Obama: 'I am a New Democrat'

[wyldwolf]

Obligatory **** Politico **** Warning...

President Barack Obama firmly resists ideological labels, but at the end of a private meeting with a group of moderate Democrats on Tuesday afternoon, he offered a statement of solidarity.

“I am a New Democrat,” he told the New Democrat Coalition, according to two sources at the White House session.

The self-descriptions are striking given Obama’s usual caution in being identified with any wing of his often-fractious party. He largely avoided the Democratic Leadership Council — the centrist group that Bill Clinton once led — and, with an eye on his national political standing, has always shied away from the liberal label, too.

As recently as last week, he steadfastly refused to define his governing philosophy.

Surrounded by 65 moderate Democrats on Tuesday in the State Dining Room, Obama was happy to portray himself as simpatico with a group of members who are largely socially liberal but fiscally more moderate to conservative.

He said he “supports free and fair trade,” according to one attendee, and noted that he was “very concerned about a return to protectionism.”

Obama made similar comments last month during his trip to Canada — America’s largest trading partner — and has shied away from the NAFTA-bashing he engaged in during last year’s Democratic primary.

Obama also said he would turn to the group — many members of which come from high-technology districts — for help on innovation and smart-growth issues

There is no New Democrat coalition in the Senate, so Obama had no previous affiliation to the group.

(NOTE: That actually isn't true. There is a Senate New Democrat coalition)

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/19862.html

[polichick]

1. wtf is a New Democrat - is that just a way to play it safe with all groups?

[4lbs]

8. Any newly elected Democrat from the November election is a "New Democrat"

For example, a US House Rep Dem who became a Senator for the first time in November, is a New Senate Democrat.

Barack Obama is a New Democrat because he became the new Democratic President.

By the same logic, when Bill Clinton won in 1992, he would have been considered a New Democrat.

When Hillary won the NY US Senate Seat in 2000, she would have been considered a New Democrat back then. However, not when she won re-election in 2006.

[polichick]

10. Ah, I see. :)

[bvar22]

45. No. Thats WAY off. "New Democrat" is an ideology.

"In the politics of the United States, the New Democrats are an ideologically centrist faction within the Democratic Party that emerged after the victory of Republican George H. W. Bush in the 1988 presidential election. They are identified with more moderate social/cultural positions and neoliberal fiscal values.<1><2> They are represented by organizations such as the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), the New Democrat Network, and the Senate and House New Democrat Coalitions."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Democrats

"New Democrats"....for those who are proud to be Half Republican.

The "New Democrats"/DLC are responsible for supporting the Iraq War, The Bush Tax Cuts, the Bankruptcy Bill, NAFTA, CAFTA, MFN for China, and the seating of Alito and Roberts on the Supreme Court.

[sense]

112. When he said that

I took him to mean he was different than we've known, not that he was new democrat as in he's part of that ideology. He does that a lot..... and people jump to all kinds of conclusions... I don't think he'd label himself, because he wants to be the president for all of us and that would be too limiting. If you allow yourself to be labeled, then people assume that you'll always lean with whatever group you've aligned yourself with and that isn't what he's doing. He's open to looking at all views and actually thinking about ideas other than just his own. That's definitely "new" but not in the way it may have appeared to some when he said that. I think we make a mistake when we try to find a box for him.

[amandabeech]

49. It's a moderate Republican who was kicked out of the Pubbie party

and who is under 50 or 55.

At least that's my observation.

[Dr.Phool]

54. It's an old Republican.

Back when they used to have a moderate, like back in the '70s.

[Doremus]

95. Purveyors of triangulation extraordinaire.

i.e. corporatists
i.e. friends of top 10 percenters
i.e. believers in "what's good for business is good for America"
i.e. main philosophy: "don't stand for anything so as to appeal to as large a segment as possible to make sure you get re-elected"

:puke:
:puke:
:puke:

[biopowertoday]

107. The New Democrat Coalition, founded in 1997, focuses primarily on fiscal responsibility as its prime

brief description here.

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf?/base/news-0/1236762013240200.xml&coll=1

............... Obama and his staff have hosted regular meetings with Republican and Democratic members of Congress during the first 50 days of the new administration.

