Are there any DLC members we can trust?

[Daylin Byak]

Last night I checked out the membership list on DU of the DLC and I was shocked to see how many members are part of that "cult" and I was amazed to see two Governors that we talk highly of on that list, Janet Nspolitano of Arizona and Bill Richardson of New Mexico. which begs the question: are there any DLC members we can trust?

And second, why are Democrats part of the DLC I read there bio on wikipedia "a group of Democrats that think we should abandon our liberal views to get anywhere" If we abandon our liberal views then what makes us Democrats cause aren't Democrats liberals and that's why people are part of our party because of our liberal views and are non-support for the war, unlike the DLC who are support the war.

Thoughts.

[acmavm]

1. Not really. They sold the man on the street out for the corporate donor.

.

[mdmc]

2. depends on what you mean "trust"

You can trust them to act just a little less evil then the gop...

[HereSince1628]

3. Sure, just trust them to behave like members of the DLC.

Remember their priority tends to be getting elected.

They can generally be trusted to worry, whine and gnash their teeth about taking positions that one or another pundit thinks might lose a conservative voter.

[Kurovski]

4. The thread just below this one on the "latest" board is

"Republicans are cheaters and liars". I don't know why I think that's funny, but I do.

[MrBenchley]

5. "we" is especially funny in this context

"why are Democrats part of the DLC"
Because some of us are adults.

"then what makes us Democrats cause aren't Democrats liberals"
You'd have to ask pro-school-prayer, anti-choice John Murtha. Or Paul "Deport 'em all" Hackett. (snicker)

[400Years]

9. Adults? You are the one that uses name calling as a first resort.

In fact, I don't know if I have ever seen you post a single thread that didn't resort to calling people names.

[MrBenchley]

12. Like I said, "we" is especially funny...

[Greyhound]

52. The ignore link is your friend. n/t

[Cassandra]

11. It was an adult decision...

to give away middle class jobs? Just because you don't know anyone who needs one? When the middle class is gone, who's going to buy what you"re selling?

[MrBenchley]

13. LOL!

Of course, asking for any proof that the DLC gave away middle class jobs is pointless.....

[Cassandra]

15. You don't support NAFTA and GATT?

Well, why didn't you say so.

[MrBenchley]

16. Is THAT what you were talking about? Weird.

You mean you think American corporations should be allowed to buccaneer overseas WITHOUT some sort of framework to rein them in?

[Cassandra]

17. The idea that there is a framework to reign them in...

is an illusion you are happy to push on the rest of us. Between those agreements and the tax policies that encourage outsourcing, this country is being screwed.

[MrBenchley]

18. Wow, you sure have a weird view of the world....

The corporations actually shipping jobs overseas are blameless, but the framework of laws and regulations reigning them in are all to blame.

"the tax policies that encourage outsourcing"
Those are GOP policies....but don't let any facts get in the way of your tedious DLC-bashing.

[Cassandra]

Please tell me what the DLC proposes...

to reverse this trend.

[MrBenchley]

20. You mean you didn't look to see what the DLC had to say

before you started ranting about them?

Well, that says it all.....

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=253727&kaid=108&subid=206

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=253699&kaid=106&subid=122

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=253558&kaid=108&subid=128

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=253585&kaid=127&subid=173

[Cassandra]

25. Actually, I wanted to hear what you had to say.

"One positive outgrowth of the outsourcing debate may be an increased focus on the policies that maintain a competitive environment for quality job creation: research, fiscal, technology, regulatory, and education policies to improve innovation and build a highly skilled workforce. The United States must always compete for the cutting-edge industries likely to drive higher-wage job creation in the United States. Continually advancing to the cutting edge ensures that as technology and automation increase the ease of out-sourcing, we are developing new products and services that create new job opportunities at home."
Basically all service jobs, although higher paying ones. What will that do to help our trade deficit? Before Reagan, we were 97% self-sufficient. Now we hardly manufacture anything for export at all. Also, research, banking and state regulatory jobs are already being outsourced. We can't have an economy where we export nothing, import everything and have nice jobs servicing each other. That just won't last forever.

