Being somewhat of a moderate Democrat (a distinct minority hereabouts), I am regularly bombarded with venom about the evils of the DLC. If memory serves me, the group was created to address the number one complaint of citizens about their representation in Washington - namely, that nothing ever gets done because of gridlock and partisan bickering.
I personally think that bipartisanship is not a bad thing by definition. It requires honest brokers on both sides, and people of good will that put parochial interest aside in favor of the common good. By any yardstick, we have not had this in DC since before the Reagan era, and it has only gotten worse. The Republican Party has drifted so far to the right that any compromise makes us give up far more than they. Indeed, much Democrat-crafted legislation begins life less progressive than it should. And yet...
And yet. And yet. "Nothing ever gets done in Washington." How to address this reasonably? I have never seen the DLC as the incarnation of the unholy that most folks here have. I am a huge fan of pragmatism, political reality, and truth in advertising when it comes to campaign promises delivered and kept. Before I begain lurking on the internets, I would have thought that Bill Clinton was universally heralded as the greatest President of the last half-century by all Democrats. Ah, not so. He is a "DLC appeaser of the right" among other things. As is his wife. What is so damned awful about pragmatism, I ask?
Why is it heresy to say, for example, UHC is a non-starter, and will remain so for the next few election cycles at least? Why is it blasphemy to point out that the 50-state strategy, glorious as it is in its perfection, will not bear sustainable fruit for at least another generation?
Sen. Obama has moved me in the end. I watched his speech last night in St. Paul and tears came to my eyes. Yes, I, a longtime Clintonista, dared to feel hope. This morning, however, I am feeling reality. Can we pick up seats in the blood red South? Can we get large enough majorities in both Houses to give the finger to the other side and do whatever the hell we want with policy? Can our persuasive, charismatic leader sway enough people to withstand the onslaught of resistance to UHC?
I am clearly a cynic, you see, and cynical people are not moved by grand themes and soaring rhetoric. Cynical people have been burned once too many times. I have to be realistic about what is possible, not what I would like to happen. I dream of marriage equality, health care for all, college for all, economic opportunity for all, open borders, safe streets and energy independence. I have no illusions about the practical acheivement of such things. The DLC has, in the grand scheme of things, impressed me as a supremely rational and pragmatic bunch of folks that want to achieve things in the real world. How far off am I?