The new meme being pushed by a lot of political commentators and anti-Obama posters is that he is showing his true centrist colors. Obama has 'lurched' to the center. The only trouble with it is that it's not really true. He's never been the flaming, far left liberal that many have tried to paint him.

In the last few days, there have been a bunch of diaries on this site and others either ranting about his 'lurch to the center' or serving as 'I told you fools he was no progressive' rants.

There are four issues that are supposedly acts of betrayal by Obama - FISA (the big one), gun control, the death penalty, and public financing for his campaign. While there is some small nugget of truth in a couple of these, they are mostly twisted to show him in the worst light possible. No big surprise there given who's doing most of the complaining about these issues.

Democrat Glen Brower is running strong and spirited campaign for State Assembly in the 21st district, representing South Milwaukee and Oak Creek.

He understands the problems we all face, from rising property taxes, rising gas prices, and ever more expensive health insurance, Glen knows that more of the same just won't do. We need honest and responsible leadership to address the problems that can no longer be ignored.

http://www.actblue.com/contribute/entity /20007

We are just three seats away taking back our State Assembly, and making sure that the issues we all care about are truly addressed.

I see folks throwing around the word Progressive Democrat. And when the issue of the hotly debated FISA comes up, I'm sure you have seen folks say 'this is a Progressive agenda'_ thats why we need Obama who sells himself as a progressive democrat to filibuster it.

I'd like to know what does being progressive to you mean as a democrat? you throw it around enough :D 

And take a look at what it is defined as:

Progressivism is a term that refers to a broad school of international social and political philosophies. The term progressive was first widely used in late 19th century America, in reference to a general branch of political thought which arose as a response to the vast changes brought by industrialization, and as an alternative both to the traditional conservative response to social and economic issues and to the various more or less radical streams of socialism and anarchism which opposed them. Political parties such as the American Progressive Party organized at the start of the 20th century, and progressivism made great strides under American presidents Theodore Roosevelt, William H. Taft, Woodrow Wilson, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt.[1]

Progressivism historically advocates the advancement of workers' rights and social justice. The progressives were early proponents of anti-trust laws, regulation of large corporations and monopolies, as well as government-funded environmentalism and the creation of National Parks and Wildlife Refuges.

I am young.  I am progressive.  I am not yet cynical and I think I can change the world.  Before I get cynical, I would like to make a difference.  

I have thought about it a great deal and would like to get into politics, but I have no idea where to start.  I know that this is a long-term goal so I am not asking how to become a senator now, but how do senators get started?  Do I volunteer for a campaign and work my way up?  Do I find a paying job with a political organization, PAC, DNC, etc?   Do I just run for a very small office and prove myself by being great at my job?

Just a little about me so you can see where I am coming from.  I am a 26 yr. old white male.  I am 8-9 months away from a Ph.D. in chemistry.   After grad school I can go in any direction I want.  I will have total freedom to shape my adult life, but where do I start?

Any and all help, ideas and suggestions would be great.  

Glen Brower has thrown his hat into the ring to represent the Wisconsin 21st Assembly District, he is running against a well financed Bush Republican, Mark Honadel.  A man who voted against the Minimum Wage, voted against emergency birth control for rape victims, and voted against tuition breaks for veterans in the UW system.

http://www.glenbrower.com/contribute.htm l

Here is a message that Glen asked me to pass along,

Hello,

I'm Glen Brower and I am running for the State Assembly in the 21st district. My decision to run came when I could no longer recognize the state and country that I grew up in and had sworn to protect as a Lieutenant Colonel in the army. Now retired, I want to address critical problems that exist in Wisconsin. I have come to the conclusion that our middle class values and way of life are slipping out from under us.

We are only three seats away from winning back our State Assembly and creating opportunity and prosperity for all Wisconsinites. With your support we can achieve this goal and truly begin to see universal healthcare, environmental sustainability and a better future for our children.