[MrBenchley]

28. Like I said.....

So from outsourcing, you want to hopscotch to the trade deficit, in desperate search of something to bash the DLC with...hokay.

[Cassandra]

30. You don't think that outsourcing has anything to do...

with the trade deficit? Shouldn't the DLC, deep thinkers that you are, have a policy to address that?

[MrBenchley]

31. SSDD

[Cassandra]

37. Obviously my time would be better spent...

going to another thread while you and wyldwolf back-slap each other, while happily fooling yourselves with the thought that you are the adults. I have a minor in economics, an MBA and my own business. Outsourcing is removing my customers here while not providing me with more customers overseas. People making a dollar a day or even 10 dollars a day cannot afford to buy my product.
You obviously prefer to let the DLC do your thinking for you. I'll admit that on the surface it sounds good, all nice and learned and wrapped up in a neat bow, but the long term implications to our trade deficit are not separable from a discussion about outsourcing. If the DLC has not instructed you on what to say about this subject, perhaps you can request a position paper from them and then share it with us.

[MrBenchley]

38. Don't let me stop you....

"You obviously prefer to let the DLC do your thinking for you."
Whereas some people open their yap to bash the DLC without even knowing what the DLC has to say.

It's a funny old world.....

[Cassandra]

40. I have read what the DLC has to say...

and they do not address my concerns. And neither do you. I will remember that the next time I see you in a thread extolling the DLC; that you have nothing to contribute of your own on these issues.

[MrBenchley]

42. It's a funny old world....

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

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

[Zodiak]

79. I love it when people get in arguments with those on my ignore n/t

[Armstead]

41. That's the same rubbish they've been feeding us for years

It totally glosses over the ore of the problem. It's like presribing aspirin for cancer.

"Gosh sure it may seem like all of the jobs are being shipped overseas. But that's good for you and will make our eonomy strong. Just get training and allow US companies to be more competative, and we'll train for the next genertion of jobs that will magically be created by outsourcing our jobs and productive capacity to chaep labor markets."

Then the "new" jobs get outsourced a few years later, and the DLC Corporatist tyoes come back with the same pie-in-the-sky shit.

[MrBenchley]

44. I'm sure the Green party has a plan

don't let me stop you.

[Armstead]

50. People like you are the best recruiting tool the Green Party has

[MrBenchley]

51. Don't let me stop you....

That Green Party bandwagon is on the roll (snicker)

[wyldwolf]

21. I have a better question

Since it is the "progressives" who complain the loudest, what do THEY propose to reverse this trend? Perhaps the DFA or the PDA have some sort of policy plan and analysis?

[MrBenchley]

23. That IS a good question...

Say, why don't the two of us start a thread bashing the DFA and PDA for doing nothing? Of course, we'd have to put all our bashing in the form of open-ended questions...

By the way, a search of the PDA site turns up a bitch about "outsourcing torture" and a couple of blog entries...but no proposal on the subject.

http://www.google.com/search?ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&q=outsourcing&submit.x=13&submit.y=12&domains=pdamerica.org%3Bblog.pdamerica.org&sitesearch=pdamerica.org%3Bblog.pdamerica.org

And DFA seems to be too busy screeching about "DINOs" to actually address anything as mundane as an issue.

[Armstead]

48. A simple answer

It's not the full answer, but it's a start.

The most succesful decades for the Uniited States economy in broad terms were the middle years of the 20th Century. Business prospered and the middle class was solid.

But in the 80's,90's and 00's, many of the policies that had created that broad-based economic success were stripped away. The value of the minimum wage fell, unions were undermined, public infrastructure was privatized and sold off to the highest bidder, corporations were allow to merge into huge monopolies.....etc. etc. etc.

Maybe for a start we should get rid of the crappy Corporate CONservative policies that have been so destructive, and restore the balance that real libralism provided, to at least get back to some middle point again.

