Ezra Klein: Bastards

« Fight the Bankruptcy Bill | Main | SS Pessimism »

March 09, 2005

Bastards

Never mind what I said yesterday. Fuck the DLC. Jesus Christ -- how does Al From sleep at night?

Update: This wasn't the DLC so, uh, never mind the post. It was the House New Democrat Coalition, which is basically the DLC-identified members of Congress, all of whom are whoring themselves out for contributions from the credit companies. They know the bill is going to pass, they know Hastert will bring it to the floor, and they've evidently concluded that they might as well flush ethics down the toilet and look like they're out front pushing the legislation so, later, they can tell the Credit Industry lobbyists how good they've been and, incidentally, how vulnerable they are in their districts.

On the subject of the DLC, I would feel much better about retracting the above if they mentioned the Bankruptcy Bill somewhere on their website. When even Ed Kilgore is silent, you know their opposition isn't too strong, if it indeed exists at all. And this isn't just a hasty judgment while I wait for the site's weekly update; their organization has two blogs and a daily e-mail dispatch, none of which have said a word about the legislation. If they wanted to attack it, they could. In fact, this could have been their Sister Souljah moment, when they proved themselves unwilling to curry corporate favor by supporting bad legislation, and in doing refuted all those who call them the corporate wing of the Democratic party. They passed. Which is a shame, because it would have been nice for their defenders, of which I'm reliably one, to have been able to say, "That all may be true, but you remember the lead role they took in fighting the Bankruptcy Bill? They were strong when it counted." No such luck.

Update 2: Since this post is getting new life through Atrios's link, I should mention that The Moose put up a note on the bankruptcy bill late yesterday. He didn't take a stand against the legislation, instead accusing Republicans of hypocrisy for throwing the nation into debt and then passing a bill against debtors, but at least he mentioned it. I still believe the DLC should have taken a clear and unequivocal position opposing the bill, but it's no longer true that everybody on their site has ignored the giveaway.

March 9, 2005 | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c572d53ef00d83421cc3353ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Bastards:

» Rage Against The DLC from Oliver Willis

Man, I've been trying to make peace in my own way about the fracas between the DLC and the Democrats at large - but its kind of hard when they act like asses. How anyone can support [Read More]

Tracked on Mar 9, 2005 9:59:22 AM

» Bankruptcy and "New" Democrats from CommonSenseDesk
If supporting this bankruptcy bill is the kind of position that [Read More]

Tracked on Mar 9, 2005 10:48:56 AM

» Bankruptcy and "New" Democrats from CommonSenseDesk
If supporting this bankruptcy bill is the kind of position that [Read More]

Tracked on Mar 9, 2005 10:56:24 AM

» Big Tent or Doghouse: whither "New Democrats?" from The Next Hurrah
Blogosphere outrage over Senate Democrats’ complicity in the bankruptcy bill is already on display; witness: Daily Kos, Atrios, MaxSpeak, Yglesias. Now, as action looks to be shifting to the House, complaints are starting to come in about the letter ... [Read More]

Tracked on Mar 9, 2005 12:00:40 PM

» Bankruptcy and "New" Democrats from CommonSenseDesk
If supporting this bankruptcy bill is the kind of position that [Read More]

Tracked on Mar 9, 2005 4:13:27 PM

» Strange Myths and Arguments from A Loser's Den from gonzography
The Rethugs will end up passing the torch to some passionless senator or another party hack next in line, but they are going to drop the bad debt and the Middle East mess and the misery index on the Democrats to solve and become identified with for t... [Read More]

Tracked on Mar 11, 2005 6:10:43 PM

Comments

But Ezra: the NDC ≠ the DLC. See the TNR article last week on the DLC for details.

The NDC, on the other hand, deserves to be put down like a three-legged doberman.

Posted by: Greg Greene | Mar 9, 2005 3:14:50 AM

So they've learned nothing. Four years of Bush's divide and conquer and they've learned nothing. These people are just bad.

