Glenden BrownIs the promised land in view?
Waldman as usual has an amazing piece as TAP about the challenge facing the next Democratic president. He writes:
Today, progressives feel as though they’ve been walking in the desert, and the promised land is at last coming into view. They don’t necessarily need their own Reagan to get there, mostly because progressives simply don’t do hero-worship in quite the same way conservatives do (on Sean Hannity’s weekend Fox show Hannity’s America, there is a regular segment called “What Would Reagan Do?” and according to the Social Security Administration, Reagan was the 155th most popular name in America for girls in 2006). But Reagan’s significance to the conservative movement does shed light on what Clinton or Obama might leave behind for the progressive movement.
The great unifying force feeding the progressive movement of the last few years has, of course, been George W. Bush. And while many have noted that Hillary Clinton will unify Republicans just as her husband did, the two cases are notably different in kind. Though progressives certainly have a visceral reaction to Bush, his presidency has provided them with a number of touchpoints that help progressives define who they are by defining what they are against: the stolen election, the bumbling military adventurism, the economic policies that reward the wealthy at everyone else’s expense, the attempt to make domestic politics into a sectarian religious conflict, the contempt for science and reason, the use of fear as cover for a dismantling of constitutional protections and the elevation of torture to official American government policy; the list goes on and on. Progressives may hate Bush, but they know exactly why they do: it’s because of what he’s done.
 . . . if today’s ascendant progressive movement draws its strength from its antipathy to George W. Bush, and today’s declining conservative movement draws its strength from hatred of Bill and Hillary Clinton, can either Democratic candidate do what Ronald Reagan did—nurture his own ideological movement and beat down the other side’s at the same time?
Check out the whole thing.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Counting chickens before they are hatched…be sure not to lay an egg.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:29 pm
Yea the GOP is in shambles, but the the Democrat party isn’t exactly holding hands singing koombiah either. The Obama and Hillary split could fracture the party especially if either the Super delegates (party elite) decide the outcome or if one side demands to seat the Florida delegates to get the nomination. GOP was only divided because of the bigot Huckabee fostering hatred towards Mormons. Now that Mitt Romney is out of the race it will be interesting to see what Huckabee does now that he has accomplished his primary objective. I have a story on my blog titled “Mormons need not apply”. Come check it out if you would like. Feel free to comment but remember obscenities or personal attacks will be deleted.
February 7th, 2008 at 8:39 pm
Well, ain’t that statement just full of insight - NOT! The GOP is divided because the new quasi-bedrock foundation of the GOP - guns, gays and god - has led sensible folks within the party to question why such even matters. Should have stuck to small government and budgets held under control. If so, the GOP would not be the laughing stock it has become - both to Americans and citizens of the world.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:02 pm
Albert
The problem with the left today is they consider themselves to be “citizens of the world” more than they consider themselves Americans.
February 7th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
Albert and Ken, the idea of small government is dead and buried.
Government is the biggest employer and granter of contracts. At the end stage of any empire the infiltration of elite run bureaucratic collectivism is the final stage before the barbarians come. They are here already, and with the decline of the dollar, they are pillaging the good stuff while it lasts.
Though it could be interesting in the next few months…and you never can tell, Nader could run, and what if there is a crisis and the election is somehow postponed?
February 8th, 2008 at 7:52 am
Ken, Good point - citizens of the world vs of JUST the country.
Now you need to think about that. Where is the integrity as a human being, in being about US first and screw the rest of the world?
I would call that nationalism, arrogance, denial, and brutishly ignorant.
How are is US harmed by having healthy neighbors and a health planet?
Also, consider that we are near the bottom of the industrialized world in both measures. IOW, THEY don’t give a shit if we sink further, and apparently, you don’t either.
February 8th, 2008 at 8:02 am
One more thing Ken, you are so dead wrong about a split in the democratic party. You’re watching too much Fox.
I can assure you, most democrats are pretty psyched about both Obama and Hillary. We like them both (thats why the tie - you can’t vote for two people).
Get it?
February 8th, 2008 at 8:55 am
You wouldn’t try to explain cliff if there was no fear. The democrats I speak to are quite polarized, and pretty nervous, as mccain embodies mostly all the democratic values, being a centrist, without the baggage. hilary has too many negatives just personally, and once people find out more about obama, it will strengthen mccains’ hand, sadly. I have stated here more than once that the dems choice of frontrunner candidates are unelectable.