But according to the DLC centrists even that modest approach is too "radical" and "leftist" and "purist." :banghead:

[wyldwolf]

55. It wasn't an answer to my question

What is the PDA and DFA proposing specifically?

By the way, the 1990s were more prosperous than the middle of the 20th century.

[Armstead]

56. Prosperous for whom?

Inome gaps widened, most industies consolodated into monopolistic conglomerates, outsourcing was beginning to gain steam, people on welfare got forced into jobs at unsuppotable wages.....

And you seem to not want to take "yes" for an answer. How about getting back into the old spirit that brought us Social Security, Medicare, a minimum wage, anti-trust regulations,an end to child labor, trade policies that protect domestic produicers and workers.....etc. etc. etc.

Life may be complicated but the basics are not rocket science. Just start restoring some clear values and truths and policies that worked to the political process before. Update them maybe, but get back to the basic prinsiples instead of being the Party of Hamlet.

[wyldwolf]

58. say, what are the PDA and DFA doing specifically?

1990s:

The Strongest Economy in a Generation. Longest Economic Expansion in U.S. History. In February 2000, the United States entered the 107th consecutive month of economic expansion -- the longest economic expansion in history.

21.2 million new jobs were created since 1993, the most jobs ever created under a single Administration -- and more new jobs than Presidents Reagan and Bush created during their three terms. 92 percent (19.4 million) of the new jobs were created in the private sector, the highest percentage in 50 years.

Fastest and Longest Real Wage Growth in Over Three Decades. In the last 12 months, average hourly earnings have increased 3.7 percent -- faster than the rate of inflation. The United States has had five consecutive years of real wage growth -- the longest consecutive increase since the 1960s. Since 1993, real wages are up 6.8 percent, after declining 4.3 percent during the Reagan and Bush years.

Unemployment was the lowest Nearly the Lowest in Three Decades.

Highest Homeownership Rate in History.

Lowest Poverty Rate in Two Decades. The poverty rate has fallen from 15.1 percent in 1993 to 12.7 percent in 1998. That's the lowest poverty rate since 1979 and the largest five-year drop in poverty in nearly 30 years (1965-1970). The African-American poverty rate has dropped from 33.1 percent in 1993 to 26.1 percent in 1998 -- the lowest level ever recorded and the largest five-year drop in African-American poverty in more than a quarter century (1967-1972). The poverty rate for Hispanics is at the lowest level since 1979, and dropped to 25.6 percent in 1998.

Largest Five-Year Drop in Child Poverty Rate Since the ‘60s. Under President Clinton and Vice President Gore, child poverty has declined from 22.7 percent in 1993 to 18.9 percent in 1998 -- the biggest five-year drop in nearly 30 years. The poverty rate for African-American children has fallen from 46.1 percent in 1993 to 36.7 percent in 1998 -- a level that is still too high, but is the lowest level in 20 years and the biggest five-year drop on record. The rate also fell for Hispanic children, from 36.8 percent to 34.4 percent - and is now 6.5 percentage points lower than it was in 1993.

Improved Access to Affordable, Quality Child Care and Early Childhood Programs.

Increased the Minimum Wage.

Enacted Single Largest Investment in Health Care for Children since 1965.

Extended Strong, Enforceable Patient Protections for Millions of Americans.

[Armstead]

59. A Bubble of Illusion

It ws certainly better then now, but too many bad things were being enabled that came home to roost in 2000-01.

How could things have gone so bad so fast? Because it was a house of cards that glossed over important underlying problems. And much of it was based on Roaring 20's style excesses and illusions, and hyper-investment scams like the dot-com boom.

[wyldwolf]

61. say, what are the PDA and DFA doing specifically?

90s prosperity - a matter of public record.

[Armstead]

62. Endorsing, donating money and working for candidates

Looking for candidates who their members believe represent a message and specific policies that would enourage more participatory democracy and work for progressive policies.

That's what they're going about it.

[wyldwolf]

63. say, what are the PDA and DFA doing specifically?

