Get FREE BuzzFlash News Alerts

Email:  

Dave Lindorff: Clinton and Obama -- The Worst and Best Thing to Happen to the Democratic Party in Years

Bill Clinton was the worst thing to happen to the Democratic Party and to progressives since that racist warmonger Woodrow Wilson won the presidency and dragged the U.S. into the utterly pointless and incredibly bloody First World War.

Clinton, by posing as a progressive, confused and undermined, and ultimately betrayed the liberal/progressive wing of the party, shattering what was left of the New Deal coalition and leaving the American left adrift and riven by the conflict between those who thought the Democratic Party was the only viable vehicle for progressive reform and those who thought it was hopelessly in the grip of corporate interests.

Barack Obama offers the hope of bringing that era of debilitating confusion to an end.

Not because he is the Great Black Hope of progressives, but because he has taken the concept of selling out to corporate interests and compromising with Republicans to such remarkable heights that progressives hopefully can no longer be confused about the irretrievably corrupted nature of the Democratic Party.

On virtually every issue of importance, President Obama has sided with corporate interests and the wealthy.

On the issue of war and peace, he has sided with the military-industrial complex, with a policy of permanent occupation of Iraq and endless war in Afghanistan, as well as continued funding of the country's colossal armory of death, from strategic missiles and submarines to aircraft-carrier-group armadas to high-tech fighter squadrons and space weaponry.

On civil liberties, he has sided with the police state, supporting continuation of the Bush/Cheney administration's insidious National Security Agency spying program, defended military spying within the U.S., and refused to prosecute obvious abuses by the prior administration.

On torture, the Obama Administration is continuing the imprisonment and torture of captives in Afghanistan and elsewhere around the world at Bagram Air Base and, probably, at other secret sites, and instead of closing Guantanamo as promised, is looking into transferring that hellhole of torture and abuse to one or several sites in the mainland U.S.

Health care reform has become a sad joke, with the emerging "reform" bill looking for all the world like the Rube Goldberg creation of the Clinton era that properly went down in flames. Instead of taking on the insurance industry, the hospital companies and the pharmaceutical industry and other parts of the profit-making medical-industrial complex, Obama cut deals with all of them behind closed doors, assuring that their profits would be left untouched, and that they could essentially write their own "reform" bill through the offices of bought-and-paid members of Congress such as Senator Max Baucus. Obama and his congressional allies carefully kept any discussion of the single-payer idea -- essentially Medicare for all, and the approach that even Obama himself admits would be cheaper and more universal -- out of sight and off the table.

Climate change action, too, has been sold out, with Obama adopting the approach favored by the energy industry -- "cap and trade." That concept is a gold mine for Wall Street trading firms, which will be doing trades next in pollution credits instead of subprime mortgages, and for energy companies that will get free credits to sell, courtesy of the taxpayer. And because it's a system so easy to game, it will do nothing or next to nothing to reduce greenhouse gases.

Finally, there's economy and banking reform. Here Obama didn't even make a pretense of taking a progressive approach. There is a stimulus program, but half of it was in the form of tax cuts -- token for the poor and middle class and significant for the rich and for businesses, and half in the form of federal grants, often for unneeded projects such as roads and road repair that go to some of the higher paid members of the working class, leaving the poor and the nonunionized with no job help. Meanwhile, bankers were the recipients of trillions of dollars in bailout assistance, while nothing was done to break up the huge mega-bank holding companies that brought on the financial and economic crisis in the first place. Instead of picking economic advisers and bank regulators from the many talented system critics such as Nobelists Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Krugman, Obama picked veterans of the Bush/Cheney administration, and Wall Street shills such as Larry Summers and Timothy Geithner.

Last fall, I and many progressives urged voters to elect Obama, not because we thought he was a progressive, but because we hoped that his background -- community organizer, raised by a single mother, experience living in a third world country (Indonesia), multi-racial -- would lead him to make at least some right decisions. We, or certainly I, hoped too that the energized young and working class electorate that came out for him in the fall would continue to press him aggressively to do the right thing on war, environment, civil liberties, and the economy.

I was wrong on the first count: Obama has been a corporatist through and through on all the major issues that matter. And I was wrong on the second. Most of the left in the U.S., from the labor movement to the environmentalist movement to the anti-war movement, has to date remained glumly quiescent as Obama has sold them out on each of their key issues.

