Skip to main content

View Diary: Time for the DLC to die (281 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Geez, get over it (2.60)
    So while the DLC pushed the party establishment to discredit Howard Dean and his army of volunteers

    It's STILL all about Howie, isn't it.  Geez, get over it.  Dean got clobbered because Trippi's vaunted "netroots" did not translate into votes.  The DLC was right about Dean, and so was I.

    Talk about somebody who is fighting yesterday's battles...  Hypocritically, you blame the DLC for bomb-throwing, yet you go nuclear on them, calling for them to "die."  You blame them for internecine attacks while you hurl all sorts of mean (but meaningless) adjectives at them.  Your screed is so nakedly hypocritical it is hard to understand how you clicked the "publish" button with a clear conscience.

    Take a deep breathe, Kos.  The Chimp is going down in November as long as the Dem Party stays united.  Stop crying about Howard Dean and blaming others for his (and your) failures.              

    •  wait a minute (none)
      it's not about whether Dean won or lost the candidacy.
      It's about what made his candidacy necessary.

       It's about the direction/agenda the DLC wishes to impose on the party. And the tactics they use to gain/maintain control.

      I posted more about this, below.

      Air America, at last!

      by Tulip on Mon May 24, 2004 at 07:33:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Amazing that *you* could even type the following: (4.00)
      Your screed is so nakedly hypocritical it is hard to understand how you clicked the "publish" button with a clear conscience.

      Prop up a mirror, Politus.  You are infamous and were a dark internet cross to bear for the candidate you supported.  Which ever moniker you fly under.  "Screed"?... yikes, from you...?

      I guess we have Gen. Boykin Rules of Engagement: our god is bigger.

      by Marisacat on Mon May 24, 2004 at 08:31:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Chimp is going down because of chimp (4.00)
      Not because the Democrats have stumbled into mass acceptance.

      If you guys have been so right, answer me this (you haven't before) -- why do the Republicans control every power center in this country? Every single one of them?

      Why didn't Kerry catch on until he co-opted Dean's rhetoric?

      Yeah, the DLC's time is history. Heck, From is going after NDN now, their ideological twins. Why? Because NDN is embracing the concept of PEOPLE controlling the political process, not corporations.

      And if it was a disagreement and nothing more, then big deal. Lots of people disagree with lots of things within the party. But From throws bombs. And people like you whine and cry when bombs are thrown back.

      I didn't throw the first grenade. But I do respond. And I will respond. Because I'm not afraid of Republicans (like From and the DLC), and I'm not afraid of bullies who attack those who stand up to Republicans and the DLC.

      •  Me like... (none)
        the new and improved Kos!!!!!

        Why didn't Kerry catch on until he co-opted Dean's rhetoric?

        ~~~~

        The real question is... Why the hell is Kerry now taking on the rhetoric of Lieberman?...yunno the guy that always got boo'ed at the Democratic Debates, whose positions on issues didn't catch on to nary a Dem voter even the conservative ones.

      •  But Don't You Think (none)
        That there's a world of difference between standing up to an individual, an organization, or an ideology, and calling for its extinction?

        What do you do about the hordes of good solid democrats who voted for Bill Clinton, perhaps pine for him, who worked hard under his administration to make the country a better place, and who therefore feel some attachment to the DLC?

        Is calling them Republican fair?  Especially when they're sending money, working hard to elect democrats and pulling levers for your guys all across the country?

        I understand your basic points, but don't you think that you could be a little more politically saavy than you have been in this thread?  You've done a lot for the democratic party--but you could do more and better than the apparent hypocrisy in this thread.

        I read earlier that you think the DLC is "different" because of its corporate sponsorship.  Well, that's a litmus test that a lot of Americans who might otherwise fall into your lap would never agree with--not because we don't recognize the corrupting influence of corporations, but because we have looked at the pitiful list of democratic donors in this country, the few companies that seem to feel the Democratic Party will be good for our economy.

        The irony is that the business sector has historically done better under Democrats and getting companies to be more socially responsible while listening to their concerns is and should be a legitimate concern of our party even if money somehow magically disappears from the political equation.  If the DLC is working (even in a misguided way) towards that principle, I don't want them dead and neither should you.

      •  From Nader's lips (none)
        Kos, you are channeling Ralph Nader, at whose knee you learned your hatred of the DLC.

        "Observers are still waiting for the DLC to explain how, with Democratic candidates espousing its protective imitation of Republicanism, the Party could lose more governorships, more state legislatures and both the U.S. House and Senate. Overall, it has been downhill since the DLC drove the Party into groveling haplessness beneath corporate lobbies and their corrupting campaign contributions."

        You are spewing Nader's talking points...  repeating his creepy, irrational hysteria about the DLC.  It is obnoxious for those who voted for Nader in 2000 -- as so many Kossites did -- to criticize the performance of the Democrats in that election.

        Nader seems to think the Dems can win with a coalition of labor and progressive interest groups, but that is so last century.  Dems do not have the numerical ability to win national elections by "cranking the base," which was Trippi's strategy for Dean's campaign.  To win, the party must appeal to the great sea of persuadable voters, and that means reasonable moderation and centrism.  It means compromise.  Openly wishing for the death of the Moderate/Centrist wing of the party is foolish beyond belief.  

        As for Howard Dean, he did not lose because of the DLC, or because of the Democratic "establishment," or because of the news media, or because of the [insert excuse here].  He lost because he ran a really poor campaign and the other guy got more votes.  Period.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (150)
  • Community (70)
  • Memorial Day (29)
  • Media (28)
  • Environment (28)
  • Elections (27)
  • Civil Rights (27)
  • Culture (27)
  • Law (25)
  • Science (24)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (23)
  • Labor (22)
  • Economy (21)
  • Rescued (21)
  • Josh Duggar (20)
  • Republicans (19)
  • Climate Change (18)
  • Marriage Equality (18)
  • Education (17)
  • Ireland (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site