the Republican rhetoric about Hillary being ultraliberal. That's their propaganda. Her shift rightward isn't nearly as drastic logistically as the Hillary-haters, both Republican and Democrat, claim.

Speak truth to power.

[Totally Committed]

18. Making stuff up? That's harsh, and untrue...

Those are genuine links I posted there. If that relationship doesn't bother you, then fine. But, it bothers me. It truly does.

It's also a Republican tactic, to try and belittle the information given by someone who doesn't agree with your point of view. Please don't do that. I made NOTHING up. Those are legitimate articles.

I have genuine concerns about Hillary Clinton, the DLC, and anyone who belongs to the DLC. So, speak truth to that, but do not ever say I made stuff up. It is simply not true.

[AtomicKitten]

19. hey, don't get me wrong

I'm livid about the DLC, but I also think some folks here at DU give them way more credence than they deserve. The grassroots organizations have rendered the DLC power moot.

I'm just saying Hillary has belonged to the DLC since the 1980s and this isn't a shift for her as alleged in the links you provided. My comments were not meant for you to take to task personally.

I simply don't understand the energy directed at stifling them. In our world it is more effective to let them hang themselves with their outrageous points-of-view. Do you really think their agenda will endear Dems? Hardly. They are a power base, but their power has been challenged by grassroots organizations and they no longer have the clout they once had. Howard Dean is working to change the primary process to ensure the Dem nominee will be elected by a consensus, not from the DLC.

I just wouldn't get as worked up about them as you and kos are. We have bigger dragons to slay.

Peace.

[Totally Committed]

28. Bigger dragons than the DLC? Really?

Theirs is a cynical agenda. Theirs is a pro-corporate agenda. Theirs is an agenda of assimilation, not opposition. Their policies will keep us on the losing end of the stick forever, because even if one of them manages to get elected, they are still as Republican as most moderate Republicans.

We cannot govern if we cannot win, and we will never win with the DLC running things. They are anti-you and me.

[AtomicKitten]

29. Um, yeah.

Like the GOP and the BFEE.

Is is that easy to forget?

You give the DLC much more credit than they deserve. They have made themselves irrelevant.

[Totally Committed]

33. They ARE practically the GOP.

There is little or no difference between a Republican and a Democrat that votes like one and has nothing but the corporate interest at heart.

To paraphrase the famous saying: If the election is between a Republicand and a pseudo Republican, the Republicans win every time. It's time for THE DEMOCRATS to win and win BIG.

[AtomicKitten]

35. "practically"

denotes you at least acknowledge the distinction.

[Clark2008]

17. I can believe she won't win the general election, though

So any support of her as the nominee is a moot point - DLC or not.

We're at war. Swing voters simply will not vote for a woman during wartime and, if you think otherwise, I suggest you leave the board and go talk to some "average" Americans.
She will not carry one red states - for much of the reason I just gave and some because of the hold the Reich-wing media has in most of them. We need to flip a couple of those borderline states and usurp Diebold, Triad and ES&S.

I don't know if Hillary's the DLC's wet dream and I don't care. I just know she won't win the general election and that's what matters.

[Roland99]

27. DLC's agenda tosses some social programs as a carrot to liberals.

Their true agenda is pro-Corporate and for using the military when it suits that pro-Corporate stance.

[LoZoccolo]

3. How did I know this would happen?

Will Marshall vs. Thomas G. West has now become Will Marshall helping Thomas G. West thanks to several levels of indirection.

We are just as gullible as the Republican rank-and-file. It's just another flavor of gullible.

[SeanQ]

14. Please read the article linked.

As I stated, he is 'participating in', not 'helping'. I included it because I happen to agree with David Sirota's take - it is an event with a topic which, given the organization hosting, just by showing up he lends credence to that it does not deserve.

And why, pray tell, attend an event which is likely to have only hard-nosed neocons and, maybe, a few very junior journalists at? Is he expecting to change minds? Or is he looking for like-minded moderate neocons he can network with? Or maybe you know Will and can provide us his excellent reason for participating?

