The Dumbing Down of Progressives

[nckjm]

First of all, this is my first post (vs. replying to posts). So, deep breath, and here I go:

I watched The Ed Show tonight and guest host Cenk Uygur interviewed PA Gov. Ed Rendell(D). During the interview, one question prompted Rendell to talk about the importance of reducing the deficit and Cenk asked him if that included reducing social security benefits to which Rendell replied (paraphrased)... "Look, I'm a good progressive but I support the gradual increase in the Social Security retirement age to 68 by 2050 and 69 by 2075. After all, we're going to be living 10 years longer by then." (BTW, Rendell, just how do you know what longevity will be in 2050...or 2030 for that matter!!! Maybe all you do know is that it will be somebody else's problem by then.)

I thought I would puke! Is this where Progressives are heading? Once upon a time, you wouldn't have heard those words come out of the mouth of a Democrat much less a Progressive. And to hear a self-described "progressive" supporting these changes to social security, well, that just takes the cake (as we say in the South). And to pour salt in the wound, Cenk and his next guest, Joan Walsh, both praised Rendell as a good progressive. Oh yea, here it comes again, that sickening, sinking feeling I am getting WAY TOO REGULARLY when watching most of the MSNBC pundits these days...And, I had this horrible pre-monition that Rendell was forecasting the position Obama has already decided to take on social security. (Come on, who can't see one this coming?)

Well, Gov. Rendell, here's a new rule (as Bill Maher would say)...you're only a GOOD PROGRESSIVE based on your CURRENT position on the life-altering issues impacting the "98er's' (my term for all of us who didn't benefit from extending Bush tax cuts). If you want to mess with social security, guess what...you lose your "progressive" label, because true progressives "don't go there." Folks, am I only fooling myself?

This gradual blurring of political lines between Progressives and Democrats is increasing rapidly. And the line between Democrats and Republicans is blurring at an even faster pace. Another example from what's left of the Left: Rendell says it is important for Democrats to make it clear to Americans how they differ from Republicans; then in less than two minutes agrees to throw social security under the bus. Folks, is this the famous "compromise" philosophy taking Washington by storm? Honest to God, these guys would put a snake oil salesman to shame.

To sum it up; as I listened to this interview tonight I thought of the story about how to boil a frog. If the frog is placed in boiling water, it will jump out, but if it is placed in cold water that is slowly heated, it will not perceive the danger and will be cooked to death. Progressives, are we on a "slow boil" to the dumbing down of progressive ideals. JUMP!!!!

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bullwinkle428]

2. Like I needed more confirmation on what an asshole Rendell is.

[nckjm]

10. good point!

[DeadEyeDyck]

14. what'd I miss?

[SugarShack]

15. Soc. Sec contributes NOTHING to the debt. It should not even be on the table.

[kelly1mm]

32. It will starting next year. The cost of the 2% payroll tax holiday is going

to be replaced with funds from the general revenues. Since income is not matching expenditures in the general budget, a portion of those funds will be borrowed expanding the deficit. This is my biggest problem with the payroll tax holiday in that it makes your argument, which has been true since SS started and somewhat insulated it from political attacks, no longer a true statement Keep repeting your message as much as you can though for the next 3 days, it was a good one that we have now given up.

[Nordmadr]

33. I have been unable to determine how they can even defend the

social security 'holiday'. The purpose seems entirely set up to change the source of the funding so that they CAN justify cutting it, or raising the age. I wrote my rep about it and he brought up how the money would be put back in from another source. The source is still US you jerk-offs. I keep finding myself in an ebb and flow. One minute I think maybe there is good happening, and another I think it is all just a big charade. I really don't think our government is legitimately functioning for the people at all anymore at this point. It makes me mad, sad, and tired.

[savannah43]

35. The cost of the 2% will be $120 billion.

I wonder who will be making a big issue of that in the next election? Also, the 2% that workers will not be paying to the SS fund will be taxed by the feds and the states. For someone making $40K per year, the before tax benefit will be $15.50 per week. Wow. What a score.

