>Never heard of the "Centrist Coalition" before... sounds like more
>leftist camoflage to me.
>IT S THE GOP WAY OR THE THIRD WAY
>Moderation is very hot with Washington Democrats. Plus, an alternative
>tax-cut plan from Vermont
>Sen. John Breaux of Louisiana surveyed the packed Crystal Room at the
>Willard Hotel Tuesday night and had to marvel.
>Moderation has never been so hot. The occasion was the winter dinner of
>the New Democrat Network (NDN), the fund-raising
>organization he cofounded with Sen. Joe Lieberman and former Bill Clinton
>campaign aide Simon Rosenberg to underwrite
>candidates who reject the party s traditional liberal orthodoxy and
>embrace a centrist, business-friendly third way. Clinton s New
>Democratic message of economic opportunity, community, and, laughable as
>it now seems, personal responsibility, helped
>put him in the White House in 1992. Clinton is gone (sort of ), but the
>message is not. It is standing-room-only in the center these days, with
>moderate groups swelling to record dimensions. The House s New Democrat
>Coalition is the body s single largest
>caucus, with 70 members-including nine of the party s 13 freshmen. On the
>Senate side, six of the party s new arrivals have
>already signed up, bringing its membership to 20.
>Exactly what It means has always been a bit squishy. Clinton and former
>vice president Al Gore, both hailed earlier in their
>careers as exemplars of the third way, weren t all that devoted to its
>tenets once they got to the White House. Now, the definition seems more
>expansive than ever. At the Willard, Breaux and company raised money with
>Republican efficiency. The room was
>wall-to-wall lobbyists, from Aetna to Microsoft to Quaker Oats, all
>helping the NDN collect $1.2 million, part of its $10 million goal for
>the 2002 election cycle. The crowd was also peppered with faces that were
>more Old Democrat than New, like Sen. John
>Kerry of Massachusetts, who has earned consistent 90-percent-plus voting
>scorecards from organized labor and old-line liberal interest groups like
>Americans for Democratic Action (ADA). The tent has gotten so big that
>it s meaningless, scoffs one senior aide to a Senate Democrat who has
>not enlisted. Pretty soon Paul Wellstone and Ted Kennedy will be the
>only ones not in it. The New Democrats aren t the only moderate caucus
>getting bigger. A bipartisan Senate group, the Centrist Coalition, has
>more than doubled in size since the end of the 106th Congress last year
>and now totals 43 members-nearly half of the body. Its roster,
>which in some cases overlaps the New Democrats, includes names that don t
>leap immediately to mind when discussing centrism,
>like Barbara Mikulski, the stalwart Maryland Democrat, and John McCain of
>Arizona, whose passionate advocacy of campaign
>finance reform often eclipses an extremely conservative legislative
>record. The coalition also counts as its own Republicans whose votes
>earned them big fat zeros from the ADA last year (Chuck Hagel of
>Nebraska, Pat Roberts of Kansas, Fred Thompson of Tennessee) and two who
>scored just 5 percent (Bill Frist of Tennessee and Judd Gregg of New
>Hampshire).As a whole,
>though, the Centrist Coalition is much like the New Democrats, an
>eclectic bunch difficult to pigeonhole. Some are economic conservatives
>and social progressives; some are the other way around.
