General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWords about liberals the past years...why I speak out still and so should you.
If we don't remember these things they could easily get started up all over again. Look at what happened in early December with the Third Way attack on Elizabeth Warren.
Hunter at Daily Kos wrote about why this happened. He posted a chart showing the Board of Trustees of the Third Way. He labeled it.
Why the Third Way hates Senator Elizabeth Warren
The obsessive centrists of the punditverse were abuzz today with praise for supposed centrist Democratic organization Third Way and their grumbling op-ed condemnation of Democratic liberal populism in abstract and "economic populists" like Sen. Elizabeth Warren in particular.
But why would the Third Way, a very reasonable and centrist organization that just wants both parties to get along and agree to cut Social Security, Medicare, and other social programs be so very worked up about Elizabeth Warren, Wall Street reform, and the mere thought of breaking up large banks? Worked up enough to launch an apparently coordinated effort against those things?
The chart is self-explanatory.
There's a reason that those in the Democratic Party who call themselves "centrists" or "moderates" have had much to say about those of us on the left for years now.
We throw a wrench into their corporate pursuits for the party, and it annoys them.
Howard Dean recognized this in 2010. His words still remain in my mind. He was 100% right.
From the Washington Post 2010:
Dean at progressive conference. Time for Democrats to 'behave like Democrats'
Dean, in a fiery speech Tuesday at the America's Future Now conference, gave voice to frustrations on the left that President Obama and Democratic leaders in Congress have not used their big majorities to pursue a more progressive agenda. "We are done with putting people in office who then forget who got them there," said Dean, a former Democratic National Committee chairman.
"You did your job," Dean added. "You elected Barack Obama. You elected a Democratic Congress. You elected a Democratic Senate. And now it's time for them to behave like Democrats if they want to get reelected. They have forgotten where they came from -- and they haven't been here that long."
Dean echoed other progressive leaders who opened the conference Monday, expressing dismay, even anger, at the White House and Congress, saying they have been too timid and compromising on issues such as health care, the economy, climate change and banking reform.
I think we have made a difference by not letting these think tanks get away with words against liberals. It seems there is now less of it. I think it is because through the years we called them out on it. With the TPP looming with Democrats' support..we need to speak out and not let them silence us with insults.
Richard Eskow spared no words either right after the 2010 losses.
Resist Wall Street's Shock Doctrine or Keep Listening to the Usual Suspects
After last night's rout, what are these experts advising? You guessed it: more of the same so-called "Centrism." That's an odd word to use for policies that most Americans oppose, like cutting Social Security or allowing bankers to enrich themselves by endangering the economy, but theirs is an Alice-in-Wonderland world.
Real centrists would defend Social Security and do more to rein in Wall Street, since those positions are popular across the political spectrum. It's a good thing the president said today that he wants to spend more time with the American people. Bankers and the Deficit Commission aren't "centrists" where most Americans live.
David Brooks had some strong words for the liberals in the party in 2007. The DLC posted the article prominently at their website. Here is the quote from Brooks at the NYT.
The Center Holds
The fact is, many Democratic politicians privately detest the netroots self-righteousness and bullying. They also know their party has a historic opportunity to pick up disaffected Republicans and moderates, so long as they dont blow it by drifting into cuckoo land. They also know that a Democratic president is going to face challenges from Iran and elsewhere that are going to require hard-line, hawkish responses.
I would have ignored David Brooks and considered the source, but the then alive DLC posted it at their site.
When Tim Kaine was party chairman in 2006 he had some words about blogs and his intention to pay them no attention. Guess he did not realize he was missing out on a lot of good information.
From the Washington Post:
Blogs Attack From Left as Democrats Reach for Center
"Blogs can take up a lot of time if you're on them," Kaine said to reporters Thursday. "You can get a lot done if you're not bitterly partisan."
The Virginia Democrat said he will not adjust his speech to placate the party's base. "I'm not anybody's mouthpiece or shill or poster boy for that matter. I'm going to say what I think needs to be said and they seem very comfortable with that."