But here is the silver lining: The sellout this time is so much more blatant, and so much more serious, than it was with Clinton, and for all the talk about Obama's ability to string words together, he is so much less of a charismatic figure than the gregarious Bill Clinton, that he is unlikely to hang on to the ardent support that propelled him to his victory last November. The disappointment and sense of betrayal among progressives this time is palpable, especially because, while Clinton, by 1994, had the excuse that he was working with a Republican, or partially Republican Congress, Obama has solid control of both houses, but refuses to use it. If, as I expect, the recession continues to deepen, with more and more people losing jobs and homes, if, as I predict, health care continues to be unaffordable and inaccessible, if, as I know will happen, evidence of deadly climate change continues to pile up, and if, as I am equally certain, Iraq explodes and the war in Afghanistan continue to worsen, the left is going to see Obama and the Democrats in Congress as the failures and corrupt frauds they are, and will abandon them.

That leaves the question of what to do, and where those frustrated progressives will turn.

I don't claim to have the answer to that. Clearly the labor movement needs to recognize that hitching its fortunes to the Democratic Party has been and will continue to be a dismal failure. It needs to pull all its political money back and only support those who are 100% allies in the struggle for the rights of workers. No money for the party as a whole. It should also go back to the pioneering work of people such as the late Tony Mazzocchi of the Oil and Chemical and Atomic Workers Union, who before his death was tirelessly working to establish an American labor party.

Other third parties on the left need to drop their individual agendas and work towards unity, especially with the labor movement, in order to create a broad-based left party that doesn't have litmus tests for inclusion -- just broad principles such as steeply progressive taxation, an end to NAFTA and the WTO, democratization of the Federal Reserve Bank, national health care, a wholesale slashing of the military budget, by perhaps two-thirds or more, free education through four years of college for all, and a crisis plan to attack climate change.

If the ever fractious U.S. left, and the somnolent labor movement, cannot come together as one, there is little hope of political change in America. At that point, the alternative would be an increasing militancy over these critical issues, outside of the electoral arena -- something that has to happen anyhow, regardless of whether a real third party force can be put together. We know that simply organizing occasional polite marches in Washington, or in key cities, accomplishes nothing. We have learned that e-mail campaigns to deluge members of Congress with canned opinions don't work. What has worked, and will always work, is massive campaigns of civil disobedience, tent cities in Washington, organized disruption of war preparations, and door-to-door organizing. The corrupt hacks who inhabit the halls of Congress and the White House will not do the right thing just because it is the right thing, or because we ask them nicely. They may, if we make them fear that they will actually lose our votes in the next election. For the most part, incumbent Democrats know that the people who peacefully march down Connecticut Avenue are still likely to vote for them come the next election. They're not going to be so sure about people who are being hit by tear gas and water cannons and who are being hauled off en masse to jail at protests.

We may need to start sending that stronger message.

DAVE LINDORFF is a Philadelphia-based journalist. His latest book is "The Case for Impeachment" (St. Martin's Press, 2006). His work is available at www.thiscantbehappening.net.

 




Another self-defeating column from the narcissistic left..

Hey, rather than hurling the same tired "sell-out" invective at Obama here's my list of some positive things that left/progressives can do 1. VOTE IN DEMOCRATIC PRIMARIES---Vote for the most progressive candidate on the slate and be sure to be there in November. I still believe that candidates from the "democratic wing of the Democratic Party" are more easily electable now than they were say, 16 years ago. In order to get the president more on board with what is important to us, we first need to get Congress to push him from the left... 2. THIRD PARTY CHALLENGES AGAINST "BLUE DOG" DEMS...These so-called Democrats depend on every last Progressive vote in their states or districts in order to get 50.1% of the total against their GOP opponents. These are the truly worthless Congressmembers who we would not miss if they were defeated. Let them know that they will no longer have your vote if they keep colluding with the side you voted against. (Note to Green Party... You lost my vote and support forever when you decided to put all your resources in defeating the late Sen. Paul Wellstone. You could have run a similar tough challenge against DINOs like Blanche Lincoln or Mary Landreau, but in your purer-than-thou narcissism, you became a tool of the GOP who wanted to see a great man like Wellstone go down at any cost. As far as I'm concerned the Green Party has Wellstone's blood on their hands.) 3.FIGHT THE RIGHT...It is so much safer and, in PM Carpenter's words "intellectually satisfying" to criticize your own when the chips are down. But all this invective against Obama as a "sellout" shows neither character nor backbone. He is not the problem. The angry mobs who are bullying and intimidating our side are the problem. The is no honor in feeling like you are speaking truth to power by criticizing Obama from the safety of your word processor, while you sit timidly with your head down at a town hall meeting when these crazies start acting up. SHOUT BACK...PUSH BACK and if necessary PUNCH BACK...The cycle of violence and intimidation will not be broken as long as these trolls think we are afraid of them... 4.LETTING THE GOP RETAKE CONGRESS IS NOT A LEGITIMATE WAY TO SHOW YOUR DISAPPOINTMENT IN THE DEMS.. ..After 12 horrible years with the GOP in control of Congress, Lindorff's suggestion in this direction is just plainly idiotic. The right can then forever stymie and real reform, knowing that the minute the going gets tough for progressives, the Lindorffs of the world will choose to lash out at their own elected officials, rather than at the forces keeping the status quo--thus increasing the strength of the far-right

