The Progressive Vs. The Corporatist --- A shadow in the light.

[mikelewis]

When I say that, who comes to mind? Which person fits which role? Is the Progressive Hilary or Obama? Is the Corporatist Obama or Hilary? Which one you select for our candidate is important because it identifies which group of Democrats will lead this party into this new millennium. I used to think that it did not matter which candidate we chose... as long as they were "Dem" it didn't matter. Increasingly, it's becoming apparent I am once again proven wrong. As the battle over the Democratic Nomination percolates, I am getting a sense of what it would be like if either candidate were to take the office and that sense leads in two separate and distinct directions.

In Hilary's case, her direction leads to the brilliant minds at the Democratic Leadership Council... those self-effacing do-gooders who preach capitulation and assimilation to many Dems across this great nation. There is a case to be made about going along to get along... when the Bush administration was soaringly popular, the DLC suggested capitulation and only token resistance to some of the most heinous breaches of Constitutional etiquette. I guess they were so busy trying to keep their jobs in those years that they decided not to do their jobs. They chose to lay down... duck and cover and wait for the Bush rocket to the moon to burn out. Only, when it became clear that that rocket had missed its mark... and missed the stars beyond and was now hurtling at terrifying speeds towards a voracious black hole these same "Leaders" decided the same plan that kept them going through the zenith of the Bush approval ratings should stay enforced. This is how we get "Impeachment is off the table" and "Though the President broke the law with his domestic spying it is now incumbent upon us to change the law and grant retroactive immunity." Now I assume that the DLC has a few brain cells left since none of them would ever admit to actually inhaling all the weed they smoke so my fear is that they refuse to repudiate the President because to do so would call into question the nature of the power he has gleaned for himself. The prevailing idea, I assume, is since Bush did it... so can we. Since Bush spied on his political enemies (and you fucking know he did)... then so can we. Since Bush trampled on the civil liberties of those he did not trust... then so can we. Since Bush amassed power and enriched all his buddies... then so can we. The DLC is envious of the power Bush has... they like the idea of the Unitary Executive and we know this because they have not repudiated that concept in any fashion. Some members have made statements about the abuse of power but the failure of the DLC controlled Congress to actually hold anyone accountable for anything at all proves the point beyond any speculation. John Conyers, a man who I deeply respect, should be holding impeachment hearings not relegated to the basement once again to wonder when truth and honesty will walk back through the door. The DLC are not opposed to what is going on because they do not stand in opposition to anything that is going on... the proof is in the pudding... and I, for one am tired of eating poopy flavored pudding.

On the other hand, who represents the competing ideology in the party? Well, us actually. Not the DU but the spirit of those who found this place years ago... that spirit that looked around in darkness and found a beacon of light and banded together... bound solely by hope and despair... that spirit that was born out of the darkness latched onto the light in spite of what the DLC told us was impossible and impracticable. They told us it was impracticable to contest the 2004 election but we got the beautiful and lovely Senator Boxer to contest... (and Hilary too... let's not forget Hilary stood up though she didn't vote against accepting the votes, she did stand up.) It was that same spirit that laughed and guffawed when James Guckert A.K.A Jeff Gannon shot his load all over the the White House Secret Service agents... prompting the DLC to ignore and acquiesce yet again. It was that same spirit that roared with pride and approval when Mrs. Sheehan became the sad face that brought the war to the doorstep of the Wood Chipper in Chief. It was that same spirit that anguished and cried when Katrina devastated our hearts and revealed our false image... prompting the DLC to once again stalwart inaction. We are the only opposition to the DLC in the Democratic party, we have always been the only real opposition to all the evil done in the name of America... the letter writers, the calls that shut down Washington, the bitching, the moaning, the prodding, the Power... that's us and not them. The DLC pretends to stand on our shoulders and at times has tossed us a bone but it has become increasingly clear that they disdain us as much as the Republican party disdains us... maybe even more.

They have shown their disdain by the very nature of the campaign they are directing for Hilary Clinton. Before I go further, let me draw a distinction. I do not see Hilary as a a pawn of the DLC... I see her as their bishop. She has evangelized for the corporate interests that invest enormous sums for that group. She has strengthened the hold that business is trying to exert over us. She has allowed the advisor's that gave us 8 years of Bush Unbridled to run her campaign into the ground and even into the sewer. Though I do not believe she disdain's us, I do believe she is more with them than with us... she listens to them more than to us... she believes they are righter than us... that they are more capable of accepting the "reality" better than us and that advice and consent she receives from the DLC is driving a bitter stake into our hearts. She has allowed her campaign to be set against us and now we have to choose... is it us or them? Do we capitulate? Do we shut up and go quietly... accepting a victory that offers no victory at all... only more of the same? What should we do? Think back my friends... think back over the years... when a group of Democrats that had as much influence as the DLC chooses not to lead the charge against abuse but advises acceptance... all the while growing richer and richer and richer as the abuses continue and continue and continue... what do we say to them now that they have chosen a candidate for us who will continue their upward trajectory? What do we say to Democrats that want to climb over our backs.... stacking us up as high as they can to crest a wall over which none of us are invited? I personally say no... That's what I say...