From the same article a Democratic lobbyist made it clear that liberals were needed for their money and activism, but the party should not cave to their demands.
"The bloggers and online donors represent an important resource for the party, but they are not representative of the majority you need to win elections," said Steve Elmendorf, a Democratic lobbyist who advised Kerry's 2004 presidential campaign. "The trick will be to harness their energy and their money without looking like you are a captive of the activist left."
And of course Fox News Democratic strategist Kirsten Powers had a lot to say in 2006 about how the liberals were becoming so shrill.
From USA Today:
Election signals decline of old school liberalism
It's more glacial shift than radical revolution, but change is afoot in the Democratic Party.
In a low point in Democratic Party history, Pennsylvania Gov. Bob Casey was banned from speaking at the 1992 Democratic Convention for being opposed to abortion rights. This year, his son, Bob Casey Jr., who holds the same views, was actively recruited by that same Democratic Party and unseated Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa.
This was a welcome move in a party that is home to vocal and organized far-left activists and bloggers who have grown increasingly shrill and threatening toward moderate and conservative Democrats. They also have excoriated former president Bill Clinton's brand of centrist politics. They argue for "party discipline," best exemplified by their jihad against Connecticut's Sen. Joe Lieberman for deviating from the party line on the Iraq war. During the past election for Democratic National Committee chair, delegates booed former congressman Tim Roemer of Indiana because he, too, opposes abortion rights.
When they attacked Elizabeth Warren for wanting to expand Social Security, the blogs and posters online hit back hard. That is how it should be. The think tanks who are not really Democrats at all but are led by investment bankers and CEOs will continue to undermine the left, the liberals. But if we speak out they won't be so noisy about it.
There are signs we might be getting across our point that what we really want is for the party to stand up and speak out for the people....not the corporate world.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)madfloridian
(88,117 posts)I just noticed it, not very observant. Interesting link, will visit there more. Thanks.
Benton D Struckcheon
(2,347 posts)Warren saying SS should be expanded is what got them all upset. What they realized is that if they have to fight that position, then merely maintaining the current level of benefits becomes the centrist position, rather than the one they're advocating.
Warren I'm sure realizes that too. Someone needs to be on the left, a few someones actually, to keep the debate from shifting right. Sanders and a few others were out there by themselves. Warren in the Senate and Grayson's return in the House adds some more heft to the lineup. A few more are certainly needed, but this gives the left side a way to hold things together until a few more can be found.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)And that should no longer be the case. Look at who they represent...not us. Good post, and we do need some more to go on the offense.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)This is the money quote:
What they realized is that if they have to fight that position, then merely maintaining the current level of benefits becomes the centrist position, rather than the one they're advocating.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)In this example, she may never achieve increased benefits, but she might be able to force a perceived showdown in the public eye, and end up with no cuts due to a "compromise" between the two extremes.
tblue37
(65,488 posts)okaawhatever
(9,462 posts)Democrats. He writes that Third Way is a "supposed" centrist Democrat organization. They aren't. Assuming their beliefs are the same as centrist Democrats is dead wrong. Third Way is an astroturf group backed by investment bankers and God only knows who else. There are a lot of Koch or Rove backed groups that claim to be bipartisan. They're not, and have never supported a Democrat but they still claim it.
Third Way is just an astroturf group that had some Democrat backers in the past and still have some. They may have even presented a different agenda at the time. It's more important to call out TW funding and current policies as being astroturf than to claim they represent centrist Democrats.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Especially on things like safety nets. You are right. The policies have come from them for years now.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)from those of the Real Democrats?
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Here's an example of what I mean.
The Third Way think tank's plan for Social Security is what Dems are using.
They really do not differ much at all. If you go to their website and search through the issues you will see what I mean.
http://www.thirdway.org/
The DLC website was more blatant about it. They called themselves the policy shop for Democrats, and they were.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)okaawhatever
(9,462 posts)point is that Third Way doesn't represent "centrist Demorats" they represent investment bankers, so their ideas on SS and Medicare reform aren't the postiion of "centrist Democrats" but rather investment bankers.