[genius]

4. Thank you. You are right.

[wli]

5. thank you for pointing this out also

Hopefully it makes people more aware of the incredibly dangerous fifth column within the Democratic Party.

[Cha]

6. Hey that's what I

said on another thread..

It's not "liberal-moderate"!
Edited on Thu Aug-25-05 02:40 PM by zidzi

There's nothing moderate about the dlc..it's radically right wing and lap dog thrown in for good measure.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2033571&mesg_id=2034544

It's nice that DUers are calling for unity but unity with What?

[LittleClarkie]

8. And I like that this poster isn't lumping the party in with the DLC

and cutting off Dean's nose to spite our face.

[LittleClarkie]

7. I like the distinctions you make

Well said.

[CoffeeCat]

10. I believe that many in the DLC are plants...

...instended to fractionalize the Dem party and kill the liberal/progressive movements within the party.

I believe many of these DLCers are nothing more than PNAC members who have infiltrated our party, and are attempting to dominate it. If they can't dominate, I'm sure they're threatening to implode it from the inside.

I believe that this neocon/PNAC influence is growing like a cancer. They're powerful. They play dirty. They threaten. I'm sure they can ruin careers and that they offer to prop up the careers of politicians who curry favor with their world-domination plans.

I think the neocons/PNAC scum are the corrupters of both parties. It's just taking the Dems a little while longer to submit, but they're getting there.

[FredStembottom]

23. And if they aren't PNAC infiltrators....

...how would you ever know that they aren't? PNAC infiltrators would divide the party and espouse losing strategies. They would attack other party members. They would be increasingly chummy with the worst elements of the Republican party. They would call other Democrats "un-American".

I am increasingly persuaded that if we defeat the influence of the DLC within our party, we defeat the Republican Party as a whole shortly thereafter.

[CrispyQ]

11. Agreed! and well said.

In his book, "We the People: A Call to Take Back America" by Thom Hartmann, he briefly mentions how the Democratic party has been infiltrated by the right in the form of the DLC. It was the first time I had heard of the DLC & immediately went online to Google it & learn more. What I read about them was very surprising. It appears they are backing away from true liberal values & that does not represent me!


BTW, this Thom's book is excellent! A very quick read & would be great for children, too! I'm giving it to everyone this year as holiday gifts.

"We the People: A Call to Take Back America"
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1882109384/qid=1125004485/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-2187220-5227244?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

[lastknowngood]

12. A couple of them are PNACers they signed the original call for

war that was sent to Bill.

[SeanQ]

16. _Why_ would we want people like that

'leading' the Democratic party? Do people really see that as supporting Democratic values?

Anyone willing to help compose a list of elected Dems who have signed PNAC missives?

[paulk]

32. this is not true

here is the letter -

http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm


here are the signers -

Elliott Abrams Richard L. Armitage William J. Bennett

Jeffrey Bergner John Bolton Paula Dobriansky

Francis Fukuyama Robert Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad

William Kristol Richard Perle Peter W. Rodman

Donald Rumsfeld William Schneider, Jr. Vin Weber

Paul Wolfowitz R. James Woolsey Robert B. Zoellick


Could you, for the benefit of our reading audience, point out the DLC members ?

[Q]

20. What do you mean 'takes control'...as in the past tense?

They already have control of 'our' party. They have positioned their candidates to be the nominee in the last four elections. They wrote 'our' platform in 2004. Their minority view of supporting the Bush 'doctrine' of aggressive war and the unprovoked invasion and occupation of Iraq has become the 'unofficial' position of the Democratic party.

They control our party through the Clintons, Kerry, Lieberman, Bayh and other 'leaders' that tow the DLC line but don't talk about it in public.

[SeanQ]

22. In a sense yes, you are correct.

But they tried to pick the new DNC chairman - and failed! Currently Dean is, as I understand it, technically 'in control' of the party now. Though the members of the DLC and like-minded people in the Senate and House still functionally control the party's presence there.

