Posts
With evident glee, the New York Times reported that Michael Bennett, the "Obama-backed" candidate in the Colorado Democratic Senate primary, had won out over the progressive challenger, Andrew Romanoff.
Minimizing the divide within the Democratic Party, the Times relegated the Romanoff challenge to an inference and reported only that Bennett "reached out to Mr. Romanoff’s supporters, saying that he would work hard to prove himself worthy of their support, but that in the end the things that divided Democrats were small compared with the issues that would be discussed in the coming midterm elections."
In other words, once again Obama backed a blue dog Democrat and once again the Democratic Party establishment "reached out" to progressives by telling them that they were caught between a rock and a hard place.
Actually the divisions between progressives and sell-out Democrats are hardly "small". Obamacrats are basically Blue Dogs that talk the talk but walk another walk. It is simply another form of double-talk.
The Republican double talk is to talk about "individual freedom" where "individual" really means "corporation". The Obamacrat double talk is to talk about "individual welfare" where "individual" really means "corporation". Both parties are willing to feed the country into the corporate maw with the promise that the remains of country will trickle back down on us.
Obama has produced nothing on the progressive agenda, except sell out and defeat labelled "compromises" and "first steps".
Romanoff had virtually no money and lots to say. Bennett had nothing to say but lots of money. In the end money won out. “It is long past time to cast off the do-nothing, divisive politics of the past and get to work,” Mr. Bennet said. Yawn. It is long past time to cast OUT the do-nothing politicians of the past and get to work saving America for the American people.
What Romanoff stands for; What the Times did not report; What Obamacrats reject:> [here ] .
©WCG, 2010
.
