The DLC holds a conference: Go for the Guns, God and Guts Crowd!

For your reading enjoyment. Mods, this is an email, so I'm posting the whole thing.

Just in case you thought the DLC wasn't quite far enough to the right. This is their big campaign strategy for '04. Can you say "thud"?

=============================================
THE NEW DEM DAILY, 20-Oct-03
Political commentary & analysis from the DLC
=============================================
< New Democrats Online: http://www.ndol.org >


Seizing the Cultural Center

For all the current preoccupation with the economic and foreign
policy failures of the Bush administration, it's important for
Democrats to remember the continuing impact of cultural issues on
U.S. politics in recent years.

Over the weekend, the DLC and Americans for Gun Safety sponsored a
conference in Atlanta to discuss cultural issues and how progressives
can reach out to gun owners, people of faith, married couples with
kids, and other voter categories where Republicans have forged
significant advantages in the 2000 and 2002 elections. Elected
officials from 18 states attended the Atlanta session.

The central message of the "Gods, Guns and Guts" conference was
summed up by keynote speaker Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR): "Silence is not
golden." Recounting his successful campaign to defeat a Republican
incumbent in 2002, Pryor reminded the audience of the "concerted
effort by Republicans to foster" negative stereotypes about
Democrats, and urged Democrats to "tell the truth" and define
themselves aggressively on cultural issues instead of letting the
opposition dominate the debate.

Pryor's theme was reinforced by Progressive Policy Institute
president Will Marshall, who opened the conference by arguing
that "it's time for Democrats to switch from a strategy of avoidance
to a strategy of engagement" on cultural issues. "Voters are going to
assume the worst unless we set them straight. Our party ought to get
out of its defensive crouch and get back on an offensive stance where
we belong."

International Association of Fire Fighters president Harold
Schaitberger talked about the success of his union in convincing his
mostly white male membership to vote heavily Democratic in 2000 by
taking cultural issues head-on and then exploiting Democratic
advantages on other issues. "We didn't concede values.... We didn't
concede defense policy.... We didn't concede fiscal discipline.... We
fought like hell to level the playing field on those issues ... then
we went in for the kill on health care ... social security ...
pension protection ... job security ... etc."

DLC Founder and CEO Al From concurred that this approach is the right
formula for 2004. "If Republicans run on their record, they'll
lose.... That's why they'll try to come after Democrats with negative
stereotypes on cultural issues. If Democrats neutralize these issues,
they'll win because Republicans can't defend their overall record."

Americans for Gun Safety president Jon Cowan offered participants a
specific example of how to seize the center on the gun issue,
discussing a new Mark Penn survey that was released at a press
conference last week. Without changing their position supporting
common-sense gun safety legislation, said Cowan, Democrats can
greatly reduce the hostility of many gun owners and expose Republican
extremism with a message of balancing gun rights and gun
responsibilities. That means expressing support for the Second
Amendment and then outlining ways to keep guns out of the hands of
felons, terrorists and children. "The Second Amendment does not
belong to any political party and the gun issue does not have to be a
partisan issue," said Cowan. " Democrats must wake up to the fact
that gun owners prefer candidates who stand up for gun rights,
responsible gun laws, and vigorous enforcement."

Amy Sullivan of The Washington Monthly and Princeton University told
participants that Democrats can help connect with people of faith
by "genuinely expressing their own religious faith," distancing
themselves from militant "secularists," and addressing concerns about
the moral condition of the country and the challenges of families
trying to raise children. She also warned against acceptance of
stereotypes about the political views of religious Americans,
especially evangelical Christians and Catholics.

And Boston College political scientist Alan Wolfe predicted that
today's cultural battleground issues might soon be replaced by a new
set of cultural concerns revolving around the practical needs of
families and the threat posed by economic insecurity -- concerns
where "Republicans are potentially very vulnerable and Democrats
should have an advantage."

