General Discussion

merrily

(45,251 posts)

124. Why I never call myself a progressive, by merrily

Thu Jul 24, 2014, 01:24 AM

Jul 2014

When the DLC first formally organized, Koch Industries donated to it and one of the Koch brothers had a seat on its Executive Council.

http://americablog.com/2010/08/koch-industries-gave-funding-to-the-dlc-and-served-on-its-executive-council.html

(According to Jean Mayer of The New Yorker, this was about the same time as the Koch brothers began planning the Tea Party.)

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/08/30/covert-operations

The first two full-time employees of the DLC were Al From and Will Marshall. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Leadership_Council

Marshall later founded the Progressive Policy Institute. It's web home page used to say something like, "Welcome to the Progressive Policy Institute, the place for pragmatic progressives."

I haven't checked lately, but the last time I checked, it no longer said that. Perhaps Tom Tomorrow got to PPI?

Anyway, PPI was founded in 1989, only a few years after official formation of the DLC. In 2003, Marshall, who is still President of PPI, signed the PNAC letter, urging Bush to invade Iraq.

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

How's that for progressive? How's that for pragmatic?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

153 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Resolved? Hillary Clinton is a Liberal Democrat [View all] bigtree Jul 2014 OP

This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Jul 2014 #1

. bigtree Jul 2014 #2

Think about the courts before not voting for Hillary or any Dem candidate Demsrule86 Jul 2014 #91

This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Jul 2014 #104

We can't afford another bad Democrat like Hillary making appointments to the courts either. Chan790 Jul 2014 #105

If the lesser of two evils is your only realistic option, what do you do? nomorenomore08 Jul 2014 #126

Good enough for me. conservaphobe Jul 2014 #3

I do. Bill Clinton advised McCain during his Presidential campaign. They are a twofer. roguevalley Jul 2014 #14

Please see my post #35 -- campaign donatinos of three possible contenders for the Democraticn JDPriestly Jul 2014 #41

liberal republican maybe nt msongs Jul 2014 #4

No Spider Jerusalem Jul 2014 #5

I wonder what kind of rift she must have had with her husband if she is a New Deal liberal? Douglas Carpenter Jul 2014 #6

Dynasties aren't my thing. I won't vote for her in the primaries. octoberlib Jul 2014 #7

I knew there were a lot of lobbying and pressure groups, but Ron Green Jul 2014 #8

that's a strange way to look at it bigtree Jul 2014 #9

how do you have an 86% rating with the ASPCA? JEez. I'm poor and animal charities roguevalley Jul 2014 #16

I support the right to lobby 100%. Shame you don't. NCTraveler Jul 2014 #82

Hmm. Way NOT to encourage anyone to vote for Hillary? merrily Jul 2014 #10

I think a majority of DUers will not vote for her in the primary, but... Amonester Jul 2014 #11

No self-fulfilling prophesies, please. I've been hearing those since October 2012, merrily Jul 2014 #15

See my post #35 re: her campaign donors compared to other possible candidates. JDPriestly Jul 2014 #42

If you're holding her Goldwater teen years against her then I assume Warren is completely off the Metric System Jul 2014 #32

Interesting. Your only reaction to everything in my post is merrily Jul 2014 #38

They're terrified of Elizabeth. Scuba Jul 2014 #61

I guess that precludes discussion of facts about Hillary. merrily Jul 2014 #64

Warren was a Republican during Reagan and Bush 41, when they were viciously anti gay Bluenorthwest Jul 2014 #87

Yes, I raised those facts on another board, maybe this one as well, when merrily Jul 2014 #96

If you read her book, you learn why she changed, came from a conservative background, JDPriestly Jul 2014 #111

Respectfully, if you are gay, you may not agree that the economy merrily Jul 2014 #130

Elizabeth Warren supports gay rights. JDPriestly Jul 2014 #138

My intent was not to imply that Warren is anti-gay. merrily Jul 2014 #139

Pushing the TPP and being in favor or the Iraq war are not liberal, period. eridani Jul 2014 #12

Precisely, no doubt Hillary has a 100% rating from Wall Street bankers. Some liberal . . . haaaahh! InAbLuEsTaTe Jul 2014 #37

See my post #35. JDPriestly Jul 2014 #43

Phenomenal post JD; should be reposted in every Hillary thread to remind everyone who's side she's on (hint: it's not the 99%). InAbLuEsTaTe Jul 2014 #51

She's an impressive woman. NanceGreggs Jul 2014 #13

Whether or not she is impressive is a different issue from whether she is a liberal. merrily Jul 2014 #17

