Why is saying that the DLC is still in charge taboo?
I've been banned from a few political blogs and forums in my day, mostly from right-wing ones on which the site owners pretend to be liberal, but by their words and their actions reveal their utter devotion to defending all that is right-wing — be it in the form of enforcing false civility to protect scum who call us terrorists ad communists from getting their non-existent feelings hurt, or by defending policies implemented by Obama but which these same people denounced when done by Bush-Cheney. These include FireDogLake, Daily Kos, Smirking Chimp, Liberal Forum, On the Left, and Open Left.
All of the above-named sites have certain things in common: site owners and moderators who masquerade as liberals but are decidedly right-wing in their political beliefs, the same owners and moderators abusing their authority to remove dissenters, and a clique of sycophants who defend whatever these people do. The message sent is clear: the left is tolerated only so long as it abides by the terms of discussion set down by the far right. Any deviation from this rule is swiftly and irrevocably penalized.
The last poseur blog I found myself banned from was Smirking Chimp. I still peruse the site from time to time to see how some of the people, namely, those who rose to my defense when I was posting, are doing.
Yesterday I read a couple of entries by someone who understands that the DLC, despite their name-change last year, is still in charge of the Democrats. This same person wrote an entry asking what it would take for Democrats to abandon Obama and the DLC. I was unable to post any reply, having been banned, but I sympathized with the poster, who immediately came under attack from Jeff Tiedrich, who deliberately lied by claiming that the DLC ceased to exist years ago.
No surprise, therefore, that I returned today to find that both entries had been deleted and the poster's account removed.
The thing is, though, that Tiedrich's false statement is a verifiable lie.
For one thing, The phony dissolution of the right-wing Democratic Leadership Council took place only last year, in February 2011. This is the end of April 2012, roughly fourteen months. It hasn't been "years", as Tiedrich lied.
(A link I saw posted and which I managed to save before the entry was removed tracks the political connections of the powerful.
The rebranding of the DLC under the Clinton Foundation was compared in one of the deleted entries to the renaming of Blackwater first to Xe, and now to Academi. It's still the exact same group of homicidal, war-profiteering maniacs, with the exact same purpose: to profit from mass murder and protect the interests of the super-wealthy. The only things different about the outfit are the logo and the name.
Likewise with the DLC, many of whose members are members of the Obama regime.
But see, here's the thing, and it's a pretty big one. Even Tiedrich, in denying the DLC's continued existence, acknowledged that the same people who operated under the DLC continue to dictate policy in the Obama White House. His only real problem with the entries appears to have been of semantics. And then, without any notice apparently given, both of the entries were sent down the memory hole.
Which brings me to ask the question: Why is it taboo in some circles to point out that the DLC and its leaders are still around and in charge of the Democrat Party, albeit under a different brand logo?
Because if we all agree that the same people are dictating policy within the Democrat Party, then it shouldn't be a crime to point that out. It shouldn't be a punishable offense to show that, as with the renaming of Blackwater, it's a shell game the DLC is playing by folding into a right-wing foundation run by its own members, the Clintons.
There's got to be some other reason why it's forbidden by some people to point this out. What is it?
I can only offer up a guess, but I think it has to do with public disgust. Remember how in 2004, 2006, and 2008, voters were so fed up with Bush and Cheney that they were looking for someone — anyone — to replace them with? The depraved and evil policies those subhuman savages are so destructive that the public wanted the fuckers out, and we made it clear that the same policies dressed up in prettier packaging would not be tolerated.
So what did the DLC, which earned equal levels of disgust from the public for having spent decades supporting and enabling these far right policies, do in response? Did they slink off to a corner of the Democrat Party, never to dare be heard from again? HELL no! They just picked one of their rising pretty-boys, dressed him up in nice-looking wrapping, and sold him as the Big Change. Of course, what was inside the packaging was always just more of the same.
The voting public was so desperate to be rid of the GOP in 2008 that it ignored the warning signs and elected Barry Obama anyway. Boy did THEY get a wake up call! After two years of watching as Barry Obama stacked his regime with the old DLC crowd from the Clinton years and proceeded to continue and expand all of Bush and Cheney's policies, voters threw up their hands, stayed home during the midterms, and didn't vote at all. They weren't about to forgive the Democrats for having betrayed them yet again. All the promises of hope and change were lies, and Obama did everything he could to prove that they were lies — and neither he or his DLC buddies were even remotely subtle about it.
But then the polls started showing that no matter how far to the right he moves, Obama's chances against any of his Republican counterparts aren't nearly good enough to secure him a second term as dictator. The polls still show going into November that the margin between Barry and Mittens is still well within the ability of the GOP electoral fraud machine to cheat its candidate's way into the executive mansion.
You'd think by now that the DLC would have learned an important lesson from 2010: that shell games are a losing strategy. No one gives a damn about what letter a politician has after his name. If that politician keeps pushing the same extreme right-wing policies, it won't matter how many times he and his party change their packaging. Voters will keep on punishing the DLC at the polls. No one wants Democrats who act like Republicans competing with actual registered Republicans for the right to implement the same policies for Wall Street's benefit.
But no, the morons running the Democrat Party are too stupid to realize that as long as they keep supporting and enabling the GOP, they'll always lose elections they ought to have in the bag. So last year they pulled another shell game, hoping against hope that they can fool the public one more time.
Apparently some people have decided to join the DLC in promoting their latest re-branding. The Holy Meme dictates that the DLC be declared dead, like an Internet troll returning to his favorite blog to flame us all again under the pretense of being someone else, and for the DLC to successfully remain on the political stage the Holy Meme must be obeyed at all costs.
That's my best guess, and it's the only one that makes any sense to me.