Progressives and liberals are as much in the mainstream as anyone

[Armstead]

This crap that too many DUers and other Democrats have been spewing about the so-called "left" and "progressives" lately is depressing.

Progressives and liberals are not "out of the mainstream." The only mainstream we are outside of is the status quo, corporatist mentality of the Beltway and Wall Street Elite.

The scapegoating of progressives ("the left") for the failure of Obama and the Democratic Congress to pass a meaningful health care bill is a bridge too far. All this whining about the awful "left" who dare to speak out against a piece of legislation that even its supporters acknowledge is half-baked is pathetic and sad.

Please remember, it was the ConservaDems who forced it to get watered down. The left didn't remove the provisions like a public option that most Democrats wanted -- and which many moderate and independent voters also wanted.

[Skittles]

1. THANK YOU ARMSTEAD

refreshing to hear from DUers who GET IT :thumbsup:

[ProSense]

2. Here's the rub

The critics don't own the label progressive.

I'm a progressive, but I also live in the real world.

All the noise: Obama is a corporatists, center-right, a sellout, a liar, a failure---is utter bullshit.

Obama is one of the most, if not the most, progressive Presidents ever.

"Please remember, it was the ConservaDems who forced it to get watered down."

Really, then why can't the critics remember that instead of trying to bring down the President?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

4. "One of the most progressive presidents ever"? You must be very young

He's to the right of Nixon.

"Please remember, it was the ConservaDems who forced it to get watered down."

Really, then why can't the critics remember that instead of trying to bring down the President?

Because he pandered to the ConservaDems instead of taking them to the woodshed.

"Ooh, they were going to filibuster...oooh, scary! They were going to blather on for days at a time. We couldn't have that!" :scared:

Good God, if the prospect of a bunch of corporate shills making fools of themselves on CSPAN is all it takes to frighten the Democratic leadership (and Obama), then they are a pathetic pack of losers.

The proper approach to a threat to filibuster is, "OK, go ahead. Filibuster. Let the whole world see what a selfish, corrupt low-life you are."

[ProSense]

6. "He's to the right of Nixon." Bullshit. n/t

[Lydia Leftcoast]

8. How old were you when Nixon was in office? I was ages 18 through 24.

And what about the rest of my post about the Dems quivering in fear at the prospect of a filibuster?

[Armstead]

12. Here's the counter rub

Critics of the bill don't necessarily expect everyone who is a progressive to agree. But when supporters of it start saying that critics are "too far left" or ideological purists, then it sounds a hell of a lot like you are mistaking ideology with the issue yourselves.

Critics also live in the real world, and we believe that in the real world this HCR bill will be bad on a pragmatic level. feel free to disagree, but don't confuse those pragmatic objections to some ideological crusade.

People have every right to be disappointed and angry with Obama's performance -- just as people have every right to be happy with him. But don't demand lockstep blind support. You think we like feeling this way? Does it ever cross your mind that after eight years of GOP Hell, we might prefer to be able to feel good about a Democratic president? Does it ever cross your mind that some of us hoped for better in terms of his performance and stance on issues?

We're not all Yes we're critical, but venting on a message board is not the same as trying to "bring him down." Does it ever cross your mind that some of us are critical of him but are still hoping that he'll justify our earlier faith in him?

[ProSense]

14. "Critics also live in the real world" Right,

demonstrated by their inability to understand Congress' role in the process.

[Armstead]

16. There are other ways to look at the situatiyon or how to handle that

You don't have a monopoly on the "real world" or how to interpret it.

Sorry to break it to you.

[paulk]

28. the whole "Congress did it" argument, to borrow a word you use

upthread, is "bullshit".

Glen Greenwald says it best -

"Now that they have a filibuster-proof majority, a huge margin in the House and the White House, the excuses continue unabated, as Democrats are now on the verge of jettisoning one of the most significant attractions for progressives to the Obama campaign -- active government involvement in the health insurance market. The excuses for "compromising" are cascading more rapidly than ever: We need Republican support to ensure it's bipartisan. The Blue Dogs won't go along with what we want. Centrist Senators will filibuster. There are similar excuses being made to defend Obama from accusations that he deserves some of the blame for the failure of the "public option." Matt Yglesias makes the typical case for shielding Obama from any responsibility:


I think there’s something perverse in the very strong desire I see among liberals to make problems in congress be about anything other than congress. It’s just not in the power of Barack Obama to make the senate anything other than what it is.


