Which island did they push him off of? Their own?

In the 50's and 60's the conservatives (well, Mr. Buckley) tossed the John Bircher's and the Objectivists "off the island" so to speak. This helped to define the conservatives (Mr. Buckley's conservatives anyway) and even set the stage for our current mandate. Mind you, the John Birchers and the Objectivists didn't go away, and they still vote for Republicans, mostly. And the Libertarians are still with us but the larger Conservative movement was held to one path. I would argue that this is the path that is most attractive to today's moral issues voter.

Those were dark days, the 50's and 60's, back when the Republicans wondered if they could remain as a conservative party or if all were lost. There was three media outlets all dominated by liberals. The conservatives had no voice. The thought of tossing allies over the side seemed suicidal at the time.

The points I make are:

1.) Whose island is it anyway? The Liberals' or the Democrats?

2.) If they wish to police their ranks, let them.

In the end both parties place candidates in play and voters select the better of the two or stay home. If enough of their historical base stays home and they continue to lose elections then at some point a new breed of Democrat/ Liberal will emerge or they will go the way of the Wigs. The Scoop Jackson Democrats haven't gone away. The question is: Will they (the American Liberal) find a home in the new Democratic party (of the anti-American Liberals) or will they have to stay home on Election Day?

Ah, Henry "Scoop" Jackson, one of the last Democrats I could have supported for national office . . . those of his ilk may not be "gone" from the Democratic Party, but they are certainly an endangered species these days - whereas once such men constituted the leadership.

No, of course Kos and the nutroots can conduct a purge if they have the numbers - no one contests that. The question is, "How will it affect Democrats' results?"

The True Believers care far less about winning than about ideology. These are the rank-and-file moonbats who are tired of being on the margins, compromising their values so "DLC types" like the Clintons can win. Having found out, thanks to the internet, that there are many others out there every bit as crazy as they, they are energized and now again believe they can win on their own.

The big honchos like Kos and Armstrong and others are in it for the payday. Note how Kos' tune on Mark Warner changed overnight after Warner hired Armstrong as a consultant.

When Kos talks about "crashing the gates," he is just selling a book.

õ¿õ

I am a faithful DailyKos reader and if you go there, people do not look to Markos as some sort of deity who tells us who to like and who not to. There is a community there that agrees, in some part, on a number of progressive values. But to describe the netroots as some strange cabal in the wilderness trying to subvert the party is ridiculous. They are rank and file Democrats who have computers, and they want to talk about what direction their party should go instead of waiting for the DSCC and the DCCC to hand them a ballot every 2-4 years. It is the exact dialog that should happen within the Republican party, so that it does not abandon it's Buckleys for Falwells and Dobsons.

It seems like it has been so long since there was movement in a party, solidarity among its base, and hope that the voices of people will effect change that people are bewildered by the entire process. Look into your history books and see where things change---its when a bunch of people agree to work together to make it happen and commit to a principle and each other. DailyKos brokers the discussion that often becomes these types of movements. Believe me, Kos is not capable of walking his readers off of a cliff or convincing them that up is down.

And of course, since no one understands it and it upsets the status quo, people are either opposed to it or afraid of it or both.

Didn't Danziger get hired by the Clinton's recently?

Where is the next Shirley Chisholm? Certainly not Cynthia McKinney, nor Obama. Someone needs to be shaking things up from the inside.

There is a battle going on for control of the Democrat party. It has arguably been joined since 1980. The "left" would rather be a big fish in a little pond. Don't expect much rationality for the nonce.

I think the right wing fundamentalists are already the big fish in the little pond, devoid of rationality, waiting for the end times and professing the unquestionable truth of a book written 2000 years ago, along with hundreds of others of fictional works.

Have faith, the further the GOP goes to the right, the more room there will be for Dems to operate, whether it be progressive or moderate.

Wait, isn't it "secular rationalists" that you fear, and "religious moralists" that you obey?