Please email the below message to your progressive friends and family.
This week, Democrats helped George W. Bush and Republicans loot the federal treasury and hand billions over to Wall Street.For some reason, we can never find money for kids' health care, clean energy, or other progressive priorities. But when it comes to right-wing priorities like war and giveaways to failed Wall Street executives, Republicans always find the money and Democrats go along.
There were progressive solutions to the financial crisis that would have truly held Wall Street accountable and helped the middle class. But instead of fighting for a bold progressive alternative, Democrats caved to the least popular president in history.
ENOUGH. Anyone with common sense will vote for Barack Obama and Democratic congressional candidates this November. But it's time for citizens to fight back and take this pledge -- will you join in signing it?
"In 2009 and beyond, I will be part of the movement that pushes Democrats to be bold progressives -- and that helps pass a bold progressive agenda into law."This pledge is endorsed by top progressive bloggers and activists. When you sign, you can also write a message to top Democrats about what bold progressive leadership means -- BlogPAC will deliver it to top staffers for Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, and Steny Hoyer.
What does taking the pledge mean? It means that when Democratic "leaders" tell Americans we must settle for watered-down solutions while bold back-benchers in the House or Senate are pushing strong progressive alternatives, we will clamor for those bold alternatives together until they are passed into law.
What else does it mean? It means we will turn those bold back-benchers into leaders. Just as grassroots progressives fueled Howard Dean's election as Democratic National Committee chair and pushed aside insiders who wanted more of the same, we will make sure that Democratic "leaders" are the ones who actually show bold progressive leadership.
What else does it mean? It means we will no longer just write checks to the Democratic Party and assume they know how best to spend it. We'll give our money to bold progressive candidates -- bypassing the influence of corporate lobbyists and entrenched Democratic insiders who are used to picking the winners and using their purse strings to make bold progressives in Congress fall in line.
Please sign the pledge and then email this message to every progressive you know.
Also, share the link to http://www.boldprogressives.org/ on Facebook. We will update this blog as pledge signers reach 100, 1,000, and 10,000. We will let the media know. And we will work together as a movement to usher in a bold progressive era starting in 2009.
Sign the Bold Progressives pledge here or below:
13 comments:
Might I suggest a better title would be "Cowardly progressives"? Enough of these Orwellian names. Your "argument" is that in the face of the most recent betrayals by Obama and the Democrats, progressive voters should continue to do nothing but vote more of the same.
Then you say, "Anyone with common sense" will do the same.
You're afraid to do anything but vote more of the same. Cowards.
How will you hold Obama's feet to the fire if he wins? You've just proved that when push comes to shove you'll never do anything. We all know this trillion dollar giveaway did nothing for the economy. Soon the bankers will be back for more money from the tax payer and Obama will step up to hand our futures away in what Kucinich has already rightly called the biggest class warfare attack in ages. If they dared to do this a month before an election how will you "hold their feet to the fire" after the election?
You won't.
DavidByron.
That's right, Mr. Anonymous. Better to do nothing. Better to shut up, fly somewhere, and buy something.
Yet another movement which will do nothing.. If you guys had actually held Obama accountable for everything he'd promised (and things which he's already broken), I would have respected you. But you didn't. So I conclude you are nothing but another shill for the ridiculous Democratic party candidate.
Progressive in the big money, pro-business, but socially liberal and knowledge worker right? I don't want to be involved with anything that might raise my taxes, restrict trade or hurt my child's chances for a spot in the Ivy League.
Another FDL/TalkLeft Liberal
Thanks for the advice, concern trolls.
What's the old saw about locking the barn door after the horse is gone?
Look, he's got the gig. He won it fair and square, with a corporatist, neo-liberal agenda (sans the "liberal" part) and rhetoric that constantly throws progressives under the bus and gives wide berth to Reagan's "party of ideas." He gamed the caucuses, the superdelegates, the rules committee, and -- lest we forget -- what used to be the progressive blogosphere. And he demonized his intraparty opponent, trivializing the vital issue of race in the bargain (and leveraging misogyny and Drudgian talking points). A progressive hero like that comes only once in a generation, so why quibble?
He's not even elected yet, and he's already gutted the 1st Amendment (promising expanded faith-based initiatives and creating an atmosphere where uttering "fairy tale," "LBJ," or "RFK" is tantamount to being a racist and/or assassin) and the 4th Amendment (championing the FISA bill) and handed a big chunk of the treasury to Wall Street insiders (championing Paulson's three-page Monte deal). Plus, he's made a mockery of public financing of campaigns (and his promise to use same).
This year we could have had real change, but the progressive blogosphere swooned for a hopey self-help huckster who's in the pocket of Big Younameit. If the alternatives were imperfect, they weren't put on a pedestal and plumped up on "Best and Brightest" exceptionalism. That stuff kills people, for anyone who remembers what Obama recalls as the "bickering" 1960s.
Honestly, I do appreciate the sentiment behind this, if not the timing or the prospects. But what are we going to do but send Strongly Worded Telegrams to the next drunk-on-hubris unitary executive?
In this essential election, those who could have held Obama's feet to the fire or gotten us an alternative who gives a damn about progressive issues were either Kool-Aid besotted or too timorous to buck the Kewl-Kidz trend. The deed is done.
What is that charming phrase Obama supporters keep uttering, like Bush supporters before them? Oh, yeah, "get over it." To the extent that's possible, that's likely to be the only thing we -- progressives and those who rely on progressive policies -- are likely to get from this next administration, based on every action we've seen from the presumptive 44th president.