I'm really surprised that there's anyone, especially Matt, who actually believes this -- that the Obama White House is merely an impotent, passive observer of what the Democrats in Congress do and can't be expected to do anything to secure votes for approval of the health care bill it favors. As the leader of his party, the President commands a vast infrastructure on which incumbent members of Congress rely for re-election. His popularity among Democrats vests him numerous options to punish non-compliant Democrats. And Rahm Emanuel built his career on controlling the machinations within Congress. The very idea that Obama, Emanuel and company are just sitting back, helplessly watching as Max Baucus, Kent Conrad and the Blue Dogs (Rahm's creation) destroy their health care legislation, is absurd on its face."


The legislation we are getting is the legislation the Obama administration wanted.

[ProSense]

33. Greenwald is ridiculous.

"Now that they have a filibuster-proof majority"

He and the rest want to pretend Lieberman gives a shit?

This is the disingenuous nonsense running throughout the stupid Obama secretly did this or that nonsense.

[paulk]

45. you always attack the messenger

that's all you've got - personal attacks and character assassination.


Lieberman would "give a shit" if Obama gave a shit. If Obama wanted to play hardball politics instead of the milquetoast act he's put on so far, even Lieberman could be convinced to toe the line. Throw him out of the caucus - take away his chairmanships, threaten to cut off Federal dollars for his state, promise that a major effort will be made by the DNC to unseat him in 2012...

Nothing was done because the Obama administration wanted the bill we've got. No public option, no medicare buy in, a mandate that gives 30 million new customers to the health insurance industry - much of it paid for with taxpayer money. They want big insurance/big pharma money flowing into Democratic coffers - and they're willing to sell all of us out to get it.

[defendandprotect]

21. It's poor policy when you consider what real HCR would have done for Obama and Dem Party . . .

a Single Payer plan would have guaranteed Obama another 4 years --

and set the Dem Party up for the next 40 years!!!

All that has been sacrificed to fake theater of the Lieberman and right wing Dems --

Baucus is eyebrow high in "for profit" health care industry money -- there was no way

he was going to work for anything but corporate interests.

Without leadership by Obama for single payer or Medicare for All -- or CHOICE --

Without Democrats calling out members to demonstrate for single payer, Medicare for All

then the only ones out there were "teabaggers." Why?

Unions didn't call us out either --

Neither did women's groups --

It's as though everyone is paid to stay silent???

[Lydia Leftcoast]

30. Yes, Obama had vast numbers of eager supporters in every state in January 2009

If he had said, "Find creative ways to show the world how much you want single-payer/a public option/Medicare for all/whatever" the supporters would have taken him up on it.

[ProSense]

34. Oh brother

What stopped them from pressuring their Senators and Reps?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

37. Lack of leadership

the kind of leadership that Reagan used to get his followers to pressure their Congresscritters.

Furthermore, as the bill had more and more of the good stuff (public option, Medicare buy-in, end of antitrust exemption, etc.) stripped out of it, it became worthless in the eyes of a lot of activists.

When Obama met with the representatives of Big Insurance and Big Pharma behind closed doors, it became pretty clear whose side he was really on.

[ProSense]

41. "the kind of leadership that Reagan used to get his followers to pressure their Congresscritters."

Reagan wanted to kill Medicare. How did that work out? Except for his tax cuts (Reaganomics), what did he accomplish?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

46. Reaganomics wasn't a huge (negative, but huge) accomplishment?

Uh, OK. It sure seemed huge at the time, and we are only now beginning to find out just how momentous (in a bad way) it was.

[MrsCorleone]

58. Just curious. What do you suppose the HC bill(s) would look like today

had big pharma jumped into the fight with both feet & all their cash to lobby along side the health insurers?

Think about what that bill would have looked like. We're not dealing with the industries in the days of Nixon & Reagan.

That being said, keep up the good fight & continue to push back. Know where to direct your frustrations, though. You're falling victim to the republican/corporate meme. Obama repeated ad nauseum that this would get very ugly, and we're just getting started.

