Posts Tagged ‘Corporate Democrats’

Troubled Democrats: Links & comments 11/15/14

October 15, 2014

Elizabeth Warren on Barack Obama: “They protected Wall Street.  Not families who were losing their homes.  Not people who lost their jobs.  And it happened over and over.”  An interview by Thomas Frank for Salon.

Senator Elizabeth Warren is not as hard on President Obama as this headline would indicate.  And she is right to say that we the people can’t expect a President to change the nation for the better all by himself.   Change requires a strong political movement, operating at all levels of government, with the power to reward its friends and defeat its enemies.

Are Democratic Leaders Already “Tea Partying” the Progressives? by “Gaius Publius” for Down With Tyranny.

The right wing of the Democratic Party would rather stay in control than win elections.

Jack Trammell (D) throws the working class under the bus in Virginia’s District 7 by “Lambert Strether” for Corrente.

In the race in House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s old district, the Tea Party Republican is more anti-Wall Street than the Democrat.

Centrists’ clueless obsession: Why do so many want to cut Social Security? by Jim Newell for Salon.

Here’s how to draw a sharp contrast with Republicans by Greg Sargent for The Washington Post.

Democratic Senator Mark Begich of Alaska, campaigning for re-election, advocates expansion of Social Security.  It is the most popular of the New Deal programs.  Why do so many Democrats, including President Obama, want to undermine it?

Rogue donors not ready for Hillary? by Kenneth P. Vogel for Politico.

The voters’ Presidential primaries are more than a year away.  But the big money primaries have already begun.  Some rich donors are on the side of working people, but working people shouldn’t count on rich people to represent their interests.

Voter ID Laws, Republican Voter Suppression Needs to Stop by Alec MacGillis for The New Republic.

The main thing that is keeping Democrats in office is the policies and tactics of Republicans.   The GOP is permanently alienating minorities and young people by trying to discourage them from voting.  Which means the Democrats don’t have to do much to benefit minorities and youth to get their votes.

Hope, change and Hillary Clinton

April 18, 2014

are.we.ready?John Atkinson writes as follows in Common Dreams.

Remember “hope and change?” At the time, few thought to ask what exactly we were hoping for and what exactly we were changing to.

And of course, what we got was a great slogan, better speeches, very little change and even less hope.

Here’s what Obama promised:

Shutting down Gitmo;

Ending warrantless wiretapping;

Ending foreign wars;

An end to trickle down economics;

Greater regulation of Wall Street and the financial sector;

A public option for health care;

Protecting social security, Medicaid and Medicare;

Serious action on climate change;

Greater equality in opportunity and more broadly shared prosperity …

Here’s what we got: An administration that set up Goldman Sachs south in the Treasury, doubled down on domestic spying; expanded a drone policy that creates between 40 to 60 new terrorists for every one it kills; health care reform that is better than the status quo, but which rewards corporate insurers as much or more than it does citizens; international trade agreements that favor corporate interests, while eviscerating domestic wages, scuttling environmental performance, and crippling US industrial infrastructure. It’s so bad, they’re trying to negotiate it in secret … … …

So now enter Hillary Clinton and the deluded Democrats who hopd for her Presidency.  Maybe it’s time to ask what, specifically, we will get; what we can hope for, and whether it will usher in changes Americans overwhelmingly want … …. .

And here’s the answer – If we nominate Hillary Clinton we will get another DLC Democrat who mouths progressive values during the campaign, then shifts to the right when (and if) elected. In short, citizens get no real choice. … …  …

The fact is, the people’s interests aren’t being represented in Washington and they won’t be if Hillary Clinton is elected. Her record is clear. She’s an ardent proponent of trade agreements; she’s consistently supported the interests of Wall Street over Main Street; she’s been hawkish on foreign policy; weak on civil protections; hawkish on the deficit (until very recently) and mum on many other issues that demand a progressive advocate.

Click on Hillary Clinton and the Future Failure of Progressive Hope and Change for Atkinson’s whole article.

Hat tip to Mike Connelly for the link.