You know this to be true. The links to shitty people in what’s left of the candidates, shows to me anyway, beyond a reasonable doubt, that unless a candidate is sanctioned by the elites, they will not be considered.
cliff being the poli sci major you were, you must have taken international relations.., ever take it with kinnard? Your criticism of Ken is just a tad childish. It reminds me of progressives claiming reps are for dirty air and water, all the while flipping the same switches in their homes, and turning the same keys on their stupid SUVs.
Don’t you remember his (kinnards) dictum? A bit Machiavellian, but completely applicable today, and used by any nation that wishes to survive.
“No permanent friends, no permanent enemies, only permanent self interest”.
The concept of a kumbayah world is something even you believe is simple nonsense, otherwise how do you explain your true political beliefs, so well hidden here…?
.. or the production of land fill material you used to peddle for a living? Produced by wage slaves in china, and low pay people here. Not to mention most of it being made of high quality plastic. You still involved in the business? I’m sure all those companies that manufactured your dittys were environmentally sound and just reeking of social justice…to the tune of 19 cents an hour.
So funny.
February 8th, 2008 at 9:13 am
Glenn - You’re nuts if you think McCain embodies Democratic values. The man is a hard core conservative through and through and his occassional forays off the conservative reservation have been enough to convince people that he’s some sort of maverick. He’s not. McCain is going to spend the rest of the year comforting the conservatives that he’s one of them. It’s going to be a festival of sucking up.
McCain is the hardest of the Rethugs to beat because the villagers who dominate our national discourse have some sort of sick mancrush on him.
As far as the Dems being polarized - not so much. Yeah, I prefer Obama, but can wholeheartedly support Hillary if she’s the nominee. I think most dems are in the same place - we have preferences but we’re not deeply divided. And don’t for a second kid yourself - whichever candidate loses the nomination is going to fight like hell to win the white house. We can’t afford four more years of Republican Bushism - and a vote for a Republican is nothing more than a vote for four more years of Bushism.
February 8th, 2008 at 9:13 am
..and for the coup de grace, how much do you wanna bet that mccain picks lieberman for his veep?
We should return to system of the veep being elected separately. What am I saying, like the elections matter?
The current situation reminds me of being a child and being given a choice of what to have for dinner…lima beans or brussell sprouts, maybe kale for something leafy and “green”. All inedible to my young palate. So much like our candidates, once you get a “taste” of them, not to mention how they form into a un swallowable bolus upon chewing.
“Sic transit gloria mundi”.
February 8th, 2008 at 9:58 am
Glendon
I don’t believe at all the McCain is a true conservative, but if he wins he may have to lead as a conservative as to not validate the fears many of us have. On the other hand if he wins without conservative backing he may just say “Screw you” to all of us and turn sharply to the left just out of spite. It’s that unknown that has many of us worried.
Cliff
There is noting wrong with fighting for you own self interests. It’s the reason we have government to begin with. The dangerous thing I see on the left is a willingness to subjugate our own self interest for the sake of “the world”. The problem with that is the world isn’t looking after our prosperity in fact many places would like to see us knocked down a peg or two or even destroyed completely, which ironically would not be the worlds best interest. Promoting ones self interest does not mean you tell the rest of the world to go to Hell, because ultimately it is in our best interest to have a peacefully and prosperous world. When other countries are prospering it benefits us as well with more plentifully and cheaper products, not to mention that countries that have good trade policies tend to not go to war with each other.
February 8th, 2008 at 11:21 am
Ken - I woudn’t be worried if I thought McCain would actually turn to the left given how fabulously Bush’s rightwing governance has worked out (don’t miss the sarcasm).
February 8th, 2008 at 11:44 am
Look, he is for the war, a democratic value, as embodied by all the candidates, and both parties. This is undeniable.
All candidates will continue outsourcing incentives, global economics, and the destruction of American sovereignty through trade agreements.
NONE will support universal health care.
mccain is for amnesty for illegal aliens. That places his platform exactly with any democrat, and bush himself.
He will follow EXACTLY the same foreign policy as obama or hilary. You must not have read my replies as to who is leading obama by the hand. We didn’t get where we are today without the leadership of the democratic party being hand in glove with bush.
As far as sucking up, all the candidates have been tripping over themselves to claim they are the most godly.
As for social issues, mccains stance, is rather wide, and when he is elected he will be the centrist, which means liberal president.
