The Shifting Political Bandwidth of Democracy

The diagram above is one that shows my viewpoint of where our two parties have been for the past 33 years. The conservatives have been in control exclusively since the end of Jimmy Carter’s term. Bill Clinton is a conservative Democrat, and has membership in the DLC to prove it. Throughout the last six years of his term, the Republicans were in control of both houses of Congress and all of the legislation passed during that time was conservative legislation. The shaded area represents the percentage of the conservative bloc that is in flux this election.

In spite of any illusions to the contrary, conservatives have been in control of our government for the past 33 years—and look what we the people have to show for it today as a nation. The only difference between a conservative Republican and a conservative Democrat is that the conservative Democrat would keep a little more government whereas the Conservative Republican would destroy it all except for the part that maintains the police and military—and even that they would privatize to be paid by the middle-class and poor taxpayers while continuing their tax breaks for the rich.

The Great Political Awakening of 2008 and why it has happened. . .

QUEEN’S COMMENTS ON Hillary’s New Enthusiasm for Obama

Of all places, I read in the Jarkarta Post  last night that Clinton is recruiting her backers to help Obama.  According to the Jarkata Post,  Hillary Rodham Clinton is stepping up efforts to swing her supporters behind Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, her former rival for the nomination. In an outreach dubbed “Hillary Sent Me,” the New York senator was inviting her primary-season partisans Friday to get involved directly in Obama’s campaign and donate to it. As part of that, she was urging them to travel to a specific battleground state each weekend, beginning with New Hampshire on Sept. 27, when she will be campaigning for Obama in Michigan.

 “This is a call to action. This is a must-do. We all have a role. And there is not a moment to lose.”

And why this Johnnie-come-lately enthusiasm for Obama?

QUEEN’S COMMENTS ON JOE LIEBERMAN

I hope that Democratic voters  have learned a good lesson about “Bipartisanship”.  I hope that they have learned that a conservative is a conservative–whether it is in the Democratic Party or in the Republican Party.  Conservatives are the same and they hold to similar philosophies–particular when it comes to supporting neo-liberal economics.

As many Americans, I watched about as much of Joe Lieberman’s speech last night as I could stomach. Judging from all the angry posts on the DNC about him this morning,  I know that Democrats are mad as hell at Joe Lieberman.  I’m glad.  I hope that they all remember that conservative Democrats in the party supported Lieberman in his 2006 run as an independent against the Democratic candidate, Ned Lamont.  Members of the Democratic Leaderhip Council actually worked in his campaign to get him elected.  The founder of the DLC,  Al From, was Lieberman’s campaign chairman.

And I hope that Joe Lieberman is a lesson for Democratic Conservatives who consider joining the Republican Party--you would always be an outsider, just like Joe.  He has become a man without a Party. 

Political ideology, like class, are taboo topics among most Americans who are brave enough to discuss politics (another taboo topic).  You won't hear either the topic of class or political ideology discussed on mainstream media above a whisper.

But both are topics which I think should be discussed among Democrats. Part of the historical significance of Obama winning the nomination was the triumph of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party over the conservative wing.

Many of you old enough to remember may have noticed that the Democratic Party since the mid 1980's is not the same Democratic Party it was prior to that time.  You are correct in that assessment and there is a reason why.

The following post discusses what I think is the REAL elephant in our living room that no one is discussing:

In my opinion, and I'm sure others may disagree as well as agree since this is after all a democracy, I think that the bottom line for this election is really about wrestling our government out of the hands of conservatives and into the hands of progressives--and that includes conservative Democrats as well as conservative Republicans.

Our Democratic Party has its own unofficial conservative wing--the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) of which both Clintons have been very active over the years.  By my standards, based on much of the legislation that they have supported, neither Bill nor Hillary Clinton are "progressive democrats".  I would categorize both of them as conservative Democrats.

I have a lifetime of experience in the financial industry and I can tell you for certain that bankers have no greater friend than Bill Clinton.