[quakerboy]

62. Perhaps they would have voted down re-importation

and denied the ability to negotiate drug prices?

[Armstead]

39. Many tried....We also made the MISTAKE of trusting them early on

We kept being reassured that the bill would have some beginning of a public coverage program and would rein in the insurance industry.

Then, when they pulled the rug out, we were told it was "too late" to do anything about it and that if we complained we were "bill killers."

And all along many did try to make our thoughts known to them. I don't want to see my long distance bill this month.

[dflprincess]

44. We did

They didn't listen to us - that's why it's so silly of the bill's supporters to claim it can be "fixed later". If they didn't listen to us on this go-round they won't listen to us in the future.

[defendandprotect]

51. Single Payer Rallies would have done it -- only the GOP can "rally" evidently!!!

[Armstead]

52. Some "Democrats" would have ciomplained about that too

Those leftist malcontents just stirring up trouble.

They have a talking point for every occasion whenever real liberalism begins to rear its head in the populous.

Either liberasls/progressives "are just sitting on the sidelines and should have fought harder" but when we do we are "making trouble."

[defendandprotect]

54. Maybe . . . I guess we'll find out if we ever decide to get out there?

[KakistocracyHater]

60. I thought there had been "townhall meetings" re: Healthcare

but even then.........& those rallies didn't help during W, how would they help now, it isn't the 1960s; we need a People's Lobby.

[CrispyQ]

57. I feel that Obama missed a prime opportunity to push single payer

when Remote Medical had that free health care event in LA this summer. He should have been on camera every day, telling the American people, "Single payer will be similar to this, only better, because you'll get to go to the clinic & doctor of your choice & you won't be billed." You know for a fact that dems & progressives were not the only people attending that event. But no, nary a word from our president.

I actually don't mind that the HC bill will cost me more money. What I do mind, is that that money will go to support the for-profit blood sucking health insurance industries, not directly for the health care of people who need it.

If I had to give a one word descriptive of Obama's first year in office it would be "squandered." Squandered opportunities, squandered political capital, squandered enthusiasm of his campaign supporters.

[truedelphi]

61. Thank you for spelling this out. Very well put.

I was very eager to find that our new President would do us proud. That he would have strong talking points and that he would fight a great fight for making the Health Care Reform bill a great piece of legislation.

Instead his talking points were wishy washy - which he blamed on the fact that "no bill has been finalized yet." As though somehow that made it impossible to rally us Progressives into supporting a very humane, very progressive bill.

Yet he was all over himself when announcing how very necessary it is to get deeper and deeper into Afghanistan - a place where even the experts say only 100 Al Queda exist.

Meanwhile each year, 45,000 of us die from not having a Congress or a President that will take the Big Insurers or Big Medical Interests on and put them on a short leash.

[FrenchieCat]

3. I think it takes all kinds to make this country work......

which is why a threatening My way of the Highway shows that some have no understanding that we are many, and we are not all alike.

The failure of some progressives is not being honest with themselves.

Some folks really wanted to elect a Progressive George Bush. They wanted someone that pounds his fist on the table; kicks asses, knock heads, stabs backs, beats his chest, and rams whatever through without regard to any voices of opposition....because if nothing else, many respect force and power more than process and democracy. In otherwords, they want to experience that force of ultimate power that George Bush held, while he terrorized us for years. I understand the mentality....as it is what happens when folks are abused long enough. Pretty soon, the only satisfaction that they want to experience is to be able to do what has been done to them.

Sure, a progressive Bush would be different, as we would be forcing what is good onto this country, some rationalize. Problem is that this is not who we elected, and let's be frank, we actually knew this, so to blame Obama for one's own failure for not being able to elect exactly who one wished is actually quite disingenous.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

5. The needs of the country are more important than anyone's political reputation

The cheerleaders don't get that.

[FrenchieCat]

19. Who determines "the need for the country?"

And calling names just makes you ugly...
cause "cheerleader" is nothing but pejorative.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

31. Just look around--what do you see?

Highest unemployment since the Depression
Two ruinously expensive wars
A corrupt financial system staffed by out and out robber barons
Corporations trying to take over every aspect of our lives
Health care becoming unaffordable for more and more people, thanks mostly to a greedy private sector

Now if you can think of more important needs than those...