And don't tell me the DLC shouldn't be blamed. Is Al From going to come out with a strong and blanket denunciation? Whatever his feelings on bankruptcy, the DLC is the organization responsible for this kind of politics, where some supposedly "moderate, courageous, common sense Democrats buck liberal orthodoxy to propose business-friendly solutions".

Bankruptcy *could have been* a very good stark black-and-white divide between what Democrats believe and what Republicans believe. Instead, Al From believes in big business. And this tactic is supposed to make Democrats more ELECTABLE?

Posted by: Marshall | Mar 9, 2005 5:21:57 AM

Back when I lived in the Bay, Ellen Tauscher was my representative. I remember back in ought two when I was lobbying for an increase in Pell grants, her aid told me Ellen’s constituents cared more about healthcare issues than they did about education. I damned near screamed at the woman that I was the Representative’s constituent, and that I cared more about education than healthcare. Perhaps I should have...

The solution is simple: People who live in districts where this is going on should call their representatives and explain that since they are getting Republican policies from their Congresspeople, they might as well have a Republican congressman (and his pork). That’ll wake ‘em up...

Posted by: Andrew Cory | Mar 9, 2005 5:35:03 AM

Greg Greene is right that's not the DLC. What's scary is they're the "more moderate and reasonable" brand of buiness-friendly, working families and labor hostile Democrats.

The DLC's letter lauding that legislation must have gotten lost in the mail.

Posted by: DHinMI | Mar 9, 2005 9:36:40 AM

Come on, guys. The DLC has to provide some leadership. Where by "leadership," I mean "discipline." So, yeah: f them.

Posted by: TJ | Mar 9, 2005 10:13:21 AM

Okay, everyone, do we stop using the blogosphere for fundraising for folks like Herseth and Moore?

If so, and if we think blogosphere fundraising is going to be that crucial in the future, aren't we cutting off a chance for a Dem. majority.

Sorry, but I have to say that as deplorable (and really f**** stupid) as this letter is, a) the most important vote a Congressman makes is for Speaker, and b) this bill wouldn't have even on the table if not for the GOP majorities.

That said, it is still disgusting. And it isn't as if (in Moore's case) suburban voters in Johnson County were clamoring for the bankruptcy bill.

Posted by: Chris Rasmussen | Mar 9, 2005 10:24:07 AM

"Okay, everyone, do we stop using the blogosphere for fundraising for folks like Herseth and Moore?

If so, and if we think blogosphere fundraising is going to be that crucial in the future, aren't we cutting off a chance for a Dem. majority."

Yes, and probably. But yesterday's bill shows me it doesn't really matter. The budget deficits and devalued dollar are going to hit this country like a tsunami, and when that crunch comes, the choice will be between massive tax increases and destruction of the safety net. I am 100% certain now of how the Democratic leadership will vote.

Quite honestly, nothing would keep me in the party except Dean and Reid hitting the microphones today and saying those Senators will face well-funded challengers in primaries. But if that were possible it would need not be done. The corruption is total.

Posted by: bob mcmanus | Mar 9, 2005 10:53:08 AM

Al From still works for the DLC?

Posted by: merlallen | Mar 9, 2005 11:07:53 AM

Okay, everyone, do we stop using the blogosphere for fundraising for folks like Herseth and Moore?

Yup. And, if Biden thinks the netroots is gonna dig deep for him in '08, he's not only an idiot, he's nuts.

Posted by: doozer | Mar 9, 2005 11:49:04 AM

At the risk of sounding a DLC accomodationist, let me raise the argument for funding Dems. who stray from the reservation:

the most critical thing is to gain back the House and Senate in 06'. Everything we have been bitching about -- the bankruptcy bill, Senate confirmations, the lack of Congressional oversight, the lack of transparency in the executive branch -- stems from the House and Senate not demanding more from the WH and that can only be solved with a Dem. majority and the committee chairmanships that result.

Everything else is missing the forest for the trees.