In particular,the president has reached out to moderate Democrats who can help push his aggressive agenda in Congress.

Obama met last month with Democratic Blue Dogs, a separate group of fiscally conservative Democrats that includes Rep. Michael Arcuri, D-Utica, among its members.

The New Democrat Coalition, founded in 1997, focuses primarily on fiscal responsibility as its prime concern. ............................

[mvd]

108. He will need the moderates to help push it through

But this "fiscal responsibility" thing needs to be addressed - I don't love big budget deficits either, but I don't see these cries of "fiscal responsibility" to be towards reining in corporations and defense spending. It's a more mild Repuke strategy, which was my main criticism of Clinton. There are times for deficits, especially now. So the President should make his case just as strongly as they make theirs.

[ProSense]

2. Isn't the DLC dead?

They should be.

[wyldwolf]

3. nope

:)

[polichick]

4. Maybe they're just rebranding?!

[bvar22]

44. ......like a reptile shedding its skin....

[polichick]

52. Exactly! :)

[NorthCarolina]

17. I wish, but the MSM still loves them. Harold Ford is almost a regular on MSNBC n/t

[QC]

38. Their chief economist was the Obama campaign's chief economist.

A man by the name of Austan Goolsbee.

[amandabeech]

50. Goolsbee is an unreconstructed Friedmanite.

Even Alan Greenspan has parted ways, at least partially, from the God of Chicago.

[QC]

53. And then there's Jason Fuhrman, who says that Wal-Mart is progressive.

I'm getting a little tired of free market fundamentalists, thankyouverymuch.

[amandabeech]

57. I'm with you.

Where are the Krumans, Roubinis and Stiglitzes?

[QC]

59. On the sidelines. n/t

[amandabeech]

60. Yes, and it is very unfortunate. n/t

[polichick]

5. For those, like me, who need a memory refresher...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=296&topic_id=5008&mesg_id=5008

[IntravenousDemilo]

6. He should be meeting regularly with Jack Layton, then.

http://www.ndp.ca/jacklayton

[ClarkUSA]

7. He's always denied being DLC; I'll believe it when I hear him say it. Unnamed sources are unreliable

Of course "New" Democrats would love it to be reported so.

[wyldwolf]

51. but he never denied being a New Democrat

The DLC is an organization of New Democrats, like the NDN.

[ClarkUSA]

71. New Democrats = DLC... you do the logic. Unnamed Politico sources do not a fact make.

President Obama is a liberal/progressive. There's not a corporate whoring/warmongering bone in his body.

[wyldwolf]

74. New Democrats = DLC / NDN / Thirdway and a host of others.

http://www.dlc.org
http://www.thirdway.org/
http://www.ndn.org/

[ZombieHorde]

89. Nice sig ClarkUSA. Godzilla is awesome! nt

[ClarkUSA]

92. Thanks. Wish it had sound effects.

[craigmatic]

9. Why doesn't he just say he's liberal ?

It's not like we don't already know some of his opinions. I wish he's just say he's a liberal so we can stop having that be a pejorative for the repubs to use against us. I wish he'd stop copping out and be vocally supportive of the long neglected left-wing of the party.

[Lilith Velkor]

33. Because he's not.

The long neglected left wing, out of desperation, projected positions on him that were never his.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mmonk]

67. New Democrat would indicate not being liberal.

[Louis-Emmanuel]

11. It's possible that Obama did not say that

The article is based on two anonymous sources. It could be a lie.

[Cha]

13. It's not as if there haven't been LIES

in articles before.

I'm sure as hell not going to worry about anonymous sources for any so called news after their track record.

[ProSense]

18. Even if he did say it, so what?

This is the DLC promoters' typical MO of latching onto every little utterance to prove their relevance. There are moderates in the Congress. The President met with them and endeared himself to them.

Think about it, an entire article about the DLC built on a quote from an anonymous source:

“I am a New Democrat,” he told the New Democrat Coalition, according to two sources at the White House session.

Who cares?

Could you imagine progressives or liberals jumping for joy because someone said Obama said "I am a Progressive" or "I am a liberal"?




Edited word.