Attendees participated in a series of workshops that explored
cultural issues in greater detail. And the conference concluded with
well-received remarks by Rep. Artur Davis (D-AL) on the need for a
clearer Democratic message about the fiscal and economic damage being
wrought by Bush administration policies, and the divisiveness of GOP
appeals to the electorate.

All in all, elected officials left the Atlanta event better prepared
to understand cultural issues, and better equipped to replace silence
with a strong centrist message faithful to their principles that
refutes the GOP campaign of disinformation and division.

Link to this edition of the New Dem Daily on the Web:
"Seizing the Cultural Center"
<http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=131&subid=192&contentid=252109>

Related Material:

Americans for Gun Safety website:
<http://ww2.americansforgunsafety.com/>

"Winning the Gun Vote,"
By Mark J. Penn, poll, October 16, 2003:
<http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=127&subid=269&contentid=252103>

"Guns and Values,"
By Jim Kessler, Matt Bennett, and Jonathan Cowan,
Blueprint Magazine, v. 2003 no. 4:
<http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=251918&kaid=119&subid=157>

"Do The Democrats Have a Prayer?"
By Amy Sullivan, Washington Monthly, June 2003:
<http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0306.sullivan.html>

"It's the Culture, Stupid!"
Blueprint Magazine, v. 11, July/August 2001:
<http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=132&subid=193&contentid=3517>

Frankly gun control has cost our party dearly. I do think that it should be left up to each individual candidate running.

Also I do think the one sentence is right:

Amy Sullivan of The Washington Monthly and Princeton University told
participants that Democrats can help connect with people of faith
by "genuinely expressing their own religious faith," distancing
themselves from militant "secularists," and addressing concerns about
the moral condition of the country and the challenges of families
trying to raise children. She also warned against acceptance of
stereotypes about the political views of religious Americans,
especially evangelical Christians and Catholics.

===================

We do have a problem with religious voters. I did meet woman Democrat from Alabama who told me that she "votes Democratic" because she is a Chrsitian.

The article does bring up important issues. I don't agree with them all but I wouldn't attack the entire message just because you hate the DLC and the fact that they do try to stand up for mainstream values.

And no, before people make the typical allegation, I am not a member of the DLC. Nor do I support Joe Liberman for president.

I didn't find this e-mail offensive at all. It makes a lot of good points.

But see people at DU hate it because it means "standing up for mainstream values". And without making a statement that offends people all too many DUers hate mainstream values and don't respect them.

to see what DLC talking points he is using. But then again...Nope not gonna do it.

The DLC is the enemy of the Democratic party.

My problem with the DLC was their corporatism. And there is nothing corporatist about this strategy.

Also, it seems to me that they aren't proposing to change the direction of Democratic policy. They are going to explain it in terms that these folks can better understand. :thumbsup:

but, definitely "cooperativist"....I've had enough of this pandering to the idiots in America. Trying to compromise with these folks IS what made us lose so big in the 2002 election. We looked WEAK.
What we need to do is show that Bush is WRONG, and that we've been right this entire time. That's what's going to get us voters.

You rarely look weak campaigning on God, guts and guns. And campaigning on God, guts and guns doesn't in any way mean you're campaigning on Bush isn't wrong.

As far as I can tell the DLC doesn't say, in this article, that we shouldn't show that Bush is WRONG. IMHO, we can and should scream from the mountaintops that Bush is wrong and how. But, Dem politicians won't connect to folks if they don't speak to them in a "language" that they accept and understand.

Been touting their candidates approval rating with the NRA and his stance on guns being such a big selling point in a south otherwise wary of Northern Libruls?

So now that the DLC is looking at this in possibly the same way, Dean supporters are complaining?

I really don't get this at all.

Where did I complain?

but the issue is why they're doing it. They're talking about being insincere and pandering. SAYING that you're pro-gun when you're really not. Or saying "Yeah I love God" and then spitting the words out afterward. People can see through that crap.
Dean really is against any new gun legislation. I am too...actually have always been.
I dunno...it just looks like the DLC is going even farther right. They'd already gone too far. They're only a few issues away from being Republican if they take all those issues on board.

