A DLC spokesperson attacks Pelosi on her Iraq stance.

>>>snip
Marshall Wittmann, a former Republican political strategist now with the centrist Democratic Leadership Council, said Pelosi may have resurrected her party's most deadly liability -- voters' lack of trust in the party on national security.

"If Karl Rove was writing the timing of this, he wouldn't have written it any differently, with the president of the United States expressing resolve and the Democratic leader offering surrender," Wittmann said, referring to Bush's top adviser. "For Republicans, this is manna from heaven."

David Sirota, a Democratic strategist in Montana long critical of the party leadership's timidity, fired back: "It is not surprising that a bunch of insulated elitists in the Washington establishment -- most of whom have never served in uniform -- would stab the Democratic Party in the back and attack the courage of people like Vietnam War hero Jack Murtha and Nancy Pelosi for their stand on Iraq.">>>>snip
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/01/AR2005120101491.html

This is really stabbing people in the back.

They ask for solidarity wih them but not with the party.

Even by DLC standards, this crosses the line. Saying the Democratic Party leadership is offering "surrender" is a Dick Cheney line. For Republicans, Wittmann's statement is "manna" from heaven. I frequently have serious issues with the DLC as an organization and with individual DLC members. However I do not believe that the majority of DLC members would support this blatant use of RW talking points against a Democratic Party Majority leader who was elected with the support of many Congressional DLC members, I would remind Wittmann. It is possible to disagree with Pelosi on this if they must without stabbing her in the back in public. The DLC needs to repudiate this comment, and if they don't than individual DLC members need to. This is outrageous.

repugs are WRONG.

:shrug:

I absolutely LOVE the guy. His appearances on Al Franken's show are the best thing about AAR!

He's my go-to guy for progressive info!


www.davidsirota.com

What's not to love?



http://www.davidsirota.com/

Pshaw! Such unbridled hubris.

What are we going to do about these lunatics?

comes out against this type of divisive and stupid rhetoric. Seems only they DLC'ers speak up if it is a DEMOCRAT who they don't agree with - they won't even criticize * that harshly. The DLC's paid spokesmodel is supported by their memebrship which is why the DLC keeps doing the same stupid stuff over and over again. That says all anybody needs to know about the corporate DLC "folks" and wannabe candidates affiliated with this kind of drive-by political shooting. :yoiks:

I want to hear Hillary take him down on this statement and I would feel a whole lot better about her. Whittman and Marshall have said other things too over time that makes me want to puke.

the DLC attacked Presidential candidate Howard Dean as an out-of-touch liberal, because of his anti-war stance. The DLC has dismissed other war critics such as filmmaker Michael Moore as "Anti-American" and members of the "loony left"<1>. Even as domestic support for the Iraq War plummeted in 2004 and 2005, Marshall called upon Democrats to balance their criticism of Bush's handling of the Iraq War with praise for the President's achievements and cautioned "Democrats need to be choosier about the political company they keep, distancing themselves from the pacifist and anti-American fringe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Leadership_Council

resist it, its policies AND, its candidates, or no matter who wins the White House in '08, things will continue to be this bad for the rest of your lifetime, and maybe the lifetimes of your children.

TC

This is a political group without a constituency.

Great observation.

Which comes from their corporate sponcers. I want an apology from a spokes person, for smearing our minority leader in the house.

...er constituents posting here from time to time....

So far I've agreed with everyone in this thread..all great points. IT does seem that the DLC's raison d'etre is to criticize the DEMS that "get out of line" and leave the Republicans totally alone. Hmmmmm..

... but the DLC inner circle jerk is a bunch of jerks.

Snakes feeding off fat cats. Period.


Here's the one that goes before it, followed by that one again.

is the fact that the DLCers get a LOT of face-time on television because they are "friendly" with media whores. When they come out with this crap, they reinforce the twin ideas that the Democratic Party doesn't have a consistent message and left-America is a fringe group that deserves no voice in the body politic.

I say we close the DLC wing of the "big tent" in favor of opening a far larger wing called the "disenfranchised voter" wing.

Let's not worry about what the little shits of the DLC are saying. Let's worry about what the elected members of the DLC are saying (well ok, we know Lieberman's stance).

Kerry is DLC - wants pullout
Clinton is DLC - wants a deadline

I don't have time to go through the rest of them but let's consider what is important. What the little shits of the DLC are saying or what the big guns are saying.

No, I don't support DLC - just putting it all into perspective. It's real easy to say crap like this when you're not really elected to anything important

What the DLC CEO thinks is irrelevant. No one cares what Al From thinks except Al From. The DLC does not influence the politicians. They take what they can use for their purposes.

other than the fact that the DLC might be the best route to winning the presidency. I mean Clinton was one of the original DLCers. If roles were reverse and we had 55 seats instead of 44+1, I wouldn't be all defensive about kicking out some of these DLCers. But hearing the statements being made by Reid, Murtha, Pelosi, Kerry, Biden, Clinton, etc makes me recognize that if I can give them a majority I really think that they will at least give us a debate on the floor about ending Iraq (I say at least because first, I know not all democrats support it and second - republicans could filibuster).

