These Are Times That Try Progressives' Souls

It is frustrating being part of the progressive movement these days - truly frustrating. And I say that not because I am on book deadline and exhausted, but because of what I have been reporting on for the book (which is due out in Spring of 2008, for those interested). These past few weeks have felt like a big kick in the teeth - with these last few days a gratuitous kick in the groin.

Let's step back and look at the effort to end the war. This week we have seen Democratic Reps. David Obey, Jack Murtha and Jim McGovern propose a bill that would force President Bush to raise taxes if he wants to continue spending money on a war in Iraq - a brilliant political move and commonsense policy. In the face of a recent Roll Call story headlined "GOP Forced to Pivot on Taxes - Polls Say Issue Losing Power," this proposal is stunning only for how modest it is - especially considering that even Sen. Joseph Lieberman has endorsed the concept behind it, as has Republicans like New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg and North Carolina Rep. Walter Jones.

Obey has also indicated that as chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, he will use his position to block any blank check war funding bill from coming to the floor of Congress. It shows a recognition of the Tyranny of the Tiny Minority that I outlined in my last syndicated column - the tyranny that means that Congress will need to stop something, rather than pass something, in order to end the war. And stopping funding, incidentally, is an idea that the latest Washington Post poll shows the public supports.

So, what has been the reaction of the most prominent Democrats and antiwar groups in Washington? Bobbing and weaving.

As soon as the war tax plan was floated, House and Senate Democratic leaders rushed to reporters to denounce it. Meanwhile, antiwar groups in Washington swiftly decided to dump tens of thousands of dollars into a brand new ad campaign not supporting the push to block funds, not applauding the effort to wedge the Republicans into deciding between war and taxes, not demanding Democrats go even further, but instead attacking Rush Limbaugh - a person who certainly made a disgusting and deplorable comment but who has absolutely no power to end the war at all.

The move, of course, was applauded by Washington pundits like Joe Klein who supported the war. To the Washington punditburo, any move that gets media attention and that gets people on screamfests like Hardball (a show that almost no one outside the Beltway watches) is seen as a successful political tactic, regardless of how much of a diversion it is from the goal of actually ending the war, regardless of the fact that most Americans have never even heard of this "controversy" or the Moveon ad "controversy" in the first place. Clearly, the ads are very well-intentioned, but they do nothing to move the ball forward in the effort to end the war, and nothing to keep the focus on ending the war - an issue that polls show the Republicans are losing on. This is precisely why the GOP is publicly laughing at the whole thing - Beltway progressives' tactics are the gift that keeps on giving.

Oh but it gets more obscene. This week, Costa Rica prepares for a national referendum on whether to ratify the lobbyist-written Central American Free Trade Agreement - an agreement whose language will, among other things, force that country to dismantle its universal health care program and raise prices for life-saving medicines. CAFTA, you may recall, is one of the Bush administration's extensions of NAFTA, and - as my syndicated column coming out on Friday will show - the White House is mounting a vicious and withering campaign of fear and intimidation to manipulate the Costa Rican election on behalf of all the corporate donors who wrote CAFTA in the first place.

And what has been the reaction of the progressive movement in Washington? Why, granting a platform to the very U.S. Senator who is leading the charge to extend NAFTA even further.

That's right, the New Democratic Network - trumped up in Matt Bai's silly book as a supposedly important piece of the progressive movement - hosted U.S. Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) for a speech on trade. True to form, Baucus in that speech pleased K Street by implicitly attacking rank-and-file congressional Democrats who were elected in 2006 on a promise to reform America's trade policy and who are trying to fulfill their campaign promises by stopping the new package of NAFTAs. Baucus is now leading the fight to give a NAFTA to Colombia - a country whose government actively colludes with paramilitary gangs to execute union organizers. With "allies" like Baucus and the people who promote him, who needs opponents?

Some of my friends may be angry at me for writing all this, but if we progressives don't engage in some self-reflection when our side has so clearly driven into a ditch, then we won't become the movement we need to become to improve this country. I am a progressive before I am a partisan - and I reject Partisan War Syndrome that says we must all just applaud every single tactic and decision, no matter how unproductive to the cause.

To paraphrase Thomas Paine, these truly are times that try progressives' souls - times that, as I said, I will be documenting more fully in my book out in the Spring of 2008. As Beltway progressives pat themselves on the back and think success means getting on Hardball and movement-building means getting one of the most anti-progressive U.S. Senators in America to attack rank-and-file progressive Democrats and undermine organized labor behind logo-emblazoned podiums in D.C., the bloodshed in Iraq continues, and the economic war on the middle class seethes here at home.

Cross-posted from Working Assets

Comments

[Dantheman99]

"Never been comfortable with the "progressive" label. It seems like current use of the label is more an attempt to re-brand liberalism, rather than an effort to explain what liberalism entails."

------------

Sam Thornton is absolutely right.

I think the "progressive" label is a lazy way of not having to defend the word "liberal" and win support for liberal policies.