..and who are the candidates they are endorsing and what are their messages and specific policy proposals?

[Armstead]

67. Got a computer? Got Internet? Know how to Goggle?

Visit their website. A lot of information there.

You don't need me to do your homework for you.

[wyldwolf]

72. yes, but that isn't my responsibility

It is the responsibility of the one making the claim to either prove hie/her assertions or to lose a certain credibility.

Since you can't or won't provide the proof, it is reasonable to assume that the DFA and PDA and all candidates endorsed by them have no specific plan.

[Armstead]

74. Whatever........

It would take me at least an hour or more to read through them, take copious notes, visit all of the candidates' websites and write a detailed report back to you.

It would take you a few minutes to check out the websites and find out for yourself.

And I have a feeling no matter how detailed a list of specific proposals from those candidates miught be, you'd just ignore it and go on repetiing the same mantra about "But what do they really plan to do about it?"

So just keep repeating the question and dismissing the "leftist purists" without bothering to find out the answers for your self. A lot easier than actually debating policies I realize.

[wyldwolf]

85. well, since you KNOW it to be so, the info must be close at hand

[Name removed]

73. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Loge23]

6. In a word: NO

It's time for all of us to abandon the party that has apparently abandoned us a long time ago.
How can anyone explain the current situation rationally? The incredibly corrupt and incompentant administration runs away with just about every item on their agenda with little or no opposition.
The mis-named "Patriot" Act was the last straw for me. How any Dem could support this fascist manifesto is beyond me.
They all must go. We desperately need an alternative.

[Roland99]

26. In two words: HELL NO!

[radio4progressives]

77. Not Just No!, but Hell No!

[Lerkfish]

7. IMHO the DLC is wrong-headed in their thinking

that makes them naive and foolhardy. Even if their hearts are in the right place, they are running plays from 10 years ago and don't realize that democrats are currently fed up and wanting change from business as usual.
Their main achilles heel is that they feel they are better qualified to judge how to run the party than the majority membership of the party. Its a misguided elitism. They even RECOGNIZE they are the minority, but somehow they continue to chide the rest of the democrats that unless we all morph into them, we cannot win elections.

All you have to do is look at THEIR track record, and ask who the hell put them in charge?
You won't get answers, though, you'll just get called "purists" and "extreme left fringe" or whatever the insult du Jour is.

They call themselves moderates or centrists, but what they really are is corporatists. They are lobby by, and are therefore beholden to, corporate funding to the point they no longer want to know or care what the man on the street democrat is concerned about.

Note this is my opinion of the ORGANIZATION. There are individuals, purportedly members of DLC that vary somewhat, but the organization itself, as judged from Al From and others and their statements in the press, seem pretty consistent.

Their goal is to be "republican lite", a lot closer to republican values than the democratic party is in reality. They want us to abandon gay rights and reproductive rights in order to "win elections". They also feel its better to have a dem who votes like a republican in office than no dem at all. I point out: what's the difference, then?

[mtnsnake]

8. So because you're weary of 2 of them we shouldn't trust any of them?

What about someone who's a mass murderer? If he's an American, does that mean we shouldn't trust any Americans?

"And second, why are Democrats part of the DLC I read there bio on wikipedia "a group of Democrats that think we should abandon our liberal views to get anywhere" If we abandon our liberal views then what makes us Democrats cause aren't Democrats liberals and that's why people are part of our party because of our liberal views and are non-support for the war, unlike the DLC who are support the war."

I have no idea. First you gotta tell me how many sentences there are in that.

[Cassandra]

10. They can mostly be trusted to be socially liberal...

but they are in the corporatist's grip and I think it's become obvious to us that that is a rapidly growing problem.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

14. I like pie. n/t

[Walt Starr]

19. I don't trust ANY DLC members

and there are damned few politicians of any stripe I'd trust with anything.

[wyldwolf]

22. I trust them all as much as I trust any politician

[SaveElmer]

24. How about this for a question...

Are there any members of the "Progressive Purists" we can trust not to stab the Democratic Party in the back whenever they get the chance?

