Obama and the Progressive Movement

[EraOfResponsibility]

by Mike Lux

(snips...)

One day during the presidential transition, when I had been named the liaison to the progressive community, someone observed to me that "my people" didn't seem to be very happy. I responded that it was not the job of the progressive movement to be happy.

I wasn't intending to be snarky. My point was that progressives' job is to keep pushing, keep organizing, keep agitating, keep demanding better things. Martin Luther King said that people kept asking him when he would be satisfied, and he answered, we will never be satisfied "until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream."

Frankly, I didn't expect this would happen, at least not right away. Watching him pick mostly centrists for cabinet positions, and knowing how the DC establishment can use a thousand big and small reasons to argue against transformative change, I feared that Obama would be convinced to scale back his ambitions for what I call in The Progressive Revolution a Big Change Moment, similar to ones we had in the 1860s, early 1900s, 1930s, and the 1960s. Over the last few decades, Democrats have adopted a culture of caution - they have tended to think small and go slow. I feared that Obama would succumb to that culture.

But he is rising to the challenge. And it is imperative that those of us in the progressive movement rise with him. We shouldn't hesitate to say where we disagree, especially on the big things like Iraq, Afghanistan and the banking crisis. And we shouldn't hesitate to push for the best possible policy details - to make sure that health care reform really is universal and has a public plan option for people being screwed by insurance companies, that the climate change policy really is effective and tough in reducing carbon emissions ASAP, and that the budget maximizes investment in the things that matter.

Read the whole article here

[FrenchieCat]

1. Well......

This is the paragraph I will file away for when things get hard.....


But we should be very clear: Obama has decided to cast his lot with those of us who have been fighting for big, transformative change. If he succeeds, we succeed, and if he fails, we fail - and we fail for at least another generation, because no Democrat will take big risks again for a very long time if Obama loses this gamble.


(Thank you for finding it for me. It is appreciated.)

[EraOfResponsibility]

2. that paragraph is nothing but TRUTH

Obama is making a HUGE leap with that budget and he doesn't intend to just sit idly by and let republicans pick parts of it out. He wants it ALL. As do I. As should all of us liberals/democrats/progressives.

[FrenchieCat]

3. Especially after 8 years of all out hell!

But that is the part that scares me the most......if we lose the entire notion as to what this is all about in the first place; progression, but not necessarily perfection.

[EraOfResponsibility]

4. I know it doesn't matter to a lot of people here

but it matters to me that Obama's heart is in the right place with his policies and this budget. That's about all I can ask for at this point.

[ej510]

5. I have no idea what is right when it comes to the banks.

[Jennicut]

6. Most don't. Not all economists agree. FDR tried so many different things

in the 1930's but not too many people talk about that. He was trying anything that would stick. It takes time.

[Captain Hilts]

8. That's right.

FDR: That's right. If something doesn't work, try something else.
ER: So true. The success of the New Deal gave people the wealth and security to oppose it in the long run. Sad. Oh, dear.

[Captain Hilts]

7. Now that wealthy and upper middle income are feeling the crunch, we have allies in support for

more dramatic policies.

The financial security of wealthier classes has made this impossible up to now.

[OneBlueSky]

9. for starters, invite universal single payer advocates to the healthcare reform table . . .

otherwise the rules will again be written by the insurance companies and the pharmaceutical industry with a single objective in mind: to maximize their profits . . . profits that are skimmed off the top and have absolutely nothing to do with providing good healthcare . . .

if we don't "cut out the middle men," we're going to end up right back where we started and have to go through this process again in one/three/five years, depending on how quickly the "reformed" system implodes . . .