[Bluenorthwest]

12. Which means 'Republican lite'

This is very quickly turning into a Party I don't want to be in.

[Teaser]

32. It's a door ass hit ya way out kinda thing

.

[Dr Fate]

36. My guess is Obama himself would disagree with that sentiment...

He didnt win and get things done by showing people the door- lol- could you imagine?

But we agree that he is not "Republican lite" either.

[mvd]

14. You could very well say liberals/progressives are New Democrats..

considering the makeup of Congress and how Clinton and Carter were.

[polichick]

15. That's why I had to refresh my memory (above) - makes more sense...

...to call liberals/progressives New Dems.

[mvd]

20. Yep, have we really had a truly liberal President since..

Roosevelt (who was originally not progressive) and a truly liberal Congress? LBJ had a hawkish foreign policy. Mondale lost to Reagan who was extremely hard to beat then, and Dukakis wasn't a good candidate. They were pretty liberal, but people thought they were the norm and therefore progressives can't win. I fail to see how "centrists" are really New Democrats.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

35. Which definition of progressive are we using?

I guess my question is...what is *your* definition of "progressive"? In social as well as economic issues? In the context of his time? In the context that he was a politician at the time?

[mvd]

37. Definitely in social and economic issues

The actual definition is subjective, but I'd say it's anyone who wants singer payer health care, pro-gay marriage, peace except in self-defense situations, not an economic conservative, etc. Of course you would have to adjust for the era.

[Better Believe It]

21. I could say that but President Obama won't.

[ErinBerin84]

16. I remember him saying

that Tim Kaine was a "new STYLE Democrat". I hope that Obama does not consider himself as um, new styley in the same way that Tim Kaine is a "new style Democrat". On the other hand, it is Politico, so I'll just watch the legislation instead of jumping all over another one of these "source" articles.

[polichick]

19. I recall him saying that about Kaine and wondering "in what way?"

[avaistheone1]

22. Yeah, and how is that free trade working out for us?

:nuke:

...might want to rethink that one Mr. President.

[asteroid2003QQ47]

69. Kept in check by the I.W.W. free trade could work for us all and...

like it or not, it's probably here to stay.
Without The Industrial Workers of the World to balance the equation the "us", as in the majority,
will be screwed.
----------------

One Big Union, One Big Strike
--Industrial Workers of the World

[avaistheone1]

72. How is the I.W.W. stopping American companies from outsourcing and offshoring our jobs?

I don't see any evidence that they have been effective at all at doing that. It would be much easier to stop free trade - than for the I.W.W. to do the job of "balancing the equation".

Free trade can be stopped, as easily as it was started. Withdraw from the NAFTA, etc, and start imposing tariffs to protect American industries and jobs.

[asteroid2003QQ47]

75. Your points are certainly valid. I.W.W. is certainly not a quick fix...

but stopping free trade might well be easier said than done and
a world wide union would stabilize wages/benefits. No longer
would it be cost effective for supranational corporations to be
leapfrogging around the planet from one class of exploited labor pool to another.
It is most definitely a possible LONG term solution and one I shall never live long enough to benefit from. That doesn't mean it's not worthy of consideration with the good of future generations in mind.
-----------------------

One Big Union, One Big Strike!
--I.W.W.

[wyldwolf]

23. Obama calls himself a New Democrat and shows what it means

For conservatives still trying to fit Barack Obama into their old tax-and-spend-liberal box, Tuesday was a very bad day. In the morning, the president gave a tough-minded education reform speech demanding more accountability from schools, teachers, students, and parents. The same afternoon, he brought members of the House New Democrat Coalition to the White House and told them, "I am a New Democrat." According to Politico, Obama went on to describe himself as a fiscally responsible, pro-growth Democrat who supports free and fair trade and opposes protectionism.

So much for the ridiculous talk-radio bid to dub Obama a socialist. As Ruth Marcus points out in today's Washington Post, "The notion that President Obama has lurched to the left since his inauguration and is governing as an unreconstructed liberal is bunk." From his education reform agenda to his team of pragmatists to his heavy emphasis on responsibility, Obama is leading the country the way he promised he would: neither to the left nor right but on a path that's new and different.