[Armstead]

36. Keep walking.....Nothing to see here, citizen

[Armstead]

7. Say I'm (we're) wrong because you believe it's a good bill, that's fine.....BUT.....

those who spout crap about some jihad by ideological progressives is nonsense.

Let me say this straight -- I don't like this bill because I believe that on both a practical and philosophical level it doesn't do what is needed and does things that will turn out badly.

I am also disappointed in Obama for not actively supporting at least some base or role for public coverage.

Yes, my objections are partly ideological -- but they are not some fringe socialist or anarchist position. It is based on a belief -- which is widely shared -- that private health insurance companies are the problem, not the solution.

Reasionable people can disagree with any of those points. But when people go on tears against "the left" it sometimes makes me wonder if I stumbled into Conservative Underground by mistake.

[FrenchieCat]

23. It feels like primary wars to me,

and it shouldn't.

we elected a President already,
and trying to destroy him less than a year in his first term
is deconstructive and can only be interpreted as unreasonable.

I don't care so much about the labels.....
It's not the Left or the Far Lefts, or the Far outs, etc...
it's people who don't seem to get that they cannot get exactly what they want
right this moment just because they want it....because the person they
initially supported lost, or they didn't bother to understand who Barack Obama was,
and what he was about.

Those who want to primary Obama closer to the time of 2012...like 2011, should.
if you think you can bring someone to the fore to go against this president,
then hey...I can't stop any of you.

But till then, I'd just wish folks would allow him to show us what he can do,
without being all up in his face every waking moment critiqing his every move,
and then try to call that "fair or reasonable".

[Armstead]

35. I get overheated because I have cared about health care reform since the early 90's

And I was thinking early in the year that Obama and the Democrats in Congress would do the right (er, c orrect) thing, even if it were only a small step in the right direction....erm the correct direction.

But I have become angry and frustrated at Obama and the Democrats in Congress for what I believe is an unnecessarily botched job, and a total cave in to Big Insurance and the legislators they own (Nelson, Baucus, etc.) at the end.

I was not expecting perfection. But I did expect to feel like some progress had been made. Instead, I am profoundly disappointed with the combination of mandates for private insurance with no Medicare expansion or public option, and a set of really weak non-regulations. If seems to me like a setback for actual reform.

I remain open to Obama, and I hope he will do enough good things to make up for this. But for now, I'm pissed and will express that pissedness on a message board. When the issue cools down, so will I and I'll swallow the defeat and disappointment. If Obama and the Democrats do other good things I'll be happy about it and say so.

[defendandprotect]

24. This health care deform is a betrayal of voters -- of Americans . . .

who deserve at least as much as people in other nation's have --

and that's not only appropriate health care system -- it's much more.

What we get for our tax $$ is MIC -- wars.

And politicans who are pre-bribed and pre-owned by corporations!!

What do we seriously think is going to happen when that is the case???

[Lydia Leftcoast]

59. Look at the comments on Bob Herbert's column for today 12/29

In particular, look at the responses in the order "Reader Recommendations."

They show just how "fringe" the disappointment with the HC proposal is.


http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2009/12/29/opinion/29herbert.html?sort=recommended

[Cleita]

9. We are still the majority in numbers and thought.

We have been ruled by the minority with money for too long and I refuse to be called a latte liberal, an elitist or a purist any longer, the latest label to smear us.

[Kaleva]

10. Only a small minority of liberals disapprove of Obama

[jenmito]

11. Yeah-but the majority of us still support the president, unlike the majority HERE. n/t

[Armstead]

13. And you assume that being critical is the same as "not supporting" him?

It is possible to support him on some levels and disapprove of him on others.

I can pretty dang well guarantee that most of the people who vocally against this HCR bill and who express various degrees of anger and disappointment on Obama are going to be there for him in the next election.

But they don't want to be marginalized or taken for granted.

[jenmito]

15. I don't "assume." I read and see that's the case here. n/t

[Armstead]

18. Well I basically support him, but he has done some things that make me mad and disappointed

Interpret that as you wish.