We need reps. like Herseth and Moore and all the rest. The entire reason they were on the list, as the Next Hurrah suggests, is that Emmanuel needs to provide them money for their 06' run.

The issue for me, if we really take the "INET as fundraising mechanism" seriously, is that we also understand its power. Once we funnel money that can be distributed to the Herseths and Moores of the world -- and they realize they *don't* have to go to K St. to get it -- the dynamic concerning Congressional fundraising (and the impetus for passing the bankruptcy bill, IMHO) alters. They'll be accountable to individual citizens and less accountable and amenable to the whims of moneyed interests.

In short, but we might have to hold our nose occasionally to ultimately get what we want. Sorry, but that's what winning coalitions *do*.

And, I'll be self-contradictory: Herseth should know better. She got a lot of her money from activists like Kos, not K. St. She should be absolutely ashamed of herself.

Posted by: Chris Rasmussen | Mar 9, 2005 12:38:33 PM

Chris,

I would take a different line. Whilst it is correct that Democratic majorities would obviate any of these policy differences, that majority is necessarily based on winning elections. And we can't win elections if congresspeople who are really bad politicians, as in they simply can't practice politics like by making bankruptcy legislation the obvious winning issue it is, are free to be stupid. You're right: we need to convince them that there's an alternative to corporate funding to insure incumbency, but we won't assure them of that until they realize that alternative funding ISN'T AVAILABLE if they sell out. You see, bankruptcy reform is a case where good politics and good policy OBVIOUSLY coincide, and yet we seem to have elected a bunch of airheads. The DLC paradigm used to be that you could sacrifice a few core Democratic policies and submit to the market blah blah blah in order to win. Yet these people sacrifice all Democratic policies and not only do they still lose, they lose as a result.

Posted by: Marshall | Mar 9, 2005 1:08:32 PM

Oh, no, Marshall. We are in agreement. This was extraordinarily, undeniably dumb strategically as well as appalling on the merits. This could have been an *ideal* moment for a filibuster, to highlight an issue that has been neglected in the media which helps us. The more *anyone* hears about this bill, the more unpopular it gets (more so, IHMO, amongst Bush voters who don't read points of view from our side of the aisle).

I'm just saying: where do we go for here? Do we say "well, I'm not giving money that goes to Herseth" or "well, that's the last dime I give to Moore"? If so, I would argue that may be counterproductive -- not because I favor dumb politicans as a rule, but a dumb politician who is an incumbent in a risky seat is still worth keeping if they vote for the right Speaker.

Further, Marshall, I fear (or hope, in the long run, I guess) that Delay's retributive tactics may force DLC members away from K St, as K St. will be fearful to help in reaction to strong-arm tactics.

Posted by: Chris Rasmussen | Mar 9, 2005 1:19:42 PM

I'm disappointed to see Congresswoman Bean's name on that list. As a contributor to her campaign, I will have to re-think my support next time, but judging from this action, she won't be needing my meager contribution now that she has access to the credit card companies.

Posted by: Left Behind Child | Mar 9, 2005 1:38:46 PM

"I'm just saying: where do we go for here? Do we say "well, I'm not giving money that goes to Herseth" or "well, that's the last dime I give to Moore"?"

yep. Only way I have to exert influence outside my district. And given the unlikelihood that the donation I give or fail to give will swing the entire house or senate....I do hold people to a different standard in general based on the state, but on this bill there's no excuse.

Posted by: Katherien | Mar 9, 2005 6:45:49 PM

In short, but we might have to hold our nose occasionally to ultimately get what we want. Sorry, but that's what winning coalitions *do*.

Bullshit. That's what we've been doing for 10 years. That's how we got here from there.

On a basic, very basic, human civility issue like this, there is no quarter to give. None. Fuck 'em. I'm done with them. I held my nose for years - I heard the same line last year with Kerry - if I'm gonna back losers in the future, I'm gonna back losers that at least fit the mold of my conscience.

Posted by: Richard Cranium | Mar 9, 2005 6:50:16 PM

I'm ashamed to say that at one time I was a dlc member. Read my little Blueprint eagerly.