Obama has always steered clear of labels, with good reason. One of the great hopes of his campaign and his presidency is the prospect of a new, post-partisan politics that leaves behind old debates and moves beyond old boundaries. That approach has become all the more necessary in the midst of an economic crisis that demands new answers and eschews rigid ideology in favor of doing what works.

The president is right that old labels don't mean anything, but new labels do—and in Obama's capable hands, the term New Democrat can take on new meaning. As Obama and others have observed, the traditional terms of the ideological debate—liberal and progressive, moderate and centrist, conservative and right-wing—are stale and imprecise. Obama has the opportunity to define a governing philosophy for our time on his own terms.

http://www.slate.com/id/2213474/

[ProSense]

24. Bruce Reed?

Mr. DLC himself?

As far as Ruth Marcus, absurd.

See what I mean about latching on?

The DLC are like bloodsuckers.

[SoxFan]

27. Yes, Bruce Reed

Domestic policy advisor to a president who oversaw record economic growth, a balanced budget, an expansion of child health insurance, etc. That Bruce Reed.

He's also a very knowledgable baseball fan, by the way.

[wyldwolf]

29. and best bud and co-author with Rahm Emanuel

[ProSense]

31. And the guy who came up with

"change you can Xerox"

Is he trying to take credit for SCHIP?

[blindpig]

70. Sounds like an empty suit to me.

If he had any intention of leading for the people we wouldn't have all of this pussyfooting. If he had emphatically come out in favor of single payer health care the people would rally to him to such an extent that all of the 'Harry & Louise' in the world would be useless.

But no, he shows where his allegiance truly lie.

[wyldwolf]

73. So who will the Socialist-Independent party run against him in '12?

[David__77]

25. Of little important.

It's actions that count. The ideological content of "New Democrat" can easily be changed. Already, DLCism is largely a spent force.

[SoxFan]

26. LOL-I just posted this and name dropped you, Wyldwolf

[firedupdem]

28. Politico and unnamed sources.....they suck n/t

[RollWithIt]

30. That's just smart political branding....

If you can't be defined then you can't be labeled.

[Dr Fate]

34. All that matters to me is that he does a good job.

So far, so good. Rahm is cool too.

Obama seems to be a good balance of Left to center- he seems more to the left in than most DLC politicians I know of.

His actions & policies will speak for themselves- I dont give a shit about who wants the credit.

All this DLC vs. everyone else stuff is old Bush era stuff...

I think I'm ready to move on.

[eridani]

40. A perfectly good explanation of why he is a wuss about dealing with bankers n/t

[acmavm]

41. Oh that's funny. Too bad we're recycling the Clinton years and the worst

of its appointees. Oh yeah, and no one ever appointed lobbyists to their cabinet either I suppose.

New? Nah, just really really good at self promotion and sleight of hand tricks. Now you see the evil of war crimes and genocide, the telecom spying, the signing statements, now you don't (because this administration defends it, as far as the courtroom). Nice tricks wouldn't you say?

I voted for him, I worked for his campaign. But I was never blind to the man's ambitions or his record. And I knew he was a centrist, not a lib or a progressive.

[DemocracyInaction]

42. Gee-I didn't know Bill Clinton turned Black

New Democrat---sounds like the beliefs of one William Jefferson Clinton, the best Republican president the Republican's ever had.

[beachmom]

43. Maybe he is a Brand Spanking New New Democrat.

Who knows?

[cascadiance]

58. What does "New Democrat" mean, as in what does "New Wave" music mean any more...

The "New Democrat" label that the DLC and Blue dogs want to cling to is losing its meaning. They are now the OLD Democrat intruders (aka "Republican Lite"). There's a reason why Sirius calls the older "New Wave" genre of music now "First Wave" to clarify that its no long really new (though I still like that genre anyway).

Obama sounds like he's in effect REFRAMING what "New" means regarding Democrats. At least I hope he is, with him grabbing a lot of DLC types for his cabinet. The "New" Democrat electorate certainly doesn't have what that old "New Democrat" label meant in mind when they elected Obama!

[FatDave]

46. People, we need to unite against our common enemy.

The Judean People's Front!

