Bill Clinton, a social progressive who was economically moderate right was a perfect fit for the times. Admittedly, he did some great things, most notably welfare reform with child care. As a result, many people got out of the welfare cycle; at least until Bush II took away child care and made it impossible for many working single parents to make ends meet. On the negative side, free trade set us back 75 years. I am somewhat embarrassed to admit that I was one who was convinced that the only way to deal with the world economy was to capitulate and sign these worker hostile agreements (my weak defense is that, at the time, I was not aware of the worker-hostile provisions of these agreements, although I should have taken the time to look). I was wrong. Anyway, that was then, this is now. What we need now is a democrat that is less like Robert Rubin and more like Robert Reich.

This is the 00's and we are in the early stages of a progressive wave in American politics. Earlier in the decade, Bush II was barely able to hold on by fooling almost half of the people, and disenfranchising a small but critical number of voters; just enough to steal two elections. That won't work this time, and we should not vote in the primary as though republican lite is the only way to win. We must take advantage of social trends and elect a true progressive; one that the electorate is ready to elect.

Essentially, the DLC is not the voice of the Democratic Party, and we don't have to settle for their anointed candidate. Social mood is presently such that we need to nominate a candidate that is solidly for withdrawal from Iraq, solidly for fiscal responsibility and repeal of the Bush tax cuts for the rich, solidly pro-union, solidly for universal health care, solidly for alternative energy and decrease in greenhouse gas emissions, and solidly for fair trade, as opposed to free trade.

We need a candidate who values work over money. Why is money earned by work taxed at a higher rate than money earned by money? Capital gains are taxed at roughly half the rate of earned income, and further exempted from payroll taxes. Steve Forbes, Bill Gates, and Warren Buffet (I give Warren credit; he has been eager to admit it) are taxed at a lower overall rate than the average worker.

A candidate who clearly delineates the differences between the haves and the have-nots, rather than one who attempts to evade the very real class war in this country should get serious consideration by progressives. One relatively easy way to differentiate is to look at just who is financing the individual candidates. Beware the "progressive" whose candidacy is financed by the same corporate money that has supported Bush. Look for the candidate whose small donations exceed large donations. That candidate is most likely to represent the individual, as opposed to the elite.

It's time to use social trends to our advantage and elect a true progressive, one that will lead us to a generation of progressive dominance in American government.
http://butlerdemblog.blogspot.com