It couldn't have been easy turning "support the 2nd Amendment" into "pro-gun", and "speak about your religious faith" into "Yeah, I love God" and "spitting the words out afterward"

Since when is supporting the Constitution "pandering"?

insincere. Remember that the DLC is trying to give Conservative Dems some advice on how speak to folks in their more conservative areas. And these Conservative Dems may run on Dean's moderate gun platform: close the gun show loophole, keep the AWB, enforce the gun regulations in place, but no support for new federal gun laws.

How awful!!

Fomr the article:

Democrats can greatly reduce the hostility of many gun owners and expose Republican extremism with a message of balancing gun rights and gun responsibilities. That means expressing support for the Second Amendment and then outlining ways to keep guns out of the hands of felons, terrorists and children.

Keeping guns out of childrens hands. Oh my, what will they think of next?

Democrats can help connect with people of faith by "genuinely expressing their own religious faith," distancing themselves from militant "secularists," and addressing concerns about the moral condition of the country and the challenges of families trying to raise children.

Now here's a real threat! It would be just terrible for the nation if Dems were to express their own faith and addressing issues of morality. Those bastards!

"The Democratic Party discovers tenth amendment in the Bill of Rights! Film at 11..." :P

...if I remember correctly) because, I presume, they wanted to use this strategy which had worked in VA. Edwards wanted to take a different tack, so he dropped them. They went to work for Graham instead. They're unemployed now.

Always rushing headfirst to the two party/one ideology position at full speed, while leaving it's base and it's most loyal supporters in the dust.

And people wonder why I've gone Green. Well this stupid shit is one of the reasons. Rushing further to the right in the vain hope of picking up a few votes from the God, guns and guts crowd is one more in a long line of suicide strategies that the DLC has sprung on us. Sheesh, and people think I cut off my nose to spite my face.

Face it people, the proud Democratic Party we've all known and loved has been hijacked by a bunch of thugs who are hell-bent on remaking it in the Republican image. If you can't see this plainly before you now, then you must be willfully blinded.

But on the brighter side(at least for me), if the Democrats keep steering right, voters will keep jumping ship, and the left is wide open for the Greens.

to react to and then run against Republicans.

It is never about having a meaningful identity first and then campaigning on it as something worthwhile.

They are ambitious to win but not sure their product can sell because they don't believe it is worth selling---so they are always at a disadvantage.

"Our party ought to get
out of its defensive crouch and get back on an offensive stance where
we belong."

i don't understand this strategy.

God, Guns and Guts aren't real issues, are they? Why would we want to make them real issues? Isn't that just committing to a defensive maneuver?

Supporting the Consitution and the Bill of Rights is pandering?

Since when?

God, Guns and Guts aren't real issues, are they?

You're kidding, right?

real issues.

Guns? Not an issue. What was the last gun legislation to pass since the Brady Bill? There are none on the table. We have the gun issue 99% resolved, and I suppose there's quibbling over a loophole here and there. Of course we SUPPORT the second amendment. But it is not under attack, so why do we feel the need to DEFEND it?

So all we have to do is blow it off. Nobody's trying to take away anybody's guns.

God and Guts were thrown in for the aliteration. Those DLCers are real poets. Not worth discussing in a political forum, tho.

If you want to put the repubs on the defensive here's what you do:

Republicans are shipping your jobs overseas.
Republicans are not responsible with your money.
Republicans run up deficits
Republicans borrow money that our kids will have to pay back
Republicans help the very rich.
Republicans are against affordable healthcare
Republicans are beholden to big business interests
Republicans let white collar criminals go unpunished
Republicans funnel taxpayer money into private corporations
Republicans hurt international trade through ham-fisted diplomacy
Republicans aren't interested in Homeland Security
Republicans want to destroy public education
Republicans leading us to war and avoid military duty themselves.

sorry, but "see, we think guns are okay too" will not get us any votes.