The American people are not buying into this "progressive" label. And, as long as Republicans use the word "liberal", and the corporate media uses the word "liberal", we better start using the word "liberal" proudly.

Many people don't know that they are liberal. "Wake Up, You're Liberal" by Ted Rall is an interesting book.

When the DLC started using the word "progressive", I knew it was a mistake. It's an attempt to have an ideology-free political discussion.

[SamThornton]

Never been comfortable with the "progressive" label. It seems like current use of the label is more an attempt to re-brand liberalism, rather than an effort to explain what liberalism entails.

Demonization of liberalism by the whacky right has seemingly driven liberals to this somewhat mawkish tactic. Perhaps the most succinct evocation of liberalism in the English language is the preamble to the Constitution, it's most passionate the opening remarks in the Declaration of Independence. Given such august roots, why should apologies be made or relabeling be necessary?

The classic progressive agenda -- a never-ending upward spiral of "improvement" -- has been rightly castigated as a dream of fools, a logic that is inherently illogical. We live in a world limited by practical considerations of space, time and the finite quantity of resources. An agenda based on a philosophy of unending "improvement" in the sense of ever-greater exploitation of what lies around us is obviously doomed to failure.

Why not call a spade a spade, liberal ideology for what it is, a call to improvement not in the material sense but in the sense of the way we treat each other. Why should this be something shameful and rejected by people who share a greater vision for our future?

[DemandTruth]

I'm lower-middle class and I'm struggling not to slip into poverty. I can't afford an Iraq tax. But I'd pay it.

I'd pay it ONLY if the money would actually go to help the military soldiers in the field. To get them the equipment and protective gear that they've been going without since the BEGINNING of this fucked up debacle.

However, I know and you know and everyone else knows that money would go straight to Halliburton and Blackwater and maybe some of it would just disappear, like so many unattended pallets of cash did in Iraq.

The war profiteers already overcharge us taxpayers 1000 percent for shoddy services and polluted water! When they take the time out from brutally murdering innocent Iraqis and swatting the hornets nest with big ol 2x4's, that is.

I make do with less than 12,000 dollars per year after I pay my taxes. But I would sacrifice more if I KNEW my money would really go to help protect our soldiers, and not to buy Erik Prince another yacht or jet.

[RobertPaul]

David
I agree with part of what BillZBubb says...Hard right/Soft Right...

But you have certainly hit the nail on the head.

Sure Limbaugh and O'Reilly are assholes. This is not news!

They say and do outrageous things because we have Freedom of Speech. But, we also have Freedom from stupidity.

Don't like what they're doing, turn it off!

Coulter, Hannity, Beck, Savage, and the rest just say stupid things to get press.

Instead of giving them the attention they WANT, we should give them the attention the DESERVE!

If we quit all the hub-bub about these fools then we would have more time to get behind the things that matter, like:
Healthcare for all
Poverty in the US
The War, etc.

The list is soooo long and yet we let ourselves be distracted by what doesn't really matter.

Until we get leadership that will accomplish more than sound bites on Hardball. we will not Progress on any of our Progressive issues.

The part that worries me the most is that I don't see any candidates that COULD show leadership that could ALSO get elected.

I think the two biggest priorities right now should be getting someone elected who will lead this country and erase the damage done by Bush, and finding a way to stop this madman from getting us into a war with Iran.

You know that, no matter what we do, Bush is NOT going to improve our situation in Iraq. He has zero incentive. He could care less about the Republican party, so what's to make him change course?

His trigger finger is just itching like crazy to get us into Iran. I pray he doesn't but...

Those are MY two goals between now and election day and I will only work on those two goals.

It may not stop Rush, or BillO. But I might be able to channel my energy into something that will count.

[Balzac]

I disagree that the attack ad against Limbaugh is not worthwhile.

Limbaugh has our military as a captive audience, and that is extremely dangerous position he occupies.

Limbaugh must be removed from Armed Forces Radio. I cannot over-state the importance of this.

Matt Bai - I liked one part of his book - the part where he pointed out that Kos wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed. Some of us have known that for a while.

Aside from that, I didn't see much else which was meaningful in his Q&A session with commentators.

I feel betrayed by our so-called representatives.

I think we should liquidate the estates of the un-American members of congress.

Angry liberal bloggers like myself should acquire their land and their mansions.

Seriously, we need to think about how we can have a negative impact on the bank accounts of our so-called "representatives".

If that means investigating the hell out of them and then taking their ill-gotten gains away, so be it.

If that requires a business plan based on putting them on trial for corruption, fining them more than the value of their estate, then auctioning their estate in a no-bid auction to the most aggressive investigators of their crimes, so be it!

Just remember, the "Royal" Bush family and congressional aristocracy declared war on us first.

[BillZBubb]

Face it David, we don't have a progressive party in America. We've got a hard right party and a soft right party.

We, on the left, will continue to be frustrated until the right wing policies bring about their inevitable economic meltdown. Only then will enough progressives get elected to effect beneficial change. Of course, then the mess will be so bad, it will be difficult to accomplish much.

The frustration is less painful if you can accept the reality.