A) Is there any denying the Clintons deep involvement and long-time identification with DLC/3rd Way?
Democratic Leadership Council
The Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) was a non-profit 501(c)(4) corporation] founded in 1985 that, upon its formation, argued the United States Democratic Party should shift away from the leftward turn it took in the late 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. The DLC hailed President Bill Clinton as proof of the viability of Third Way politicians and as a DLC success story.
The DLC's affiliated think tank is the Progressive Policy Institute. Democrats who adhere to the DLC's philosophy often call themselves New Democrats. This term is also used by other groups who have similar views on where the party should go in the future, like NDN and Third Way.
On February 7, 2011, Politico reported that the DLC would dissolve, and would do so as early as the following week.[4] On July 5 of that year, DLC founder Al From announced in a statement on the organization's website that the historical records of the DLC have been purchased by the Clinton Foundation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Leadership_Council
New Democrats - Origins
After the landslide electoral losses to Ronald Reagan in the 1980s, a group of prominent Democrats began to believe their party was out of touch and in need of a radical shift in economic policy and ideas of governance.[1][2] The Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) was founded in 1985 by Al From and a group of like-minded politicians and strategists. They advocated a political "Third Way" ...
The first-wave of New Democrats, from the 1980s to 1990s, were very similar to Southern and Western Blue Dog Democrats. Al From, the founder of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) and its leader until 2009, had been a staffer for Willis Long, a Democratic representative from Louisiana. Among the presidents of the DLC were Al Gore, senator from Tennessee, and Bill Clinton, governor of Arkansas. The first-wave New Democrats sought the votes of white working-class Reagan Democrats.[9]
In the 1990s, the New Democrat movement shifted away from the South and West and moved to the Northeast. In the 1992 United States presidential election, Bill Clinton was elected president.[9]
The second-wave of New Democrats, from 1990s to president, came into existence after the 1994 election. After 1994, the Democrats were much more dominated by urban areas, minorities and white social liberals. The New Democrats shifted from the South to Wall Street.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Democrats
[/div class="excerpt"]
The Third Way
In the United States, "Third Way" adherents embrace fiscal conservatism to a greater extent than traditional social liberals, and advocate some replacement of welfare with workfare, and sometimes have a stronger preference for market solutions to traditional problems (as in pollution markets), while rejecting pure laissez-faire economics and other libertarian positions. The Third Way style of governing was firmly adopted and partly redefined during the administration of President Bill Clinton. The term "Third Way" was introduced by political scientist Stephen Skowronek.[40][41][42] "Third Way" presidents 'undermine the opposition by borrowing policies from it in an effort to seize the middle and with it to achieve political dominance. Examples of this are: Nixon’s economic policies, which were a continuation of Johnson's "Great Society", and later Clinton’s welfare reform.
Clinton, Blair, Prodi, Gerhard Schröder and other leading Third Way adherents organized conferences to promote the Third Way philosophy in 1997 at Chequers in England. The Third Way think tank and the Democratic Leadership Council are adherents of Third Way politics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way
Third Way desperate in its quest to cut Social Security
Third Way is reaching the point of desperation in its quest to cut Social Security and protect its Wall Street, K Street lobbyist, and GOP donors from paying their fair share. As Third Way has become more and more marginalized, its public outpourings have become more and more extreme and, quite frankly, head-scratching.
In a 2011 Politico column, "Progressives: Wise Up," Third Way's president and vice president for policy lectured advocates for Social Security to stop fighting a Grand Bargain that would have cut Social Security's modest benefits - cuts that are opposed by 93.8 percent of Americans.
In 2013, the duo took to the Wall Street Journal where they attacked Senator Elizabeth Warren for proposing to expand Social Security as a solution to the nation's looming retirement income crisis. This time, they lectured not just progressives; they warned the entire Democratic Party not to "follow Sen. Warren...over the populist cliff." Since Senator Warren was standing with the 90 percent of Democrats (and 73 percent of Republicans) who want to increase Social Security benefits, it was no surprise that Third Way admitted that they represented, "no people," beholden only to their wealthy paymasters.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nancy-altman/wall-streets-third-way-ab_b_9125786.html Wall Street Uses the Third Way to Lead Its Assault on Social Security
Third Way, lobbyists for and from Wall Street who are leading the effort to enrich Wall Street by privatizing Social Security, was created by Wall Street to fool some of the people all of the time. I have written previously to expose their fictional claims to be a moderate or liberal Democratic group.
Eric Laursen documented Wall Street’s effort to become even wealthier by privatizing Social Security in articles and his recent book ("The People’s Pension: The Struggle to Defend Social Security Since Reagan" (AK Press)).
I showed that Third Way makes itself useful by providing a faux “liberal” or “moderate” “Democratic” quote machine that can be used to discredit Democrats and Democratic policies such as the safety net. I gave examples of how Third Way gave aid and comfort to the effort to defeat Elizabeth Warren and the effort to unravel the safety net. Third Way continues to prove that you can fool some of the people all of the time.
The National Journal ran an article on November 8, 2012 entitled “Left Divided over ‘Grand Bargain.’”
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/12778-wall-street-uses-the-third-way-to-lead-its-assault-on-social-security
THIRD WAY SAYS CUTTING SOCIAL SECURITY AND PUBLIC HEALTH CARE A SIGN OF “LEADERSHIP”
I know the world-weary journalist pose is to huff that the catfood commission will go nowhere, that the recommendations released today are politically impossible, and that it’s not worth getting worked up about. Indeed, any proposal that both Grover Norquist and Paul Krugman can take time beating about the face and mouth doesn’t appear to have a constituency.
But there is a constituency for this, and it begins and ends with Third Way, who wastes no time in telling the world that they can only be real manly men if they support cutting Social Security and health care for the poor, the elderly and veterans:
"With huge deficits projected for decades to come, it’s now time to put up or shut up, in short to lead or leave. This is the first real leadership test for both parties in a divided capitol: will they embrace the Fiscal Commission recommendations, or cop out and pick the plan apart?
No plan will be perfect, but without a serious, long-term commitment to balance the budget, we’re going to stifle economic growth for decades and ultimately have to make draconian cuts in spending. Only by acting aggressively now do we avoid a budget doomsday. President Obama, Democrats, and the new House Republican majority all campaigned on a pledge to get the deficit under control and reform entitlements.
The moment of truth is here. The Commission report is the only game in town – and if this wasn’t just a campaign slogan, the parties must come together and demand a vote on the Commission’s recommendations."
https://shadowproof.com/2010/11/10/third-way-says-cutting-social-security-and-public-health-care-a-sign-of-leadership/ |