[jenmito]

25. I'm talking about posters who I don't HAVE to interpret. They come right out and say

they will not vote for him, someone saying they DESPISE him, etc.

[defendandprotect]

26. This isn't about Obama, personally -- it's about a failed health care bill . . .

and where Obama was involved, the wrong moves -- intentionally or otherwise.

ALL of this is about the nation -- not Obama --

It's about our citizens -- not Obama --

It's about small "d" democracy -- not the Democratic Party which has been substantially

co-opted by corporatism --

What should we have expected from someone like Baucus running the health care discussions?

Baucus' pockets are filled with corporate money from the "for profit" health care industry!

And, Obama isn't far behind on that one!!

[ProSense]

17. I assuming that calling for a primary challenge is not supporting him.

The level of noise is ridiculous. Year one, and instead of trying to effect change, some people are focusing on an election three years away.

[Armstead]

20. We're not all one block

I haven't called for a primary challenge to him.

I don't even want to think about three years from now.

[ProSense]

22. But you assume everyone who doesn't agree with you belong to one block? n/t

[Armstead]

27. Nope. I'm not applying this to everyione with whom I disagree on one or more issues

There are numerous people who I disagree with, and we get along because they are reasonable and don't expand that into personal confrontation or broad stereotypes about "the left" or whatever.

[defendandprotect]

29. Would you prefer that those voters just walk away and not vote?

Would you prefer they cast a third party vote?

And maybe you are misjudging the seriousness of the health care issue --

and the seriousness of the disappointment?

[FrenchieCat]

32. That is their choice.......

but it doesn't make them reasonable or fair.
It makes them spend their energy on trying to elect someone 3 years out,
instead of focusing on the real common enemy; and that really is the GOP.

If they don't get the part about the only reason with have a senate majority,
is because we have too many in the Senate who don't want exactly what we want,
then they simply don't want to understand, and that makes them childlike, unreliable,
and really not very smart.

[defendandprotect]

49. The "choice" is to vote for the "lesser of evils" . . . and that "lesser" is shrinking ....

And they are expected to be "reasonable and fair" but our elected officials aren't????

It makes them spend their energy on trying to elect someone 3 years out,
instead of focusing on the real common enemy; and that really is the GOP.

Try to absorb what they are saying to you -- they feel betrayed and won't vote for Obama again.
That means, they will either vote for no one, for a write in, for a third party -- or for
some other Democrat. Which of those "choices" do you see as more beneficial to your interests?

The "common enemy" is

corporate fascism

which has overtaken the GOP and which is also overtaking the Democratic Party. That co-option of the Democratic Party has been going on for 40 years or more!

Further, as long as the only competition to the Democratic Party is the fascist/GOP, then the
Democratic Party will continue to move to the right. Do you understand that? Do you understand
the goals of the DLC?

This is a little messed up grammatically, but if I understand it correctly . . .

If they don't get the part about the only reason with have a senate majority,
is because we have too many in the Senate who don't want exactly what we want,
then they simply don't want to understand, and that makes them childlike, unreliable,
and really not very smart.

what you are arguing for is continuing to vote for the "lesser of evils" which we have
been doing for decades? But that this time the results will be different?

I'd also suggest to you that when you have to try to sideline those who oppose your logic
by suggesting they are "childlike, unreliable, and really not smart" that it's probably time
you checked your own childishness, unreliability, and smarts!!!

Wow!

What we've just had go by is a World Class "Bait & Switch" in universal health care, converted
to a new financial bonanza for the health care industry -- insurance companies and pharmaceutical -in an unprecedented corporate giveaway --

Needless to say this is another step in putting corporations in complete control of our government!










============================
That is their choice.......
Posted by FrenchieCat
but it doesn't make them reasonable or fair.
It makes them spend their energy on trying to elect someone 3 years out,
instead of focusing on the real common enemy; and that really is the GOP.

If they don't get the part about the only reason with have a senate majority,
is because we have too many in the Senate who don't want exactly what we want,
then they simply don't want to understand, and that makes them childlike, unreliable,
and really not very smart.

[rudy23]

48. In some ways, I think it is. Keeping someone honest can bring out the best in them.

I honestly believe that it would be good for Obama if we did pressure him more from the left. He would have an excuse to give his donors that we "made him do it", like FDR used to say.