[kelly1mm]

38. For that 40k person, it is almost 2x the Making Work Pay Credit. Was

that only 1/2 a score?

[RandomThoughts]

3. They want to keep people working so they don't think about what is going on.

Part of the dumbing down of society, it is a side effect of believing a group can move the world in a direction in secrecy, they begin to fear being seen, and react by PR, then downward spiral into harming people to keep them from seeing what they are doing, part of that is fear, part of that is keeping people working and not having time passing on life lessons to other generations.

Transparency solves the problems.


You can't change society for the worse if many elderly people across the entire spectrum are sharing and thinking on their life experiences.

They probably don't even know why they are doing it.

[HereSince1628]

4. Progressives and Pragmatists are going in opposite directions

This developing rift is going to break the Democratic coalition unless
the professional democrats realize that they must reconcile the
following memes:

1)The Perfect cannot be allowed to be the enemy of the good.

2)Pragmatism (The Easy) cannot be allowed to be the enemy of the possible.

[Amonester]

46. +1

New rules! :fistbump:

[scarletwoman]

5. First, let's draw a clear line between "politicians" and "progressives".

Gov. Rendell is a POLITICIAN. And remember, even the neo-liberal DLC/New Dems love to label their policy statements as "progressive" -- look at the Progressive Policy Institute.

Truth is, labels are useless and meaningless. Our political language is hopelessly degenerate, words have no meaning.

Rendell's willingness to buy into the DC line that Social Security is a "problem" is a clear indication that HE's no progressive. It's NOT an indication that Progressives are weak -- because he clearly isn't one.

sw

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

6. Yep. Rendell is a DLCer who fervently supported fellow DLCer Hillary Clinton

in the primaries, and his behavior was appalling.

Anyway, point well taken, OP. You're on to something, though I may not agree with everything that was stated. For the record, as much as I love Ed Schultz, he is often not up to the issues and doesn't think quickly on his feet.

[nckjm]

21. Interesting you should mention Ed Schultz

I felt that Ed "got over" Obama's tax cut extension cave-in really fast. With the passing of the end of DADT, it was like, OK, Obama...all is forgiven. I love you again. Actually, Ed is getting harder to watch and that's a disappointment.

He's not alone on this...a lot of "liberal" pundits have been so enthralled by Obama's "victories" at the end of the year that they have totally taken their eyes off of the "THE BIG THING"...the re-distribution of wealth in America and how this is already destroying the America most of us have known.

I wasn't that surprised by what Rendell said. He's shown himself to be only a politician. But Cenk and Joan just basically gave him a pass on it. Cenk gave him a gentle nudge but not a challenge to what he said. That's when the image of the frog just sitting in the pot popped into my mind. I just can't figure out why we are so non-confrontational when something so important is at stake.

[leveymg]

29. The TV "progressives" are also subject to hiring/firing restraints on what they can say

They know the limits, and at some point they too must go along in order to continue drawing paychecks. You won't see or hear any fundamental challenges to established orthodoxies, particularly not by people who are paid to be on TV.

[Hydra]

8. That's part of blurring the lines

The Corptocracy is doing an excellent job of stealing our words and using them for their own positions.

Tax cuts for the rich are a progressive value now. So are Bank Bailouts.

The Real Progressives can't fight it, because we get another hit from the noise machine- they say "You aren't a progressive, you are a far left extremist!"

The people in our party that don't see what's happening or support this add weight to it and we are marginalized.

[sulphurdunn]

43. "You aren't a progressive, you are a far left extremist!"

My usual response: Not only that, I'm a socialist too. Me being these things only bothers you because you're a goose stepping fascist tool. ;-)

[saras]

44. Absolutely

Someone had to say it. Whenever someone tells me that 'socialism doesn't work', I tell them in response that they need to quit using public roads, then, and quit using public water and sewer services, and quit depending on the United States military to defend them.