What leverage do we have once he's elected? Please explain how that answer is >0.
"Bold Progressive Action" = Howard Dean as DNC chair? Mr. "I didn't see any sexism, I don't get cable."? That guy? Is that the only specific example you can come up with for "Bold Progressive Action"? (answer=yes).
In the vast history of the Sternly Worded Letter, this weak tea is very weak indeed.
How about this instead:
Dear Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Dean, et. al.;
We know you aren't progressives, or liberals or really have any principles at all except for re-election and filling campaign ocffers. If you were (or did) you wouldn't continually have caved to, and even carried the water of, President Worst Ever and Lowest Approval Rating Ever at every opportunity and especially on an ill-conceived $700 billion give away to Wall Street Fat Cats. We know the only thing you care about are campaign contributions and that is where we plan to hurt you.
And we are doing it starting now.
Now.
Not next December, or January, or next year or 4 years from now.
Now.
We will call for the following, NOW:
No more campaign contributions. To anyone. No more fund drives. For anyone. No more calls to donate. No more calls to volunteer. We will remove your links, we will not accept political advertising. We will tell people to "vote their conscience", and trust that they will do just that.
And we will do it starting NOW.
We are confident of three things, that Barack Obama is certain to win the presidency, that a sizeable Democratic Party majority will be returned to the house and a clear majority to the senate, and that none of you will do anything progressive or liberal unless forced to by painful withholding of support.
We may not be able to do much, but we will start our own little portion of pain NOW.
Sincerely,
your dear friend in the blogosphere
herb the verb
You Corrente idiots really are just demi-Cassandras: no one listens to your dire predictions, yet they all turn out to be wrong (Oh no! Florida and Michigan are lost, Obama has thrown away the election! Women will never vote for him! Blah! Blah! Blah!) If it hadn't been for Obama and those meddling kids, you could have elected a DLC centrist who would have, based on nothing but your hopes and dreams, miraculously adopted a progressive agenda. She would have stood up to Bush and Paulson and not voted for the $700 billion bailout (whoops! Scratch that, she voted for it).
Vastleft and the rest of you corrente hacks, if you are intent on representing the true concerns of liberals everywhere, I suggest you spare the world your sanctimony and work on honing your prognostication skills. We don't want people who are so consistently wrong speaking for us.
"Idiots" and "hacks". Lo how deep and soft hath the irony fallen.
Bluster and threats and 'we vs. 'you "idiots"' sure was a grande ole time for the Bush supporters all those years, so by god now its *your* turn right?
Bring on the Dixie Chicks boycotts and the freedom fries!
Oh wait, that's Hope Fries. My bad.
new clothes emporium:
Threats? Where exactly do you see those in my previous comment? I suggest you 1) brush up on your reading comprehension, ii) not take offense at comments directed at others, and c) fuck off (you can take offense at that last one if you want).
By the way, the (PUMA charlatans|hacks|idiots) at correntewire and their ideological brethren around the intertubes have been wrong about almost everything this election season, yet they insist on spreading their preening, bitter condescension (tisk tisk, if only we listened to vastleft, think how wonderful things could be!) all over the web. Your taking offense at my insults doesn't rebut my assertions at all. But then, you probably already know that. Enjoy your Hope Fries.
dmd76, you must have me mistaken for someone else you used to troll.
While I do believe that Obama's lame, post-partisan campaign created significant electoral risks in a can't-lose year for Democrats (risks that the financial meltdown has definitively washed away), my concerns have not been particularly focused on whether he would win the election, but whether he (and his rhetorical frames) would support a progressive agenda. But why stop mischaracterizing my postings now?
I also do not have the illusions about Hillary Clinton that you wish to impose upon me. I'm well aware that she's a "centrist," but she's one who increasingly leaned back left during the campaign, while Obama did the opposite.
Being more progressive than Hillary wasn't such a high bar to clear, but he missed it by a mile.
Obama's shameful moves, such as the FISA bill and his disturbing faith-based initiatives speech, speak pretty well for our track record as Cassandras.
Your words, demi-Cassandra:
"10. Neither state [Florida and Michigan] was made “whole” in this process, and it may cost the Democratic Party dearly come November, as McCain will have a great wedge issue in the legendarily swingable Sunshine State."
You are incoherent, vastleft. In your first comment, you claim we Obama supporters "swooned for a hopey self-help huckster who's in the pocket of Big Younameit" and ignored "an alternative who gives a damn about progressive issues", but in your second, you state "[b]eing more progressive than Hillary wasn't such a high bar to clear." Which is it? Was she the great, progressive hope or was she not?
Finally, if you want to compare records, I've got four letters for you: AUMF. She voted for it and never acknowledged her mistake - shameful and disgusting. I notice you no longer bring up "hand[ing] a big chunk of the treasury to Wall Street insiders", what with Clinton voting for and defending Paulson's plan. It's the same with all of you PUMAs, ideological purity for thee but not for me.
I'm taking the pledge.
It's my fervent hope that the people will land big enough Progressive majorities in Congress that the Democrats can drive 18 wheelers loaded down with subpoenas and clean Washington out of the excessive corruption of this sorry decade - starting with the D.O.J. itself. Some will, of course, call it 'hell on wheels'. I will call it the restoration of constitutional government.
Post a Comment