Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
The purge continues along with the drift to the left
Posted by: McQ on Monday, September 18, 2006

Jonathan Singer is not at all happy with the Democratic Leadership Council. Seems Al From from the DLC attended a meeting in which NYC Michael Bloomberg apparently explored the possibility of running in the '08 presidential race as an independent.

"Treason" says Singer:
I don't particularly like the theoretical aim of the DLC — bringing the Democratic Party closer to the center, or at least making it more palatable to corporations — not do I approve of its tactics, particularly Democrat-bashing. But as bad as these two things are, for the DLC to help advance the candidacy of a presidential aspirant outside of the Democratic Party is political treason, grounds enough for excommunication.
Throw the bums and all they represent out!

Of course the DLC has always attempted to move the party more to the center because they believe that is where elections are won. That, of course,causes the extreme left to chafe and complain even given the fact that the DLC formula is the only one that has produced a Democratic president in decades. But now, well, this is just too much:
But by attending a strategy session for Michael Bloomberg's independent presidential campaign, Al From has crossed the line. (Well, he probably crossed the line before, but now he has really crossed the line.) With this act, he has signaled for the last time that he is not actually interested in growing the Democratic Party to bring positive change to the country but instead interested in furthering his own power and ambition.
As opposed to the folks like Singer who are instead interested in, uh, furthering the "power and ambition" of what? Certainly not a viable Democratic party.

There are several reasons why Al From and the DLC would (and should) be interested in attending this meeting, not all of which would be to support a Bloomberg candidacy.

1) Bloomberg is a NY Republican which means, essentially, a Republican in name only. Obviously, given the meeting, he has ambitions to higher office. If I were the DLC I'd want to know those ambitions and how they may impact my candidate, Hillary Clinton.

2) I'd want to know how serious Bloomberg was about such a run and who were those backing him. Money talks, BS walks.

3) I'd want to figure out if his candidacy (depending on how he planned on running) would help or hurt my candidate's chances.

4) If I figure it would hurt my candidate, I might want to gather facts which would help me neutralize that possibility (like offering him a high-level job in a H. Clinton administration).

Given the opportunity to be on the inside of such a session would be invaluable for any political operative, but it certainly doesn't necessarily mean endorsement of the effort. But it is enough for Singer to call for From and the DLC's ouster from the Democratic tent:
I am all for having a big-tent party. After all, the Democratic Party has always been more welcome to differing political ideologies. Even today, during a period of great polarization, the Democratic Party welcomes many more voters and politicians from outside of the party's orthodoxy than the Republican Party. (For every Linc Chafee in the GOP there are a number of Ben Nelsons, Max Baucuses and Mark Pryors.) Ideology alone should not be grounds for kicking people out of the party (except, perhaps, in extreme situations).
Wow. Self-delusion aside, this is amazing in its, oh, I don't know, blindness? Yeah, make assumptions and ostracize the only group that has, as I mentioned, successfully elected a Democratic president in decades.

Oh, and the orthodoxy thing. The wing of the party Singer comes from demands orthodoxy as a prerequisite of standing in the tent. That's what his whole piece is about. Any hint of deviation, and that is all this DLC/Bloomberg thing is, and the assumptions/charges fly and the call oust the offending party and banish them from the tent is made.

Big finish:
The Democratic Party, and even the centrists within it, must sever all ties with Al From and the DLC. They must not be allowed access to Democratic Congressional leaders. They must not be allowed a role in the nomination process in 2008. They must not be allowed a presence at the Democratic convention. By supporting Bloomberg, Al From and the DLC have indicated they no longer are interested in participating in the Democratic Party and we should see to it that they get their way.
Yeah, let's make that Bloomberg thing happen, why don't we?

Fratricide. It doesn't only happen in war.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
(For every Linc Chafee in the GOP there are a number of Ben Nelsons, Max Baucuses and Mark Pryors.)
I notice he left Lieberman off his list...
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
GOP Senators who disagree with the Bush Cult over detainees are accused of aiding the terrorists, as being unpatriotic, as being traitors to the United States, and yet it is left leaning Dems who are being intolerant.

Think about it: John McCain - the leading GOP Presidential candidate in 2008 and a former POW - is accused of being a traitor to the United States of America by leading voices in the GOP. not just anti-Republican, but treasonous. But rather than pointing out this rather glaring instance of fraticide, you instead pick up on some small inside-baseball dust up.