The cartoon below by John Klossner says it all for me about the way I feel  regarding Lieberman.  Let us also remember that Joe Lieberman would not be where he is today if it were not for some members of the DLC who supported his campaign for CT Senator against the Democrat, Ned Lamont.  Al From, a Democrat and member of the DLC managed Lieberman's campaign.  Bill Clinton, a member of the DLC is reported to having said that he didn't care who won--Lamont or Lieberman.

I detest Lieberman and the DLC who helped to put Lieberman in office. However, the fact is that Lieberman does tend to vote with the Democrats on every other issue than the war.  And I believe that he makes up our majority count for 51% in the senate (since he bills himself as as a democrat leaning independent)

I think that is the only reason that our Democratic Senators have continued to play nice with him.  If we sever all ties with him, he may come entirely out of the closet and burst forth in all the glory of who he really is, voting on ALL issues with Republicans.

First thing to remember is that on the positive side, almost half of the Democrats in the House did vote against FISA last Friday.

The count among Democrats was 128 for and 105 against.  There was one lone dissentling Republican.

Does anyone know who the lone Republican was? (Not Ron Paul, I already checked that and he was not present.  He who cares so much about the Constitution.)

As for the 128 who voted for FISA, how many of this bunch are also members of the Democratic Leadership Council?  it would be interesting to know. In fairness, it would also be interesting to know how many of the ones who voted against it were DLC members.

NOTE: In case you never heard of the DLC. . . In spite of its official  sounding name, the DLC is not an official organization of the Democratic Party.  In my opinon, I see them more or less as being hand maidens for the corporate America and the neocons--those types of Democrats acting like watered down Republicans that Harry Truman often criticised.

NO?

Well I don't either and that is why I don't like the DLC either.  The DLC (Democratic leadership council) who took it upon themselves to appear as an "official" Democratic party group when in fact they most certainly are not.  They are self-annointed.  At one time they comprised 33% of our Congress--not any more, thank God.

Al From one of the founders of the DLC was campaign chairman for Joe Lieberman.  Bill Clinton is reported to have said that it didnt matter to him whether Lieberman running as an Independent, or Ned Lamont, the Democrtic choice for Senator in 2006 won the race.

Truman would have called the DLC what they are:  "Watered down Republicans".  These are the people who support trade agreements and legislation that benefits corporations over people.  The vote for things like the war and the continuation of cluster bomb manufacture, etc.

Our Democratic nominee is not a member of the elitist club.

There is a lot of hand wringing going around this morning a lot of "woe are us" and dire predictions. 

But the funniest among them all to me is the attempt to make Obama appear as a liberal.  Obama is a centrist who stands perhaps one degree to the left of Hillary Clinton.  Obama has crossed the aisle and worked with Republicans just as much as Clinton has.

The impending nomination of Barack Obama is a MILD backlash to the crap that has been allowed to go on in DC for the past 20 years.  We are so accustomed to the right wing BS being churned out of DC that most Americans don't even remember what a liberal looks like. Well, I do and it sure the hell is not Barack Obama.  Obama IS  a moderate.  Kucinich is a liberal.  Gravel is a liberal.

As for real progressive populists?  Even though Hillary who is a corporate centrist tried like a fox near the end of her campaign to don the clothing of a populist in order to better appeal to the voters (and she did fool the less educated among us with her tricks), she is no populist and never has been one.  A real populist would be look more like Edwards, Richardson or Howard Dean--not Hillary Clinton.

So count your blessings this morning you Republicans and DLC buddies.

AND FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT THE DLC, Hillary and Bill are both members in good standing.

Al From, the founder of the DLC was the campaign manager for Joe Lieberman.  Bill Clinton said that it didn't matter to him if Joe Liebermann (running as an independent for Senator in CT in 2006) or if Ned Lamont, the Democrats choice won. That is the DLC's idea of "bipartisanship--to support Joe Lieberman instead of a real Democrat.  As far as I'm concerned they can go on over and join the Republican party and stop polluting the Democrats.