One More thing...

Call your Congressmember and urge them to vote against any health-care bill that does not include the public option...That will send Obama a message he wont forget

et tu ???

PamB I cannot believe that even those on the Left, refuse to give Obama more than 6 months time to try and un-do and fix that mess which took 8 years to create ! An illegal occupation that we are supposed just lay our guns down, and turn around and every man put on a boat home?. A Recession/Depression-largest one most of us have seen in our lifetimes- he was supposed to snap his fingers and have fixed immediately? I'd like to know HOW much more Obama could do to please you guys. Sheesh !

When the going gets tough..

The left gives up

Give it another six months

We hit the one year point, even the people who tells us Obama is playing chess instead of checkers will see we are still in Iraq, building up Afghanistan to keep tearing it down, the jobs in China are still in China, and, if we're lucky, we don't have health care reform. If we have health care reform, it'll likely be a Plan D style windfall for the insurance companies. The accumulated "changiness" will stink in the streets and the true believers will be losing their religion. When it becomes undeniable that representative government cleaned out our bank account and walked out on us for someone with a classier address, what solutions arise? Only the horrors rushing toward us seem tangible and inevitable. Even a worthless old philosopher like Hegel saw the grand cycles of history over a century ago, but that fool granted humanity more dignity than a population of forest voles who over-breed to collapse. Which just goes to show that optimism can be the opiate of the masses too. But we're waking up to the nightmare. For the good that does.

In what alternate reality ....

... did Clinton pose as a progressive? Some of your readers may not have been old enough to be paying attention to politics in 1992, but anyone who was would never make such a ridiculous claim. Hell, .... for the two years immediately prior to the '92 election, he was the head of the DLC. Clinton never ran as anything other than a moderate Democrat. How can anyone with a double-digit IQ can make the claim that he "confused and undermined, and ultimately betrayed the liberal/progressive wing of the party"?

The only ones "confused and betrayed" are the perennially puritanical and peurile (true) progressives, who convince themselves that the candidate they like is finally "The One" who will deliver all their dreams. They ignore the candidate's records, contradictory words and ideological flaws, focusing only on those perfectly ambiguous words and campaign slogans ("Hope" and "Change", anyone?) that, in their minds, mean that the candidate is sending signals that clearly demonstrate (again, only in their minds) that their shiny, new candidate is one of them. Sound familiar, Dave? (BTW - Because he spent some time as a community organizer and had a single mother?!? Seriously

To be fair, I doubt that Mr. Lindorff falls squarely into this group. He's one of a subset of Clinton-haters who did not truly believe that Obama was a progressive - he just felt betrayed by Bill Clinton and deemed Hillary guilty by association - plus, she voted for the AUMF. He's an ABC (Anybody But Clinton) who spent the primary season demonizing her, while pushing Obama, mainly because Obama's last name wasn't Clinton, and trying to convince others that Obama was (in his heart) a progressive who would someday see the light.

Now, the perennially duped true progs have no one to blame but themselves. Obama was their candidate - well, for this past year anyway. They'll try to blame others to make themselves feel better, but in their hearts, they just feel angry and betrayed ........ yet again. Plus, it's really hard to admit you were wrong, despite the fact that Mr. Lindorff and his fellow true progs have had enough practice to turn pro. In all seriousness, if we didn't have to live with all the ramifications of their dupitude, it would be fun to watch. Well, ......


... more fun. :)

...they ran as populists, & rule as Rethugs....

As Thom Hartmann said, WINNING Democrat (presidential candidates)... like Clinton and Obama, RUN as POPULISTS & progressives, but seem to always RULE as RETHUGLICANS.