[Walt Starr]

27. Man, have you got THAT backwards!

Most people I know who have left the Democratic PArty to become Independents only after decades of beinbg stabbed in the back by the party!

:eyes:

SHEESH!

[SaveElmer]

32. Hardly..

Looks to me like they just couldn't stomach the fight any longer. I know the feeling, as I told you I have been there myself, I was pretty dissatisfied with the party after 1988, and I have to admit to feelings of frustration after 2000 and 2002...but I realized nothing would be accomplished by carping from the sidelines...its more satisfying to me to stay in the fight.

[Walt Starr]

34. You are just plain wrong on so many levels

Every last person I know who has given up on the Democrats has done so in disgust.

The Republican Party panders to its base.

The Democratic Party stabs, shits on, and tells its base to shut the fuck up, then they get pissed when their base decides to walk away.

Another thing to remember, you're really winning a lot of votes from independent progressives by bashing us.

Maybe it's time you took a lesson from the GOP playbook, because I will withhold my vote on any race where the Democrats have pissed me off.

My vote is not granted on a silver platter to somebody just because they stick the stupid assed (D) after their name.

[SaveElmer]

36. How do you define the "base"...

I hear this term constantly yet it is never defined....

Why are you the base and I am not?

And you know...anecdotal evidence from you is not going to hold much sway...it proves nothing...I can point to an equal number of people I know who have become Democrats since say 1992 precisely because when Democrats are in power they are so much better for the country.

The number of Independents has been growing since the late sixties. Progressives got precisely what they wanted in 1972 and the party sank even further, and the number of independents continued to grow. Has nothing to do with issues, but with the decline in machine politics.

[Walt Starr]

39. There are many consituencies in the base

but overall, the base are those individuals who donate money to the campaigns and work to canvas neighborhoods to drum up votes for a campaign.

The base are those individuals who are actively pursuing voters for candidates within a party.

And there are large numbers of us who worked our asses off in 2004 an now have walked away in disgust.

Those who are left will have to work to get our votes now, because we have determined it is no longer in our interests to support candidates who have proven they do not support us.

I am now an Independent and my vote is no longer to be taken for granted, nor is any money for donations or any work to physically support any candidate. I am no longer beholden to the Democratic Party, nor are party concerns ever of any concern in any decision I make in a voting booth.

That is precisely what the policies of the DLC have wrought for the Democratic Party.

[SaveElmer]

43. So then I can be considered the base...

And you no longer can be....

And I have to say, if you look at the work the DNC has done to bring in grassroots support, evidenced by the record number of small contributions to the Party, that there aren't as many disaffected as you seem to think.

2006 will tell us the answer

I'll bet you now, the Democratic Party, in 2006 will take back at least one house of Congress, perhaps both, a majority of Governorships, and in 2008 will retake the White House...

[Walt Starr]

45. Yep, you are now the base and I am no longer a part of the base

I am now a part of that group who is not beholden to any party which it is yourjob to get to vote for your candidate.

About your prediction, never misunderstimate the Democratic Party's ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Never.

They have proven they are too timid to be effective time and again, and current opportunities that are being missed reinforces the level of timidity demonstrated by them. Timid politicians are not worthy of my vote.

[SaveElmer]

46. We shall see...

Mark this thread and we can come back to in in November...

[Walt Starr]

49. Remember well, nobody is saying anything different about 2006

than was said about 2002 and 2004, IMO.

All the Republicans need for their strategy are two words, "Yes, but..." It matters not what is said after those two words as everybody already knows what they are saying and nobody really cares. Rubber meets the road and they get slightly more than 50% of the cast vote, or at least enough votes to outstrip the Democrat.

[Zodiak]

80. What should frighten the party about Walt's statement here is:

I have been reading his post for some time, and he is to the right of me (and I am a moderate Dem from Texas). If the Dem party has lost Walt, then I would say that the Dems are pissing off more than the "fringe" and the "purists".

