This is going to anger a lot of people, I mean a lot. From those on the Left, Right, and Center, but just because something will anger people does not
mean it should be kept away. Seeing as how you survived reading the title without racing to post an immediate reply telling me I am absolutely insane
I think we are ready to move forward.
A little history is in order to fully understand how we got to this point. It really began in 1985 with the founding of the Democratic Leadership
Council after the horrible election loss suffered by Mondale to President Reagan. The intention of the DLC was to move the Democratic Party away from
the Left position it had held since Roosevelt. While it did not oppose the New Left movement overall many positions were to be torn out of the party
just as basically the entire Old Left positions were.
The New Left is a term used to describe the Liberal movement in America that began during the late 60s. These Liberals rallied behind the anti-war
candidates like Eugene McCarthy, George McGovern, and even Robert Kennedy. They were not as left-wing economically as the Old Left was (Roosevelt,
Truman, Johnson) but were far more socially progressive. This movement had angered Henry “Scoop” Jackson, the man whom modern day Neoconservatives
call their founding father, who created the Coalition for a Democratic Majority. Its aim was for the establishment of the New Deal Coalition which
collapsed in 1968 after seeing the results of two failed elections (’68 and ’72).
These people in the DLC became known as “New Democrats” for their very conservative economic message coupled with a more culturally liberal
attitude. In Congress the first of these freshman Democrats to join the Committee on Party Effectiveness (House version of DLC) were William Gray, Tim
Wirth, Al Gore, Richard Gerphardt, and Gillis Long. They, and the others they influenced, would go on to become the establishment in the party 10
When the DLC began it had only 43 elected officials and two staffers, Al From and Will Marshall, these men wanted to make a Southern Democrat win the
party nomination in 1988. This effort failed so in 1989 they turned towards influencing public discussion so Marshall founded the Progressive Policy
Institute which would set out blue prints for the DLC.
Now this council still did not have control over the party even 6 years later but in 1992 a man from Arkansas would rise as their most prominent
speaker; Bill Clinton. With him the DLC would push for welfare reform (Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996),
expansion of Earned Income Tax Credit, AmeriCorps, support expanding health care through tax credits and opposed single-payer, support for school
vouchers, No Child Left Behind, and the expansion of Free Trade (NAFTA, CAFTA, WTO). The DLC is also a proponent of interventionism abroad with their
support of invading Iraq and Afghanistan, Marshall even co-signed a letter to President Bush from the Project for a New American Century endorsing the
So where did these folks come from? What inspired them to transform the Democratic Party? That also takes a look at history during the defining era
of the 1960s. From 1936 to 1960 the Centrist wing of the Republican Party dominated party politics; Landon, Willkie, Dewey, Eisenhower, and Nixon. But
in 1964 the grassroots activism of conservative members propelled Senator Barry Goldwater to the nomination, defeating the expected nominee Nelson
See, the Rockefeller type centrist Republicans lost the election but not the war… yet. In 1968 Nixon ran a much more conservative campaign while
still holding onto the centrists, he kept them even in 1972. By 1976 they were still in the party but were the primary was very close between centrist
Ford and conservative Reagan. And by 1980 Reagan defeated their candidate, George H.W. Bush. Throughout the 1970s the party began to lose its centrist
wing as they were angered with Nixon’s Southern Strategy of virtually pinning whites against blacks in the South.
Then in 1980 when the Reagan wing took hold of the party and brought on board many Southern Democrats they abandoned the party en masse. By 1985
influencing Democrats with enormous amounts of wealth which the Rockefeller ‘Centrist’ Republicans always had they were able to create the DLC.
This organization received heavy funding which the Democratic Party had not ever been able to do for years. In effect, the centrist Republicans bought
up much of the Democratic Party.
By 1992 their power was strong enough to propel Clinton, one of their own, into the White House. He was the most conservative Democratic President,
economically, since perhaps Grover Cleveland in the 19th century. Al Gore, then vice President, made his run for the White House in 2000 as another
‘New Democrat’. In 2004 another ‘New Democrat’ ran for President and won party nomination; John Kerry. However in 2008 Barack Obama was the
first Democratic nominee not to be a ‘New Democrat’ since 1992 and was elected as a Liberal… that did not last long.