But it is the very fact that we, as members of the party, got Dean elected chairman against their best efforts gives me hope that perhaps we can wrest the party from the likes of the DLC. The types of candidates we select and get elected in 2006 will, I think, have a major influence on this. If we can win back seats (and maybe replace a few existing ones) with our candidates (be they moderate or liberal as appropriate to their constituency), with traditional Democratic values and enough spine to stand up and speak truth to power (both in the form of the GOP and the DLC), then I'll have a renewed hope. And I'll do what I can to bring that very thing about!

[BrklynLiberal]

21. kick

:kick:

[Douglas Carpenter]

24. kick and recommended

[Sgent]

25. I haven't said much

But Hillary would possibly be the worst candidate we could put up in '08.

She has none of the civil liberties credentials, since she will always be associated with Tipper Gore in their campaign to control the individual purchases of this country. Libertarians who come down harder on social issues (esp. after the * admin) would not migrate for Hillary.

The other reason is that Hillary Clinton=Ann Coulter of the left to a LOT of swing votors (I know, I was one, and am in a family of them). Many of them would hold their noses and vote for * for a 3rd term before voting for Hillary.

Someone in the vien of Dean or Clark, or even Powell if we could get him to switch parties, would be much more likely to win.

[rateyes]

26. In the end, we need to have progressive candidates

who will not drop out after Iowa and New Hampshire. I am tired of the "coronation" of the Dem. candidate before I even get a chance to vote in the primary in my state. The game isn't over til its over. I really think that somehow it would be much better for our party if all of the state primaries and caucuses were held the same day later in the season, after all the candidates had a chance to get their message out, and to have our convention a month after the GOP convention---but, that's just me. I'm tired of this "run to the left in the primaries, then to the center for the election" stuff. Say who you are and where you stand, and stick with it. If we are going to a "50 state strategy (as I think we should), then we need to "nationalize" the primaries/caucuses for the presidential election...at least that's my opinion. If you can convince me otherwise, I'm willing to listen.

[mzmolly]

30. Marshall is NOT a signer on the PNAC document.

He helped author this document which some compare to PNAC. Though, I don't see a call to invade the middle east?

http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?contentid=252144&subsecid=900020&knlgAreaID=450004

"At the same time, we believe President Bush is in many respects leading America in the wrong direction on national security. Having triumphed on the battlefield in both Afghanistan and Iraq, we are now in danger of losing the peace in both countries. By insisting on our right to act unilaterally, by ignoring intelligence assessments that conflicted with his desire to act, and by underestimating the resources needed to accomplish the missions, the president is putting America's battlefield gains in jeopardy. By focusing too much on U.S. military might as its main foreign policy instrument, the administration is abdicating its responsibility to fashion an effective, long-term political and economic strategy for changing the conditions in which Islamic fundamentalism breeds and from which new threats to our national security are most likely to arise. And by pushing ideologically motivated tax cuts and repudiating the nation's hard-won commitment to fiscal discipline, President Bush also is reducing our future capacity to act around the world and weakening American economic leadership and leverage."

I'm not a fan of the DLC or Mr. Marshall, but I think we should be accurate and not overly inflamatory.

[AntiCoup2K4]

31. He didn't sign the original PNAC document, but he has signed many since...

http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraq-20030319.htm

http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraq-20030328.htm

http://www.newamericancentury.org/hongkong-20040629.htm

http://www.newamericancentury.org/russia-20040928.htm
(Note: Joe Biden also signed this one)

http://www.newamericancentury.org/defense-20050128.htm


And the previously mentioned Marshall Wittman who supposedly "converted" to the Democratic Party after a resume that contains virtually every right wing "think tank" on the planet has also been busy in PNAC land.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/Bushletter.htm

http://www.newamericancentury.org/Bushletter-040302.htm

[mzmolly]

34. I don't see the same type of language that the original PNAC

document contains. However, I don't care for Democrats aligning themselves with PNAC period. How many Republicans have signed on to DLC policy documents? My guess is ZERO.

Thanks for the information. :hi:

[SeanQ]

36. Great links!

Thanks!