With that comes the ability to investigate, to hold accountable, to issue subpoenas, to hold hearings, to stop any legislation that would otherwise get through.

Yeah, Kerry wants a pullout.....THIS week!
I don't forget Mr. "Reporting for Duty" savior armyguy who only argued about the MANNER is which we invaded! He had better plans for VICTORY!

Clinton is more of the same. Rah, rah, sniff, sniff, change in the wind, can't say pull-out, Ok, DEADLINE!

They were in agreement with the "little shits of the DLC" as late as a month ago. Murtha was the test balloon.

50% or more of the time. They are a huge voting block that can scuttle any Democratic attempt at ameliorating the effects of this war. What the "little ones" in the DLC is still very important, if not noticed.

But I agree....Al From himself is not that dangerous. Nelson, Nelson, Lincoln, Pryor, Salazer, Landrieu, Carper, Leiberman, and Conrad, on the other hand, are notorious Republican voters.

As an interesting side-note, Kerry is one of our top 10 senators. I am not knocking him for what he does in the Senate and I don't think any of us should (unless he suddenly becomes a RWer, whch he is not).

Hillary is about #16 or so. I won't knock her, either, although I disagree with a lot of her talking points as of late.

You want a target-rich environment of DLCers to not like? There are plenty at the bottom of the list. The aforementioned ones are the most egregious, and their votes count the same as the "big guns".

I really didn't want to give power to the democrats anyways.

I mean god forbid we actually allow the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid the ability to determine what legislation gets debated on the floor. I mean, our troops are already in Iraq, let's just let them there since continued republican majority will ensure they never come home unless it's in a body bag.

that we either we fail to hold Party turncoats accountable or lose any chance at a Democratic majority is a false dichotomy.

There is nothing wrong with political pressure in the form of primary challenges (esp. by Populists in red states), denial of campaign funds, isolation, and exposure to the voting base. Smart politicians will roll with the punches and adapt...dumb ones will go the way of the dinosaur.

I say that the worst of Democratic turncoats deserve all of these forms of political pressure. The status quo has gotten us here; it won't get us out. If it was possible for the Republicans to purge their wavering elements while gaining popularity (arguably because of a consistent message), then surely the Democratic party can do the same with the worst of the worst among their ranks. There are too many of these "over 50%ers" in the Senate to ignore.

And let us not forget...the "far left fringe" of the Democratic Party (everyone left of the DLC) has been essentially correct on most issues ever since these neo-cons came to power. And each time a new issue comes up, the left is decried out as "fringe" and "loony" until the facts make it clear the left was correct all along.

I think the "left fringe" is correct in calling the RW Democrats to the carpet. I think a stirred pot makes a better dish than a stagnant one. Perhaps this dish will taste better to the American people than the last 3 losing election cycles.

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

The DLC thinks Americans are a bunch of dummies. They say: "Above all, Democrats must make it clear to the public that we stand for winning in Iraq, not a rush for the exits" and "What Democrats really should demand from President Bush is victory, not a hasty departure."

Note to the DLC: We have witnessed 2-1/2 years of lies, failure, torture, mass corruption, record-breaking deficit spending, and the tragic deaths of many soldiers and many many more innocent Iraqi men, women and children and we should fall for this line that we can have "victory" by demanding it from Bush? I don't buy your bs anymore than I do the Bush Administration's.

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=253638&kaid=131&subid=192

DLC | New Dem Dispatch | December 1, 2005
Iraq and the Vital Center

Yesterday, President Bush unveiled a "plan for victory" to shore up sagging public confidence in his Iraq policies. Though it broke little new ground, the president's speech at the U.S. Naval Academy did provoke an unfortunate reaction from House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, who endorsed Rep. John Murtha's earlier call for a swift withdrawal of U.S. troops.

We share the widespread frustration with the Bush administration's utterly inept handling of Iraq's post-conflict rebuilding. But too much is at stake in Iraq for America to simply give up and come home. What Democrats really should demand from President Bush is victory, not a hasty departure.

more

I'm not fooled a bit that he is just "someone in the DLC" and his comments have no relevance to what the big dogs of the DLC think.


But he sure gets airtime, media play, and hype for having no power.

That kind of public statement is absolutely inexcuseable. No Democrat is "offering surrender," and we are UNITED in our opposition to Bush's fantasy-world "stay the course," "total victory" propaganda.

It wouldn't surprise me if this jackass is on Rove's payroll.

that we shouldn't criticize Lieberman and other DINOs, but evidently the DLC doesn't apply that rule to itself.

I guess Democratic unity goes only one way with that crowd.

Oh, wait, Marshall Wittman is a "former" Republican strategist. I wonder just how "former" he is.

I called Pelosi's office today and thanked her (thru an aide) for backing John Murtha.