March 10, 2009
President Barack Obama firmly resists ideological labels, but at the end of a private meeting with a group of moderate Democrats on Tuesday
afternoon, he offered a statement of solidarity.
“I am a New Democrat,” he told the New Democrat Coalition, according to two sources at the White House session.
What does this mean? Well what it means in general is that Nelson Rockefeller may have lost the 1964 nomination but he not only won the nomination in
1992, he won the general election. These Democrats today; Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Obama and almost all but a few Democrats currently in the US
legislature are New Democrats in one way or another.
If you do not believe me just take a few looks at the Health Care Law.
Republicans were for President Barack Obama's requirement that Americans get health insurance before they were against it.
The obligation in the new health care law is a Republican idea that's been around at least two decades. It was once trumpeted as an alternative to
Bill and Hillary Clinton's failed health care overhaul in the 1990s. These days, Republicans call it government overreach.
Mitt Romney, weighing another run for the GOP presidential nomination, signed such a requirement into law at the state level as Massachusetts governor
in 2006. At the time, Romney defended it as "a personal responsibility principle" and Massachusetts' newest GOP senator, Scott Brown, backed it.
Romney now says Obama's plan is a federal takeover that bears little resemblance to what he did as governor and should be repealed.
. And a third
Not to mention Obama supported only half of the $2 trillion that his advisor Christina Romer said was necessary for an adequate stimulus. Obama voted
in favor of the continuation of the Bush Tax Cuts through 2012 back in December so long as he got a few items he wanted. He did not stop Wall Street
executives from leaving with golden parachutes or even try to limit the size of their bonuses. When Liberal economists called for the nationalization
of particular large banks he refused. Now just take a look at the debt deals.
The Obama administration, in seeking $4 trillion in spending cuts in a debt limit deal, has put major changes to Social Security and Medicare on
the table if Republicans agree to increased tax revenues.
The offer caters to both sides in the debt limit negotiations and according to the Washington Post, President Obama will urge congressional leaders on
Thursday to seize the opportunity to act. The compromise, however, still puts both Republicans and Democrats in tough spots.
Obama has also continued the New Democrats and Neoconservative tradition of ‘intervention, war, bomb’ by slowly removing troops from Iraq,
expanding the war in Afghanistan, using drones in Pakistan and Syria, and intervening militarily in Libya. That does not sound like a very Liberal
thing to do. This does not even include his exempting military spending from spending cuts as the cost of our empire grows larger and larger every
He ran roughshod over the constitution with the continuation of the USA Patriot Act, intervention in Libya without Congressional approval, expansion
of the TSA, and pushing for the ability to assassinate people (which he got).
Then we add in supporting cuts to Medicare, Social Security, and other social welfare programs, the continuation of Bush tax cuts, continuation and
expansion of foreign intervention, warrantless wiretapping, corporate health care reform, and I could go on and on. Obama is not a Socialist; do not
make me fall over laughing. If Obama is a Socialist so was every President from Hoover to Ford. He is not even a Liberal; Obama is just a more
left-leaning version of Bill Clinton and Al Gore. Any Democrat who would voluntarily support cuts to the big three is not a real Democrat, simple as
Under his presidency he has failed on every Liberal initiative and has allowed the Tea Party to right the agenda when they only control the House of
Representatives. I mean the discussion today is so far to the right that it is almost impossible to not see unless there is something wrong with you.
How Liberals can possibly be happy with him is beyond me. Obama is definitely not a Liberal and that definitely rules out being a Socialist.
What kind of political discourse do we have in this country when an Eisenhower type of politician is considered far-left? That is the type of stuff
the John Birch Society said. Is the mainstream right in America now the same as the John Birch Society was in the 1950s? Is that really what we are
talking about here? By this point if we brought Reagan back he would probably be considered a centrist in the GOP nomination for 2012.
Now I know this thread is going to be taken the wrong way, with people slamming me for turning into some Liberal now. Well good luck to you. I am not
a Liberal, rather a Moderate, but am not the type of person who wants to be an ideologue as I previously was as it is much better to be able to look
upon our current political discourse and see what is going on. Obama is a Rockefeller Republican, Republicans are the John Birch Society, and the
Democrats are split between being Rockefeller Republicans and the ‘far-left’ is just like the centrist Democrats of the 1980s.
7/19/2011 by Misoir because: (no reason given)