So is Mr. Obama the Progressive Candidate for me? I don't know... I don't know him well enough. He exploded onto the scene... whispering in my ear the things I like to hear... telling me sweet nothings that make me want to believe him. I search his eyes when I see him... I watch how he looks at the crowd... whose hand he shakes... who he smiles at... what he says... how he says it. Is Obama one of us? Did he look out in the darkness all those years ago and curse the failing of the light as each and everyone of us did... oh so long ago? Does that same passion that drives us to read stupid canvass reports... pour over boring spreadsheets... hunt through obscure .gov pdf files... uncover ancient articles in the hope that then can be traced to now to reveal even a sliver of light... does that same passion burn in him? Is he one of us? He seems to be... that speech he gave... that beautiful and glorious speech he gave thrilled me and enthralled me because I could envision myself writing it though I lack the skill to even attempt it. I could envision WillPitt or H2OMan or Understandinglife or any of the myriad once and future greats writing this speech... capturing the essence and illuminating the heart of the matter. Is Obama one of us? I don't know... I'm just now starting to learn who we are in this new reality and wondering if that spirit that rescued us from the dark can survive as a shadows in the light.

[flor de jasmim]

1. Bill Clinton rule: Go for the candidate that asks you to hope and think

The continually changing goalposts by which Hillary's campaign is trying to measure success reminds me of the changing goalposts for marking "success" in Iraq.

[mikelewis]

2. I can't blame her for trying to win... I blame her for trying to win by setting herself against...

...what I want for this nation. She has to be divisive but by attacking she has provoked defense. She has forced us to take a stand... and she has forced me to stand against her. That's a shame but a reality.

[ThatBozGuy]

4. I often find myself in the same position, it really saddens me that this is where the Clinton legacy

ends Not in a democratic blaze of successful glory but a falling whimper of republican lite embracement to gain what they believe is their entitlement and damn even the democrats if they get in their way.

[mikelewis]

5. In many ways, she shares the same sad story that McCain has embraced...

She has rhetorically embraced the Rovian way and that sort of politics has ruined this country and I believe ruined her campaign. In stead of reaching out for us, she attacked one who sounds like us... that was stupid. Stupid stupid stupid and it cost her big... it cost her everything.

[ThatBozGuy]

3. I met the man before he was the Barack Obama that has burst on the scene.......

and he is the person he has whispered he is. He is not just telling you his position now that he is running, he is telling you the person he is under the hood and who has been.

He listen, he cares, he changes his opinion not when he thinks you want to hear something, but when he see s that a change needs to be made within some very specific principals that he has worn on his sleeve.

A lot of people say he speaks well, and you know why? because he is speaking what he believes not what he thinks you believe, but he knows that a lot of fellow Democrats believe exactly what he believes, Home, hearth, family, equality,life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

It isn't a slogan that We the people are all created equal its in his beliefs, it is who he is.
It isn't a slogan that we are obligated as a country to help those that cant help themselves its in his beliefs, it is who he is.
It isn't a slogan that preemptive war is only perpetual war its in his beliefs, it is who he is.

and I could go on and on. This and has been who this guy is, not some poll adjusted, tell you anything you need to hear, what ever you say is right guy.

This is a guy that has beliefs that just line up so well with what America should be as a Democrat that we couldn't write the script better than it is if we tried.

This guy is the real deal.

[Smelting Pot]

6. Great post!

If I could recommend a post, I would!

I think that part of what those who "don't get" Obama are struggling with is their own cynicism. They truly believe that his beliefs are nothing more than a slogan because that is all they have come to expect of politicians. It's kind of sad that the disbelief has become contempt in so many of them.

[mikelewis]

11. Disbelief is understandable when major corporations exist merely to decieve us into...

...purchasing a product we do not want or a service we do not need. These corporations sell us Bush... sell us war... sell us bullshit and tell us it tastes so yummy... Disbelief is essential for a thriving democracy... I believe... though I cannot find the exact quote... that it was Emerson who said that "the decay of any society is when old men start believing their newspapers".

