Many who called Deaniacs "fringe" in 04...are now disloyal to the party.

[madfloridian]

Vibes of guilt were being sent out to whomever did not stay and support the party. They were already sending unpleasant thoughts our way locally and statewide.

We did what we had to do, just as many others did. Howard Dean supported the nominee, and we stayed on board.

Many of us were already disillusioned, even those of us were lifelong Democrats. But we did what was asked of us.

They are the ones now who are letting the party down. Not us. We did not let the party down, we are working for change. We went nowhere.

They care so little about the Democratic party that they will stay with Lieberman no matter what he does.

Damn it, remember the way the DLC accused us of being cultists, worshippers, because we got excited about making a difference? Remember those guys who called us fringe activists? Remember them? I do. They are the ones who are saying Joe Lieberman is more important than being a Democrat.

They are the "fringe" people now. Not us. Al From and his memos from 2003...here they are. They called us fringe.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/62

But we stayed and worked for the winner of the primary, and they do not have the integrity to do so now.

I am furious with the ones who made fun of us in 04. We were loyal, they are not. It is all about them and their egos and corporations.

[The Magistrate]

1. The Nominee Of The Party Is To Be Supported, Ma'am

In my view, it really is that simple. People have no right to ask another to do what they will not do themselves.

[dolstein]

2. You're entitled to your view. However, I'd like to point out . . .

that many of the people who demand absolute party loyalty now displayed little interest in party loyalty back in 2000 when it matter. Indeed, Al Gore was a favorite punching bag for DU'ers back in the early days. It wasn't until he started drinking the MoveOn/Kos Kool-aid that that he suddenly got some respect.

I'll probably get banned for saying this, but since this place is pretty much worthless as a forum for discussion these days, I'll say it anyway. Supporting Joe Lieberman, who has served in the senate as a Democrat for 18 years, remains a registered Democrat, and has pledged to remain in the Democratic caucus if re-elected, will not in any way affect the partisan balance in the U.S. Senate. The amount of attention devoted to this race is far out of proportion to its political significance. If only the typical DU'er could muster the same enthusiasm for defeating, say, Rick Santorum or Conrad Burns . . . then perhaps we'd be in business.

I'm beginning to understand what it must have felt like to be a Rockefeller Republican in 1964, when a bunch of former Dixiecrats took over the party.

[madfloridian]

5. Do NOT compare us to Dixiecrats. How insulting.

How horrible of you to do that, Dolstein. Our party really does need change more than I thought if that is the mindset of so many.

How dare you.

[Pale Blue Dot]

10. Don't worry. It's the death rattle of an outdated idealogy.

Don't give it more time than it deserves.

[Cha]

26. Gotta love

the "death rattle"!

[Sparkly]

6. No you DIDN'T!!!

You didn't just bash DU, bash the party, and express support for an opponent... and surely you DIDN'T just compare today's Democrats with "Dixiecrats."

[TheWraith]

18. Of course not.

He (she?) compared the suicide dove left, who would rather have an ideologically pure party with absolutely no power, instead of a slightly imperfect party with an actual voice, to Dixiecrats.

[Sparkly]

21. Ohhhhh.....

Thanks for the clarification. :)

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Guaranteed]

8. Wrong. You're confusing your "fringe groups."

Dean supporters aren't Greens.

There's the DLCers, the Dean/Clark/Gore/Kerry people, and then the left-wing Dems and Greens. That's how I'd split up our party- three groups, not two.

[Sparkly]

9. Plenty of "left-wing Dems"

also support Dean/Clark/Gore/Kerry, I must point out... :)

[Guaranteed]

11. They're not mutually exclusive.

I support and like Kucinich, for example, but I don't identify with him very well and do disagree with him sometimes.

[Sparkly]

14. I agree -- they're not. nt

[Zodiak]

52. You are correct

There are three populations on the democratic side. However, the main group of Democrats (Clark/Kerry/Gore) are the main group, and the most progressive (around 70%). Then there is what I call the DLC-lite crowd. Centrists who score around 50-60% (Hillary is one of them). Then there is the DLC-heavy crowd like Ben NElson and MAry Landrieu who vote for right-wing policies most of the time.

It is this latter group of Democrats that are supporting Leiberman and undermining the party at every turn.



So far, there is no liberal wing of the Democratic party in the Senate. Tom Harkin is the closest thing we have, and I would hardly call him a wild-eyed liberal. He does consistently vote the right way, though.