But I just can't abide them anymore. If what they 'do' is provide a home for conservative democrats that need a home but for one reason or another don't want to be repubs, let them bolt. Just like we let the morons bolt from the party in the wake of civil rights.

There hasn't been one last straw as much as there's been a continuing string of them. Their bashing of Gore post-election. Their bashing of Dean in the primary season. Their members doing the Rose Garden jig with chimpy for his war.

But the very, very last straw was what happened within days of the 2004 election, when goopers framed/propogandized chimpy's win on 'values', and the bastards at the dlc agreed that we are party without them. Fuck them.

Look, the conservative element/dlc has gotten almost everything they've wanted. And the reason they wanted these things was so that we'd be 'electible' and gain governing majorities. We caved on: the death penalty, welfare 'reform', had to have every spent nickle under the microscope of 'fiscal sanity', nafta, gatt, wto, got 'tough on crime', played down guns, sucked up to business and deregulated....etc etc.

My point: where are those majorities that were gonna result from selling out, pandering and triangulating and playing nicey-nice to the demographic du jour? Instead of southern and conservative dems being afraid of being labeled as in bed with Jesse Jackson, they are now labeled as being in bed with such 'leftists' as Tom Daschle and Hillary Clinton. And still they run...

The conservative dem is the bane of the party, and the dlc is a reactionary group that does more damage to the party then help because whatever they react to and push us to 'overcome' by moving right(and it IS moving right) only allows the gop to move the goalposts further.

Posted by: jdw | Mar 9, 2005 9:44:03 PM

Ezra, what about this?

Posted by: praktike | Mar 10, 2005 3:16:50 PM

Ladies and Gentlemen - I have a weblog devoted to ridding the Democratic Party of these thugs who are now calling themselves the New Democratic Coalition, Network, whatever. All I know is that if it walks like DLC, talks like DLC and smells like they're feeding at the pig trough for corporate cash, it's the DLC.

After a decade of losing all three branches of government and signing on to pack the Court with ultra Right-wing thugs posing as jurists, not to mention they are applying their lips to Hastert's rear end (and it's big enough for all twenty members who signed that letter to have room to apply their lips; bring the ChapStick)I don't know about you, but the members of the Congressional Black Caucus who signed off on this are going to get their asses handed to them at the Legislative Weekend in September, because I'm personally going to see to it, no matter in whose grill I have to get. And any staff person that tries to stop me, will get pimp-slapped.

Posted by: Palladin | Mar 10, 2005 3:55:54 PM

Praktike -- they also used to endorse private accounts for Social Security. What matters is their stance, and volume, when the fight is going on. I'm sure a comprehensive search of their archives could find support and opposition for the legislation, or a close relative of it. They needed to be loud now.

Posted by: Ezra | Mar 10, 2005 4:32:14 PM

The Democratic Party has a big tent, and can toerate those who occasionally vote with the other side as a matter of principle. We Democrats have to be plitical realists, too, and recognize that Senator (D-LA)is not always going to be able to vote like Senator (D-MA).

But this! How there can be any pretense of justifying this by principle or political expediency is beyond me. This is just craveness, and venality.

Posted by: rea | Mar 10, 2005 7:22:27 PM

"Democrats have to be plitical realists, too."
This is pure bull shit. You don't win a war by consorting with the enemy. Newt laid down the law. They would stick together, or he would personally take them down. The result, Republicans own everything GD thing.

When Ds keep crossing over and voting YES on Republican legislation that serves their own re-election interests instead of the party's and the public's interest, they undermine everything. I am sick of this and ready to give up and go Green. Someone needs to pound on Reid and Pelosi to learn from Newt and take control of these traitors. If they are going to vote R, they might as well be R and let the RNC fund them instead of the DNC.... Q: How rationale are the R's? A: They aren't! Fight fire with fire.

Posted by: oakland | Mar 12, 2005 8:02:41 AM

sh.SEXMOVIES sh.SEXMOVIES