[Jackeens]

47. Let's trust that this isn't 'New Democrat' as in 'New Labour' (UK)...

.... :-)

When Tony Blair talked of 'New Labour" it was code for "I'm setting setting out to destroy everything 'Old' Labour fought and stood for. The worse thing is....he succeeded.

[mod mom]

48. Consider 2 things: 1."and FAIR trade" 2. the source

[JTFrog]

55. Politico Anonymous Sources. - And the usual suspects go wild.

:eyes:

[Bold Sea Captain]

56. why is the DLC so desperate to glom on to Obama?

though Obama has repeatedly rejected them, including having his name removed from their roles when they tried to claim him as a member.

yet here they are again, trying to rebuild their fractured coalition using him as the draw.

it's sad that they cannot realize that their time has passed and will not come again.

[wyldwolf]

61. yeah, ummm

why is the DLC so desperate to glom on to Obama?

It was Obama who called himself a New Democrat.

though Obama has repeatedly rejected them, including having his name removed from their roles when they tried to claim him as a member.

No, that was a misunderstanding. Obama ADMITS to filling out the form to be included. He SAYS he didn't realize being included constituted membership. FACT.

He also said, "I’m not likely to launch blanket denunciations of the DLC or any other faction within the Democratic Party... I may even agree with DLC positions: their insistence on the value of national service, or the need to harden domestic targets like chemical plants from potential terrorist attack, to cite a few examples."

yet here they are again, trying to rebuild their fractured coalition using him as the draw.

Fractured coalition? 16 new members in 2006, 13 new members in 2008, Obama's Chief of Staff, Secretary of State, and at least half a dozen others walking the halls of the white house.

Not to mention a DLCer replacing Dean as head of the DNC! Fractured? Not hardly.

[JTFrog]

62. See the usual suspects. You sure talk a lot of smack for someone building his case on Politico

Anonymous sources.

"It was Obama who called himself a New Democrat."

Bzzzzzzz. Wrong.

You obviously keep ignoring your own warning.

[wyldwolf]

63. so your refutation is "usual suspects.. you sure talk a lot of smack." lol

[JTFrog]

64. You supply the refutation at the beginning of your OP but just blaze on ahead anyway as USUAL. n/t

[wyldwolf]

65. I'm posting here on the assumption - as must people - that the story is true. YOU, however...

... won't even consider it because it would be too disappointing to you.

There is certainly no indication it isn't true and every "progressive" stop on the net - KOS, Openleft, FireDogLake, believe it to be true.

[JTFrog]

66. You know what they say about assumption. YOU seem pretty eager to "glom" onto it as the truth. n/t

[wyldwolf]

68. yes, and you are eager to "glom" onto it as false.

[alwysdrunk]

76. I don't buy that "New Democrat"=DLC

What's the reason for the seperate coalition? Why not just be DLC, the group that's been there for 30 years?

Also, Obama was always a new Democrat in a way, he's been looking forward to a post-partisan era since he first ran for Senate. He doesn't like the all the labels and the tribalism. A New Democrat could be that...

[wyldwolf]

77. I'll explain it

1. "New Democrat" has always meant a Democrat that subscribes to the Third Way in American politics. The DLC is the leading "think tank" of the Third Way. Others include The New Democrat Network (http://www.ndn.org/) and Third Way (http://www.thirdway.org/)

2. One doesn't have to be a member of the DLC or any other organization to be a New Democrat, however one must be a proponent of the Third Way to be a New Democrat. Just as one doesn't have to be a member of the IEBW to be an electrician.

3. Obama was speaking to the House New Democrat Coalition when he called himself a New Democrat. The New Democrat Coalition was formed in 1997 by Congressmen Cal Dooley (D-CA), Jim Moran (D-VA), and Tim Roemer (D-IN) to establish an ideological home in the U.S. House of Representatives for the New Democratic movement started by the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) in the late 1980's and led nationally by President Bill Clinton in the 1990's.

4. To think Obama meant anything other than an ideological kinship with the New Democratic movement, of which the DLC is the leading proponent of, is completely illogical.

[PassingFair]

97. Except that DLC DOES = New Democrats

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Leadership_Council


"The DLC's affiliated think tank is the Progressive Policy Institute. Democrats who adhere to the DLC's philosophy often call themselves New Democrats. Note that this term is also used by other groups, who have differing views on where the party should go in the future."