There may be a poll out there somewhere that draws the line on issues like SS between moderates and liberals but I don't know where to find it.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)They really are not in the middle or center at all.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)You are right though, they are not a Democratic group at all.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)bankers dont make wealth, they steal it.
If you "play" the stock market, IMO you are a fool.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)Phlem
(6,323 posts)-p
H2O Man
(73,615 posts)Very important. Thank you.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Means a lot coming from you.
blue14u
(575 posts)Thank you for the reminder and info. I will bookmark this for
future reference...
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Sometimes we have to look back to be sure we are able to move forward. No more insults toward the left.
blue14u
(575 posts)madfloridian!!!
I always enjoy your posts!
alp227
(32,054 posts)His father is rolling in his grave.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Devil in the Grove about Marshall's work defending Southern black people railroaded into prosecution for crimes they didn't commit.
A great man - I had no idea before reading this.
If his son is like you say... Marshall's corpse is indeed spinning vigorously.
WatermelonRat
(340 posts)"Thurgood Marshall Jr. worked in the Clinton White House and is currently a partner at the international law firm Bingham McCutchen, LLP and a principal at its lobbying subsidiary, Bingham Consulting. He is also chairman of the Board of Governors of the United States Postal Service and a member of the Board of Trustees of the Ford Foundation. According to documents filed with the SEC, he is a director serving on the board of Corrections Corporation of America, the largest commercial vendor of federal detainment and prisoner transport in the United States."
Yep, definitely spinning.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)I hope they know those days are over. If they didn't learn that in 2010, they will never learn it.
Here's what they need to know. We are not just going to support ONLY REAL Democrats, we are going to use our considerable power, that same power that gave Democrats the House, the Senate and the WH, to clean up this Party, to GET RID OF THEM.
Send them back to the Republican Party where they belong, and tell them to 'stop using women and gays for political purposes'. Pretending to care about Gay and Women's rights isn't working anymore.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)The first words out of the mouths of Dem strategists after the big losses in 2010 were that we needed more "bi-partisanship". In other words one big happy party just like the other one.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)I have nothing to add, it has all been said in this thread.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Sincerely yours,
America's Bankers
Doing God's work, you insect
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Well done!
Scuba
(53,475 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)madfloridian
(88,117 posts)Howard Dean had been chairman when our party had such big wins. Yet due to pettiness he was allowed to take his trip to American Samoa without even being told of the announcement by Obama of Tim Kaine as new chair.
From Ari Berman's Herding Donkeys, pages 205-207. Transcribed.
On January 7, White House political director Patrick Gaspard, a former top labor organizer from New York, called DNC executive director Tom McMahon. Gaspard told McMahon that Obama planned to name Virginia governor Tim Kaine as his new DNC chair and wanted to make the announcement at the DNC the following day. Gaspard asked if Dean would be around. Dean's planning to be in American Samoa, the last U.S. territory he'd yet to visit as DNC chair, McMahon responded. (He'd logged 741,000 miles on the job.) Should he postpone his trip?
If he's already planning the trip, don't tell him to cancel, Gaspard replied. It would be better, in other words, if Dean wasn't there. Administration officials didn't want Obama to face any questions at the press conference about why Dean hadn't received a plum position in the White House. One snub led to another.
Gaspard, ironically, worked on Dean's campaign in 2004, but now served a higher office. "The decision was made by Rahm and Plouffe and (deputy chief of staff) Jim Messina", said the senior transition member. "I was specifically told by a senior administration official, 'It comes from those three guys. They specifically want to do this to Dean.'"
Even the new Camelot wasn't above a little revenge.
...Dean's snub didn't matter because of one man's bruised ego or thwarted ambitions. Rather, his shabby treatment would come to represent a broader abandonment of the party's grassroots base, especially as Obama packed his White House with well-worn veterans of previous administrations who embodied longevity over innovation and connections over change...