> I wouldn t call it a centrist coalition as much as I would
>call it a result-oriented coalition or a pragmatic coalition, says
>McCain, who is sponsoring new gun-control legislation with coalition-mate
>Lieberman. It will be a real shifting group, with different coalitions
>coming together on tax issues, some on education, some on prescription
>The heavy traffic in the center reflects a couple of trends. One is the
>continued shift of population to the suburbs, where moderate swing voters
>rule. The other is the message of the 2000 presidential election. Voters
>(with an big assist from the U.S. Supreme
>Court) selected a chief executive who promised to set a new
>cooperative tone in Washington, with an emphasis on reconciliation and
>bipartisanship. People want us to stop bickering and work together,
>says McCain. And with the numbers now so evenly matched (50-50 in the
>Senate and a slender nine-seat GOP advantage in the House), the
>assumption is that the center is where the legislative action will be. It
>s also no coincidence that these groups include several members who have
>their eye on a presidential run. Thompson and Frist, as well as Democrats
>Kerry, John Edwards of North Carolina and Evan Bayh of Indiana, know that
>national campaigns are won in the center. Besides, said Bayh, recently
>installed as the new head of the Democratic Leadership
>Council, the intellectual wellspring of the New Democrat movement, the
>center is just a comfortable place to be. How many
>people get up in the morning, look in the mirror and see an
>extremist? he asked.
>The centrists are beginning to make their legislative mark. New Democrats
>supplied critical votes last year in favor of permanent normal trade
>relations with China. They ve also championed a range of high-tech issues
>like limiting liability for Y2K failures.
>Last month, they proposed an alternative to President Bush s
>education-reform package, one that targets more money to poor school
>districts and favors charter schools over vouchers. But more often, the
>polyglot nature of the groups makes concerted action difficult. Neither
>the Centrist Coalition or the New Democrats have been able to settle on
>an alternative to Bush s $1.6 trillion tax cut. Some members think the
>size of the cut is too high, others want a trigger provision that would
>roll back tax cuts if projected surpluses fall short. As Lieberman
>acknowledged this week: The bipartisan Centrist Coalition is not at this
>point headed in a bipartisan direction.
>THE SANDERS PLAN
>There was a time when Rep. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, the lone Democratic
>Socialist in Congress, was more likely to be found pushing for deep cuts
>in military spending than for lower taxes. But now even Sanders, founder
>of the Congressional Progressive
>Caucus, has contracted tax-cut fever. Sanders and the caucus, which
>includes 53 of the most liberal House members, are
>promoting what they call The American People s Dividend, calling for
>$900 billion in tax relief, spread over 10 years. Where
>more than 40 percent of the benefits under President Bush s plan go to
>the wealthiest people in the country, the progressives want everyone to
>get the same payout: a $300 refundable tax credit for every man, woman
>and child. If you are a low-income person or the richest in the world,
>you benefit in an equal way, said Sanders, a Vermonter since the late
>1960s but whose accent still carries the echoes of his boyhood in the
>Flatbush section of Brooklyn, N.Y., where he grew up the son of a paint
>mayor of Burlington before winning the state s only congressional seat in
>1990, he runs his races as an Independent and functions
>in the House as a Democrat, but still considers himself a socialist in
>the Western European mode.
>Sanders sees the plan as a quick and efficient way to put money quickly
>into the hands of the working families who are most likely to spend it
>quickly-and hopefully stimulate the economy. The proposal is also
>predicated on continued projections of a surplus. No surplus, no tax
>credit. Sanders was asked why, as a progressive, didn t he see the $900
>billion used more
>appropriately to expand federal investment in areas like health care and
>education. He said the if the surplus was as big as the forecast
>suggests, there is room for both cut taxes and spending, and that the
>caucus would be coming out with a larger budget framework soon. In the
>meantime, he added, If there is sentiment for a tax cut, then we want to
>be in the game.
> Should John Kerry be elected he will have violated
>his oath of office before even before putting his hand
>on the bible based solely on his previous actions and
>his acknowledged intent.
>Treason by any other name.. Yaketyak
>Sorry wannabee -- but the rightwing was goes right to Hitler. We're gona
>remove this one from office.
Hitler was a left-wing SOCIALIST, you dumbass. And you can't remove
him from office, he dead, you dumbass.
My T-shirt says, "This shirt is the
ultimate power in the universe."
The left would vote for their socialist pal Hitler if he was running
against Bush or any Republican. The Dems support klansmen like Robert
Byrd, anti-semites like Sharpton, Jackson, McKinney and other hate
>> My T-shirt says, "This shirt is the
>> ultimate power in the universe."
