What is the Repuglican version of the DLC?

[boolean]

Do the repugs have a "moderate" group within them? Because the DLC is part of the problem, if you ask me. They are the ones that create the divide among the Democratic party. I hardly ever see repugs fighting amongst one another, at least not openly in public. Only when the boat is sinking (such as now) do you see scores of repugs desperately jumping ship.

But when things are Rosy, you hardly see any opposition. Where were Giuliani, McCain, Schwarzenegger, or any other of the "moderate" repugs whenever the gay marriage amendment was being pushed around? Did you see any of these so called moderates speak out against their party? What about Terri Schiavo, or the war, or any other number of issues that are decidedly not moderate? Where was the dissension among the repuglican party when the repuglican party was pushing a neocon agenda?

In contrast, the Democrats, when they disagree, boy do they do it openly. You get Zell Miller at the Republican convention. You get Lieberman kissing chipmy. You get Rahm Emanuel on CNN and (especially) Faux news bitching against his own party. You get Hillary supporting flag burning amendment bullshit. These are all wolves in sheep's clothing. They are conservatives that ought to be repuglicans, but because of the demographics of their constituencies, hide under the Democrat "D". New York is a decidedly blue state. Why do you think Hillary ran there?

Whenever Democrats fight each other, it gives the repugs ammunition. They point at the Dems and laugh. They accuse them of being inconsistent, they say they have no principals, no plans, that they're wishy washy, can't make up their own minds. The conservatives hiding in the Democratic party need to be flushed out. Does this mean the Democratic party has to be a small tent? No. For all of the repuglican's faults, one thing you can't accuse them of is being small tent. They do have McCain and Giuliani and Schwarzenegger. But one thing you will never see is Giuliani speaking at the Democratic Convention. (Like Zell Miller) You will never see McCain go on CNN and say Ed Gillespie's strategy is stupid (Like Rahm Emanuel).

Disagreement within the party is fine. But do it behind closed doors. When those doors are open, stand in unison. Do it democratically, if you need to! (Wouldn't that be nice?) Make a list of issues, take a private vote on various positions on that issue, and stand together on the issue. This is something the repugs are very good at, and it's time the Democrats wake up and take notice.

If the various polls on what people think about Iraq and WMD are any indication, the people, for the most part, are stupid. The people don't pay attention. The people only hear sound bites. The people need to hear a consistent, unified alternative voice. That's what leadership is. The Democrats need to take liberal and progressive positions on issues and they need to fucking stick with them TOGETHER. And when there is disagreement, they need to gently acknowledge the disagreement while consistently attacking the Republican's stance on it. Otherwise, expect more of the same bullshit.

[Guaranteed]

1. The DLC. HA! nt

[Kagemusha]

2. No, the Republican version of the DLC is the National Review.

Not a moderate group, but an ultra hardcore neocon one.

Why should a Republican DLC be more moderate rather than less?

Edited because I stupidly put in New Republic instead. Bah

[marmar]

3. The Log Cabin Republicans?

Not that they have any power, nor are they paid any attention to....Remind me again why they are Republicans?

[snowbear]

4. The ReTHUGS..

..are nasty, dirty, filthy, low life, lice-infested, sleezebag, scum of the earth, cockroach ridden, corrupt, lying, sleazy dirtballs..

..to ever be compared to ANY level of the Democratic party -- from the most leftwing, to the most centrist.

They are a disgrace to this country!

--> <--
Just take a look at the creep so many of them worship!