Tell you what, when the DLC is accused of being in league with Al Qaeda, get back to us.
 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
GOP Senators who disagree with the Bush Cult over detainees are accused of aiding the terrorists, as being unpatriotic, as being traitors to the United States, and yet it is left leaning Dems who are being intolerant.
Ah the old "they do it too!" defense. How original.

Hint: Bush isn’t running for office in ’08 so all of that is a waste of pixels.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
the leading GOP Presidential candidate in 2008
That would be too bad for the GOP.
 
Written By: Mark A. Flacy
URL: http://
GOP Senators who disagree with the Bush Cult over detainees are accused of aiding the terrorists, as being unpatriotic, as being traitors to the United States, and yet it is left leaning Dems who are being intolerant.
By whom? Got quotes, or is this direct from your imagination?
Think about it: John McCain - the leading GOP Presidential candidate in 2008 and a former POW - is accused of being a traitor to the United States of America by leading voices in the GOP.
That should be an easy bunch of quotes to find, huh?
 
Written By: Pablo
URL: http://
But rather than pointing out this rather glaring instance of fraticide, you instead pick up on some small inside-baseball dust up.
I love how you avoid mentioning Lieberman....just like the article above. What, have you made him a Stalin-era type non-person so soon?
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
is accused of being a traitor to the United States of America by leading voices in the GOP
Yeah, I’m interested in those quotes as well. Let’s see them.

Of course, MK will not show up in this thread again.

 
Written By: JWG
URL: http://
is accused of being a traitor to the United States of America by leading voices in the GOP
Yeah, I’m interested in those quotes as well. Let’s see them.
Of course, MK will not show up in this thread again.
Allow me to help him out, incidentally:

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/015276.php
Don’t miss Andrew McCarthy’s excellent dissection of the objections raised by Republican Sen. John McCain and "his entourage" of terrorist rights advocates against President Bush’s proposed terrorist trial procedures. As McCarthy notes, Sen. McCain’s unwillingness or inability to see past his experiences as a prisioner of war in very different times under very different circumstances raises this question: Can the nation afford a President John McCain? (One might also ask whether, given his power and influence with respect these issues, the nation can afford a Senator McCain).
Now, I wasn’t the one who said, "leading voices in the GOP", but this is not an example of a leading voice in the Democratic party calling out Al From, either.

The right wing of the Republican party absolutely wants to purge its party of anything resembling a moderate. They’ve been doing it for a decade. The ideological conformity they’ve induced has been bad for the country, but it has been good for their attainment of power.

It’s your blog, McQ, so you can highlight Democratic fratricide on a weekly basis and completely ignore Republican fratricide, like the Club For Growth’s multi-million-dollar attempt to oust Lincoln Chaffee with Steve Laffey, complete with hysterical rhetoric on all sides - but hopefully, someone will call out your target selection as painting less than a full picture.

Of course the DLC has always attempted to move the party more to the center because they believe that is where elections are won.

Or, alternatively, where the Democratic party is permanently annihilated by abandonment of separate and competing principles of government, to be replaced by a mush-filled echo of Republican principles, with stammering ifs, ands, and buts tacked on.

Which is what Republicans want.
Which is why the give Democrats so much "advice" about ditching their left wing.






 
Written By: glasnost
URL: http://
It’s your blog, McQ, so you can highlight Democratic fratricide on a weekly basis and completely ignore Republican fratricide, like the Club For Growth’s multi-million-dollar attempt to oust Lincoln Chaffee with Steve Laffey, complete with hysterical rhetoric on all sides - but hopefully, someone will call out your target selection as painting less than a full picture.
It is indeed my decision, glasnost, but here’s the point, the Republican party is in power. So their ’fratricide’ is much less interesting than that of the party seeking power.

If the point of all this is to win, then I would assume you’d agree that fratricide, dividing the party and making the tent smaller aren’t conducive to that goal.

And to me that makes Dem fratricide much more appealing as a story than Rep fratricide. It is also an interesting study of how the left on the blogosphere is trying to define who is and isn’t a Democrat (or should be one), and frankly I’m interested in following it and seeing how that develops.