But I find that I don't disagree with anything that is printed from their conference. And folks, Howard Dean is pro-gun ownership, just to remind everyone, OK?

We DO need to "re-tool" our image--without compromising any of the basic things we stand for--for greater acceptance among some groups. And no, I'm NOT talking about the "Christian Right", either. Personally, I want to WIN W.Va., Tennessee, Kentucky, Arkansas and Louisiana again--along with other Southern states, too. And I'd like to win New Hampshire in the fall again. And--lest we think the issues discussed in the Atlanta conference were merely "redneck appeal" points--I wouldn't mind winning Ohio again, too. Right, AWD? :eyes:

The positions advocated in the article were the same sort of gun positions that Howard Dean espouses--and boy, does Dr. Dean ever have a lot of support around here! The more "exclusive" we become, the greater our chances of snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory next year become--you know, as in 1988. As I've said before, just consider this sentence:

"George W. Bush with a popular mandate!":scared:

Issues like the economy, tax burdens, the deficit, abuse of civil liberties, and the environment have been ours for awhile. Now Iraq and our overall foreign policy shambles are, too. Let's be able to knock off Dub & Co. next year with EVERYTHING that's on the table--I'm greedy; I may settle for 50.1%, but I WANT a 60%+ landslide!

:kick:

B-)

We are in a cultural moment where Madalyn Murray O'Hair's murder can go uninvestigated for years because she was an atheist.

We are currently blurring the separation between church and state with all deliberate speed. This is reflected at the level of policy with "faith-based" programs and pushes for back-door parochiaid in the form of school vouchers.

The last Presidential election set a record for public displays of candidate piety.

Under these conditions, the DLC advises moving further in the same direction. It boggles the mind.

The real issues today are money and power. Those have to be tamed or all otehr issues become moot. And to do that we need more average people on our side.

I don't think Democrats ought to become phony conservatives on cultural issues. But I also think a lot of the stereotypes about liberals are due to a gross misunderstanding of liberal and progressive positions -- (and the gross misrepresentations of us by the right wing).

The gun issue, for example, is ultuimately a distraction. It ought to be more localized and taken out of the national debate -- except for enforcement against illegal traffiking. I agree with Dean on this. In a rural area like Vermont, people use guns primarily for collecting, hunting and target practice. They don;t need the same gun laws as an urban area -- and rural voters ae likely to see that.

The God issue is dicier. We obviously need to maintain the wall berween church and state. But how religious a candidate is ought to be more individual. The point does need to be made that liberals can be religious too.

We need to take the message to the people just how Dean and Edwards have!

And that's all this is, its another pussy-footing driveling attempt to go to the American public and APOLOGIZE for the ideals that are BEST for the nation.

*snivel snivel* "well, if you spin it THIS way, we kind of look like Republicans." Bullshit. I believe this is ultimately a LOSING stategey. I think we would command far more if we stood up and said, "you know what, we are a party of opposition, this is what we think, this is what we believe and we're not fucking apologizing for it or running the the center like huge cowards. If you agree vote for us, if you don't vote for someone else. It's called democracy.

I am so sick and tired of winning being more important than being right. I am so sick and tired of not caring about what we stand for as long as we "win." And furthermore, I also don't support a strategy that is centered around catering towards the LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR in society! :(

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!! I'm going to go get a chill-out muffin... grrr...

*grumble grumble grumble*

I didn't realize the 'Opposition Party' was against the 1st (God) and 2nd amendment (Guns). If it were up to the hard right and the hard left we'd repeal the Bill of Rights.

...being mixed with politics.

There is a difference between acknowelding the 2nd amendment makes room for a well trained militia, and masturbating with orgasmic delight in a pool of every kind of gun known to mankind for no other reason that because its "our 'heritage'" That's not supporting the second amendment - that's abusing its intent in the most extreme way possible.

