Are Hillary and the DLC purposely trying to destroy the DNC?

[nichomachus]

One thought that has crossed my mind, when thinking about the FL/MI debacle, is that the DNC was led into a trap.

Long story short, it made a threat it can't really keep -- something that is a disaster, as any parent knows. If you tell your kid you're going to ground him if he does something, you'd better be willing to ground him, no matter what, or you'll have no authority in the future.

The DNC now finds itself -- with the able assistance of Hillary -- on the horns of a dilemma.

If it keeps to its threat and refuses to seat MI and FL, then Hillary will be beating her "disenfranchisement" drum until our ears bleed, despite the fact that she and her team approved the idea when it was proposed.

If it rolls over and seats the delegates, then DNC rules become just meaningless scratch marks on paper and will have no effect in the future, because people will know they can break the rules and then blackmail the DNC into caving.

In either case, Hillary's DLC will emerge stronger, as the DNC grows weaker. The common wisdom is that Hillary miscalculated and thought that FL and MI would be unnecessary. Maybe so, but, when dealing with the Clintons, never discount the possibility of more convoluted political machinations.

Did she and her followers lead the DNC into a trap by approving the threat. After all, even if MI and FL weren't in play at this stage, she could still have scored points by holding a gun to the head of the DNC demanding that they be seated. Even though it wouldn't have made any difference, it would still have emasculated the DNC.


We all know that the Clintons want to be the emperor and emperess of the party with the DLC as their courtiers, and what better way to do that than to cut the balls off the DNC.

Discuss.

[havocmom]

1. McAuliffe sure as hell is.

Talk about a person who does not know when to bow out gracefully...

[dchill]

2. Only since Howard Dean became head of the DNC...

so, yeah, for quite a while, now.

[rock]

3. No

Only the DLC (sarcasm - or is it?)

[nichomachus]

4. Except

that she is one of the top honchos of the DLC -- so it's kind of hard to separate them.

[lisa58]

5. They probably want the DNC to BE the DLC...

...they want the influence/power - they think they've earned it.

[Frustratedlady]

6. OK, I need to be edjerkated.

I am embarrassed to admit this, but I am not familiar with the differences between the DNC and DLC. I checked their site and see the DLC has a different ideology, but I'm wondering that if they are so different, why isn't there a separate party? Why didn't Hillary run under the DLC name? If they aren't that different, why haven't they worked out their differences and merged?

Although I have been a Democrat for most of my life, I haven't delved into the guts on the party that much to be able to argue the point of DNC vs. DLC, but I would certainly appreciate assistance in filling this void in my education.

I am sure there are others who are also curious.

[KittyWampus]

11. The DNC is the Infrastructure & Authority of the Democratic Party. The DLC is a group of elected

Democrats who supposedly share the stated ideals declared by their manifesto.

That the DLC has some goals and ideals that run counter to the Democratic party as a whole and seem to undermine Democrats at times... does make one wonder. What really -IS- the goal of the DLC?

[tokenlib]

14. The DLC is corporate coddling democrats for the leisure class...

They are the ones who feel that to win elections, the New Deal legacy of government activism on the behalf of the poor and struggling is outdated. The have reacted to the Reagan revolution by caving to republican ideas of less government and leaving the struggling on their own. They would be open to privatization of government services.

If you listen to Al From and Bruce Reed--they are like founder types--you might get nauseous. The dems who voted for bankruptcy reform legislation--were mostly DLC. Lastly, they despise populist rhetoric and policies.

[Frustratedlady]

15. Thank you. That's what I was afraid of....

Privatization of government services scares me. I have always believed that was what NCLB was introduced to do...eliminate public education in favor of contract schools. A disaster, for sure.

Apparently, never having heard or heard of Al From and Bruce Reed was a blessing? I need to check them out, though, so I can understand the division.

Harrison Ford is the only one I've listened to and he seems to be so serious and adverse to other opinions, that I can understand he would be connected. However, I thought Vilsack was a member, and he doesn't fit the mold.

[nichomachus]

16. I think you may be a little confused

Harold Ford (Democrat, Tennessee)

Harrison Ford (Jones, Indiana)

[Individualist]

21. DLC is a subversive organization

This is why the DLC is dangerous. For all their claims of supposedly wanting to help Democrats, they employ people like Marshall Wittman who specifically try to undermine the Democratic Party, even if it means he has to publicly defecate out the most rank and easily-debunkable lies. They reguarly give credence to the right wing's agenda and its worst, most unsupportable lies. They are the real force that tries to make sure this country is a one party state and that Democrats never really challenge the Republicans in a serious way. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/why-the-dlc-is-so-dangero_b_13640.html


"The Democratic Leadership Council's agenda is indistinguishable from the Republican Neoconservative agenda.." Dennis Kucinich

[WeDidIt]

7. Yes, without any doubt whatsoever

Their purpose now is to insure GOP victory this year so Hillary can come back in 2012 as the "saviour" telling us "I told you so!"