I’m not here to be ’fair’. I’m not here to be unbiased. Or balanced. I’m certainly not here to blog about what glasnost thinks I should blog about.

I’m here to blog about what interests me.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
glasnost, I didn’t see the word "traitor" in your quote. Or anything else that appeared to paint McCain with the "traitor" brush.
 
Written By: Mark A. Flacy
URL: http://
Glasnost, I don’t see anyone in that link calling McCain a traitor. So, you didn’t help much.

Is it okay for Republicans to disagree with McCain and not be accused of calling him a traitor?
 
Written By: Steverino
URL: http://steverino.journalspace.com/
Glasnost, if that’s the harshest quote you can find, you’re probably better off quitting while you’re behind.
The right wing of the Republican party absolutely wants to purge its party of anything resembling a moderate. They’ve been doing it for a decade. The ideological conformity they’ve induced has been bad for the country, but it has been good for their attainment of power
Yeah, who knew all the help the White House and GOP Senate committee has given to non-moderates like Chaffee and Specter was all part of a plot to gain idealogical conformity!
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
The right wing of the Republican party absolutely wants to purge its party of anything resembling a moderate.

Yeah thats why both the administration and the RNC supported Chafee and Specter in their primaries and general elections. You are not very observant.
 
Written By: kyle N
URL: http://impudent.blognation.us/blog
Ah the old "they do it too!" defense. How original.
Yes MK, please confine yourself to original conspiracy laden theories as to why the Democrat party is tearing itself apart in a unique and never before seen way. It is not excusable to note that this is politics as usual.
 
Written By: unaha-closp
URL: http://warisforwinning.blogspot.com/
Or anything else that appeared to paint McCain with the "traitor" brush.
Sen. John McCain and "his entourage" of terrorist rights advocates
So, advocates of terrorist rights, I assume, you’d be willing to stand up and say, are not traitors?

Good. I agree.
Others don’t.

 
Written By: glasnost
URL: http://
If the point of all this is to win, then I would assume you’d agree that fratricide, dividing the party and making the tent smaller aren’t conducive to that goal
I’d say, frankly, it depends on the cirumstances. So, I wouldn’t neccesarily agree. Which was the logical part two of my first post. My part one being bitc*ing about the asynchronous attention.
I’m here to blog about what interests me.
Yep! And us commenters are here to provide helpful contrary perspectives and pressure to adopt them! Hoorah! An ecosystem! :-D
 
Written By: glasnost
URL: http://
I’d say, frankly, it depends on the cirumstances.
How about a record of lost national elections and no power for, oh, quite some time.
So, I wouldn’t neccesarily agree.
Heh ... wow, there’s a surprise.
And us commenters are here to provide helpful contrary perspectives and pressure to adopt them! Hoorah! An ecosystem!
It’s much more fun at the top of the blogging food chain though.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
So, advocates of terrorist rights, I assume, you’d be willing to stand up and say, are not traitors?
I would. I’ve already stood up, as have Jon and Dale and said they have the right not to be tortured. Obviously that could be construed as an advocate for terrorist rights.

But while I’ve been called everything but a child of God by some, I’ve never been called a traitor for having that stance.

All that to say your McCain quote isn’t a very good one to bolster the claim you made and I agree with shark, you’d be better off to quit while you’re behind.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
Oh and one more thing:
I’d say, frankly, it depends on the cirumstances. So, I wouldn’t neccesarily agree. Which was the logical part two of my first post. My part one being bitc*ing about the asynchronous attention.
I lean to the right and have never made any secret about it, so get used to the asynchronous attention.

And no, bi*ching won’t change it.

But I’m also an advocate of split government. So I actually want to see these fools win the House. For the life of me, if they’re going to try to drum out everyone who even farts crooked, they won’t even get close.

There are plenty of reasons other than selling out the Dems for which Al From could have been in that room. But Singer immediately goes to the least probable and demand the ouster not just of From but the whole DNC.

Sound like a healthy party to you?
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
So, advocates of terrorist rights, I assume, you’d be willing to stand up and say, are not traitors?
Depending upon the rights in question and my mood at the time, I would be content with "idiots" and perhaps "cretins". "Misguided" is probably what I would say when calmed down. Since it’s McCain we are discussing, I’ll probably stick with the first two.
 
