Democratic Underground - Read it: - Democratic Underground

You know, that article BY the DLC just might be the best argument AGAINST the DLC that I have ever read.

"Clinton signed a welfare reform bill and a free-trade agreement over the opposition of most of the Democratic congressional delegation. In 1997, his effort to secure an extension of fast-track negotiating authority was killed by his fellow Democrats as well."

So Clinton's primary opposition in Congress was ... those darn Democrats.

"The DLC and the New Democrats are vulnerable to such a defeat, since they are attempting to change a public philosophy without the benefit of a realigning event and without a mass or activist base. From the makeup of the delegates to the nominating conventions to the main sources of campaign volunteers and funds, it is clear that the liberal faction and its constituent groups continue to predominate within the party. The liberals are still an important, if not vital, component in winning the party's nomination for office from congressman to president. And with their dominance of the congressional party, they are also critical actors in constructing a governing coalition. Lacking this base within the party itself, New Democrats -- or a faction in either party attempting to change their party's philosophy -- require a sustained period of political success in order to truly remake their party and wed new groups to their coalition."

At least the DLC recognizes the fact they do not really represent the Democratic base. And interesting choice of pro-nouns describing anything liberal as they, them and their. Not we, us and our.

"Indeed, a group of Republican elected officials and benefactors has established the Republican Leadership Council to recapture the GOP's agenda from its right wing and replace it with a more mainstream platform in order to better the Republicans' odds in 2000 and beyond. ... They hope that a New Republican-- or a 'compassionate conservative' -- wins the GOP presidential nomination soon and saves a party that has lost the presidency twice and has seen its newly won hold on Congress weaken."

They got their man with his "compassionate conservative" message elected. But if the RLC is the Republican version of the DLC as this article suggests, then how come their man took his part FURTHER to the Right instead of the Center? Or do the two LCs really have the same goal: move this country to the Right? The D version just has further to move.

"Ultimately, it is success in winning such offices, plus a continuing hold on the presidency, that will institutionalize the New Democrat philosophy further. And with each victory, it will be harder and harder to return to the liberalism that preceded it."

And in conclusion ... this DLC article fully admits what everyone here already believes. The DLC wishes to destroy liberalism. So we can finally get down to the debate we should be having in this country:

Fascism (is it enough that we make the trains in this country run on time)
versus Nazism (or must we conquer the remainder of the world to ensure no outside force threatens those trains).

Reply #86: Read it: [View All]