Of course the (slightly) positive flip-side of this coin, is Dem candidates who don't really know how to run as Populists - like stick-in-mud Kerry & Gore - can't even win elections at all.

Yes, yes, Gore "won" the election of 2000 - but ONLY because Black & minority voters came out in (unexpected) DROVES to try to keep cheney & bush (and thus the John Birch society) from stealing the presidency, and all the awful power associated with it.

A HUGE portion of Gore BEING ROBBED of his 2000 election win, was his ABJECT FAILURE to INSPIRE populist, minority, & Democratic (much less independent) voters
(who dutifully, if not enthuthusiastically, voted for him, but weren't about to spend even more of their own money to protest the Rethuglican election-stealing crew from the hapless, couldn't-fight-their-way out of a wet-paper-bag Kerry or Gore.)

as a language lover

I find the phrase "glumly quiescent" tingling my brain cells (and the rest of the article's not shabby, either). Thank you so much.

So how come we're not talking about President Kucinich?

Gee-zus, Lindorff, your ignorance of how our political system works, if it can really be called a system at all, is amazing.

Do you know that the real "change" in political parties happens in caucuses, primaries and party platform committees? I mean, if all you ideologically pure leftists had gotten off your butts in 2004 or 2008 during the Democratic caucus and primary season maybe we'd be talking about President Kucinich.

I live in a working class neighborhood, about a mile from a large Bridgestone/Firestone tire plant. A lot of union members live in my neighborhood. And in '04 my precinct during the Democratic caucus split in a three-way tie for John Kerry, John Edwards and Howard Dean. In '08 my precinct went for Barack Obama by a narrow margin.

Both times I supported Dennis Kucinich, but did anyone, even after I emailed the Kucincich campaign Web site, get in contact with me? NO.

In '04, somehow the Dean campaign tracked me down and talked my into being a precinct captain. In '08 again no one from Kucinich's campaign even showed his or her face in my working class neighborhood. I caucused in '08 for Edwards.

I know Kucinich had almost zero financial--hey, I threw him 25 bucks out of my disability pension--support but I hear out of the ideologically pure left how "people power" can defeat money. So why weren't all the earnest little coordinator class, ideologically pure leftist boys and girls out there busting their asses for Kucinich?

Oh, I'm sorry they were busy helping Ralph Nader ramp up another quixotic presidential run.

Kucinich's message resonated with the folks in my working class neighborhood but he was written off by almost everybody as a long-shot and something of a flake. But they liked what they heard.

Look, Lindroff, you can preach to the choir on the college campuses all you want but that ain't going to get those kids off their lily-white butts to do want is needed. I'm going to challenge you and the boys and girls over at ZNet and CounterPunch to go out and preach your gospel to the people who need to hear it, the working men and woman of this country.

You want a new party? You want single payer health care system? Then stop mincing around the quadrangle, walk into the nearest redneck waterhole, you know the one with the NASCAR posters and a Confederate flag on the wall, and talk to those people.

They just might surprise you.

ET Spoon

Buzzflash has disgraced

Buzzflash has disgraced itself, Dave Lindorff just last week was up here advocating that the crazy Naderites he calls "progressives", should make common cause with Conservative anti health care reform activists, and adopt Conservative tactics by disrupting town hall meetings.

Lindorff talks about selling out, and telling anyone crazy enough to listen, to go out and support the Conservative Authoritarians with their mob-efforts, what are you doing? Selling out? Yes. For what reason? Because you oppose the Public Option? Its bad enough Lindorff that you oppose the public option, but since you are advocating the same Conservative tactics in opposing it, you earned the wrath of Good Americans who need help and who want this public option. The very policy that we want to make sure Obama doesnt sell out on, you oppose!!! And Lindorff you said you want people to join the town hall mob in opposition to the public option. Buzzflash is disgraced, Buzzflash sucks, down with Buzzflash.

