Howard Dean has EVERY right to attack the DLC!

[Sean Reynolds]

LONG before Howard Dean attacked the DLC, they attacked him.

In April they attacked Dean for his anti-war view:

Just as the swift liberation of Iraq has strengthened the Blair Democrats, it has weakened the party's antiwar contingent, whose worst fears failed to materialize. The outcome deals a near-fatal blow to the presidential prospects of Howard Dean, whose staunch opposition to the war thrilled Iowa's left-leaning activists but is out of step with rank-and-file Democrats, about two-thirds of whom approve of the war. Moreover, because 75 percent of all voters back the war, the odds that Democrats will make Bush's day by serving up an antiwar nominee as his opponent in 2004 seem long indeed.

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=251557&kaid=127&subid=171

In May Al From, founder and CEO of the Democratic Leadership Council and Bruce Reed, President of the DLC, yesterday circulated this memo to “Leading Democrats” in which they argue that traditional Democratic values are “an aberration” and that the thousands of grassroots Democrats inspired by Governor Dean’s message to “take back our party” are “activist elites” and not “real Democrats.”

https://secure2.convio.net/dfa/site/SPageServer?pagename=copy_of_takebackdemocrats

Again in May the DLC said Dean, Dennis Kucinich, former Sen. Carol Mosely-Braun and Al Sharpton, flunked this first test. Talking about the first debate because they didn't support the war!

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=251567&kaid=131&subid=192

Also in May they AGAIN attack Dean and Kucinich:

For example, presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich's economic plan revolves around one thrust: a "massive public works to rebuild our cities, our water systems, our public transportation systems, our schools, our parks. "

To the extent that he even talks about the economy, another contender, Howard Dean, stresses health-care, education, and social-welfare spending.

In contrast, centrist Democratic candidates have focused on advocating an alternative to both Keynesian economics and Bush's supply-side economics.

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=251582&kaid=107&subid=123

Again in May they attack Dean by saying:

Myth number one: "Real Democrats Always Turn Left." This myth is represented by Gov. Howard Dean's stump speech line that he represents the "Democratic wing of the Democratic Party." Unfortunately, both the conventional wisdom and the Dean boast are based on the false premise that party activists, not the party rank-and-file, represent the heart and soul of the Democratic Party. We believe New Democrats best represent the traditions of the Democratic Party as exemplified by Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy and Clinton, and the actual values and economic aspirations felt by rank-and-file Democrats today.

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=251692&kaid=131&subid=192

Again in May (wow, they hit hard in May) they bash Dean:

What activists like Dean call the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party is an aberration: the McGovern-Mondale wing, defined principally by weakness abroad and elitist, interest-group liberalism at home. That's the wing that lost 49 states in two elections, and transformed Democrats from a strong national party into a much weaker regional one.

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=251690&kaid=127&subid=900056

In June, the DLC again thats a swipe at Dean and other anti-war candidates:

The party divide shows up in today's nomination contest. On one side are anti-war candidates Dennis Kucinich and Howard Dean, whose arguments echo those of Henry Wallace and George McGovern. On the other are Joe Lieberman, John Kerry, Dick Gephardt, and John Edwards, who, like Britain's Tony Blair, backed using force against Iraq on the condition that President Bush challenge the United Nations to do its job. While scathingly critical of Bush's botched Iraq diplomacy, once an impasse was reached in the U.N. Security Council, they did not flinch from going to war with a smaller coalition.

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=251785&kaid=127&subid=171

In July the DLC REALLY using the McGovern talking points!

The fact is, "the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party," as former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean likes to call it, is an aberration, a modern-day version of the old McGovern wing of the party, defined principally by weakness abroad and elitist interest-group liberalism at home. That wing lost the party 49 states in two elections and turned a powerful national organization into a much weaker, regional one.

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=251866&kaid=85&subid=65

Also in July the DLC attacks Dean's campaign, saying it'll be a dot-com bust!

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=251916&kaid=127&subid=177


In July, they state that Dean is too far to the left to win the election, and that nominating him would be a disaster:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F50B1FF6345B0C7A8EDDAE0894DB404482

In September, the DLC attacked Dean's trade stance, saying it'd be a disaster!

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=252062&kaid=131&subid=207

In November, they attacked Dean about trying to get southernors to vote in the election.

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=252174&kaid=131&subid=192

Also in November, the DLC attacked Dean's stance on reregulation.

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=252220&kaid=131&subid=192

As well in November, they said: What was Davis' mistake? Early in his first term, he governed as a moderate but, later on, pretty much capitulated to the left-wing-dominated legislature on critical issues such as the budget, advocacy for gay rights, and illegal aliens' drivers' licenses. Becoming a willing prisoner of the legislative party was Davis' cardinal error, one that Democrats should watch out for nationally, particularly in light of the success, so far, of the Howard Dean campaign.

