Who's selling Dems out? DLC, CBC and Blue Dogs, that's who.

political writing around today . . . always perceptive, and generally right on target . . .

...someone said the Black Commentator was bullshit.

Most everyone else does.

They started as a way to counteract the "tax and spenders" in the Dem Party that started the loss of the South for us - people like Sen. Jim Sasser.

But, I can see the consternation about the others.

The Blue Dog Democrats are a congressional grouping of fiscal and social conservatives and moderates, primarily southerners, willing to broker compromises with the Republican leadership. They have acted as a unified voting bloc in the past, giving its thirty members some ability to change legislation. The name appears to be both a reference to several well-known Louisiana paintings featuring blue dogs, as well as a reference to the old "yellow dog" Democrats having been "choked blue." Oddly, blue is the color chosen by the media to represent Democrats.

...from Wikipedia

the Blue Dogs are almost surely "old Democrats", hearkening back to the party's past during the eras of Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman, and to the party's former electoral stronghold in the southern United States

Blue Dog Democrats tend to differ ideologically from another coalition of moderate Democrats, the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC). The DLC describes itself as new Democrat and positions itself as centrist while taking liberal positions on social issues and conservative positions on economic issues and trade. Democrats who identify with the Blue Dogs, on the other hand, tend to be social conservatives, but have differing positions on economic issues ranging from fiscal conservatism to economic populism. For example, most Blue Dogs are strong supporters of gun rights and get high ratings from the National Rifle Association, many have pro-life voting records, and some get high ratings from immigration reduction groups, which cannot be said for most members of the DLC. On economic issues, Blue Dogs span the spectrum from fiscal conservatives to supporters of labor unions, protectionism, and other populist measures, while the DLC tends to favor free trade.

A small number of newer Blue Dogs, however, hold positions closer to those of the DLC, and some Blue Dog Coalition members are also DLC members. Blue Dogs share with the DLC a desire to keep the Democratic Party grounded in their view of the political center, and to ensure that the party does not drift too far to the left of their own positions and no longer appeal to what they believe to be the majority of U.S. voters.

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

And might I add, look out for Blue Dogs in the CBC...per their voting records i.e. on the bankruptcy bill and estate tax, as well as CAFTA.

The post before mine quoted a part of it and I then quoted a part of it.

Regardless, it says what it says. Sorry.

I don't have to read Wikipedia. I live amongst them and there are some as you describe, but, for the most part, they're the Dems who are for choice AND for balanced budgets.

Real life is, you know, better, sometimes, than a link to an encylopedia.

weren't what lost the south for the Dems.

We lost our Dem senators in Tennessee to: Al Gore became vice president and the other lost to Frist because he was a classic "tax and spend" liberal. That would be Jim Sasser.

We really, really, really hate taxes in Tennessee - more than we allegedly adore Christian Coalition talking points.

Try it sometime.

We did - and we now have a Dem governor.

Why? What do you think it was? I was reporting at the time of the guard change and I interviewed tons of people and the taxes are what did it. The right-wing radio continues to perpetuate this old, old, old belief, but, hey.. it ain't because of abortion.

Like, a generation before.

they've become some of the worst capitulators. Many have proven to be reliable allies for Bush on his major issues, whether tax cuts (you don't have to be a "tax and spend liberal" to realize these were extremely reckless), the war, bankruptcy "reform" (all BUT three voted FOR it), and many other pieces of legislation. I wouldn't be surprised if many that voted for CAFTA the other day were "blue dogs".

:shrug:

They're fiscal conservatives and social liberals.

"To some people, being a gay Republican seems like an oxymoron. We disagree. The Republican Party's founding principles and core beliefs represent a powerful tool that should be used to defend liberty-not attack it as the radical right has done. Their dogged campaign to block gay and lesbian civil rights goes against the party's core principles of smaller government and personal freedom. They use values as a veil for hate. The radical right's influence on the GOP can be diminished one voter at a time, by making the case for fairness. That is what motivates the Log Cabin Republicans to lead today's most important battle for the civil rights of gay and lesbian Americans. Even those in the gay community who disagree with our politics should realize our value."

http://online.logcabin.org/talking_points/talking_points_whyitisokaybeingagayGOP.html

To me, "Blue Dog" has always meant DLC, and if that's what we're talking about they are more like Caucasian African Americans. Think Colin Powell or Condi Rice: Too much of both and not enough of either, and a complete betrayal of those from whence they came.

NOT social LIBERALS.

One more time:

The Blue Dog Democrats are a congressional grouping of fiscal and social conservatives and moderates, primarily southerners, willing to broker compromises with the Republican leadership. They have acted as a unified voting bloc in the past, giving its thirty members some ability to change legislation. The name appears to be both a reference to several well-known Louisiana paintings featuring blue dogs, as well as a reference to the old "yellow dog" Democrats having been "choked blue." Oddly, blue is the color chosen by the media to represent Democrats.

...from Wikipedia

So "Blue Dogs" can basically be candidates who are:

Fiscally-conservative and socially-moderate
Fiscally-conservative and socially-conservative
Fiscally-moderate and socially-conservative
or
Fiscally-moderate and socially-moderate

Well, that definitely makes a difference.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y132/donco6/rodrigue.bmp

I know too many of them. None are like this.

Sorry, but you're, to use a metaphor, barking up the wrong tree.