[ThatBozGuy]

13. Exactaly and that is why you see Mr Obama win the way he has, the media shows who he is.....

There is a lead in the polls against him, and then he goes there (wherever there is) people see and hear him and many talk to him personally and they see hes not set of goods, but a person that gets it, that is like them.

That is why Ms Clinton is having hard time after they meet him, Ms Clintons attacks are no longer on Mr Obama but on the people that see themselves in his beliefs.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

7. A fork in the road.

We know which way one of those roads leads.

The other road, not so much. However, I find it hard to believe that this other road will lead to the same place. Maybe it ends in the suburbs of DLC City, instead of all the way to city hall. And that is the first step. If by some miracle the other road leads to Prog City, well damnit man, what a fine morning that would be.

The third road of McSame leads straight to Hell. :evilfrown:

[zalinda]

8. What the hell are you talking about?

There isn't much of a difference between their platforms. There isn't much difference between either of them, except one is a white female and one is a black male. If you took out names in their web sites you would be hard pressed to figure out who the web site is about.

I don't like either of them. Neither of them will represent most of America. They will only represent those that can afford to go to Starbucks and buy their coffee everyday without thinking about how much it costs. Obama isn't even a shade more progressive than Clinton.

I have watched all this crap throwing from a distance, and this is just more of the same. It isn't thoughtful or thought provoking. It is here so the Obama supporters can get their juice on.

zalinda

[Armstead]

9. I understand what you're saying, but I think you're missing something

In some ways I share the frustration you express. I'm one of those people who line up with Dennis Kucinich on the issues, and supported Edwards as the closest mainstream alternative. I went with Obama after Edwards dropped out, as the only alternative to Hillary DLClinton.

I've often wished Obama were more clearly liberal/progressive.

However -- and his "race" speech convinced me of this -- Obama does represent the best hope for a true rebound of liberalism and progressive populism in a way that matters. he is trying to push the politics we've got in a better direction in a realistic way.

Frankly, his candidacy has forced me to rethink my own way of seeing things. The lines are not as clearcut as we sometimes believe.

We've all been pushed into either/or corners over the years by the phoniness of contemporary politics and the shallow media. In reality, the truth and solutions are more often a mix of conservative and liberal ideas. The population, as individuals, are usually a mix of competiong instincts.

Obama is trying to get us all to first shed our cynicism, and then look at things in a more objective way. And to look for ways in which the majority of us might agree on basic goals and roll up our collective sleeves.

Would I prefer that Obama have a message more like Kucinich? yes. But he is a lot closer to that than most mainstream politicians these days.

[mikelewis]

10. Yes, that's exactly why I wrote it...

...to offer Obama supporters a chance to get their juice on. Also, it offers a chance for rebuttal to superficial and empty comments like , "There isn't much difference between either of them, except one is a white female and one is a black male." If this is all you see... black and white, male and female.. then you have bigger problems than the blindness you have shown in your post. Your comments show your heart is not right and your vision reflects that.

[zalinda]

14. Oh, please

read the damn websites. They both say the same thing when you boil down the platform. You want another difference, one is aggressive and one is passive-aggressive. One wants health care mandate, the other one doesn't. Blah, blah, blah. Both are beholden to corporate America. Both triangulate. Neither care for anyone making less than $100,000 a year. To think that there is any huge difference between the two, is to have blinders on.

I see absolutely no inspiration in Obama, none. If fact, with his false preacher cadence he turns me right off. If I want to listen to a preacher, I'll go to church, thank you very much. I don't trust him, I don't like him. He's the left version of Bush.

My heart is not right and I can't see straight? Wow, what crap. Next you'll be telling me that I'm crushing angels, because I look at reality, instead of the Obama fantasy.

Wow, at least with Clinton supporters they don't think that she is the second coming.

zalinda

[mikelewis]

18. Are you daft or just intentionally obtuse?

Clearly, your assumptions about the nature of the world and the people in it need a little reorganizing... and frankly, I'm not the one to do it. Jesus once said... "Let the dead bury the dead" and I really didn't understand what that meant until reading your post. I guess I have to thank you for that gift of understanding... and leave you in your despair. Good day.

[Armstead]

12. K&R for a thoughtful post

[cooolandrew]

15. K&R. WE, just WE are the ones we've been waiting for...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnaEPIGROUg

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

16. k

[eridani]

17. Obama may be pretty centrist, but he sure the hell can ORGANIZE! n/t