[The Magistrate]

15. It Is True Enough, Sir

That there are some new roles being tried on here and there. Having myself urged Party loyalty then, as well as now, and having every expectation of continuing to do so in the future, as it is my reasoned conviction that is the best course among the available options, there is no need for me to change anything concerning this question.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LincolnMcGrath]

17. Lamont is the only Democrat running in Ct.

[chaumont58]

19. What is the sense of a primary system, if it can be thrown aside willynily

Lieberman lost the primary. It wasn't stolen from him, he didn't get as many votes as Ned Lamont. Now, if he gets his voters and a certain amount of repukes in the general election, he goes back to the Senate for another six years. You say he will continue as a Democrat. What is the sense of shiting the Democratic voters of Ct? These fuckin' DLC Senators are shitting in the Ct Democratic voters, telling them their votes really don't count. Its like something out of George Orwell. All voters are equal, but some voters are more equal. I wish I had the means and wherewithall to punish the 4 traitors. In my mind, never again would those four be given even the time of day by any Democrat.
I would tell them that they now are part only of the DLC, not the DNC.

The Democratic Party is fucked as long as there is a DLC.

[TheWraith]

20. The left certainly does love to eat its own.

It seems like half the discussion here these days is all about trashing Democrats who fail some arbitrary purity test for how they're supposed to conduct business--even when the failing is entirely in the minds of the bashers. More the pity.

That's the difference between extremists on the right, and extremists on the left. The crazy right organizes behind the best available candidate and seeks to acquire power, even if they have to do it a little at a time. The crazy left demands that everything be delivered all at once, exactly the way they want it, or otherwise they'll take their toys and go home. And god forbid that anyone interested in practicality try to step in, because they're more than happy to rip you to shreds for disagreeing on some small matter of doctrine.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cha]

27. Yeah, and who the fuck

is lieberman eating?

[Pale Blue Dot]

28. "some small matter"

:rofl:

[tnlefty]

29. No, it is about respecting the primary process - period.

There have been many times that I've had to fall in line after a primary, and I will have to do so again for the seat in the US 3rd Congressional District in TN. My much preferred candidate, who I supported with money and networked with people from across the political spectrum, lost this race. The winner isn't my first choice, but he won the primary so now my resources, etc. will go toward him.

You fall in love during the primaries and you fall in line for the general.

[Guaranteed]

....

[Guaranteed]

31. Just about every word of your post is incorrect and

deliberately misleading.

[Sparkly]

32. I read this post differently from those who are criticizing it.

I'm not sure what TheWraith was referring to, but from one perspective at least, it makes a lot of sense.

Trashing Democrats as EITHER "too left" OR "too right" is counterproductive, especially once they are the nominee.

The "crazy right" of the GOP is willing to do ANYthing, back anybody, compromise just to effect movement in their direction. They'd be willing to nominate a presidential candidate not even born in this country (Arnold), or a brown-skinned General with very little experience in 2000, or a black woman without adequate experience for 2008, and of course, a complete IDIOT with ties to big oil and no CLUE about foreign policy in 2000 and 2004. Whatever has the best chance of moving their issues in their direction, they get behind in critical masses.

The "crazy left" of the Democratic party, as I see it, isn't necessarily "LEFT" at ALL, but like to think they are. Too many are willing, from a sense of self-righteous "rebellion," to circle right around against Democrats to embrace rightwing views, rightwing money, and rightwing-supported opposition which in EFFECT -- no matter how you look at it -- has empowered Republicans.

One more note about this so-called "left" -- this view holds that the more outspoken one is, the more "left" they are. Thus a conservative Democrat who speaks out is "left," and a liberal one who treads a careful rhetorical line is "DINO." (And I must add, a liberal General is automatically "rightwing" somehow, as "part of the MIC.") This is all nonsense.

It's like nostalgia for the 60s without a clue of what that was about, and I, too, find it very frustrating.

Dr. Dean is now our DLC leader and I couldn't be happier or prouder of that.
We ran a "New England Liberal" in 2004 and he garnered a LOT of new votes (and in my opinion, won), and that is something to be proud of, too.
Democrats in Congress, one after another right down to Senator Clinton, are speaking out forcefully against BushCo blunders.
And Lamont won against Lieberman, which is GREAT!!

I oppose opponents of Democrats from all sides -- well-meaning, supposedly "conscious-driven" so-called "leftists" and Greens, as well as well-meaning, supposedly "conscious-driven" Lieberman supporters out to "save us from ourselves." And make no mistake, there is GOP support for undermining our party on BOTH sides -- propping up Greens and Lieberman "Independent Democrats" alike.