Written By: Mark A. Flacy
URL: http://
I love how you avoid mentioning Lieberman....just like the article above. What, have you made him a Stalin-era type non-person so soon?
Well, considering the fact that Bill Clinton, Hillary, Barbara Boxer, and tons of other Democrat bigwigs actually went to CT to campaign for Lieberman why would anyone include him?


I know, Rush explained it all to you, but can you seriously swallow that crap without gagging?

 
Written By: Davebo
URL: http://
My part one being bitc*ing about the asynchronous attention.
Well now I’m curious. How would you implement synchronous attention?
 
Written By: Mark A. Flacy
URL: http://
Why through the liberal’s best friend: the government enforced ’fairness doctrine’ of course.

On a blog ... no such luck.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
It’s your blog, McQ, so you can highlight Democratic fratricide on a weekly basis and completely ignore Republican fratricide, like the Club For Growth’s multi-million-dollar attempt to oust Lincoln Chaffee with Steve Laffey, complete with hysterical rhetoric on all sides - but hopefully, someone will call out your target selection as painting less than a full picture.
This is not a case of "Republican Fratricide" but a conservative interest group trying to oust a liberal republican for a preferred candidate.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/09/republicans_to_concede_ri_if_chaffey_loses_primary/

Bush came out for Chafee & ticked off Ann Coulter for it.

 
Written By: h0mi
URL: http://
Yeah, I’m interested in those quotes as well. Let’s see them.
Of course, MK will not show up in this thread again.
Here is what the Speaker of the House - third in line to the presidency - had to say about Dems - and by extension those who share their position, i.e., McCain, Warner, and Graham - concenring the legislation:
"You wonder whether they’re more interested in the rights of terrorists than in protecting the American people."
This quote sends the clear message that those who do not agree with Bush are traitors.

Now, if you want to offer some kind of lame explanation to the contrary, go ahead. But you know what’s going on here, even if you don’t have the intellectual honesty to admit it.

Now, I expect you to dissemble, to apologize, to do whatever you can to defend Bush and the GOP. You believe that whatever Bush does must be defended. I understand why you need to do this. You are apparently hardwired to defend authority. Sad, but clearly obvious.

Ironic that you style yourself as a libertarian.

 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
GOP Senators who disagree with the Bush Cult over detainees are accused of aiding the terrorists, as being unpatriotic, as being traitors to the United States, and yet it is left leaning Dems who are being intolerant.
You’re supporting that with this?
Here is what the Speaker of the House - third in line to the presidency - had to say about Dems - and by extension those who share their position, i.e., McCain, Warner, and Graham - concenring the legislation:
You shouldn’t put words like "traitor" in someone else’s mouth. This is abject nonsense. You don’t get to take one set of words and impute new meaniong into them as proof of your scatterbrained theoretical allegations.

What is evident here is that you think Democrats are traitors.
 
Written By: Pablo
URL: http://
"You wonder whether they’re more interested in the rights of terrorists than in protecting the American people."
That’s it? That’s all your "evidence"? Boehner makes a statement accusing democrats of being too soft in the WoT and you twist that into treason?
even if you don’t have the intellectual honesty to admit it
Does using the phrase "intellectually honest" cause you to spit up a little in your mouth? This is a joke, right?
 
Written By: JWG
URL: http://

MK, in case you really are this unintelligent, let me offer you a legitimate explanation as to why Boehner’s statement has nothing to do with treason. Let’s reword his statement a bit:

You wonder whether they’re more interested in the rights of [criminals] than in protecting the American people.
Would the above statement mean the speaker is accusing people of supporting criminal actions against citizens, or would it mean the speaker thinks some people have the wrong priorities?

Even you should understand the difference which means you are the one being intellectually dishonest.

 
Written By: JWG
URL: http://
Ironic that you style yourself as a libertarian.
Not as ironic as you spending all that time to come up with those lame quotes which say absolutely nothing close to what you claimed.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
"You wonder whether they’re more interested in the rights of terrorists than in protecting the American people."
This quote sends the clear message that those who do not agree with Bush are traitors.
No. It says the Democrats are at best patriotic idiots with no good judgement as to how best to handle the situation.

Most people agree with that assessment.

Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp
 
Written By: Tom Perkins
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider