Reply #16: Amazing how Progressives perspectives on the issues

[angee_is_mad]

are colored by race sometimes. I agree with the link below because I have seen it played on here many times.

http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2009/12/16/132039/17

by BooMan
Wed Dec 16th, 2009 at 01:20:39 PM EST

The progressive blogosphere is completely dominated by academic progressives. Bloggers of color tend to be just as highly educated as white bloggers. Most of the really well known progressive bloggers have advanced degrees, in law, economics, political science, or something else. They tend to be interested in the theoretical aspects of public policy, like determining what might be the ideal way to deliver affordable, accessible health care to all our citizens. That's good. We need that. But urban and labor activists tend to work on the ground in communities of need. They are focused on giving people help right now, not on winning some epic ideological battle in Washington DC. Their idea of progress is much more mundane. Can they help Mrs. Smith keep her house? Can they can get Mr. Jones the dialysis treatment he needs? What can they do about these payday lenders? Can they negotiate slightly more pay or better benefits for their workers?

So, when it comes to something like the health care bill, you'll see academic progressives throwing up their hands and saying that no bill should be passed if it doesn't do x,y, and z. And they have solid reasons for saying that, reasons that are substantive both politically and policy-wise. And then you'll see a lot of urban progressives looking at them quizzically, asking "are you out of your ever-loving tree?"

The more you've worked on the ground in urban or labor activism, the less likely you are to cut off your nose to spite your face. If a bill can make health care available to all the diabetes patients you know, you're not going to worry about its lack of cost containment or the private/public balance of the insurance providers.

What concerns me is less the imperfection of the Senate bill than the politically foolish and dangerous idea of mandating that people buy private insurance. Because I am going to honest with you. I have progressive goals, but I think the most important issue facing our world right now is not terrorism or climate change or health care, but the dangerous insanity of America's Republican Party. And I don't support doing things, however high-minded, that will put us at risk of seeing them back in power. From that standpoint, I am totally conservative. I will eat a lot of shit to save or even grow our majorities. So, my problem with the bill is not so much that it is a missed opportunity to destroy the private insurance industry or that it doesn't contain costs enough or any other particular feature. The bill will still help millions of people. My problem is that it is not going to be popular and you'll see people voting Republican as a result. And that is not something humanity can afford, because a revitalized GOP that isn't purged of its current Teabagging Palinism is very dangerous indeed.]