So let's not knee-jerk on this. Let's make all our views hold sway in the party, from withIN the party. And let's admit, address, and reject any and all efforts to weaken Democrats.

[madfloridian]

36. I am addressing their efforts to hurt the party now. That's what I'm doing

At DU it is common belief that anyone who thinks for themselves is lefty fringe.

That is the point of my post. The ones who are supporting Lieberman after the primary are probably more to the right than I ever was to the left.

Now that is not knee-jerk.

[Sparkly]

37. I'm right with you, mf.

Didn't mean to criticize you one bit. :hi:

[madfloridian]

40. Thanks.

So many of us have worked so hard. They need to do what they should now for the party.

[Sparkly]

42. Yup -- the "they's" on all sides, imho.

Shouldn't be this hard at this point to be "WE," should it?

Joe's as wrong as the Greens on this, and perhaps more so on the principle that he's still claiming to be a Democrat (and making up a new "Independent Democrat" label)! And I'm sickened by the media "shock" about Democrats supporting our nominee, and by any and all Democrats who are giving any hint of encouragement to Lieberman.

[TheWraith]

44. Good post.

My point was mainly to criticize the self-destructive impulses that seem to run rampant around here, where many people seem more interested in bashing a Dem for doing something wrong than in taking on Repubs for doing EVERYTHING wrong. If somebody's first impulse is to gnaw on the people who are on their side, whether it's coming from the activist wing or the moderates, then they really need to reconsider what they hell they're doing here, if they're not more interested in taking on the real threat.

It's a behavior that's curiously common to our side, as much as it is absent in the right. To quote a line from The West Wing, "Party unity? We're Democrats!" I suppose it's a testimony to the strength of our cause that even though we're so often completely bumfuzzled, we do manage to pull off the odd victory. It's also, I would guess, what protects us from the kind of dangerous, mind-altering lockstep that put the Republicans into the kind of place that they are. So while I wouldn't change it entirely, it would be great if we could all learn to play nice and direct our energy where it belongs, rather than on attacking the few people who we have seriously in the game.

[CTLawGuy]

51. Look at it this way

if the REpugs are an enemy army and the Dems are our army which defends us....

how are we even supposed to think about beating the enemy army if our army isn't willing to fight?

First we are trying to get OUR army in order by getting rid of bad influences like Lieberman, who is often in bed with the enemy army.

Once our army is set, we can think about beating the enemy.

[WildEyedLiberal]

56. OMG - excellent, excellent post

I wish I could K&R this post. Well said!

:applause:

[mhatrw]

45. The crazy DLC doesn't respect the Democratic party or

Democratic voters, only it's own power and agenda.

[eridani]

46. Bullshit. Lamont is the center, not the left

If I wanted everything all at once, I would not be supporting Lamont, who is not in favor of single payer health care.

[msongs]

22. your candidate is NOT the democratic party candidate :-)

I support the democratic party candidate duly elected in the democratic party primary by the registered democratic party voters.

in case you have not heard, it is NOT JOE LIEBERMAN.

Msongs
www.msongs.com/22007politicalcalendars.htm

[Cha]

25. Fuck lieberwhiner! And fuck

his hero bush!

[ulysses]

33. dear old dolstein

If only the typical DU'er could muster the same enthusiasm for defeating, say, Rick Santorum or Conrad Burns . . . then perhaps we'd be in business.

I kept wondering where you were with this sentiment during the McKinney runoff - oh wait, your "typical DUer" is a raving commie. My bad.

More sour grapes from the formerly smug DLC crowd. :D

[w4rma]

39. It sounds like the message you advocate, dolstien, is never fall in line

behind a DLCer if that DLCer wins the primary and you support an independent. Correct?

[Bretttido]

53. Well according to him, primaries really mean nothing at all

other than an extremely accurate poll among your party. So I wonder, wtf does he think we have them for?

[CTLawGuy]

50. That may be

however, we have a primary system for sorting out who our ONE candidate will be to go up against the ONE republican candidate.

If the loser of that primary runs anyway, then (in most cases) it helps the Republican, and even if it doesn't, it sends a message that the primary is a worthless tool, and that the voters aren't to be respected.

That's Lieberman's real crime. And how do you know he's going to stay a Dem after being defeated in the Dem primary? I'm sure he sees the defeat as a betrayal, and the failure of his friends to adequately help him. Id say the repugs offer him a committee chairmanship if they retain power and he bolts.