If it were up to the "hard" left we wouldn't abuse and descarate the Bill of Rights by treating it dogmatically like religious fundamentalistis treat the bible. It's a living breathing document that requires constant thought and interpretation to the circumstances of the day.

The 'Hard Left' in my reference means left of liberal democrat; those who would seek to make all arms illegal. Outside of religious fundies, most Americans believe in separation of church and state. This isn't a platform exclusive to the 'hard left' and we shouldn't allow the repugs to paint Democrats as the party that wishes to prohibit religion. And dogma exists on both sides of the equation, demagoguery is not exclusive.

"we shouldn't allow the repugs to paint Democrats as the party that wishes to prohibit religion."

And I can't go as far as saying we should make all guns illegal.

It is not a matter of winning being more important than being right.

The message people get about liberals is that we're Godless effete pagans who don't care about families and want to take away peoples guns to keep the population enslaved.

I don't know anywhere in the liberal creed that says you're not supposed to believe in God, or are opposed to families or want to disarm the populace to make them helpless.

Liberalism IS about protecting freedom and diversity -- whether one chooses to be on the "fringe" or the mainstream in their personal behavior. Making that clear is not selling out.

I still hate the DLC though. :)

:D

I think you pretty much nailed my response to this too, especially the God issue. Of course, given the DLC's long-ingrained habit of not being exactly forthright on policy issues, I'm sort of waiting for the other shoe to drop on this. Still and all, it's certainly not the most obnoxious thing to come from Al and Co.

Most values espoused by progressives are much more in-line with Christianity than the Republicans. The Repugs only claim is on abortion, representative of Evagelical Christians (bible belt). The Democrats are on the side of helping those that can't help themselves. Only a small minority, myself included, are agnostic or atheist so this plan may not be a bad thing.

Of the myriad of issues about which Jesus spoke, to my limited knowledge, the Bible makes no reference whatsoever to him condemning abortion- despite the fact that abortion was available in biblical times. I've asked fundies for a cite for many years, and even they have been unable to come up with one. (since I'm certainly no biblical scholar, I give them the opportunity to prove me wrong)

The closest that Jesus came to condemning abortion was in his general preachings about the sanctity of life, the protections to which all humans are entitled, and the care that man owes his fellow men. But then again, he never described the unborn fetus as a "life" either.

Otherwise, I agree with you. As far as I'm concerned, the words republican and Christian are mutually exclusive, so long as one actually focuses on the teachings of Christ, whether he's seen as Savior, Prophet or Poet.

We need to address the wedge issues that have so killed us in the past.

For a better insight then the typicial DU (DLC IS EVIL) mindset, read the Emerging Democratic Majority.

Basically it shows how the far-left and the center-left can, at least partially, work together.

...they don't tote a gun and a bible. It's because they've ABANDONED their traditional base...leaving them without ANY representation.

- Don't fool yourselves: a good portion of the MILLIONS of Americans who DON'T VOTE are of the Democratic persuasion.

- And frankly...who gives a shit about the second amendment when the rest of the Bill of Rights is extinct?

> Don't fool yourselves: a good portion of the MILLIONS of Americans
> who DON'T VOTE are of the Democratic persuasion.

The challenge of the Democratic party is to bring minorities and the working/non-working poor to the polls, groups that traditionally have had low voter turnout.

> - And frankly...who gives a shit about the second amendment when
> the rest of the Bill of Rights is extinct?

If you're talking about the Patriot Act then I wholeheartedly agree. If not I'm curious what you're referring to?

The DLC is spot-on. I think this approach will be good. This doesn't mean abandoning issues like gay rights or abortion rights, either. It means stuff like this: calling out a rapper who spews disgusting lyrics, like Clinton did in 92. Pushing things like the V-chip which voters approved of solidly.

With Bush in the WH EVERYONE should be armed.

Gun control is a losing issue.