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=252197&kaid=127&subid=173

In early December they attacked Dean again on his guns/god/gays/ speech. Again calling him McGovern.

The heart of Dean's reply was: "hy can't we talk about jobs, health care and education, which is what we all have in common, instead of allowing the Republicans to consistently divide us by talking about guns, God, gays, abortion and all this controversial social stuff that we're not going to come to an agreement on?"

We're not sure which is more doomed to fail -- the naive hope that if we just change the subject, divisive issues will go away, or the condescending idea that Americans who care passionately about "all this controversial social stuff" should move on and care about something else.

As Clinton showed time and again, the way to deal with divisive issues is to actually deal with them.

Gov. Dean is embracing one of the historic fallacies of pre-Clinton Democratic politics, in dividing issues into "our turf" and "their turf." Throughout the 1980s, polls showed Democrats holding a consistent advantage over the GOP on issues like education, health care, and the environment -- "our turf." But Republicans held even bigger advantages on national security, managing the economy, and "values" issues -- "their turf."

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=252248&kaid=131&subid=192

Later in the month, the DLC attacked Dean again about his comment on Saddam.

Gov. Dean's foreign policy speech in Los Angeles got more attention than others for two reasons. First, it was telegraphed by his campaign as evidence of his repositioning as a "centrist" on foreign policy. And second, it contained the deeply unfortunate assertion that Saddam Hussein's capture by U.S. troops did not make America safer. That line was not just another trademark "off-message" ad-lib by Dean, since one of the speech's key weaknesses was a glaring disconnect between his defiant defense of his opposition to the war in Iraq, and his efforts to make it clear he supports the use of force to defend America's interests elsewhere in the world. Nowhere does he offer an alternative course the United States could have taken in dealing with the threat that Dean has acknowledged Saddam posed.

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=252271&kaid=131&subid=192

He took the attacks, not really bashing the DLC for how many months? From the looks of it, since April. So, IMO, Dean has every right to attack the DLC. They've called him a disaster on trade policy, a far-left liberal out of touch with America, an economic failure, and someone that'd lose in McGovern fashion. Hm, those DO sound like Republican talking points. So, maybe Dean was RIGHT when he said the DLC is the Republican wing of the Democratic Party.

[corporatewhore]

1. dean does have every right to attack the dlc

i just wish he would stop actin like one

[eileen_d]

2. And I have every right

to yawn when he does it. :boring:

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

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

[eileen_d]

7. Hey, "bring it on!"

I mean that in the cheerleader way, not the Bush way ;)

[Sean Reynolds]

8. Spirit Fingers!

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

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

[meegbear]

3. And since his May 19 directive to "Annoy the DLC"

it's good to see people are still obeying his orders.

[elperromagico]

4. Let's just hope he doesn't lose the moderate Dem vote

in November. I think Dean will move to the center for the general election, but will he be able to keep the moderate Democratic vote?

On edit: I'm being rather vague here. The DLC is not moderate Democrats. People will vote how they choose. But can Dean pull voters other than yellow-dog Democrats? His Internet campaign shows that he certainly has the potential to do so.

[markm]

6. Us versus Them

Dean's campaign is all about "Us versus Them" with Them being Rebublicans, DLC Democrats, Washington politicians, people who disagree with anything he has ever said and anyone who seems convinient to attack today. Come one Democrats, we are an inclusive group. We can do better than Dean. Much, much better.

[Sean Reynolds]

9. Like the DLC Democrats that have sold us out the past three years?

Sorry, I'd rather have Doctor Dean, Dennis Kucinich, Braun and even Clark before the DLCers.

Sadly, the DLC has changed. It was once a solid council, but since 2000 it's really turned hawkish.

[LuminousX]

12. The DLC forgot its roots

The DLC ran against the 'liberal image' of the Democratic party, it was about constant revolution and rethinking. It was good for its time. But then it became entrenched and fearful of the revolution. The DLC became more about appeasing its narrow corporate interests which fed the DLC the money it needed.

It became about the status quo. Time for another change. Let's hope the revolution never stops. We need to constantly keep turning things over, tossing out one set for another set.

[Zomby Woof]

14. Welcome to DU!

Glad to have another voice of reason on board. :-)

We CAN, and SHOULD, do better than Dean.

[stickdog]

10. All Democrats have a duty to attack the DLC until it wises up.

Bush is not a shining example to us all, dipwads.

[Fleshdancer]

13. I remember when the attacks started....

My first reaction was :wtf: and then I started getting a little pissed off that this Dean fellow wasn't defending himself. Fortunately that all changed.