[SteppingRazor]

54. I gotta say I do agree with Dolstein's take on Lieberman v. Santorum/Burns

The CT primary is over. I'm a lot more interested in seeing the Democrats take over the Seante than I am in rehashing this old news. The party still has reasonable chances of picking up seats in MT, MO, TN, RI, OH and PA, which would give us control of the Senate. Heck, VA could even be in play if the George "Macaca" Allen scandal has any legs.

As far as Senate control is concerned, it doesn't matter whether Lieberman or Lamont wins. Either one will caucus with the Dems. But all these other races DO matter. If we can get control of at least one house of congress, we can stop the agenda of the religio-crazy wing of the GOP two years before Bush exits the White House. In my opinion -- and I would hope in the opinions of most -- that matters a lot more than the constant rehashing of the Lieberman/Lamont debate.

[madfloridian]

55. Lieberman is getting GOP support now.

And the Democrats will most surely have to take away his seniority.

Joe's loyalty will lie with those who get him back into office, and that looks to be Republicans.

[SteppingRazor]

57. Lieberman will not caucus with the GOP...

I mean, I support Lamont, of course, but it doesn't serve anyone's purpose to throw around speculative misinformation. Lieberman has said from the get-go that he'd caucus with the Dems, and he's offered no reason for anyone to think otherwise.

As for this GOP support you refer to, I'm assuming you're referring to the lack of support for Schlesinger -- which is hardly a ringing endorsement of Lieberman, of course.

Anyway, none of this was my point. My point was that, now that Lieberman has lost the CT primary, our goals are best-served by focusing on removing Republicans from office. Congressional majorities mean a lot more than a single-state squabble.

[dolstein]

61. Well, it depends on what yours goals are

I agree that if our goal is to regain control of Congress, our time, money and energy is best focused on races against vulnerable Republican incumbents.

Unfortunately, it's at least questionable whether everyone around here shares that goal. Some people believe that it's more important to focus in the short run on purifying the party than building a majority coalition. That's the same kind of thinking that got us killed in 2000, but it still holds appeal for many on the left who have a hard time telling the difference between Republicans and establishment Democrats.

[IndianaGreen]

66. "purifying the party" is DLC-speak

The only assholes interested in "purifying the party" are the DLC's Al From and Marshall Wittman, the former operative for the Christian Coalition and John McCain.

It is your appeasement DLC thinking that got us a dictator in the White House, a loss of liberties at home, and a quagmire in Iraq.

[IndianaGreen]

65. Lieberman said he is not supporting the Democratic House candidates

because they have endorsed the Democratic Senatorial nominee. Lieberman called himself a "non-combatant" on the House races, refusing even to verbalize any support for the Democratic House candidates. This is posted in LBN.

Judas Joe's actions speak volumes as to what sort of little shit Republican he really is.

[IndianaGreen]

64. You get credit for being consistent, dolstein

You have been consistently wrong about everything since 2001 when you joined DU. You were wrong about the war in Iraq. You were wrong about PATRIOT. You were wrong about Kerry/Feingold resolution to withdraw all the troops by next year. You are still wrong about the liberal wing of the party. And you have been consistently wrong about Judas Joe Lieberman!

One thing you get lots of credit, as far as I am concerned, is that you were intellectually honest about your views and you never engaged in improper behaviour in your postings.

[LincolnMcGrath]

3. You nailed it.

[Guaranteed]

4. Integrity. That words seems to keep coming up with these clowns.

And, you're right- they're usually lacking it.

[xultar]

7. Puh...Puh...Puh... LEEEEZZZZzzzzz

[mmonk]

12. The irony is fun when it comes full circle.

People who stick with the premise of my sig line never have to feel embarassed. If you're correct in the first place, things have a way of coming full circle for yourself and your critics.

[Guaranteed]

13. Absolutely. nt

[PATRICK]

23. The question with the one answer

What if the DLC scorched earth middle roader was in fact a GOP plant? Could you tell or tell any difference if they are not? That is how bad the words and actions of some have been, consistently so regardless of situation or reality.

Does it matter, because the answer that does matter is that regardless of which one it is, they have to leave party leadership which they utterly ruin.

I am talking carefully about the big offenders, not every Dem who uncritically or pragmatically has ties with the grand oxymoron, the DLC. Mainly it is their non-elected thinkers, organization high ups and advisers. After that it is the messed up pols that have drunk so much of their poison that Dr. Jekyll rarely makes a politically attractive appearance any more.

[mom cat]

30. Preach it! .... You are so right on!

[Mark E. Smith]

34. "I'm furious with the ones who made fun of us in 04"

Damn. Talk about a thin skin ...

Lives, people. Get some.

[madfloridian]

35. They need to be loyal. The ones who said those things...

they need to stand up for the party's candidate now. Many of us did when our candidate lost.