:scared: I am sorry, on guns I am really kinda sensitive about em. Call me treehugger, nutcase, or what, knowing what a gun does to someone and knowing of the accidents that happen, and most importantly knowing what one did to my uncle, I have a hard time accepting the party to become like this. I disagree is all, I dont like guns one bit.

Except those who are prohibited by law from being armed.

I don't trust Repubs but if we match them in firepower we can keep them in line.

Most Repubs own guns.

Well of course if you wanna be armed you should and those prohibited by law. I dont know, I am far from a pacifist but guns are something that have always turned me off big time.

If you are a real pacifist you would be exempted.

If we were literally in combat with the GOP bastards then I may consider but as of now, I dont need guns to feel safe.

Its just knowing damn well what guns did to my uncle, what may have traumatized my grandfather and others in my family were all guns, they are like veterans is what I mean. I dont like em. I am not gonna call for the 2nd amendment to be repealed though but I dont like em, never will.

I want a REAL Democrat and the NRA voters can f_ off. Enough union members, veterans and military will vote Dem so the NRA lovefest can cease.

The reputation of our party is deserved. We only have a few TRULY pro-gun Democrats (John Dingell of Michigan for one, Mark Warner gov of VA another).

The NRA endorses pro-gun candidates of both parties. Problem is the Dems have few candidates they can endorse.

I am glad he won though but he didnt win by a landslide because of this indeed he beat Mark Earley in a close race.

the way the NRA has promoted?

The "reputation is deserved" my ass. Clinton didn't, Gore wouldn't have.

I propose repealing the 2nd amendment. I dont think so, I could be wrong but I dont think I am. The rep isnt deserved, groups like the NRA feed on fears, and I hate playing on fear.

such emotion over this topic.

What is the big deal about solidifying and marketing the party's support of basic human rights (freedom of religion and a right to self defense), to eliminate the draining distraction those issues have been causing, so we can focus on the REAL problems:

And the conference concluded with
well-received remarks by Rep. Artur Davis (D-AL) on the need for a
clearer Democratic message about the fiscal and economic damage being
wrought by Bush administration policies, and the divisiveness of GOP
appeals to the electorate.

Which the Far Right has co-opted!

People are smart enough to know that their family life and communities are under siege and the Right and Fundies are the only ones making it an issue!!!

Of course, the Far Right & its policies are ACTUALLY antithetical to the Common Good, Family and Morality... but they are the only ones talking about it.

Remember when Al Gore and Tipper did that book about families?

People are starved for MEANING in their lives.

I wish DU'ers would read Rabbi Lerner's work. He has addressed this emptiness in American society.

It is NOT JUST THE ECONOMY STUPID!

I wish DU'ers would read Rabbi Lerner's work. He has addressed this emptiness in American society.

It is NOT JUST THE ECONOMY STUPID!

Reading The Politics of Meaning was one of those rare occurances in which reading a single book radically altered my perception of the world around me -- or at the very least helped to crystallize many of the things I was feeling but couldn't quite put together on my own.

More religion in politics is NOT something that I agree with, ever! Especially since that "more religion" the DLC is proposing is one that shelters individuals who are VERY hostile to me and mine. I don't like the idea of the party pandering to the Reich, no matter what form it takes.

They will campaign on the "values" bullshit because they CAN'T run on their record. And we'd by damn better be ready with a response when they do it, because they will try to hammer us with the "evil liberal" image. The DLC is right on this one. Should we make these the centerpieces of our campaign? Hell no! The centerpieces are the economy, the war, the economy, foreign policy, the economy, jobs, the economy, etc. (you see where I'm going with this). But we'd better be ready at minimum to respond to the Puke attacks. We cannot just ignore them.

I for one would love to see a Democrat, especially in the South, respond to the "They want to take your guns" charge by saying, "This Puke is either a liar or an idiot! I don't want to take your guns away from you, I've got one myself! HE, on the other hand, doesn't want you to be able to AFFORD one!"

Bake