BS: Progressives vs Liberals

Subject: BS: Progressives vs Liberals
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 01:45 PM

Don't know how many of you have been following these debates this week. Last night on our local PBS affiliate station, the weekly local version of Washington Week, had some footage that exemplified the problems the nation faces, as long as the Democratic party loyalists remain so hostile to the progressive left.

The "angle" the program took was to send a correspondent to Democratic party HQ & Republican party HQ on election night, to cover the reactions of two women who had never participated in party politics before. The Republican woman described herself as a suburban soccer/security mom, who claimed she had never been political at all before 9/11. About what you would expect.

The Democrat was a biologist, and an environmental activist. She said she had never participated in electoral party politics, but was politically active outside the political system as an environmentalist.

So, while they are filming the Democrat, the big screen TVs are showing in the background. Suddenly, an image of Nader being interviewed by the national media comes on the TVs, and the crowd starts booing. The environmentalist woman--new to the party--says she thinks that is TERRIBLE, and that Nader is in no way deserving of such a response. Asked if she had supported Nader in 2000, she said no, but she considered him and his organizations great allies in the environmental movement, and she was disgusted with the party folk in the room for responding to him as if he was the equivalent of Bush. She said that made her really angry and left her disappointed with her new experience.

So while the Republican suburban soccer/security mom looked like an airhead, the obviously intelligent woman who had experience working outside the political system as an environmental activist, showing her disgust with the booing of Nader, was the picture being presented to the public, in this tightly orchestrated "media spin" of election night.

And actually, for once, I think the local pundits actually portrayed the reality of the Minnesota election dynamic quite accurately in this regard.

I said in another thread this week that the question will become whether or not the Democratic party will reach out to the progressive left, or continue demonizing the progressive left, and keep losing elections like they did this year with the presidential & congressional offices.

Also, did anyone catch the program NOW with Bill Moyers last night? I thought the guy they brought on to dissect the Democrats was really bad. A Clinton Democrat, obviously. But I just thought the guy sounded clueless. Also, Moyers was in rare form, I thought, when interviewing conservative Grover Norquist. Brilliant!

Subject: RE: BS: Progressives vs Liberals
From: GUEST,Frank
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 02:30 PM

Will the Progressive Left reach out to the Democratic Party or shoot themselves in the foot by alienating Liberals? What is needed is for both Democrats and those on the Left to articulate their passion together without becoming policy wonks and not to shoot each other down but to unite in a common vision. This is a major reason that Bush won aside from the fact that the election was defrauded.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Progressives vs Liberals
From: Big Mick
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 02:36 PM

Actually, Frank, the reason that the Dems lost is because they have gotten too far away from those that are their historic base. That is Joe and Jane Lunchbox. The numbers are quite clear, the great middle is the bunch that determines what happens electorally. When you try to force feed them concepts they consider radical, they just reject you, even if the alternative is a guy who has taken them to an ill advised war, built the biggest deficit in history, etc. It is simple, they don't trust folks that try to make them believe that their inner beliefs are wrong. If the "progressives" were paying attention, they would see that their time of greatest achievement was when they were doing a bit at a time. That is the problem with folks like our GUEST. They will continue to holler that we should support folks that can never be elected, and parties that will forever be a minority vote, even if they are successful. Rather we should MAKE the Dem's back into the party that they should be. That is the way to successful change in this country.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Progressives vs Liberals
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 02:39 PM

Sorry Frank, we're done with that silly argument. Like I said elsewhere this week, the Democratic party needs the progressive left right now much more than the progressive left needs the Democratic party.

The liberals in the Democratic party are politically corrupt and morally bankrupt. Beyond redemption right now. We don't need the liberals for anything, but to get the hell out of the way.

And where are your liberal champions on election fraud Frank? Where are Kerry and Edwards and McAuliffe and Ted Kennedy? Making a stand? No, whimpering off stage with their tails between their legs.

Nader is the man of the hour on voter fraud Frank, in case you hadn't heard.

The minimum wage referendums championed by Nader and ignored by the Democrats in two states PASSED.

You can't share a common vision when one side of the equation is blind. The liberals have been blinded by their greed, graft, and corruption. It truly is that simple.

Subject: RE: BS: Progressives vs Liberals
From: jaze
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 04:15 PM

Just who are these "security Moms"? I keep getting the image of people who covered their houses with duct tape and plastic during the alleged heightened terror periods. And this was the best our Gov't could offer us for security??At least in the old days we had fallout shelters!

Subject: RE: BS: Progressives vs Liberals
From: DougR
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 06:00 PM

It pleasures me to see the "progressives" and the "liberals" at each other's throat. Such devisivness surely will continue to see Republicans elected to the White House.

It is my belief that the Democrats must distance themselves from the "progressives" and return to the party of Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman and JFK if they ever hope to rreain power in the White House, the Senate and the House.

The "Progressives" should organize a party of it's own, and not try to take over an existing party.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Progressives vs Liberals
From: Padre
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 09:02 PM

'Progressive' was the word that the CPUSA always used to describe itself - just finished reading "The Romance of American Communism" by Vivian Gornick, in which she interviews several old-line CPUSA members. How sad they all seemed to be - and all used the word 'progressive' to describe themselves and their movement. Is this word still some sort of code for Marxist/Leninist/Maoist thought?

Subject: RE: BS: Progressives vs Liberals
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 11:50 PM

Ask Paul Wellstone.

Subject: RE: BS: Progressives vs Liberals
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Nov 04 - 11:59 AM

"Progressive" - isn't that what Tories call themselves in Canada? I believe that when English Conservatives talk about relaunching themselves under a new name, "Progressive" is a favourite choice.

It's one of those words that can mean just about anything you want. A bit like Democrat or Repulican, really. Or Liberal.

Somewhere on this planet there is probably a Progressive Democrat Liberal Republican Party. And certain to be as right-wing as Hell, if it's been in power for more than six weeks.

Subject: RE: BS: Progressives vs Liberals
From: CarolC
Date: 07 Nov 04 - 12:17 PM

I say let's chuck the lables and just start dealing with issues. Labels are a waste of time.

Subject: RE: BS: Progressives vs Liberals
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Nov 04 - 01:02 PM

Nice idea, Carol, I agree totally. But it isn't likely to happen anytime soon.

In US politics right now, people who consider themselves to the left of the center left "liberals" call themselves progressives.

Why progressives you ask? Well, the Wellstone Democrats wanted to invoke the name of the Progressive Party of the late 19th and early 20th century populist movement of Robert LaFollette and Eugene Debs here in the Upper Midwest. The term has stuck pretty well, and so far hasn't been co-opted by the Democratic Party, despite Wellstone's use of the word. The word & the political views that accompany it these days absolutely terrifies Democrats, as is obvious from the predictable reactions of the Democrats in this thread.

To the Democratic party, there are only a few labels worse than the 'liberal' one. 'Progressive' and 'left' or 'leftist' would be two of them for sure. And when you combine those two together to get 'progressive left' well, you might just as well call yourself a communist and let the McCarthyite tactics begin.

Subject: RE: BS: Progressives vs Liberals
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Nov 04 - 04:45 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Progressives vs Liberals
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Nov 04 - 04:49 PM

Sorry, my post didn't work. Here we go again. I wanted to give this link to folks who are interested in a good resource site for learning more about the politics of the progressive left. It's called Jay's Leftist and 'Progressive' Internet Resources Directory.

Keep reading and thinking, folks!