I have been told that a win in this district will be difficult to achieve because I will be outspent by a vast amount. However, I'm not certain that our democratic system of one vote, one voice, should be dismissed in favor of dollar signs. It is my firm belief that this election will not be won by the highest bidder, but by a true grassroots approach. Citizen by citizen, neighborhood by neighborhood, ward by ward, we will produce a voice that no special interest can purchase and no bank roll can outperform.
I encourage you to take a few minutes and go through my website. Take the time to gain a sense of who I am and what issues I believe are critical to our future. You owe it to yourself, your family, and our community

Thanks again,

Glen Brower

http://www.glenbrower.com/contribute.htm l

This is my first MyDD diary, if you didn't guess by the title. I've been regularly writing at DKos for a little while now....

....wait, don't stop reading....

I like the idea that there are multiple forums to discuss Democratic issues, identity, and action. I like that they don't have the exact same sensibilities and the same set of diaries every day. I think it's healthy for the Party to have multiple voices and multiple points of view. In fact, internal conflict as we've seen in this election season can produce a healthier appreciation for the choices we face, the direction we hope to go, and the identity and culture of our Party.

As MyDD has spiraled exponentially into the depths of anti-Clinton and anti-Obama hatchet jobs (and more recently...whose supporters said what when that offended whom and who honestly cares...diaries), we seem to have lost touch with a number of ideals and characteristics which, for me at least, are inherent in the spirit of a tireless progressive activist.

As progressive activists, we can separate out our emotions - which run rampant toward the furtherance of progressive causes - from the strategic choices we know that we must make in order to see progressive policy implemented. We can find it in our hearts to forgive and forget when a (largely) progressive candidate panders for votes by trotting out gimmick-laden policies. And perhaps most importantly, we can temper our enthusiasm for progressive causes with the pain that millions of Americans are suffering. We can know and understand that sometimes the best policy for the country isn't the best policy for each individual voter, and that sometimes progressive unity requires understanding an issue from an alternative perspective.

So this has been bothering me.  Huffington and Moulitas.  Both run blogs that have declared open war on Senator Clinton.
Arianna was a right wing mouth piece during the Clinton years, was married to a conservative, a man who was a republican appointee of Reagan's and eventually a congressman.  She had a blog during to 90s, a rallying place for Clinton haters wanting to get Bill Clinton out of office.  Her ex was a multimillionaire and this is where she got her money. She admitted to being friends with Newt Gingrich.   So we have a Reagan lover, a multimillionarie who hated the Clintons as a part of her everyday life and NOW, suddenly she a populist progressive who is shilling for Obama to defeat Hillary.  She is a hero of the new left while a true liberal like Senator Clinton has been demonized because at 15 she was a republican (nevermind that overwhelming young kids identify with the party of the parents). I don't get it.

dkos is owned  by his own admission as former young Reagan lover.
Maybe he was a kid like Hillary. Yet her young teen years as a "Goldwater Girl" gets her demonized but his young years are OK?  Hmmmmmmmmmmm....now he hates the Clintons, and has created a blog that helps destroy her, a blog  where using the "racism" attack against the Clintons is acceptable. Yet he once supported Reagan, a man who went to Philadelphia, Mississippi, and used coded racist words to win his presidency.

Suddenly, people like me, an old white woman like Hillary, (we are within a year of each other age-wise) are painted as racists by the like of dkos and Huffington; she because of spin, me because I support her over Obama.  We (old liberals like Hillary and our peers) were working for civil rights way back when; working for women's rights way back, protesting Reagans' policies in the 80s while they were supporting Reagan; while Hillary was opening clinics for poor women and children in Arkansas, Arrianna was supporting Reagan's hate policies in Central America and the middle east.
While Moulitas supported Bush I's war, I was angry as hell at the  results of the Reagan economy that was destroying the middle class.  