[defendandprotect]

50. Agree . . . time Obama was listening to someone other than Rahm . . .!!

[depakid]

38. Actually- according to the data and surveys, we're clearly the majority

and on many issues- the very substantial majority.

This despite the Beltway conventional "wisdom" and the corporate media- which has created nothing less than a culture of lies in America.

Check it out:

Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007

http://people-press.org/report/?reportid=312

Alternet summary: http://www.alternet.org/media/54914

----------------

Progressive Majority- Why Conservative America is a Myth

http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/pdf/progressive_majority.pdf

[Armstead]

40. That's true -- One of my favorite examples...

In 2004 at least two "red states" that went for Bush also voted to raise their state minimum wage.

[depakid]

42. Yep- and a lot of it has to do with framing, narratives and perceptions of "fight in the dog"

As learned folks like Lakoff and Westen have repeated emphatically over the years.

One of the most frustrating things about being in the trenches in the mid to late 80's and through the Clinton era was watching Dems repeatedly get beat to the punch and defined not only inaccurately and dishonestly on issues that they ought to have owned (and would have owned had they listened to- and fought for the various advocacy groups that constituted their base).

Instead, more often than not, they abandoned their traditional values, and pandered to the right- blurring the contrast between the two parties in a vain attempt to coopt Reaganism.

And looking weak- or inept in the process.

[TheKentuckian]

43. I do have to add that if Obama is due credit than he has to accept blame sometimes too

No question that the Republicans quickly followed by fake Democrats deserve the lion's share of the blame but Obama is the quarterback and quarterbacks ALWAYS take heat AND the rewards.

I can't fathom being called a perfectionist and uncompromising on a Democratic site for expecting at least strong market based regulation, reform, and oversight but I have been. Does anyone seriously believe that is my idea of a perfect healthcare bill? Hell, I'm not opposed to a NHS and see single payer as the sweet spot but I knew all of that was way the fuck off the table and did what I could to encourage a more realistic outlook as you all damn well know if you've read my posts.

How am I some childish asshole ideologue for wanting at least Center/Right market style reform here? How in the world are public option supporters now far out leftists when well more than half of the country wants it too? It is a totally moderate position and certainly a straight down mainstreet Democratic proposal.

Hell, if I wanted the bother I'd dig up posts from the summer when many of the most hardcore supporters were calling the Baucus mark a hundred different kinds of crap that they'd never support but a few months later nearly the exact structure is on the table and its better than sliced bread. That's intellectually dishonest as shit.

[VMI Dem]

47. Centrists supporting a center-right President.

[bvar22]

53. Some interesting info from 2005.

Here is what the MAJORITY of Americans (Democrats AND Republicans) want from OUR government!

In recent polls by the Pew Research Group, the Opinion Research Corporation, the Wall Street Journal, and CBS News, the American majority has made clear how it feels. Look at how the majority feels about some of the issues that you'd think would be gospel to a real Democratic Party:

1. 65 percent (of ALL Americans, Democrats AND Republicans) say the government should guarantee health insurance for everyone -- even if it means raising taxes.

2. 86 percent favor raising the minimum wage (including 79 percent of self
described "social conservatives").

3. 60 percent favor repealing either all of Bush's tax cuts or at least those cuts that went to the rich.

4. 66 percent would reduce the deficit not by cutting domestic spending but by reducing Pentagon spending or raising taxes.

5. 77 percent believe the country should do "whatever it takes" to protect the environment.

6. 87 percent think big oil corporations are gouging consumers, and 80 percent (including 76 percent of Republicans) would support a windfall profits tax on the oil giants if the revenues went for more research on alternative fuels.

7. 69 percent agree that corporate offshoring of jobs is bad for the U.S. economy (78 percent of "disaffected" voters think this), and only 22% believe offshoring is good because "it keeps costs down."

http://alternet.org/story/29788/

[newtothegame]

55. We are out of the mainstream for the very reason you said though.

We're out of the beltway. The other side goes to D.C., sees what's going on, and then meets with the powers-that-be to get things changed in their favor. We read stuff on the internetz and then post about it like it's fact.

[butterfly77]

56. This is the media's theme..

and some really believe what they are selling..