DLC Whines about Democracy Alliance

It looks like the whiney ass titty babies at the Democratic Leadership Council went and cried to Jim VandeHei and Chris Cillizza about the Democracy Alliance:

Democracy Alliance also has left some Washington political activists concerned about what they perceive as a distinctly liberal tilt to the group's funding decisions. Some activists said they worry that the alliance's new clout may lead to groups with a more centrist ideology becoming starved for resources. [...]

But Democracy Alliance's decisions not to back some prominent groups have stirred resentment. Among the groups that did not receive backing in early rounds were such well-known centrist groups as the Democratic Leadership Council and the Truman National Security Project.

What is the Democracy Alliance saying they focus upon for contribution requirements?

The goal was to invest in groups that could be influential in building what activists call "political infrastructure" -- institutions that can support Democratic causes not simply in the next election but for years to come.

By that measure, the DLC shouldn't get a cent. In fact, you have to be a real hater of long-term progress to support the DLC.

The Democratic Leadership Council's faux centrism is a triangulation that puts short-term gains over long-term success. By shifting the debate to the right, Democrats lose in the long run. Progress slows. The DLC is the problem, not the solution.

I don't know if DA "gets it" -- but it appears to get it enough to help Democrats in the long-run drying up resources for the DLC. Not that it will have much of an effect, the DLC is funded by corporations, not progressives. But every dollar that doesn't go to the DLC is three less dollars progressives will have to spend cleaning up the DLC's mess.

The fact that the DLC went and bitched to the press is par for the course.