> The left would vote for their socialist pal Hitler if he was running
> against Bush or any Republican.
BWAAHAHAHAHAHA! Yeah, and pigs would fly out of your ass. You're so wrong,
it's painful to watch.
Bush is the closest thing to a FASCIST PRESIDENT that we have ever seen.
You thought the Nazi party was SOCIALIST??? LOL! You lunatics are
hilarious. Go read a little: The Nazi party (Bush's template for his
regime) was a FASCIST dictatorship, also sometimes called AUTHORITARIAN
(Bush loons get hard just talking about it) and also CORPORATISM (Il Duce's
original concept for Fascism).
SOCIALISM is a completely different beast from the Nazi party. They have
almost nothing in common. But that doesn't bother Bush lunatics like
yourself. You don't need facts - just repeat the hatefully ignorant Hannity
and Rush spew.
BTW: Democrats are NOT Socialists. Not even close. That's just another
ignorant lie from desperate Bush loonies.
Which is of course why the long name of the party is the:
Get a clue.
>>"@" nos...@at.com puked putrid pinko:
>SOCIALISM is a ... beast
Yes, it is. Thanks for the confession.
Yes, you DummyRATS are:
January 1993--Dims held the White House, Senate, House, state
legislatures and governorships;
August 2004--Republicans hold the White House, Senate, House, state
legislatures and governorships.
So shrieks another lying, 'laughing' (whistling past the graveyard)
Hyenacrat who's terrified of the following:
Vietnam Vets Who Hanoi John Back-Stabbed Fight Kerry's Phony Campaign
the Dim Divide: Kennedy/Kerry versus the Clintons
Phony John Fonda Ho Chi Minh Kerry betraying his Vietnam
Terrorist Appeaser Draft Dodger Bubba aiding and abetting the enemy
the Heinz 57 Positions Stentorian Senator's mentor, Teddy
"Chappaquiddick" Kennedy after committing vehicular manslaughter
W. Virginia Dem. Sen. Robert "Sheets" Byrd's history as a KKK wizard
Bush's strategy in the Mideast
Hitler wasn't a socialist, you moron. Learn to read and think and you
could find out why.
Jeezis H. Christ on a cracker, you Bush loonies are an ignorant bunch.
In a socialist society the means of production  are owned by the workers
rather than by a rich minority of capitalists or functionaries.
Nazi Germany refers to Germany in the years between 1933 and 1945, when it
was under the control of Adolf Hitler's dictatorship and the totalitarian
ideology of National Socialism (a variant of Fascism).
Get it? The Nazis WERE NOT SOCIALISTS. Totalitarian fascism is NOT
Socialism. The Nazi's adhered to a racist, hyper-nationalistic, totalitarian
ideology, formulated and promoted by Adolf Hitler, and borrowing elements
from Italian Fascism.
>Hitler wasn't a socialist, you moron. Learn to read and think and you
>could find out why.
Hitler was the head of the National Socialist German Workers Party.
Hitler was a socialist. period.
This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe.
> Hitler was the head of the National Socialist German Workers Party.
> Hitler was a socialist. period.
Saddam Hussein was the head of Iraq's elite Republican Guard.
Hussein is a Republican. Period.
>On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:59:32 GMT, leto...@nospam.net wrote this crap:
>>Hitler wasn't a socialist, you moron. Learn to read and think and you
>>could find out why.
>Hitler was the head of the National Socialist German Workers Party.
>Hitler was a socialist. period.
You have been corrected several times now -- and someone even posted the
correct definitions for you to think about. -- This leads us to understand
that you are a butthead who is either incapable of learning, or who
chooses to be dead wrong.
The first can be corrected, if you are willing. The second means you are a
rightwing asshole in denial.
FACT: Hitler was a fascist
FACT: A fascist is not a socialist.