They frequently use the term on the DLC website, too.

Now they are all trying to back out of the "DLC"
club because the information available on the
internet has OUTED the group as the Corporate
Wing of the Democratic party, which is very unpopular
at the moment.

New Dems and Blue Dogs frequently joined forces with
republicans to bring us the FIASCO in which we now
find ourselves.

[wyldwolf]

101. lol. WHO is trying to "back out of the DLC?"

[Radical Activist]

78. Did anyone ever come up with a credible link or audio/video for this yet?

Politico has proven to be a troll often enough to not be taken seriously, as you know.

[polichick]

90. Nope (except your link below) - big surprise! :)

[Radical Activist]

79. Here's a serious news article about the meeting

for those who haven't seen it and want a source without politico's trolling.

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf?/base/news-0/1236762013240200.xml&coll=1

[IndianaGreen]

80. A 'New Democrat' like Tony Blair was 'New Labour'?

This is a harbinger of bad things to come!

[alwysdrunk]

86. No,"New Labour" was a change in the whole party platform

Led by Blair but still, they change their party charter (or what the correct nemre for the document is) from blind support for unions to dependant support.

[Elidor]

81. “Very concerned about a return to protectionism.”

Protectionism? If we had a little protectionism, we'd still have a friggin' STEEL INDUSTRY DAMMIT!



LOOK AT THAT SHIT!

[Elidor]

82. FUCKIN STEEL, GODDAMN!!!

10. 21.5 Mton United States Steel Corporation (United States)

WE’RE NUMBER 10!*

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_steel_producers

[Elidor]

83. THEY MAKE THIS SHIT IN AMERICA!!!

steel being a basic industry, generates substantial growth of both upstream and downstream facilities. According to some estimates one person-year of employment in the steel industry generates 3.5 person-years of employment elsewhere. Considering all these, total employment generation will be substantial.



OH FUCK YEAH, LOOK AT THAT FUCKIN BELCHIN FIRE AND SHIT! THAT’S FIVE FUCKIN JOBS RIGHT THERE!

[Elidor]

84. COKE? I GOT YER COKE RIGHT HERE, MOTHERFUCKER! IT TOOK TEN PEOPLE TO MAKE THIS SHIT!

OH FUCK YEAH! UNION LABOR IS IN DA HIZZOU!!!



FUCK FREE TRADE!

[LittleBlue]

85. Yeah, those old Democrats like Roosevelt and Kennedy are obsolete

I don't see what's wrong with the old Democrats. They weren't perfect, but they often protected this country and her people in desperate times.

[wyldwolf]

87. A historical perspective

The New Democrat / Thirdway movement was created to differentiate themselves from the New Left movement that many had identified as representative of the Democratic party. It was the New Left, originating in the late 60s (and the forerunners of today's progressive movement) that led to the landslide losses of 5 out of 6 Presidential elections.

"New" Democrat meaning different than what the Democratic party had become since 1968 or so and a return to the policies, and modernizations of, FDR, Truman, and Kennedy.

I would be happy to discuss with you how the New Democrat movement is more closely related to the New Deal Democrats than today's progressive movement is which, referencing it's roots in the 1960s, was a rejection of the Truman/Kennedy wing of the party.

[LittleBlue]

91. I didn't know that. Thanks!

:hi:

[biopowertoday]

110. The New Democrat Coalition, founded in 1997, focuses primarily on fiscal responsibility as its prime

brief description here.

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf?/base/news-0/1236762013240200.xml&coll=1

............... Obama and his staff have hosted regular meetings with Republican and Democratic members of Congress during the first 50 days of the new administration.

In particular,the president has reached out to moderate Democrats who can help push his aggressive agenda in Congress.

Obama met last month with Democratic Blue Dogs, a separate group of fiscally conservative Democrats that includes Rep. Michael Arcuri, D-Utica, among its members.

The New Democrat Coalition, founded in 1997, focuses primarily on fiscal responsibility as its prime concern.

[wyldwolf]

114. um... yeah? That's pretty well known.

[lojasmo]

88. Nah. He actually WON an election.

That disqualifies him.