Personally, John Kerry is a DLCer I can somewhat trust. That is about it.

In the Senate.....Harkin is the "progressive leftist" whom I think is VERY VERY reliably liberal. We rarely talk about him on DU.

I think that those apologists for the Democratic conservatives and party turncoats (and you know it is most of the DLC, especially in the Senate) who have been acting like our teachers and guidance counselors for the entire Bush era need to kindly listen for once.

[MrBenchley]

29. And the answer is clearly "no."

[MH1]

33. Nope. n/t

[radio4progressives]

78. "Progressive Purists" - a phony DLC Talking Point Meme...

a bullshit straw man, and non sequitor.

[Zodiak]

81. agreed

I am definitely NOT pure.

I do not give a rat's bum about gun control.
I do not belive in policial correctness, safety nazism, and I think that we pick on smokers too much.
I like hamburgers, steaks, and I fish and hunt from time to time.
I drive a pick-up truck and was raised on a military base.
I was an Eagle Scout.
I believe in capitalism and free enterprise.
I think Ron Paul is an okay Republican.
I do not like illegal immigration and think we should send the lot packing.

But if I had a dollar for every time I was accused of being some lefty nutcase with some kind of Birkenstock hippy greenparty Ralph Nader "purist" agenda on this board by a DLC apologist, Skinner would be able to retire.

We should stand for traditional Democratic principles....plain and simple. The 'big tent' needs to close the door on the right wing of the tent and open it back up on the left....its lonely without populists, greens, and progressives and I'm tired of this little bunch of elitist blowhards running the ship into iceberg after iceberg calling the rest of the party "immature" for not staying on board.

As long as Dems like Nelson (or Nelson) are in the party and representing us, it doesn't matter if we have a majority. Anyone remember 2000-2002?

[SaveElmer]

86. No more so...

Than "Vichy Democrat", "Corporatist Whore" etc etc!!!

[NoPasaran]

35. I trust them at least as much

As I trust any DUer who announces he's quitting the party and leaving DU forever!

[Totally Committed]

47. No.

And no Republicans we can trust either.

Do DLC. No Republicans.

TC

[AtomicKitten]

54. You lost me at "cult."

Until some of our DU faux radical elites (nice, huh?) can show some goddamn common courtesy toward other members of the Democratic party, the rest of us Democrats have nothing to discuss with them. The DLC has as much right to a voice as the loud 2.5% that calls for their being purged from the party. I belong to neither sect, but I'm disgusted with the propaganda spewed here on a daily basis to try to sway others. The energy would be better spent working toward retaking at least one house of Congress in 2006.

And I'd be careful about applying the word "cult" lest it be mirrored right back.

[SOS]

76. The DLC can't be "purged"

because it has nothing to do with the Democratic Party.
Individuals can join, but their total number wouldn't fill the seats at Radio City Music Hall.
It's 1992 influence is long gone.
It's like saying the Republicans should purge their Party of AEI members.
The DLC is an office on Pennsylvannia Avenue, with a rapidly dwindling membership.
Terry McCaulliff is gone, Howard Dean is in. The influence of the DLC is approaching zero. Even founding members like Rosenberg and Kamarck have quit in disgust.
Not one of the 2004 Presidential candidates would even attend one of their functions.
It does have a PNAC signatory and a Christian Coalition lawyer at the helm, but that won't impress many Democrats after 5 years of Bush.
And as Iraq plummets into total failure, their foreign policy credentials are dead.
There's nothing to "purge" if 100% of the national Democratic candidates refuse their lunch invitation.

And on the courtesy front, perhaps Will Marshall could stop calling the 60% of Americans who now oppose the Iraq debacle as "the pacifist and anti-American fringe."

[AtomicKitten]

83. you get it, you really get it

... "It's 1992 influence is long gone ... The DLC is an office on Pennsylvannia Avenue, with a rapidly dwindling membership ... Terry McCaulliff is gone, Howard Dean is in. The influence of the DLC is approaching zero ..."