Zorra
(27,670 posts)colsohlibgal
(5,275 posts)The phrase and later book title "The Center Holds" drives me nuts. It might have been at least acceptable pre Reagan when the center was way, way left of where it is now. But now? Eisenhower would not tolerate it.
I hear supposed democrats like Chuck Schumer dismiss the far left as less credible than the far right - and think what a privileged little toadie he is. He's wealthy and does not want to be any less wealthy.
We're here with the official right wing propaganda "news" channel, Fox, and CNBC which is the wall street wing shouting "let them eat cake".
In the end rich folks, like the owners of WalMart, don't wish the misery of going through life with 450 million rather than 550 million. It makes you feel for the poor owners of COSTCO, they are making the huge sacrifice of a few million less so they can treat their employees well and not like dirt.
I heard someone recently on Moyer's show that said instead of left/right or liberal/conservative, it should be empathetic/cruel and greedy.
In the end it's about empathy and fighting pure greed/hate.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)"So I called up Governor...our number one target is Rick Santorum...let him go back to wherever he lives, Maryland, you know you heard about it, he is Pennsylvania but he tried to get exempt from the school tax there cause he lives in Maryland even though he is a registered citizen of Pennsylvania. In any case I called up the Governor of Pennsylvania, Governor Rendell, I said who is the best candidate to beat Santorum. He there is only one person who could beat him but he won't run and B you wouldn't want him to. I said why wouldn't we want him to run, he said he's pro-life. He's a deeply religious Catholic man. Bob Casey."
"I said, those days are over Ed. Yes I'm pro-choice, but we need the best candidate. We can't insist that every democrat check off 18 different issues before they get (unintelligible) we could do that, we can't anymore. And so, we persuaded, Harry using his very...Harry has amazing insights into people...and we together persuaded Bob Casey to run. A poll yesterday...national...all the polls they did...Casey 51 Santorum 40. You should see Santorum nervous and walkin on the floor."
(unintelligible)
"And we're doing this in the other states."
Yes, those words "the center holds" drive me nuts as well.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)Last election, Hillary Clinton was considered neither more conservative nor more liberal than her husband ("about the same" by 63% of Democratic voters.
So if you're someone who actually goes around writing AUTHORITARIAN in all caps in your screeds on the D.U., and think the U.S. economy was driven into the dirt by President William Jefferson Clinton, then she's the most Conservative Conservative who has ever Conservatived. But for the rest of us, she's yet another competent technocrat, likely as level-headed, and able to steer the nation in the right direction.
Unlike the anti-Democratic screamers, I won't adopt their behavior of tearing liberal lions like Senator Warren down. I think the Senator is doing a fine job too, and has a voice that needs to be heard.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)main contributers to the Deficit, the Iraq War. Count me in as a 'screamer' or whatever other word applies, against that travesty. And no potential leader could have case a more important vote during this period in history and gotten it so wrong. Morally, ethically and if someone doesn't care about that, economically, unless you are Defense Contractor.
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)Democrats put in all sorts of things Bush was supposed to "attest" to before starting that war. The authorization was conditional on that. You might rightfully accuse them of being naive about how willing Bush was to nakedly lie, but at the time that wasn't quite so obvious to the nation. Nor was it quite so obvious what an overwhelming incompetent the man was. You'd have thought that the guy with the dubious achievement of being able to cunningly swindle Gore out of the Presidency would have been better in actually making things work.
But please, I'm not trying to convince you to support Hillary in the primary. (What are you going to do, vote for Biden? He voted for it too.) All I'm saying is that she's almost certainly going to be our nominee, and when she is, I would like to see another Democratic President.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)a worse indictment of Hillary if you tried.
Here, let me help you, and before doing so, I have to ask, 'where were you between 2000 and 2003? I have to ask because anyone who said this ....
.... cannot have been around watching Bush and his band of war criminals lying so obviously to the American people.