You've missed the point. NanceGreggs Jul 2014 #18

No. LWolf Jul 2014 #99

Well, thank you very kindly ... NanceGreggs Jul 2014 #120

But that WAS the point of the OP, LWolf Jul 2014 #148

They might be DU mortal sins but, that is the GOP strategy and that is how they win. Tuesday Afternoon Jul 2014 #19

Rethugs back winners? Not lately. In 2008 and 2012, they tried to back merrily Jul 2014 #20

I understand about the national level and yes things are changing but those four rules that Nance Tuesday Afternoon Jul 2014 #22

Before Obama, we had Bush and before Bush Clinton. merrily Jul 2014 #24

you left out a Bush I think. Also there are a lot of campaigns besides Presidential. Tuesday Afternoon Jul 2014 #25

We are talking here about Hillary for Pres., not other elections. merrily Jul 2014 #26

I agree with Nance, point. you missed it entirely. First off. Hillary has not declared so it is Tuesday Afternoon Jul 2014 #27

Hillary's failure to declare so far does not affect anything I've posted on this thread. merrily Jul 2014 #28

good lord. no shit. Tuesday Afternoon Jul 2014 #29

All I did was respond to things you said in your posts. merrily Jul 2014 #30

I understand what you mean about "dynasties". NanceGreggs Jul 2014 #21

agreed. She is a person in her own right and if she: first off, declares and runs and Tuesday Afternoon Jul 2014 #23

This is a point lost on so many. joshcryer Jul 2014 #34

See my post #35. Apparently her donors don't think she is all that liberal. JDPriestly Jul 2014 #45

How can you vote for her? You're a Canadian. n/t BuelahWitch Jul 2014 #84

No, I'm an American citizen ... NanceGreggs Jul 2014 #102

Could'nt of said it better myself minivan2 Jul 2014 #31

Well yeah. joshcryer Jul 2014 #33

Check mu post #35. It lists the donors for the Senate races of Hillary and Elizabeth Warren. JDPriestly Jul 2014 #36

The vote is the only thing that matters. joshcryer Jul 2014 #39

Hillary's top donors (for a Senate race no less) tell the real story: JDPriestly Jul 2014 #35

Bingo! B Calm Jul 2014 #40

Why wouldn't the financial industry support her? joshcryer Jul 2014 #44

I am beyond game theory on this. JDPriestly Jul 2014 #46

Game theory isn't amoral. joshcryer Jul 2014 #47

I love your inventiveness with the language. Now bankers and their supporters are the NEW liberals. Romulox Jul 2014 #53

I am merely pointing out how the statistic is derived. joshcryer Jul 2014 #59

I think you're failing to convince anyone--even yourself. I bet you'd feel silly saying it out loud Romulox Jul 2014 #60

Yeah? Show me one corp telling their employees how to vote. joshcryer Jul 2014 #63

Wall Streeters know on which side their bread is buttered. This is just a bad line of argument. nt Romulox Jul 2014 #65

Not when the Republicans get more of them. joshcryer Jul 2014 #67

They've gotten more subtle. merrily Jul 2014 #133

How people vote in primaries? We're still over a year away from a primary. merrily Jul 2014 #58

There is speculation there will be no primary. joshcryer Jul 2014 #62

No mystery. You said game theory is how people vote. I asked if you meant voting in merrily Jul 2014 #68

In first past the post, plurality systems. joshcryer Jul 2014 #71

I understand the system. My question went more to merrily Jul 2014 #128

I just don't like irrational Dem bashing. joshcryer Jul 2014 #132

Also not responsive. merrily Jul 2014 #134

I'm on record that I am not enthused about 2016. joshcryer Jul 2014 #137

If Sanders runs, I fully believe it will be to move the merrily Jul 2014 #143

P.S. finding it hard to buy that you will go to great lengths to defend Hillary merrily Jul 2014 #144

It's unfortunate you are so distrustful. joshcryer Jul 2014 #146

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!!! +10 InAbLuEsTaTe Jul 2014 #49

Those are **LIBERAL** multinational financiers. Romulox Jul 2014 #55

Also known as fascism. joshcryer Jul 2014 #69

Nice one. Also, people who even *mention* Goldman Sachs are just like Hitler. Romulox Jul 2014 #70

Struck a nerve, I see. joshcryer Jul 2014 #72

Indeed. BULLSEYE! Bankers are the new "liberals", everybody else are FASCISTS! Romulox Jul 2014 #76

Didn't say that. joshcryer Jul 2014 #78

They are buying access, but per the OP they are not buying votes. pampango Jul 2014 #86

Really excellent point. Htom Sirveaux Jul 2014 #107

She sat on the board of WalMart when it was not even merrily Jul 2014 #131

She's a sneaky calculating weasel who not only voted for the IWR but pushed for it behind the scenes w4rma Jul 2014 #48