Yahtzee! Which is precisely why they should be viewed as nothing more than an annoyance. Their era is over, their influence dissipating.

All the energies spent chronicling their sins, wailing against their now defunk dogma, and calling for them to be exorcised from the Democratic party are a pointless waste of time. Plus sharpening up one's elbows and trying to muscle others from a group is bullying behavior. All the DLC haters need to do is muster some common courtesy and patience, and their most fervent wish of seeing the DLC disappear will come to fruition.

[NCarolinawoman]

57. I trust my Congressional Representative Brad Miller.

He spoke eloquently against the IWR. To paraphrase: "On the surface it would seemingly be the patriotic thing to do to vote in support of the war, but after looking at the evidence, I am not at all convinced that this war is necessary." Ironically, Brad represented John Edwards's home district in North Carolina.

If you look at Brad Miller's voting record, it is solidly progressive. But yes, he is a member of the DLC, as is another progressive Rep. in N.C., David Price. David use to be a political science professor at Duke University.

[Zinfandel]

60. Fuck NO! Corporate republicans in democrats name only...What better

way to control a party...

[Daylin Byak]

64. Thank you for replyling

Basically you can trust a few DLC members but not all of them. I didn't start a new thread about this but I have been reading alittle about another wing of the Democratic party, they only oringate in the House there called the Blue dog democrats who are they? all I know there are a group of conservative Democrats but are they similar to the DLC?

[Idioteque]

65. There are lots of good DLC members...

Brian Baird, Earl Bleumenaur, Ron Wyden, Adam Schiff, David Wu, Jim Moran, and Jay Inslee just to name a few.

The DLC has some good ideas, among them are trade liberalization and getting rid of farm subsidies.

Where I draw the line is when they attack the base of the party. That being said, a lot of New Democrats in Congress are very progressive and they do a great job.

[paineinthearse]

66. The membership list is back?

I was having an off-line conversation with another member in which we discussed it had been removed for some period of time. That was about the time they had listed Obama as a member and he objected.

Can you provide a link?

[Daylin Byak]

68. DU has a list of DLC members

just go to research forum and scroll down till you find the list, it's there.

[paineinthearse]

69. yes, but....

How current is it? When is the last time it was edited? What is the source?

I'd like to see DLC put it back on their website.

[Daylin Byak]

70. I'm not sure how current it is

[mitchum]

71. You can trust them to be DLC...

"What is the nature of a thing?"
that's about it

[timbnyc44]

75. Interesting timing to your question.....

Here's Molly Ivins on the same topic: (excerpt)

http://progressive.org/mag_ivins0306

Enough of the D.C. Dems
By Molly Ivins
March 2006 Issue

Mah fellow progressives, now is the time for all good men and women to come to the aid of the party. I don’t know about you, but I have had it with the D.C. Democrats, had it with the DLC Democrats, had it with every calculating, equivocating, triangulating, straddling, hair-splitting son of a bitch up there, and that includes Hillary Rodham Clinton.

I will not be supporting Senator Clinton because: a) she has no clear stand on the war and b) Terri Schiavo and flag-burning are not issues where you reach out to the other side and try to split the difference. You want to talk about lowering abortion rates through cooperation on sex education and contraception, fine, but don’t jack with stuff that is pure rightwing firewater.

[Jack Rabbit]

82. Sure, I trust Al From and Bruce Reed . . .

To try to read progressives out of the Party and whine about the problem with the Democratic Party being that there are too many Democrats in it.

And you can trust me to say the time is long past for these two nitwits to sit down and shut up.

[ronnykmarshall]

84. NONE!! NONE OF THEM!!

THEY ARE ALL SPAWNS OF SATAN!!

[Amaryllis]

87. Bill Richardson totally stonewalled the Greens from doing a recount

in NM after the 2004 election. The election results were so suspicious there that David Cobb tried to do one there, but Richardson stonewalled them every step of the way. NM almost certainly would have gone blue if they'd been allowed to do the recount.