Posted on 08/18/2006 8:47:46 AM PDT by Blackrain4xmas
The Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) is a more centrist element of today’s Democratic Party. After Sen. Lieberman’s primary defeat last week, I decided to go to the DLC website and see how the centrist Democrats were reacting to their defeat as well as the victory of the far left. There wasn’t a canned response at that time. I had hoped that the DLC would have prepared both win and lose positions in advance, but apparently the party just can’t figure out how to pander to their base of pacifists, appeasers, geo-political procrastinators, Bush-haters, socialists etc. while at the same time seeking support from that critical centrist and right side of the spectrum needed to win general elections.
At the DLC website I came across some articles describing Democrats’ national security strategies. I thought they’d be interesting since I really don’t know where the party stands. Given that their recent “Real Security” publication was only 8 double-spaced pages with no details on anything, I was surprised to see that there’s a great deal of text on liberal national security strategies.
A further examination of the site showed that there’s an associated magazine called, Blueprint. Now, Blueprint magazine had a very intriguing cover story. It was called, “Fighting Smarter” By Will Marshall and Jeremy Rosner; Adapted from the book, WITH ALL OUR MIGHT: A Progressive Strategy for Defeating Jihadism and Defending Liberty
Oddly enough, the strategy seemed to make very good sense.
(read the FULL ARTICLE here) http://www.therant.us/guest/pender/08182006.htm
(Excerpt) Read more at therant.us ...
Intresting. So they cannot even write their own stupid slogans but have to steal them from Conservatives
So while they're condemning the neocons, they're busy copying them. Almost word for wrod.
Which progress???
That's really funny stuff. I posted this on a website I moderate http://www.democracyforums.com and I can't wait to see our moonbats responses.
We have people that today said, "And this conflict enables Hezbollah to show its great humanitarian side." -alanzomouring23 in praise of terrorist organizations.
Yes, I'm shamelessly plugging, however you should really see some of our moonbats. My icon is Reagan's re-election poster "Reagan Country" and, even with the title of "Senior Staff " I still have people tell me my hero is a racist closet KKK member.
Reagan (and Newt Gingrich) is my icon, too. When I will edit my home page on FR, you'll see.
pingy dingy
Ask em
Which part of their plan is bad?
First, we must marshal all of America's manifold strengths, starting with our military power but going well beyond it, for the struggle ahead.
(not just relying on the military sounds like a good idea, no?)
Second, we must rebuild America's alliances, because democratic solidarity is one of our greatest strategic assets.
(Sen Kerry was all about alliances etc during his campaign. How is this a bad idea?)
Third, we must champion liberal democracy in deed, not just in rhetoric, because a freer world is a safer world.
(I'd have thought liberals would be all about "liberal democracy". Why not?)
Fourth, we must renew U.S. leadership in the international economy and rise to the challenge of global competition.
(This is Pres Clinton's driving theme even today in his post-Presidency speeches. Why is this bad?)
Fifth, we must summon from the American people a new spirit of national unity and shared sacrifice.
(argh that bi-partisan unity. Who needs a united United States of America? Is partisanship good?)
They're not too fond of that
I wonder if Tim Russert or Chris Matthews will be asking these questions in the near future? LOL!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.