Funny you should mention sailing

In fact, I'm an ace sailor--lake, ocean, night navigation--you name it. One thing about sailboats is that they don't just have to go where the wind blows. They sail just fine into the wind. In fact, they're at their fastest on a reach, when they're going perpendicular to the direction that the wind is blowing. Obama, if he ever even really intended to go towards some kind of public insurance, whether single-payer or "public option" alternative to private insurance, should have started out well to the left of where he did, and then driven a hard bargain. The last place he should have been was in a back room of the White House with executives of the insurance industry, cutting deals before the real dealing even got going. He also should have been organizing shock troops from among his backers, not tossing the project to Congress ans asking the greedheads and corrupted leadership to cobble together a plan for him to sign. If Lyndon Johnson had taken Obama's approach back in the mid-'60s, we wouldn't have Medicare and Medicaid today, and the poor and elderly would be dying in the streets. You have absolutely no idea how negotiations work, and clearly, unless he intended to sell us out from the beginning (a very likely proposition, considering the amount of money he accepted from the insurance industry and other parts of the medical-industrial complex), Obama and his White House advisers don't know how to bargain either. You don't start out by giving ground. He has done no arm-twisting of recalcitrant Democrats, no threats to people who break party discipline, no pulling rank. Nada. That's how great presidents have made great strides. As a sailor, all Obama seems to know how to do is run before the wind. Dave Lindorff www.thiscantbehappening.net

As a sailor, do you deliberately miss the point?

Actually Mr. Lindorff, I too am a sailor. Thanks for the interesting and irrelevant sailing anecdote. Your response is an obvious distraction from the point that in a Democracy there are three possible forces that determine success or failure: 1. The wind from the Left; 2. The wind from the right, and LEAST IMPORTANT BY ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE, but significant, 3. the skills and intentions of the Sailor(s). Your fantasy world of distracting anecdotes and delusions of sailor omnipotence and self-determination are, well, distractions and diversions from the important work at hand. THE DETERMINING ISSUE TODAY is the passivity and cowardice of the Progressive grass roots and the in-the-streets activism of the Mob, funded and facilitated by the Corporate / Rethuglican fascists. The reverse was the determining factor in the election. Duh.

Lindorff, you oppose the

Lindorff, you oppose the public option, in fact you advocated just last week that Conservative tactics to stop the public option are a good thing that crazy Naderites should repeat.

I do oppose the public option

It was a sop from the start, and would not have worked unless, perhaps, it had been set up to be used by employers (they would be barred from using it), and free to negotiate lower prices from docs, hospitals, and drug companies (it would be barred from doing those things under the back room deals Obama cut). The answer clearly is single payer, and Obama made the stupid (or corrupt) decision to bar that issue from the discussion, even though it is what Medicare is. By the way, Buzzflash deserves credit, not blame, for reaching outside the narrow norm of whatever you think is acceptable.

That is why it is a farce

That is why it is a farce for you to be calling Obama a sellout. You havent supported the public option, you havent acted at all to encourage anyone to write their representatives, all you have done is advocated against the public option. You have gone so far in your zealotry against the public option, as to advocate Conservative town-hall disrupting tactics to block the public option. I know Americans who need the public option, such as myself, who are faced with an individual mandate in absence of a public option. Since you are in a common cause with Conservatives who oppose the public option, and embracing Conservative tactics - that isnt outside the norm of what I think is acceptable it's conspiring against Americans who need help. Down with Buzzflash and to ____ with Lindorff.

Mr. Lindorf - your Magical, Fantasy notion of the Presidency?

Can you articulate it? Do you see it? Is the presidency somehow a Godship - Almighty, and therefore in a President's action we see not the necessity to build alliances and negotiate goals with the reality of limited resources - most of all limited Political Capitol, given the LEGENDARY lethargy and cowardice of we lip-service progressives; but "simply" (or is that Mr. Lindorf's simple mind) and transparently the pure "will" of the president? You are not into sailing (as in sail boats) much I'll guess. Actually, you can't sail without wind! And the direction of the "wind" has an enormous, profound impact on where you can go, how fast you can go, and whether you can get there at all! Ooops, I hope I didn't wake you from your monstrously irresponsible and destructive fantasy. [By the way, I totally share your NEGATIVE view of Pres. Clinton].

M

Dup

Lindorff the

Lindorff the anti-public-option activist also says that the various warring 3rd parties should unite. Yeah right. Under which banner? The Green Party or Independent Ralph Nader? Nader and the Greens have so much in common, yet cant unite. When the Greens nominated Ralph Naders 2000 Texas campaign manager, Ralph Nader called the Greens "part of the problem" and went on the offensive against the Greens, calling them too disorganized, calling them a tool of the Democrats and therefore of the Republicans. "They should unite" is just more pointless drivel that isnt going anywhere. If you really wanted them to unite, you would know which banner you wanted them to unite under. I didnt know there was anyone in that little league game besides the Naderites who refused to unite with the Greens.