>>Hitler was the head of the National Socialist German Workers Party.
>>Hitler was a socialist. period.
>You have been corrected several times now --
I corrected you, dumbass. I even posted proof, dumbass.
My T-shirt says, "This shirt is the
Like Joe said if you can claim Hitler was a Socialist because he used
that as part of the name of his party, then Saddam is clearly a
>Courtesy of Merrian-Webster..
>Main Entry: Na·zi
>Pronunciation: 'nät-sE, 'nat-
>Etymology: German, by shortening & alteration from Nationalsozialist,
>from national national + Sozialist socialist
>1 : a member of a German fascist party controlling Germany from 1933
>to 1945 under Adolf Hitler
>Courtesy of Britannica
>political party of the mass movement known as National Socialism
>(q.v.). Under the leadership of Adolf Hitler, the party came to power
>in Germany in 1933. Nationalsozialismus , also called Nazism or
>Naziism totalitarian movement led by Adolf Hitler
>On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:55:16 GMT, tlac...@shentel.net (Tom Lacombe)
>>On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 20:16:12 -0400, Horvath
>>>On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:37:01 GMT, leto...@nospam.net wrote this crap:
>>>>>Hitler was the head of the National Socialist German Workers Party.
>>>>>Hitler was a socialist. period.
>>>>You have been corrected several times now --
>>>I corrected you, dumbass. I even posted proof, dumbass.
>>>My T-shirt says, "This shirt is the
>>>ultimate power in the universe."
>>Like Joe said if you can claim Hitler was a Socialist because he used
>>that as part of the name of his party, then Saddam is clearly a
>John Kerry spent 4 months in Viet Nam in a combat role,
>he spent the next 30 odd years in politics doing his best
>to disarm America. Which time period is more telling of his
>real loyalties and actions ?
Thank you for posting that. Hitler was the head of a party that was
Socialistic in name only. Peace!
>actually no... he used the name to create the implication that it was
>and it became accepted as being that. He knew what he wanted to do,
>just didnt tell many others about it.
>Kinda like the DNC/DLC Progressives calling themselves democrats.
>Think about it.
Before we answer that question, however, let us look at what the Left
and Right in politics consist of at present. Consider this description
by Edward Feser of someone who would have been an ideal Presidential
candidate for the modern-day U.S. Democratic party:
He had been something of a bohemian in his youth, and always regarded
young people and their idealism as the key to progress and the
overcoming of outmoded prejudices. And he was widely admired by the
young people of his country, many of whom belonged to organizations
devoted to practicing and propagating his teachings. He had a lifelong
passion for music, art, and architecture, and was even something of a
painter. He rejected what he regarded as petty bourgeois moral
hang-ups, and he and his girlfriend "lived together" for years. He
counted a number of homosexuals as friends and collaborators, and took
the view that a man's personal morals were none of his business; some
scholars of his life believe that he himself may have been homosexual
or bisexual. He was ahead of his time where a number of contemporary
progressive causes are concerned: he disliked smoking, regarding it as
a serious danger to public health, and took steps to combat it; he was
a vegetarian and animal lover; he enacted tough gun control laws; and
he advocated euthanasia for the incurably ill.
He championed the rights of workers, regarded capitalist society as
brutal and unjust, and sought a third way between communism and the
free market. In this regard, he and his associates greatly admired the
strong steps taken by President Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal to take
large-scale economic decision-making out of private hands and put it
into those of government planning agencies. His aim was to institute a
brand of socialism that avoided the inefficiencies that plagued the
Soviet variety, and many former communists found his program highly
congenial. He deplored the selfish individualism he took to be endemic
to modern Western society, and wanted to replace it with an ethic of
self-sacrifice: "As Christ proclaimed 'love one another'," he said,
"so our call -- 'people's community,' 'public need before private
greed,' 'communally-minded social consciousness' -- rings out.! This
call will echo throughout the world!"