[tech9413]

20. Having spent most of my life in PA and meeting the guy f/f

I can say two things for sure. He is nothing more than a politician and has never been progressive. He's barely a democrat. I wouldn't trust him any farther than the stick I could smack him upside the head.

[grahamhgreen]

7. Well said. A true progressive would argue for increasing SS guarantees.

[upi402]

9. Not all Democrats are actually Democrats

But you may get flamed here for pointing out the elephant in the living room here on DU.

You can't rip a phone book in half all at once, but ya can 1 page at a time. They're on the back cover by now.

Welcome to DU!
:hi:

[nckjm]

24. Thanks for the welcome

It's a tough crowd here :-) but that's OK; it makes for a good give and take. Being relatively new to DU, I don't have any history with anyone or any axe to grind. I sense there's a shared vision (a level of consciousness and worldview) that draws people to DU. Shared principles and values provide the glue to bind us together as we hold forth the vision...as long as we focus on what binds us, what separates us becomes just background noise. DU is an important meeting place.

[hulka38]

11. That's a great first post.

It's a great post, period, especially, "Come on, who can't see this coming?" That says it all. Yet I see people deluding themselves about this all over DU. It's baffling. Do they want to be fooled and manipulated because it's less painful than facing reality. They deny that the rationalizations to cut SS are beginning and are eagerly awaiting those same rationalizations from a smiling, trustworthy (insert a Dem here). This psychosis is enabling the leaders of this party to screw us. It's terribly irresponsible and effects everyone. Maybe the centrist Dems should realize that some on the more progressive side have better insight than they do. When this comes to pass, and it will, maybe it's time they stop telling us to shut up and listen for a change.

[nckjm]

22. Thanks for the welcome

Like many, I continue to be amazed at the boldness with which the American "take down" is happening. It's like cancer cells spreading throughout the government...although it is the corporatocracy at work.

[Cleita]

12. I gotta say I had the same reaction.

Later on KO with Sam Seder, he said that maybe people who are unemployed with little chance of employment after the age of fifty might have shorter life expectancies and it would make more sense to lower the retirement age like to maybe 60 or even 55 so that the shrinking job market pool opens up to younger people.

[MrSlayer]

13. They are not even trying to pretend anymore.

Two party system my ass. One fascist party is what we have. The only good people in Congress are in the Democratic Party but too few to make a difference.

[butterfly77]

16. He was talking to someone on cnn

I believe the Parker Spitzer show and parker asked him why didn't he come to cnn and be a host she said something about him being a fair progressive,whatever the hell that means.

I personally,think he has been working with the republicons.He smiles like hell when talking about what the President needs to do but,everytime someone asks him would he work for the white house he gets serious as hell and begins stumbling to tell us why he can't and that is because...And I don't want him to I hope the President doesn't ask him.

Rendell said once his term is up he will think about it because he has been talking to all four stations and what would one of those stations be...

[butterfly77]

17. Kicked&Recommended!

[MissDeeds]

18. No, this is not where Progressives are heading

Anyone can claim to be a progressive, just as anyone can claim to be a Dem, but that doesn't make it so. Beware false prophets.

[jotsy]

19. Welcome to the machine.

Unfortunately, I've seen the phenomenon before, particularly at MSNBS. (yeah, I know that's wrong, it looks to me a more proper finish that way,)Voices from the left that proved themselves effective as informative sources which might inspire dissent, some of whom have moved on to mainstream, but seem to have turned it down a notch since, or in Big Eddie's case mock his passion and mark it as 'fringe'. I see it as a feathering exercise in a lesson on group think, and that you are wise to resist a network's attempt to mold your opinion.

From a frog who jumped.

Have thick skin, it's the advice I got and didn't heed well enough.

[Aleric]

23. I could except this if not for...

..the primary issue and your analysis of it.