Most of us HERE on DU were right there watching and laughed when Congress put on a show of putting in conditions 'Bush was SUPPOSED to adhere to'. Because anyone who was not an outright blind Right Wing partisan already knew what to expect from Bush. Hillary, you say, 'might have been naive'. Well, that's a kind way of proving my point.
Anyone THAT naive, as you call it, on the Left especially and there many even on the Right who were not that 'naive', is not fit for a position as powerful as POTUS.
To get it so WRONG on something as critically important as this, that took the lives of over one million people, thousands of our own troops, and destroyed a nation which had zero to do with 9/11, not to mention took away our Moral Authority in the eyes of the world, AND contributed hugely to the Deficit, cannot be trusted with the decisions a president has to make. To even suggest shows a degree of denial that is unprecedented.
Every single Democrat I know, AND a fair number of Conservatives, KNEW they were lying, but Hillary didn't?? Maybe if she had read the material Sen. Graham read, which changed HIS mind, but which she avoided reading, it might have helped cure any naivte she was operating under.
We don't need 'naive' leaders. We need someone who got THAT decision right.
Your dismissive attitude towards the lives lost isn't a very good asset to try to drum up support for someone who contributed to that enormous travesty and human tragedy.
And that is pretty much how most Dems I know feel about anyone who helped Bush and his gang of War Criminals commit that crime.
If Dems want to LOSE, she will be the nominee. If not, they will start listening to the voters they NEED and provide someone the voters can vote FOR.
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)...good luck finding someone who isn't a complete joke.
However, given how the DU's general track record, I'm not intensely worried.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)can be found to run for the WH, every single other American is a 'joke'.
Do you understand why that Third Way phrase from some think tank intended to undermine Liberals, has ALWAYS been a joke?
It was such a joke that after they first rolled it out back around 2004, it was ridiculed by actual Democrats to the point where no self respecting Dem would be caught using it.
It brought back some fun memories. I always wondered how much they spent coming up with those lame phrases, 'purity troll' 'reality based community' 'concern troll' etc. All they succeeded in doing was to solicit advice from people who can actually think for themselves, that they has wasted their money.
Sabrina, supremely proud to have never been a member of that particular 'reality based community' and who may one day write a history of its sad and short lived appearance in the political arena'.
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)Is this even a matter for debate?
As for the rest, "Purity Troll" comes straight from the hands of Markos Moulitsas, hardly a Third-way-er (unless you're really off the deep end), "Concern Troll" is used for an entirely different category of troll - usually someone from the opposition who pretends to be for a group and tells people they should do everything the opposition wants because they are "concerned" for what might happen if they do not, and "Reality Based Community" is a Democratic slam on Karl Rove. Though it sometimes makes the lady (whose conscience must bother them) doth protest too much, and they react with hostility in assuming that I'm talking about them. (And if you do that, I am.)
The "Third Way" group however seems to be a tiny handful of liberal Republicans. I think these people are very easy to talk to, and not at all bad (they were cheerleaders for the ACA), except they're largely powerless since there are so few liberal Republicans left. When is the last time you went to their website? I think there are more quotes from Freepers on the D.U. than them. (Of course, DUers are also pretty powerless, being on the fringe of the party.)
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)She has an easily found track record of screwing her constituents as a Senator as well as being one of the architects of the so-called Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act, although in the end she didn't cast her vote for it ( ).
Octafish
(55,745 posts)I'm not sure I would have gone in a different direction, money being the measure of all things, if not the staff of life, these days.
theaocp
(4,244 posts)and a very Happy New Year to my favorite of all mad Floridians.
polichick
(37,152 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Jakes Progress
(11,122 posts)Democrats do not pay attention to posts as sane as this at peril to their moral souls.
I've been avoiding posting for a while - a relief to me and, I'm sure, many others. But I sill lurk, and this post, like most of hers, is a joy to read and succor to the soul of those of us who are considering giving up.
Recommend highly.