[wyldwolf]

93. so did...

Bill Clinton
Al Gore (at least I think so)

and all these people (LOTS of them):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Democrat_Coalition

and 16 house members in 2006 and 13 house members in 2008. :)

[PBS Poll-435]

98. CAROLYN MCCARTHY IS A NEW DEMOCRAT?!?

I thought she was the Gillibrand slayer next year.

:shrug:

[wyldwolf]

99. she's a one issue former Republican

[inthebrain]

94. Last time I heard the term "New Democrat" it was from Bill Clinton

Change you can believe in eh?

Last time we had a "New Democrat" we had a Republican with a big D on his chest.

[wyldwolf]

100. complete bullshit. But you knew that already

[inthebrain]

102. Whatever.

Note that what Obama is proposing with Merit Pay is the same old Union Busting crap that the Republicans proposed.

Oh, and Clinton the great triangulator who "reformed Welfare as we know it" was so different than the Republicans how?

[wyldwolf]

103. How was Bill Clinton different than Republicans?

1) Anti-science agendas. When did Bill Clinton ever nominate a virulent anti-contraception wacko as head of the FDA, or prevent the Surgeon General from supporting a sensible health initiative because it offended the fundies? Let alone censor websites that talk about earth sciences?

2) Fiscal restraint. When did Bill Clinton support budget deficits of 300B+, not including an off-budget war - to finance tax cuts for millionaires. Bill Clinton raised top bracket income taxes and got us a surplus. Bad Clinton! Bad!

4) Unemployment reduction. Clinton - went from 7.1% to 3.6%. GOP prez? Back up to 4.6%. Bad Clinton again! No!

5) Pro-choice. Did Bill Clinton want to overturn Roe or nominate "strict constructionist" judges at all levels? Now name the GOPer who hasn't used at least one of those code words.

6) Starting wars of choice. Combat deaths of troops sent into harm's way by Bill Clinton = 0 (accidental deaths in Bosnia and Somalia was Bush's baby before you try either). GOP prez? Gosh who knows but 6000 or so at least. Hillary (and Bill Richardson - who is DLC. too) says she'll bring the troops back in a sensible manner. DUers say she won't (will he?). Forgive me if I go with the one who will actually get to make that call.

7) Bill Clinton - plummetting violent crime. GOP prez - back up again! No difference there (OK OK that's probably a corollary of decent economic stewardship, but it's also got to be affected by hopelessness and lack of optimism in society too)

8) Health care - Bill Clinton got it for more people. GOPers don't give a damn and 46 million uninsured is fine by them. You asked for differences I believe. Not perfection right? Ask someone whose sick kid gets covered - even via a for-profit HMO if need be - if they like the difference or not.

9) Cronyism and corruption. No Bill Clinton didn't pick people he didn't know and trust for key cabinet or senior positions (would Kucinich? Would anyone?) but they were all qualified, no bid contracts.

Now does that sound like GOP to you? Why?

[inthebrain]

105. Starting Wars of Choice?

Are you kidding me?

How many times did Freakin Clinton bomb Iraq?

Oh, and Clinton also withheld funds to third world countries that performed abortions and he himseld also attacked partial birth abortions.

Health Care? Are you kidding me? He handed that off to Hillary to write as he couldn't be bothered with it. All it was was another avenue to give the Insurance companies more control over your health care with the aid of the state.

Oh, and how about using freaking NAFTA to union bust. Last I checked it was Clinton that wrote the unions out of the NAFTA agreement.

Yeah, and under Clinton we saw an escalation of the drug war that saw more nonviolent offenders sent to prison. Oh, and some guy getting plunder shoved up his ass and another shot 42 times in the back for taking out his wallet. Yeah, more cops on the street and the largest prison population in the world is what we needed.

He wasn't all that different or much better than the Repukes.

And his job creation wasn't much different than the McJobs created under Reagan. Only reason why his job creation looked better than what it was was mainly becuase all the people he tossed off the welfare rools weren't due to hit the job market until long after his term ended.

Oh the ole Clinton era of Clinton Bipartisanship.

[wyldwolf]

106. LOL! MORE bullshit from you

Bombing Iraq was not starting a war.