He would not support a revision of Roe vs. Wade, though he does not personally feel abortion is right.
He would not support a Constitutional ban on gay marriage.
Glendon, they(current crop) all are “mavericks” and my point is that no matter who is elected there will be nominal “change” in one direction or another. This is the elites plan, the only change we’re going to get is the pittance we might get after buying gas, or groceries.
There really are no substantive differences.
The danger of mccain is his propensity towards war escalation, though any president can be forced into that by the elites. obama is guided by proven murderers in foreign policy, and hilary is the only candidate with any ability to fight, though as she is a strong woman, it makes many in the public eye hate her.
The entire affair is so well manipulated, as to be brilliant. No matter who gets elected, on the spots where the rubber meets the road, there will be no change. Healthcare, foreign policy, borders, immigration, militarism…Read MONEY!
Fight all you want, bush is not the disease, he is the symptom. The elites run this show, and you and I aren’t part of that. Or has the last 2 years of a democrat congress whizzed by without you noticing….
THAT NOTHING HAS CHANGED!
The American People are also not so stupid so as to allow 2 branches of government to be controlled by the same listless inept party. Not that I think it will make any difference personally, if it is divided.
This system doesn’t work, and the best thing for it is the powerful reassertion of States rights, and the withholding revenue from our gluttonous somanbulistic federal entity.
In addition, let us of course bow down to the realization that the presidency is chosen by the electoral college. So once again…those who cast the votes mean nothing…
February 8th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
Publish it Glendon, Cliff, or whoever it is that moderates this “open” blog.
Or is it that only tepid, short responses are needed to sustain this McBlog?
and that is “gluttonous somnambulistic” federal entity.
February 8th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Look, he is for the war, a democratic value, as embodied by all the candidates, and both parties. This is undeniable.
All candidates will continue outsourcing incentives, global economics, and the destruction of American sovereignty through trade agreements.
NONE will support universal health care.
mccain is for amnesty for illegal aliens. That places his platform exactly with any democrat, and bush himself.
He will follow EXACTLY the same foreign policy as obama or hilary. You must not have read my replies as to who is leading obama by the hand. We didn’t get where we are today without the leadership of the democratic party being hand in glove with bush.
As far as sucking up, all the candidates have been tripping over themselves to claim they are the most godly.
As for social issues, mccains stance, is rather wide, and when he is elected he will be the centrist, which means liberal president.
He would not support a revision of Roe vs. Wade, though he does not personally feel abortion is right.
He would not support a Constitutional ban on gay marriage.
Glendon, they(current crop) all are “mavericks” and my point is that no matter who is elected there will be nominal “change” in one direction or another. This is the elites plan, the only change we’re going to get is the pittance we might get after buying gas, or groceries.
There really are no substantive differences.
The danger of mccain is his propensity towards war escalation, though any president can be forced into that by the elites. Think kennedy, and Vietnam. obama is guided by proven murderers in foreign policy( obama is brezinskis’ boy), and hilary is the only candidate with any ability to fight, though as she is a strong woman, it makes many in the public eye hate her.
The entire affair is so well manipulated, as to be brilliant. No matter who gets elected, on the spots where the rubber meets the road, there will be no change. Health care, foreign policy, borders, immigration, militarism…Read MONEY!
Fight all you want, bush is not the disease, he is the symptom. The elites run this show, and you and I aren’t part of that. Or has the last 2 years of a democrat congress whizzed by without you noticing….
THAT NOTHING HAS CHANGED!
The American People are also not so stupid so as to allow 2 branches of government to be controlled by the same listless inept party. Not that I think it will make any difference personally, if it is divided.
This system doesn’t work, and the best thing for it is the powerful reassertion of States rights, and the withholding revenue from our gluttonous somnambulistic federal entity.
In addition, let us bow down to the realization that the presidency is chosen by the electoral college. So once again…those who cast the votes mean nothing…
February 8th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Mc Cain: “Change is coming.”
Hillary: “Change you can count on.”
Obama: “Change we can believe in.”
Thomas Jefferson Johnson: “Change… for the future!”
But yeah, we voted for change in 2006 and nothing changed in Washington.
February 8th, 2008 at 4:06 pm
It is way past time to change the straw in the barn, but there isn’t anyone reliable to hire, and there is no money for new straw.
Maybe it is time to just let the animals out of the barn to fend for themselves.