If you just read thin skin into it, then you don't have a clue what happened back then, and you do not understand how ironic that Al From and many of the leaders of his group are coming out in support of Lieberman. They are fringe on the right, perhaps.

I never was extreme anything, I am not now. I resented it then, I resent it now. I am about as moderate and centered a person as you could meet.

This is about loyalty. If you demand it of others, then you need to have it yourself.

[tnlefty]

38. Say it again and say it LOUD! I resented it then, I resent it now.

I suppose primaries were just for some of us but not others who claim party loyalty, but who enjoy throwing insults and barbs. I've fallen in line many times after many primaries, and I expect others to do the same!

[Upfront]

49. Thanks For The Reminder

Now I am pisssed all over again. I am still proud to have supported Howard Dean and still do. You nailed it MadFloridian.

[jsamuel]

43. Now there is a well reasoned position... "Get a life."

:sarcasm:

[ShortnFiery]

47. Excellent Observations madfloridian

:applause: :thumbsup:

[JNelson6563]

48. Yeah, but guess what Bunky

Many of us have continued on,. working hard, building the party and, here's the scary part for some, building a power base.

Let whoever wants to whine and bitch carry on. We quietly seize the party and the whiners will have little left to do but sit in their own poop and cry.

:toast:

Julie

[Jack Rabbit]

58. Progressives weren't the fringe in 2004 and aren't now

That is what Lieberman and his militant moderate pals don't understand and don't want to understand.

The militant moderates are elitist in the worst sense of the word. Like a Russian Tsar, who believed that the people existed to serve him, the militant moderates think that rank-and-file Democrats exist to support their initiatives and that they are arrogant to suggest that party leaders should reflect the popular will.

Opposition to the war has been mainstream since 2004. It is now obvious that the war was predicated on lies and was from its inception a colonial misadventure. It is now obvious that things "aren't going right" in Iraq because the war was not waged with the consent or consultation of the Iraqi people, but for the benefit of corporate war profiteers and the consent and consultation of a few crooks among the Iraqi exiles willing to serve a front men. It is obvious by now that the neoconservatives knew nothing about Iraq and little about Arabs or Muslims. They had no idea how the Iraqis would respond to an invasion; they simply assumed that they would be so happy to have US troops oust Saddam that they would allow US corporations to rob them blind.

Anybody who by now can't appologize for believing the neoconservative lies in 2003 or for thinking that staying the course is the best policy doesn't deserve to be in public office. That is as true of Joe Lieberman as it is of Dick Cheney and the other liars themselves.

The people did not err in opposing the war or passing judgment on Senator Lieberman. By running as an independent in defiance of their judgment, Lieberman proves that not all Democrats are democrats. Some are elitist. They are the fringe.

[madfloridian]

60. That's it, we never were the fringe at all.

But that is what they painted us. Now I am saying that is how some of them are acting...rightist fringe.

:hi:

[nealmhughes]

62. I agree totally.

If this were a referendum on the DP in Connecticut on whether to continue the Republican/DLC-abetted disgusting war, then the DLC lost.

HRC has changed her spots and John Edwards has apologized. CT rejected Joe. Looks like a movement is afoot.

When the house foreclosures start en masse, then you'll see how fast the "moderate" becomes a "fringe kook moonbat liberal."

When the analyses of the disaster of DLC championing of NAFTA is complete and the Iowa proces begins next year, you'll see the DLC free traders in shame, or else distancing themselves as fast as possible. When a single state comes up with a universal single payer healthcare plan and it works, then you'll see those who ditched the concept like a hot potato with fresh skunk spray on it suddenly enbrace it.

As soon as a critical mass of the angry nonpolitical suddenly have a candidate who can express the impotence they feel at the deindustrialization of the country and oil and China fetish, then they will swing towards the Left. I believe that the mass is here now, only they lack the voice to have the message they are unable to articulate due to corporate media manipulation to keep us sheeple with Jonbenet and Kevin and Brittany to divert us and a pseudo war on "child abusing myspacers" to keep the airwaves filled, then let the rain come hard and fast when it begins.

[Lithos]

63. Politics is a conversation with and by the people

While you can try and control the vocabulary and ideas on the table for awhile, ultimately it all boils down to what the people say and the politician listening. Lieberman and a few others are not listening and are trying to tell the people what to do.

[lojasmo]

59. Right you are, MF

Democrats who support Joementum after he disrespected CT democrats need to be drummed out.

[threadkillaz]

67. And we're going to NEVADA...

YEAAARGGHHH!!