I am a progressive. I work with and serve thousands of progressive woman. And you, Sec. Clinton, are no progressive woman.
A good letter. Points out the obvious but doesn't quite point out what appears to me to be the issue of utmost importance.
Right wing politicians have employed the tactics developed by their patrons with great effectiveness. The chief goal has been creating a series of schisms amongst the American Public that divides us on issues of secondary, or even tertiary importance. We've become a multi-headed dog that can't decide which way to go. That needs to change, and in pretty short order.
America needs unity; not a united front against terrorism, or guns or god or gays. We need a unity that ignores issues that divide us and consider first and foremost what's best for ourselves and our families and our neighbors. If what's best for me takes away from what's best for the rest of America, then I need to be willing to forget about that and do what I can to help others.
That's a place to start. If you need to follow a leader and you hear someone shrieking about the other guy instead of talking about what we can do collectively to solve the problems we're facing, please turn around and find someone else to follow.
A good start, Donna Smith, but probably too little, too late. YEARS late, really.
If it weren't for Sanders' bid, we wouldn't even hear this.
In spite of his faults (and some of us acknowledge them) Sanders' run — on his own — has brought about the possibility of your letter and your "choice," Ms. Smith.
WHY? Because for ALL the hype & talk, "progressive Democrats" have N E V E R put together a group or position that actually educated voters while challenging party leadership. Only Sanders' candidacy — as an independent for decades — has done what your party has been unable to do (or come close to doing, sadly) for as many, or more, decades. They've sold out women, workers, minorities, unions, national infrastructure, the environment — all in spite of often sweet-sounding RHETORIC — which is their Specialty.
I don't blame you specifically, Donna Smith, but in spite of the positions which you make clear here, you and many cohorts have put up with the untenable for many decades and sat quietly in the galleries of conventions and meetings while corporations took over your party — and TRASHED every progressive idea and candidate that ever dared show their head.
... and trashed every attempt at forming a third party with TRUE progressive values and positions.
Those doing this gave a virtual death sentence to any movement or resistance to change that rose up in this nation. The word "Collaborators" sends shivers up spines of most progressive-leaning people, yet describes, de facto, how Democrats have served anti-democratic interests in this nation for a long time.
In the grand scheme of things, UNforgivable.
As a Feminist and Progressive, you speak for me, too, Ms. Smith. Especially this:
"As a progressive, I believe in peace. Sometimes when I listen to you, I think you want us to understand you can order us to war as decisively as any man. That's not why I want a woman to lead. I had hoped a woman would take more seriously the idea that we need not send drones with bombs to kill other parents' children to prove our strength as a nation. Showing the ability to go to war or bomb and kill is not what I see as a sign of power. I am a progressive for peace. You are not."
Skilled propagandists understand that as much as war is a fight over territory, part of any winning strategy (in the quest for All Dominance, All the Time) is to also control the cognitive field by arranging words to mean what the dominators want them to mean.
If Hillary and the small ilk of warrior women (Samantha Powers, Condi Rice, Susan Rice, etc.) succeed in repackaging the meaning of words like Feminist and Progressive, then an important theater of would be therapeutic transformation (as means to transcend the make-war imperative that's driving our nation to ruin) is lost. And I think the packagers of war candidates as "new product" know this.
There are some men, albeit not enough, with enough empathy and imagination to truly take in what it means to BE a second class citizen: be that status incurred through gender (woman), race ( Black), ethnicity (Hispanic/Latino), or religion (Muslim). And it's so damned easy to be glib when YOU are not from one of those groups.
Place that "secondary" interest aside, you say... when it's not YOU that's been on the receiving end of unchecked police violence; not you raped in a detention camp; not you facing direct exploitation, danger, or incarceration.
For a LONG time while males did NOTHING (most of them) to further Women's Equal Rights, Civil Rights for Blacks, or respect for Hispanic workers, etc.
Until there is equal opportunity, respect, and reverence granted to ALL persons, this call to some kind of magically unifying solidarity will only succeed in allowing the same white male dominators to do what they have done for centuries. And yes, I realize that lots of white males also feel cheated by lousy work conditions along with increasing Civil Liberties limitations imposed by the Draconian Patriarchal Capitalistic war state.
Nonetheless, there's a little thing called "privilege check" and until you have the sensitivity to truly probe what it means, your call to solidarity is empty.
You're also minimizing the message shared by Donna Smith in doing what so many males do: work overtime to make gender irrelevant, immaterial, or supposedly inconsequential to the power paradigm (along with its political counterparts).
Survivor of US Drone Attack: Obama Belongs on List of World's Tyrants
As usual, a poster pushes the FALSE argument that holds those unable to stop evil for what evil does.
The control of media is a huge factor in what stories get out to actually reach the public... and how!
There wasn't a majority of Progressive Democrats but there sure was a lot of Big Money filtering in to greedy, amoral Republicans who pushed the agenda amenable to the Koch's Brothers and other American Nazi families.
(Listen to Amy Goodman's interview on the Koch Family's background... it's similar to that of the Bush family and Prescott's affiliation with the Nazis.)
