Corporate Democrats at Netroots Nation

Netroots Nation is supposed to be an annual gathering of progressive bloggers and activists, although quite a few corporate Democrats showed up to crash the party.

Although Hillary Clinton, who voted for the unjustified Iraq War and voted for free-trade agreements that shipped American jobs overseas as a U.S. Senator from New York, didn't show up at Netroots Nation herself, the Ready for Hillary SuperPAC, an organization seeking to convince Hillary to run for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2016, did bring their bus to Netroots Nation.

One corporate Democrat who did show up at Netroots Nation was Mary Burke, the likely Democratic nominee for Governor of Wisconsin and a supporter of charter schools and corporate welfare. In fact, Burke participated in a panel discussion about women running for public office at Netroots Nation. Another corporate Democrat who made his presence known at Netroots Nation was Chuck Schumer, the #3 Democrat in the U.S. Senate from New York and a shill for Wall Street interests who want to deregulate the financial industry in this country.

I find it disturbing that corporate Democrats have managed to infiltrate a supposedly progressive convention. Also, it's a shame that there there are few truly progressive conventions in this country, in fact, the only one I know of is Fighting Bob Fest, which is held annually in Wisconsin.

Are war hawks using Hillary Clinton to divide and conquer the Democratic Party?

Neoconservatives, who had considerable influence on Former Republican President George W. Bush's foreign policy and were behind the costly wars in Iraq and Afghansitan, are now trying to influence Hillary Clinton, who is considering running for the Democratic presidential nomination:

After nearly a decade in the political wilderness, the neoconservative movement is back, using the turmoil in Iraq and Ukraine to claim that it is President Obama, not the movement’s interventionist foreign policy that dominated early George W. Bush-era Washington, that bears responsibility for the current round of global crises.

Even as they castigate Mr. Obama, the neocons may be preparing a more brazen feat: aligning themselves with Hillary Rodham Clinton and her nascent presidential campaign, in a bid to return to the driver’s seat of American foreign policy.

[...] 

It’s not as outlandish as it may sound. Consider the historian Robert Kagan, the author of a recent, roundly praised article in The New Republic that amounted to a neo-neocon manifesto. He has not only avoided the vitriolic tone that has afflicted some of his intellectual brethren but also co-founded an influential bipartisan advisory group during Mrs. Clinton’s time at the State Department.

It's not just the brains of the neocon movement that are praising Hillary Clinton. Republican U.S. Senator John McCain of Arizona, who is one of the biggest war hawks in either house of Congress, praised Hillary Clinton a while back and is open to the idea of supporting Hillary's possible candidacy for president.

Many of the same war hawks who helped people like George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld lead this country into two long, costly wars that resulted in the deaths of thousands of Americans and turned a federal budget surplus into a massive federal budget deficit are now promoting Hillary Clinton's possible presidential candidacy as part of an apparent plan to divide and conquer the Democratic Party, whose base is full of progressives who, like me, are opposed to the interventionist foreign policy that the neocons support and promote. I disagree with people like Hillary Clinton and John McCain on this, but I firmly believe that the U.S. shouldn't be the world's policeman and should stay out of the affairs of foreign countries except when U.S. interests are at stake.

Hillary Clinton is more interested in serving some of George W. Bush's former cronies than rebuilding the American middle class and other progressive goals.

Cleveland, Ohio is now home to overhyped professional athletes and politicians

The City of Cleveland, Ohio has been in the national spotlight for the past few weeks.

First, the NFL's Cleveland Browns drafted quarterback Johnny Manziel, who played for Texas A&M University in college football for two years, winning the Heisman Trophy as a redshirt freshman.

Second, Cleveland landed the 2016 Republican National Convention, which will officially nominate the Republican Party's candidates for the offices of President and Vice President of the United States. Republicans are all but certain to nominate presidential and vice-presidential candidates who support far-right political views that would wreck the American economy, destroy what little is left of the middle class, and take away rights from the American people.

Earlier today, Lebron James, one of the most high-profile NBA players, announced that he is returning to Cleveland to play for the Cleveland Cavaliers.

With Manziel, James, and whoever Republicans nominate for president and vice president, Cleveland will now be home to overhyped professional athletes and politicians. