Do you support the DLC?

[motocicleta]

Poll question: Do you support the DLC?

It's poll time, folks. We've currently got a lot of DLC centered discussion (errr, flamewars), and a ton of nasty debate over the effect the DLC has on the Democratic Party. Might we get a DU show of hands?

[Forkboy]

1. This should be a nailbiter.

:D

[motocicleta]

3. So why the fuck do the DLC supporters get so much of our bandwidth?

Or did I just screw with the validity of the poll?

:sarcasm:

[mrreowwr_kittty]

29. The one on this thread is sucking up all the bandwidth. I say stop feeding him. n/t

[motocicleta]

37. see post 25.

I have a short list of time and bandwidth killers who hate liberals yet allegedly are Democrats, and he is right there. They are having a field day right now. Must be campaign season.

[Swamp Rat]

5. LOL!

:popcorn:

[motocicleta]

10. Nice one, SR! nt

[IndianaJones]

2. How is it nasty debate? Its called sour grapes. Those lacking influence will always resent...

those that wield it most.

[motocicleta]

4. Speak of the devil

[IndianaJones]

6. its called the majority. enjoy the irrelevant and powerless fringe. nt.

[Zhade]

19. We're not DLCers.

NT!

[motocicleta]

7. It's nasty because the debate inevitably leads to those on your side

and those on the progressive side exchanging pleasantries. And I believe you just started it here. Thanks for making my, and arendt's, point.

[IndianaJones]

8. you mean the corporate whore and Republican lite pleasantries? lol. nt.

[motocicleta]

12. Again, you are injecting something that was not on this thread.

The DLC forces lead in the race to the bottom.

[IndianaJones]

13. look at post #9...just what you wanted. makin' your bones. nt.

[Forkboy]

14. If the shoe fits, wear it.

[Richard Steele]

61. Those are FACTS. And they're far from pleasant.

[TahitiNut]

16. Spoken like a true monarchist. "Long Live The King"?

:eyes:

[Name removed]

21. Deleted sub-thread

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

[Zhade]

18. Indeed. It's a shame the DLCers are so resentful.

NT!

[kath]

66. Re: "sour grapes" -- it does not mean what you think it means.

look it up.

[Exultant Democracy]

9. If Harold Ford was on fire, I would piss on him to put it out.

Unlike the DLC I respect life, and lets face it that guy deserves to get pissed on by someone.

[IndianaJones]

11. oh...you mean these pleasantries. just what the OP was looking for. nt.

[motocicleta]

15. WTF is your sig line?

Are you asking us what our personal reason for wanting to attack Iran is, or are you questioning why HRC wants to attack Iran? 'Cause I want no part of that crap, fyi. If you do, ... no comment.

[IndianaJones]

68. I'm mocking the idiotic left. Its easy. nt.

[Kelly Rupert]

17. Mocking the only people standing between us and an attack on Iran?

Why do you support attacking Iran?

[IndianaJones]

20. Mocking people that defend an idiot and question those that do not share their worship...

there was a smackdown on the same idiots by the gentleman that runs this site.

[Moochy]

34. nice lumping there lumpy

[Swamp Rat]

22. Good luck with that modus operandi on DU.

Though, I'm sure you'll find more of those who will appreciate your efforts at mocking the "idiotic left" on other websites.

[IndianaJones]

what? not worshipping the kook in charge of Iran? thats been covered.

the fringe lost.

[Swamp Rat]

30. Straw Man

:)

[IndianaJones]

32. now that one is actually good. nt.

[Naturyl]

23. Why are people talking about "the idiotic left" on DU?

I know a guy who has been banned from DU twice for much less. Why are constant attacks on progressives being ignored?

[IndianaJones]

25. Don't know...maybe its the 1000:1 ratio of attacks on moderate and DLC Democrats. nt.

[motocicleta]

27. Good freaking question.

Welcome, by the way.

[Kelly Rupert]

28. Well, it might have something to do with how moderates are sick

of being told that they're Republicans.

[Swamp Rat]

31. Maybe it's because "THEY" are not so moderate after all.

:D

[motocicleta]

24. Especially if you never bother to explain yourself,

and just post meaningless subject line sound bites! Must be a laugh riot for you!

You make no argument supporting your case, and attack anyone who may possibly be arguing against you. You highly resemble a paid troll, although I am sure you are not. Ergo, you are now on virtual ignore. That means I will never respond to you again unless you pull your rhetoric from the logical gutter and start to make some sense, but I will actually read your garbage in case you suddenly get an attack of smarts.

Night night, "Indiana Jones". Mwaaahaaaahaaahaaaaaa!

[IndianaJones]

26. no need to explain. the fringes powerlessness speaks for itself. nt.

[557188]

46. power power power

Of course the Democrats could've used the "fringes" in 2000 and 2004 to WIN.

Ignore your base and you lose elections.

[cascadiance]

53. Here's some images for your sig...

I think they speak well for what you feel! Power I guess is the ultimate issue isn't it!

[Tesha]

38. The thing you *REALLY* want to be sure to do...

The thing you *REALLY* want to be sure to do is when
push comes to shove and this poster's candidate starts
looking like she's going down in flames come November
2008, remember that you don't need to pay attention
to *ANY* entreaties from the poster (or any of their
friends) as to how you should vote.

We're the "loony left" and they've made it clear that
they believe they can win without us.

Tesha

[motocicleta]

50. Don't get me wrong

I'm voting for the Dem come Nov 08, no matter who it is. But this idiotic left crap will not be forgotten, and it is so illogical and wrong-headed that it really isn't worth debating; these guys can't find their asses with both hands and a fucking map.

Matt

[Tesha]

52. Then it doesn't matter.

> Don't get me wrong; I'm voting for the Dem come Nov 08, no matter who it is.

Then it doesn't matter. Since the DLC can count on your
vote no matter how badly they abuse you, they'll keep
abusing you.

Tesha

[motocicleta]

56. I'm weak.

Do you really think it makes no difference? If I can be convinced, I might do otherwise.

[silverojo]

33. I voted with the majority on this one

Only because there wasn't a choice of "F*** the DLC, they're the true axis of evil."

[motocicleta]

36. Sorry about that.

Waking up this morning, my wife looked over my shoulder as I checked the status of the poll. She says, "DLC Whaaaaa? Oh right, I guess that's me."

[Raksha]

35. Damn, that felt good!

(Can you guess which one I picked?)

[LWolf]

39. No, and I do not, and will not, support a DLC candidate, or

a DLC-like candidate, who while not being officially "DLC," espouses a DLC platform.

[Totally Committed]

41. Awesome post!

Exactly as I feel, too!!! :applause:

LWolf -- :yourock:

TC

[Clark2008]

55. That would be the top three or five candidates, wouldn't it?

[LWolf]

60. Top is a matter of interpretation, lol.

If "top" means money collected and poll numbers, then yes, that's what it would mean.

If "top" means issues and record, then maybe not.

[yurbud]

40. if the DLC pandered to business in a way that HELPED progressive policy they would be OK

for example, explain to most corporations how a handful make their life more difficult: oil companies, credit card companies, and health insurance companies. Then explain to them how truly progressive policies would get those hands out of their pockets.

The DLC doesn't do that. Instead, they suck up to any corporation that will open their checkbook or promise a seat on their board to a pol who gets booted by his voters.

They are republicans without the Elmer Gantry window dressing.

[yurbud]

42. I bet your poll will end up looking like this one I did a few years back & got 285 votes

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5567638&mesg_id=5567638

[Totally Committed]

43. Well, let's see... How do I feel about the DLC????

THE

DLC

SUCKS

OUT

LOUD!

[yurbud]

44. When the Dems were further left, they controlled both houses of Congress for decades

when they jumped on corporate bandwagon, they became an echo, not a choice.

[TahitiNut]

45. Exactly!

And I'm an independent. The corporate parties are an abomination of 'democracy' imho.

[motocicleta]

51. And they will keep being irrelevant as long as they choose to be

puke lite, becoming important again only when they embrace their base.

[Breeze54]

54. The voters voted for the repub-lites!!

It's the voters that need to stop believing every sound bite
and start voting for true Dems and not the Dino's!!

The voters are the one's that determine who's in Congress!

[yurbud]

64. it's a little more complicated. Cindy Sheehan was thinking of running against DINO Dianne Feinstein

but I get the impression she was strongly discouraged behind the scenes.

Another revealing case was Ned Lamont against Joe Lieberman. Lamont beat him in the primary, so it should have been game over right there, but when Lieberman did his independent bid, the establishment closed ranks behind him.

Ultimately, I agree with you, but we have to watch for the landmines.

[Breeze54]

65. CS wasn't 'really' going to run, imho.

She said it to draw attention to Pelosi's inaction and she was right!

Mission accomplished!

I know about Lamont. I made calls on his behalf!!
I didn't just arrive here at DU or in the political blogosphere. ;)

[yurbud]

69. Did you mean Feinstein not Pelosi? Isn't her run against Pelosi still on?

[Breeze54]

70. No

I never heard her say that she was going to run against Feinstein, only Pelosi.

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Sheehan_announces_independent_run_against_Pelosi_0809.html">Sheehan announces independent run against Pelosi

snip-->

Sheehan later appeared on CNN to explain that she was running because "they're not making
the administration change course in Iraq. They give him more money ... to wage the war.
They're not holding him accountable."

[Individualist]

47. Damn the DLC. They're not only corporatist sellouts,

they're a subversive organizatiaon that wants to undermine the party.

Let's just look at the cold, hard facts about the DLC and its record. The DLC has pushed, among other things, the war in Iraq and "free" trade policies, using bags of corporate money to buy enough Democratic votes to help Republicans make those policies a reality. They have chastised anyone who has opposed those policies as either unpatriotic or anti-business -- even as a majority of Americans now oppose the war in Iraq, oppose the DLC's business-written trade deals, and are sick of watching America's economy sold out to the highest corporate bidder. Additionally, in brazenly Orwellian fashion, the DLC has also called its extremist agenda "centrist," even though polls show the American public opposes most of their agenda, and supports much of the progressive agenda. http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0727-32.htm

The progressive movement has not just threatened this message monopoly -- it is undoing it. Through MoveOn, the rise of popular documentaries, blogs, think tanks, etc. It's not just that we talk about real values and innovative strategies. It's because we're talking, period, that the centrists feel threatened.

Hence the DLC's vicious attempts to discredit the movement. And that's what they want. They don't seek to win an argument over policy. They seek to destroy the credibility of their opponents and restore their message monopoly. http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=721

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," http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Kucinich_DLC_agenda_undistinguishable_from_Neocon_0813.html

DLC Watch, the wicked shall not escape justice http://dlcwatch.blogspot.com

Without a doubt, the DLC is the most fundamentalist organization within the caucus, the most ideologically rigid, and the most destructive to the progressive cause.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/5/24/1712/23448

These DLC types are amazing, they really are. Their pathology is unique; they all secretly worship the guilt-by-association tactics of Lee Atwater and Karl Rove, but unlike those two, not one of them has enough balls to take being thought of as the bad guy by the general public.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/11275627/the_low_post_democrats_walk_themselves_to_the_gallows

[Totally Committed]

48. Kick because the DLC SUCKS.

TC

[KittyWampus]

49. Bet there's a sizeable number of DU'ers who sling the term "DLC" and have NO idea what it actually

is.

[kath]

57. Unfortunately, I think there are people here who don't know the difference between the DLC and the

DNC.

Ack.

[EFerrari]

63. Worse, there is a sizable number of us who know exactly who they are. n/t

[Bluebear]

67. You said it, sister!

[baldguy]

58. The DLC is the Republican wing of the Democratic Party.

[stimbox]

59. Error: you can only recommend threads which were started in the past 24 hours

Drats!

Excellent post!!!!

[Mister Ed]

62. I don't need to support 'em. They've got corporate lobbyists for that. n/t