This argument that says that those with less power are responsible for what those with too much power do is a BIG LIE.
It is similar to the argument that insists that anyone living in a nation designated "enemy" deserves to die.
It's the argument that protects the dominator/killer/trespasser by attributing HIS sins to those he does unto.
Since you know me so well and for so long, fine. Whatever. Have at it.
Hillary Clinton's laugh isn't your normal, man or woman on the street chortle, it's a deep, monotone pharyngeal stop.
Hah!It's somewhere between "bug off you maggot" and "fook you". I wouldn't wish this disdainfully exasperated monosyllable on anyone I know, friend or foe. God, I hate that woman (or whatever it is).
I apologize to Donna Smith for putting this on more than one blog but I thought it à propos on both. God I hate HRC!
Your points are well-taken, but if you actually talk to a conservative, you find that what they think is best for themselves and their families is utterly at odds with what I, as a leftist, think is best for me and my family.
And as far as their neighbors - conservatives could not give a flying fuck about their neighbors except to fear them as a possible threat - especially if they are nonwhite! To care about one neighbors and community requires this thing called "solidarity" and there is no more foreign a concept to a conservative than solidarity. That is why they are so anti-labor-union for example.
You seem to be expressing a common zeitgeist of out times - that ideology - and promotion of one ideology over another ideology has somehow been "rendered quaint" and is no longer relevant. It is a dreadful myth!
Survivor of US Drone Attack: Obama Belongs on List of World's Tyrants
Her laugh is actually more like a wicked witch of the west laugh...or in the case of the chameleon Clintons the triangulating wicked witch of the north, south, east AND west.
Clinton mocks Sanders' Medicare for All plan saying it is too expensive, yet the cost for the first ten years of Bernie's plan is estimated to cost taxpayers $16 trillion, $10 trillion less than the $26 trillion of taxpayers' money that Congress committed to bailing out the too-big-to-fail banks that are financing Clinton's campaign.
SiouxRose has been "lashing out" on this site for many years, misinterpreting people's opinions, accusing people of being part of a paid "tag team" who were using prepared "talking points" as part of an Establishment attempt to silence her.
If anyone is posting things that further the interests of the Powers That Be it would be SiouxRose. She sews dissention and that acts against the great need progressive minded people have to find ways to come together. Attacking with unsubstantiated accusations the postings of others by depicting them as talking points that are "fed" to them and could not possibly be what the posters actually believe is, to say the least, unfortunate and counterproductive.
A progressive plutocrat would be against himself.
Well then, I guess we might just as well get ourselves some guns and start gunning them down so we can take our country back. The rabid right certainly aren't going to reach out to you and sing kumbaya. If you are unwilling to reach out to help others, how do you propose to heal the chasm the right wingers have split our society with?
Yes, I have spoken to some with strongly "conservatives" views. Down at the local VA hospital where all the rest of you Americans pay for the socialized health care I receive, I run into quite a few rednecks who thought dick cheney was a great American. You might not be able to deal with these Veterans; but I'm able to deal with most I meet because we share a common bond and they could care less about my pony tail.
I didn't suggest you go looking for a junk yard dog to pet or play fetch with. But if you drive by a redneck whose pickup has spun out and landed in a ditch, it's safe to stop and offer to help pull 'em out. And if you've got a neighbor who barks when you walk by, keep on walking. If you walk far enough you'll find someone who believes the same as you and you can start working together to build a community, instead of going to work and coming home to your own four walls.
Quaint or not, care and kindness are ideals I prefer not to leave behind.
Nicely done because you did it with such finesse. Have you read the works of Lame Deer, Lakota Medicine Man?
Is there anyone in the Democratic Party who doesn't call themselves a progressive? Obama uses that label for himself or at least his policies. Off hand I can't think of anyone.
Delusion exists on both the left and the right.
CheckBernies record of all the issues you are checking with Hillary. After that, all I can say is that I am so ready for Hillary!!!
Who the hell said anything about guns??? A proper democratic syatem is fully capable of allowing ideologies to organize winning majorities, and the losers acknowledging the winners right to govern for the term of the government, in a perfectly peaceful manner!
And I was not talking about cordial neighborliness or helping people out - we are talking organizing enough people of our common ideology to elect a full majority government that can put in place policies that follow the ideology that we promote. But we are not going to do this from "common ground". Conservatives are vehemently opposed to universal healthcare, compassion to refugees, organized labor, control of guns with no legitimate sporting purpose and many other issues - and there is no common ground to be had on these fundamental issues. But once again, where did the idea that this would lead to us shooting at each other come from?
USAns need to understand that this concept of "bipartisanship" as some kind of ideal is a uniquely USAn political concept and like so many other USAn things, highly dysfunctional. In parliamentary system like Canada, there is no "bipartisanship". The majority party runs the government without impediment and the losing party is relegated to griping and giving speeches and arguing from their side of the parliament chamber for up to 5 years. If the ruling party does not keep the people happy, they get replaced in the next election. No shooting is involved.
When you say "... we are talking ..." perhaps you should leave me out. Apparently you and I are talking about different things.