BTW, Blue Dogs supported the HELL out of Wes Clark. They sent TONS of workers and volunteers down here, up here, over here - to my state - to canvass for him. And Clark is NOT a moderate. He's fiscally conservative (in the true sense, not the political sense, of the word) and social liberal.

I LOVE the Blue Dogs. They rock.

OH, that's right.

God help us :evilfrown:

but I thought the CBC was where most of the Congresspeople who've shown any backbone were from.

:shrug:

But check out the article to see who "the suspects" are and how they've been voting.

Far too subjective...

There needs to be an objective criteria here for comparison of percent favoring this bill in any group versus the other Dems.

For example, only a couple progressives voted for it. Yet, no one complained about them and they shouldn't.

How many votes is too many, though, and how many means you didn't sell out?

I will post a more detailed analysis later.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1969653

The claim about CBC is a bunch of cr*p.

The claim about Blue Dogs is true but for this bill. I don't know about other bills.

The claim about DLC is absolutely true. It is true for other important bills, too.

From the text in the charts linked to in the Black Commentator article:

"Those voting for the bankruptcy bill included 10 members of the Congressional Black Caucus, 13 members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, 2 Progressive Caucus members and all but 3 Blue Dogs (there is overlap among some caucuses). Most striking is the vote by eight members of the Congressional Black Caucus in favor of permanently eliminating the estate tax. Four Progressive Caucus members, which included two CBC members, supported the bill. Nineteen members of the Blue Dog Coalition voted for the bill and 16 voted against."

***********

Below are the members of the Black Congressional Caucus during the 109th Congress (All current Caucus members are Democrats.) See how many of them voted for the bankruptcy bill, for abolishing the estate tax and for CAFTA.

Sanford Bishop of Georgia
Corrine Brown of Florida
Julia Carson of Indiana
Donna Christian-Christensen of the U.S. Virgin Islands
William Lacy Clay, Jr. of Missouri
Emanuel Cleaver of Missouri
Jim Clyburn of South Carolina
John Conyers, Jr. of Michigan
Elijah Cummings of Maryland
Artur Davis of Alabama
Danny K. Davis of Illinois
Chaka Fattah of Pennsylvania
Harold Ford, Jr. of Tennessee
Al Green of Texas
Alcee Hastings of Florida
Jesse L. Jackson, Jr. of Illinois
Bill Jefferson of Louisiana
Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas
Stephanie Tubbs Jones of Ohio
Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick of Michigan
Barbara Lee of California
Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas
John Lewis of Georgia
Cynthia McKinney of Georgia
Kendrick Meek of Florida
Gregory Meeks of New York
Juanita Millender-McDonald of California
Gwen Moore of Wisconsin
Eleanor Holmes Norton of the District of Columbia
Senator Barack Obama of Illinois
Major Owens of New York
Donald Payne of New Jersey
Charles B. Rangel of New York
Bobby Rush of Illinois
Bobby Scott of Virginia
Bennie Thompson of Mississippi
Edolphus Towns of New York
Maxine Waters of California
Diane Watson of California
Mel Watt of North Carolina
Albert Wynn of Maryland

http://www.techpolitics.org/congress/1091vote108.php?sort_field=cbc%20desc,%20vote1091108&sort_order=desc

Democrats deserving of punishment include Representatives Bean (D-IL), Cooper (D-TN), Dicks (D-WA), Cuellar (D-WA), Hinojosa (D-TX), Jefferson (D-LA), Matheson (D-UT), Meeks (D-NY), Moore (D-KS), Moran (D-VA), Ortiz (D-TX), Skelton (D-MO), Snyder (D-AR), Tanner (D-TN), and Towns (D-NY). The full roll call vote is available at http://clerk.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.asp?year=2005&rollnumber=443.

3 of the 15 were CBC: Jefferson, Meeks and Towns voted for CAFTA.

Here is the list of the Blue Dog Coalition (from Wikipedia). 4 of them, Cooper, Matheson, Moore, and Tanner, voted for CAFTA.

List of Blue Dog Coalition members
Joe Baca (California)
John Barrow (Georgia)
Marion Berry (Arkansas)
Sanford Bishop (Georgia)
Dan Boren (Oklahoma)
Leonard Boswell (Iowa)
Allen Boyd (Florida)
Dennis Cardoza (California)
Ed Case (Hawaii)
Ben Chandler (Kentucky)
Jim Cooper (Tennessee)
Jim Costa (California)
Bud Cramer (Alabama)
Lincoln Davis (Tennessee)
Harold Ford, Jr. (Tennessee)
Jane Harman (California)
Stephanie Herseth (South Dakota)
Tim Holden (Pennsylvania)
Steve Israel (New York)
Jim Matheson (Utah)
Mike McIntyre (North Carolina)
Charlie Melancon (Louisiana)
Mike Michaud (Maine)
Dennis Moore (Kansas)
Collin Peterson (Minnesota)
Earl Pomeroy (North Dakota)
Mike Ross (Arkansas)
John Salazar (Colorado)
Loretta Sanchez (California)
Adam Schiff (California)
David Scott (Georgia)
John Tanner (Tennessee)
Ellen Tauscher (California)
Gene Taylor (Mississippi)
Mike Thompson (California)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4213071&mesg_id=4216769

Meeks, Moore, Snyder, Moran, Matheson, Tanner, Hinojosa, Dicks, Jefferson, Cooper, Towns, and Cuellar

See the "crossover" here? Meeks, Moore, Matheson, Tanner, Jefferson, Cooper and Towns--DLC/Blue Dog/CBC