Oh, and Clinton also withheld funds to third world countries that performed abortions and he himseld also attacked partial birth abortions.

Bullshit. Clinton rescinded the gag rule when he took office in January 1993 and Bush reinstated it in January 2001.

http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-BarackObamaUK/idUSTRE50M3PQ20090123

Clinton supported the Freedom of Choice act.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Choice_Act

Twice during his eight years in office, Clinton vetoed bills for a federal ban on partial birth abortion.

http://www.nrlc.org/ABORTION/pba/pbaban070702.html

Health Care? Are you kidding me? He handed that off to Hillary to write as he couldn't be bothered with it. All it was was another avenue to give the Insurance companies more control over your health care with the aid of the state.

Are you so NAIVE to believe a President handles everything himself? Do you think Obama is hammering out health care reform? LOL! And besides, just what Republican has ever attempted it on a national level??

Oh, and how about using freaking NAFTA to union bust. Last I checked it was Clinton that wrote the unions out of the NAFTA agreement.

Yeah? Where are you checking?

Yeah, and under Clinton we saw an escalation of the drug war that saw more nonviolent offenders sent to prison.

How is that "Republican?"

Oh, and some guy getting plunder shoved up his ass and another shot 42 times in the back for taking out his wallet.

Bill Clinton did that? Sounds like a wacked out Sean Hannity rant.

Yeah, more cops on the street and the largest prison population in the world is what we needed.

And thank God violent crime rates went down!

And his job creation wasn't much different than the McJobs created under Reagan.

Immensely better.

Only reason why his job creation looked better than what it was was mainly becuase all the people he tossed off the welfare rools weren't due to hit the job market until long after his term ended.

That doesn't even make sense.

By the way, good "Republicans" like FDR, JFK, RFK, and Barack Obama all supported welfare reform.

[PurityOfEssence]

96. And they called Willy "slick"...

The fact that Bill Clinton was more than a bit veracity challenged and a fairly unabashed appeaser humanized him a bit, and even kept some of us from being so pissed off at his relentless rightward dragging of the Democratic party. At least he was, and admitted he was, a bit on the imperfect side.

This also kept his most ardent supporters more in the realm of rationality, rather than unrealistic hero-worship.

The rewriting of history and the careful crafting of storybook rosiness is a bit disturbing. The insistent unwillingness to actually state who and what he is belies a need to be everything to everyone, and such people are, in the end, unreliable.

[Umbral]

104. OK OK OK You've convinced me! Stop rubbing it in already.

Your endless carping about this DLC, New-Dem thingy has finally sunk in. It's so obvious, I should never, ever vote for a Democrat. They are two-faced lying Pieces of shit. Thank you for the education.

[LWolf]

109. Which is one reason why I've always opposed him. nt

[geek tragedy]

111. He's always criticized the Democratic party for its orthodoxies

and outdated thinking on some issues. So, yeah, duh of course he's a New Democrat. Hard to run as a change agent and describe yourself as an Old School Democrat.

[Naturyl]

113. New Democrat = centrist and anti-welfare (think Clinton's welfare DE-form)

One of the chief distinguishing features of these "New Democrats" is a (supposedly) grudging concession (to Republicans) that widespread welfare-state polices (such as the New Deal, Great Society, and single-payer) do not work and should be phased out in favor of "third way" economic policies which emphasize libertarian capitalist slogans like "personal responsibility," etc.

More than anything else, Clinton cemented his status as a "new kind of Democrat" with welfare DE-form, which showed conservatives everywhere that he meant business when it came to conceding that a robust social safety net is no longer desirable.

[wyldwolf]

115. NY Times - Quotes from Emanuel and Axelrod

“He’s not an ideologue,” said David Axelrod, his senior White House adviser. “He’s a pragmatist. He’s someone who’s interested in ideas that will work. Some may have their roots in one doctrine; some may have roots in another. But he’s not concerned about that. He’s less concerned about how he’s described than what he can accomplish.”

“If you asked him, I think he’d put himself on the ideological scale as a New Democrat,” said Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff. “But I think he’d say that doesn’t fully capture it.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/15/us/politics/15obama.html?ref=us