Rendell is wrong to say that Americans *will* be living 10 years longer. It would be more correct to say that it is likely that Americans will be living longer, be healthier for longer and be able to work for longer. Mandatory retirement ages should be removed. People should be allowed to work as long as they are able and want to. The one-size-fits-all retirement age should be eliminated in favor of a system which allows some flexibility in retirement age - earlier if necessary later if more reasonable. (I would argue that a good lawyer gets better after 65, for example, while a coal miner should be able to retire from the mines before they are 50. The social security retirement age has always been arbitrary. We need to fix that but not by insisting that it is lowered or raised universally.

[tomp]

25. the problem is that you ever saw rendell as a progressive.

too many people have the idea that democrat=progressive.

rendell is a power-playing democratic party hack and never was anything else.

i agree with you on the slow boil but it is now time to jump....away from faith in the democratic party.

[Enthusiast]

26. If one is in favor of

increasing the retirement age they are not 'progressive'. They might play the role of progressive but they aren't truly progressive. Very simple.

[lonestarnot]

27. Frogs can be jumpers but the jumps from high places may be beneficial to us all. JMFJ!

And leave the frogs alone!

[xchrom]

28. that interview is symptomatic of the Disease of the Single Narrative. nt

[GeorgeGist]

30. Rendell is dumb. Period.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

31. Here in SoCal we have a company called "Progressive Private Security"

I am yet to meet long term private security guard that I would classify as sentient, let alone progressive.

[ThoughtCriminal]

34. Just wearing a "Progressive" label doesn't make it real

I still prefer "Liberal".

[LWolf]

36. Welcome to DU.

If you are going to publicly, openly point out the blurring of political lines between parties, you might want to put on one of these:

[Vinca]

37. Great first post. I'll never understand the big objection to raising

the cap on social security. Raising the retirement age is foolish when anyone over 50 is SOL when it comes to looking for a job right now. If a 50 year old can't find a job, what do they expect a 69 year old will do?

[liberation]

39. I don't think the issue is whe "dumbing down" of progressives...

... as much as the fact that plenty of centrist (and center-right even) people these days tend to label themselves as "progressives."

Plenty of these people would panic and cry to high heavens in fear if they were to ever get in contact with a left-leaning political platform from other industrialized nations, the EU specially.

[PhillySane]

40. I like Rendell so much better

when he sticks to football talk.

[KoKo]

41. PROGRESSIVES? You Gotta Be Kidding! Doncha Know...We are "Fucking Retards"

according to Rahm Emmanuel and Robert Gibbs (the President's Mouthpiece) called us "crazy" and suggested we needed to be "Drug Tested."

Other Threats and Slurs were amongst these "slings and arrows" to destroy the Dems who supported Obama after working to get "More and Better Dems into House and Senate..giving Money to "Act Blue" and working and Demonstrating for YEARS against BUSH/CHENEY POLITICS!

AND ...."THIS" is "WHAT WE GET in RETURN?"

EXPLAIN IT TO ME? PLEASE TELL ME...How a President will TRASH HIS OWN DEMS who WORKED FOR YEARS...YEARS to get HIM IN POWER?

WHAT KIND OF BETRAYAL IS THIS? What????

[Atticus]

42. Welcome! I imagine someone with your views has an occasionally "interesting'

life in NC. I'm in southern Illinois and think we likely have similar neighbors.

Hang in there.

[Zax2me]

45. K&R

[nadinbrzezinski]

47. To play absolute devil's advocate regarding the age factor

Rendel is relying on this little factoid... life expectancy in the US has absolutely gone up over the last few decades... BUT... you knew that was coming...it has not just stalled but started to go down.

To know this you need to keep up with national statistics, and trust me, most of these people (don't care what party) know the first part, not the second.

There are good reasons why it went up... between vaccinations and better medical care, but it has stalled as we spend the insane amounts we spend on health care (double than Canada) and it has actually gone slightly down.

If the trends continued the way they were even ten years ago... he'd be correct though. And that is the problem, most of our ahem policy makers, have not kept up with trends... on and incidentally the benefits have hit mostly white middle class Americans. Blacks, though better life expectancy, is nowhere close, and the same goes for hispanics, and if you break this up for blue vs white...

So it is also important to understand where they are pulling numbers from, in order to fight it.