[GoesTo11]

8. Ding Ding Ding Ding!

The election's over. This is the reason for fighting on.

[RufusTFirefly]

9. Thank goodness the prospect of impeachment still packs a punch.

:sarcasm:

I agree with Nicho's analysis.

Hillary Clinton appears to be the political equivalent of a suicide bomber. She's determined to bring down the party along with her.

The DLC had one star -- Bill Clinton -- and fell under the delusion that its political philosophy, not its charismatic front man, was the secret to the organization's success.

Subsequent DLC disciples -- Lieberman most prominent among them -- have failed to ignite the imagination of the electorate. In case the DLC didn't get the message, the collapse of Hillary Clinton's expected coronation has made things all too clear.

Voters don't want to support Democrats who pander to the most distasteful elements of the Republican party, namely union-busting, corporate-loving, influence-peddling, saber-rattling, empire-building racism.

Faced with the prospect that the DLC is doomed to meet the fate of the dinosaur, Hillary Clinton and her corporate handlers have arrived at a brilliant strategy. Nicho is right on target.

[KittyWampus]

10. Middle ground is to seat delegates but reduce their number & adjust apportionment

to any candidate who broke agreement and remained on ballot.

[northernsoul]

12. My suspicions are increasing

I sense bit of "I'll scuttle the ship if I can't be its captain" from that crowd lately. And so the former establishment becomes the saboteurs. Sad.

I hope that I'm just being paranoid.

[LucyParsons]

13. I'm sure they're disappointed that something resembling a traditional Democratic Party has tried to

rear its populist head.

They want it to be ONLY DLC. And, then, Nader would be 100% correct. One party.

[New Dawn]

17. The DLC only wants to control the Democratic Party.

The GOP will do the rest.

[dcindian]

18. I see a merger comming up between the DLC and the NeoCons

The NeoCons had an easier time taking over their party since hate is hand in hand with republican self interest life style. The DLC has had a harder time not in infiltration but in the actual take over of their party.

I think it is somewhat telling when you look back at the rise of the two sub-parties and the path they both took in their quest to wrestle democracy from the hands of the people. How similar both of the chosen paths appear gives us a clue of the aggressive nature of the tactics employed. Divisiveness a tool left to the extremist, now a black jack used daily by even the presidential candidates.

We can take some small comfort though that it is our party which has resisted the total take over of our progressive values before the fall of liberalism occurred. The Republicans were not so fortunate some even say Goldwater would not recognize his own party. I think he would, but not in an American party but a foreign party and it's use of divisiveness to wrestle a countries moral fiber from their very souls.

I think the DLC over estimated where it was in the time line for take over. The NeoCons placed their divisive candidate just a mere 7 years ago into power. We Democrats were not quite ready to embrace their counterparts the DLC when they played their divisive candidate card on us.

America is the worse for what the NeoCons did to her. Corporations have worked hard to take over both parties through the DLC and the NeoCons. They have many tools on their side the media, big money, and our jobs. What they did not realize is how utterly impotent a corporate government could be and Americans resolve to stop the bleeding.

Hopefully we as Democrats can see them for what they are. Hopefully we can continue to hold back the water waiting to drown us all in a government made for and by large corporations. Sadly Kucinich and Edwards could not carry the torch for us this time and we have to take a small step in Obama. Perhaps with luck he will be able to do a good job and let us turn America back on track to a more progressive a more liberal tomorrow.

[Catherina]

19. Remove the question mark, move the word ARE to slot #5

and you've got my answer.

The DNC needs to cut its losses and focus on the silver lining of the party redefining itself. We won't lose most Democrats. Those we lose were never really with us to begin with.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

20. Here's my take...

Hillary's Power Play -- Split The Party, Win in 2012 For The DLC

It is all about power. Her imminent loss in these primaries, and the resultant weakening of political clout, has forced her hand. She is dividing the party, sacrificing what should be an easy Democratic win in the GE to further her ambitions.

A win for Obama this year strips the Clintons of their preeminent position as heads of the party. His success would negate any chance of them reclaiming the WH come 2012 and they are playing the desperation card now in a malicious maneuver to thwart such an outcome. The party and country be damned! 'McCain would be a sitting duck in 4 years.'

Shedding the mantle of power is not an option for the Clintons. It is win at all costs. They have invested too much.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6110415&mesg_id=6110415