If if looks like a Republican, passes legislature against the people like a republican and ratifies anti-labor, pro-corporate global trade agreement, then it IS a Republican and does not belong in our party.  It is a disgrace to call people like that Democrats.

The decision to be made on Saturday determines whether the Democratic Party will throw its rules out the window to favor the candidate who has by all accounts lost by the rules which she signed a pledge and agreed to play by over a year ago.

The rule is that states who do not hold their primaries according to the Democratic Calendar will not have their votes counted nor will their delegates seated.

[There are all kinds of very good reasons for this rule that states follow the primary calendar—whether they like it or not.  But the main reason is that it protects the democratic process for ALL democrats in ALL states.  It is not just the voters of Florida and Michigan whose interest is at stake here.  It is the democratic voters of ALL the other 48 states who are disenfranchised when states like Florida and Michigan hold their primary out of turn.  And not only do they disenfranchise the voters, they also disenfranchise the candidates by doing this.]

 TAKE A LOOK AT HILLARY'S CLUB--THE DLC

If you are a real Democrat, you seriously need to learn about the “Democratic Leadership Council” and what they are trying to turn our party into. Both the Clintons belong to it as did Joe Liebermann.  [Liebermann may even still belong, I don’t know.  This bunch is so Republican-friendly that they may still allow him to belong.  I do know that many of the DLC supported Liebermann over Ned Lamont, the democratic nominee.  Bill Clinton is reported to have said that it didn’t matter to him whether Ned Lamont or Liebermann (McCain-suck-up) won.  Al From, one of the founders of the DLC was Liebermann’s campaign manager against the Democrat.]  

DO YOU WANT A MEMBER OF A GROUP WHO GAVE STRONG SUPPORT FOR THE 2003 INVASION OF IRAQ AS OUR PRESIDENT?  I DON’T. 

The DLC gave strong support for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. That was a smart decision now wasn’t it?  That alone should tell anyone with and IQ over 60 what this bunch stand for.  Prior to the war, Will Marshall co-signed a letter to President Bush from the Project for the New American Century endorsing military action against Saddam Hussein. [For those who may not know, Will Marshall is one of the founders of the New Democratic movement which aims to steer the Democratic Party to a centrist position. They are represented by organizations such as the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), the New Democrat Network, and the Senate and House New Democrat Coalitions.]  

Hillary, who throughout her entire career in the senate has been what many have labeled as a "hawkist corporate centrist who thinks that lobbyists are just dandy" has now in the last two months of this campaign emerged as a "populist" who is fighting for the people.

This might be laughable except for the fact that we are a nation who has shown our utter gullibility by voting for George Bush twice.

Hillary Clinton is no populist.  Hillary Clinton has been for a number of years a member AND officer in the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC).  This is not an official DNC group.  Here is an excerpt from its platform:  ". . .argues that the United States Democratic Party should shift away from traditional populist positions."

Now how do you reconcile the fact that Hillary is not only a member but an officer in an organization that is anti-populist and her claims to be one?  A true populist would have NOTHING to do with the DLC.

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

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_sub.cfm?kaid=86&subid=191

Here is another famous Truman quote that both Hillary Clinton as well as members of the DLC should heed:

"If you give the people a choice between a Republican or a Democrat who is acting like a watered down Republican, they will choose the Republican every time."

Any Democrat who belongs to the DLC, who has supported NAFTA, who has served six years on the board of Wal-Mart (the largest union-busting corporation in the world), who rattles swords against Iran right alongside McCain and Bush, who has taken millions of dollars for her presidential campaign from Washington DC lobbyist, is by any definition of the word at least a "watered down Republican.

Many of us never heard of Rendell until this campaign. Here are a few facts surrounding this Governor of Pennsylvania that you may not know:

Like Joe Liebermann, Rendell did not have the blessings of the Democratic party when he ran either. When he announced his intent to run for the Democratic Nomination for Governor of Pennsylvania, he did so without the backing of the state party.

The Pennsylvania Democratic Party threw their support behind Bob Casey. However, unlike Lieberman, Rendell did wrangle the Democratic nomination. If you