Reagan's trickle down of the 80s was taking a toll on us as the Bush I administration started.  Some of us had been screaming for a decade about the destruction of unions under Reagan.  But we were drowned out by the yuppies screaming for more, more, more money for themselves.  Bill Clinton came in and restored the economy.  Hillary tried to get the American people to pay attention to the health care crisis but was drowned out by Arianna's friends in Congress.  She took the blame.  She was demonized by the right.

But NOW, Arianna and all the former yuppies (many of them now regulars at dkos I am guessing), are spewing lies and hatred toward Hillary.  Her blog has been pushing Hillary hate all along. dkos was a late comer to the game but it is clear.  The so called "former" Independents and Libertarians and former Reagan lovers now have a common cause: their hatred of the Clintons.  They are aligned with people like Matthews etc who became millionaires thanks to right wing billionaire icons like Jack Welch, former CEO of GE.  

Hillary has been successfully demonized by the right wing republicans.  And yet on the Net, new dems, newcomers to political work, demonize Senator Clinton by calling her a republican get away with it.  During the years when too many bought Reagan's "morning in America" hook, line and sinker, Hillary was working for liberal causes.  
Hillary worked with people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and Charlie Rangle, Barbara Jordan, Marian Edleman to improve things for women and minorites but somehow SHE, according to former right wingers like Arianna, is a neocon, war mongering racist.
Now it's a racial slur to compare Obama to an African American hero like Jesse Jackson but then again the Reagan yuppies HATED Jackson and Sharpton and STILL DO. Why? Because Jesse made them uncomfortable.  There was none of this "unity with the right wing" who was encouraging the status quo of an unfair justice system that STILL punishes African Americans unfairly.

But alas, here on the NET, the right wing sanctimony has been adopted by the neo left.  Unfair blogging is acceptable.  Arianna's blog UNFAIRLY gives voice to the Obamaloving, Hillaryhating left.  The numbers of "Hillary is a liar, Hillary is a racist, Hillary is evil" blogs on Huffington is overwhelming. And anything anti Hillary is printed in BOLD RED LETTERS.

So how does a former right winger who was by marriage in the Reagan administration, and how does a blogger who admitted to being a Reagan lover,  get to be the icons of the left?
How do long time democrats who have consistently worked for liberal causes get demonized and trashed by the left.

I am still scratching my head. I am frustrated, disappointed and stunned.  I will, and have said from the beginning, vote for whomever the dem nominee is.  I am a yellow dog democrat and could never ever vote for a party that has pushed and encouraged  plutocracy; could never vote a party that has a "me, me, me" mentality; a party that still elects racists to office. And yet, I have been pushed out of my party. I have read bloggers (even here) announcing the unimportance of older voters, women voters, white women voters (obviously because we are pro Hillary). And that hurts.  Suddenly people who loved and worked for Ronald Reagan are heroes; and people, like Hillary, who worked against the right wing machine since the 1970s are demonized. I don't get it.

I call myself a liberal. I have never been ashamed to use the word liberal, even in the 80s when the word was mocked, dissed and twisted by the right. Maybe I am not a "progressive" because I do not identify with people like Arianna, or Markos, or Matthews, or Randi Rhodes (whom I believe is the antithesis of liberal).  Maybe I will never get it.  I do not know how people who have worked decades for civil rights, equal rights, and the betterment of society can be demonized by people who supported the right wing ever. When a consistent liberal journalist, one of the few, Paul Krugman, is demonized for criticizing Senator Obama, I don't get it.

My guess is this: some/many maybe of the bloggers now shilling for Senator Obama are probably former Reaganites who "saw the light".  I believe this to be true because many seem to embody the same kind of paternalistic hero worship that dominated the Reagan right.  Anything against him is demonized; he has that Teflon thing going with his followers; and he "inspires" hope which to me is no different than the "inspiration and adulation" given to Reagan. Hope does not feed the poor; never did; I did not get it then; I don't get it now.