But "these are not the droids you're looking for" worked so well merrily Jul 2014 #57

She's a centrist, with some relatively liberal views and some conservative ones. nomorenomore08 Jul 2014 #50

I don't think "progressive" and "liberal" are synonyms. merrily Jul 2014 #56

The distinction between the two can be tricky, I suppose. nomorenomore08 Jul 2014 #73

Neither Obama nor Hillary is to the left of liberals. merrily Jul 2014 #77

Yeah, the meaning is quite subjective. I call myself a Social Democrat because that has a more nomorenomore08 Jul 2014 #85

Socialism may be another of those subjective words. merrily Jul 2014 #122

There are different degrees of it, just as there are different degrees of capitalism. nomorenomore08 Jul 2014 #123

It means government ownership of the means of production, not just merrily Jul 2014 #125

That would be socialism in its purest form. I have my doubts about such a system nomorenomore08 Jul 2014 #127

No, that would be socialism, period. merrily Jul 2014 #129

I'm all for collective ownership of the essentials - education, health care, utilities, etc. nomorenomore08 Jul 2014 #140

I am unsure how much socialism I am for, but I am for merrily Jul 2014 #141

I guess that's why I say I'm a Social Democrat rather than a socialist per se. nomorenomore08 Jul 2014 #142

The US electorate may be ready. merrily Jul 2014 #145

I hope so too. I think this country is desperate for real change. n/t nomorenomore08 Jul 2014 #147

I'd love a new word, LWolf Jul 2014 #109

See, and I don't think neo-liberals are economically liberal. merrily Jul 2014 #112

Economic liberalism LWolf Jul 2014 #117

Progressive Policy Institute comes to mind Dragonfli Jul 2014 #121

Why I never call myself a progressive, by merrily merrily Jul 2014 #124

P.S. You may want to glance at this. merrily Jul 2014 #135

I needed a laugh this morning. hobbit709 Jul 2014 #52

You shouldn't lead with your chin, bigtree. Hillary is no liberal, and it just makes her look bad Romulox Jul 2014 #54

Hillary is about as liberal as Dick Nixon. Scuba Jul 2014 #66

If Hillary is a liberal, then I'm the King of England. InAbLuEsTaTe Jul 2014 #74

And LWolf Jul 2014 #108

Neo. MannyGoldstein Jul 2014 #75

What if... joshcryer Jul 2014 #83

hillary is more of the same......clinton/bush/obama enough already bowens43 Jul 2014 #79

Positions on the issues Thinkingabout Jul 2014 #80

I have said it many times here. NCTraveler Jul 2014 #81

Nope. LWolf Jul 2014 #88

Yep. And one of those dogs is a biter. progressoid Jul 2014 #94

Yet, given deceptively similar names. merrily Jul 2014 #136

Yes. LWolf Jul 2014 #150

As opposed to all the political slogans that advocate not moving at all or merrily Jul 2014 #151

lol LWolf Jul 2014 #152

On those issues, you are preaching to the choir. merrily Jul 2014 #153

Hidden in all that bulky blather is a trend Bigtree will not speak to...her ratings from Human Bluenorthwest Jul 2014 #89

It's not an endorsement, Bluenorthwest bigtree Jul 2014 #90

She herself rejected the label 'liberal', in 2007 muriel_volestrangler Jul 2014 #92

I feel obliged to point out to those posters rock Jul 2014 #93

Well, you're correct about the ass of you part, anyway. LWolf Jul 2014 #100

It may not be equivalent to being pleased with them rock Jul 2014 #101

Nope. LWolf Jul 2014 #106

If that "sure thing" is going to perpetuate anti-working-class policies, Maedhros Jul 2014 #110

Would you like bush* or the equivalent (say bush#3)? rock Jul 2014 #113

I will vote for the candidate that best represents my values. Maedhros Jul 2014 #115

Nothing. LWolf Jul 2014 #118

One actual benefit to having a "demonic Republican" in the White House Maedhros Jul 2014 #119

I've often had that thought. LWolf Jul 2014 #149

My conscience does not let me vote for Hillary. JDPriestly Jul 2014 #116

Well, she’s either 10/11 or 11/11 for Warren’s 11 progressive values Chathamization Jul 2014 #95

So the Third Way candidate is kinda cool after all. L0oniX Jul 2014 #97

Hillary hired the same PR firm that does "the list" for Obama yurbud Jul 2014 #98

That's great, D.C. institutions like her. Htom Sirveaux Jul 2014 #103

A few of these concern me KamaAina Jul 2014 #114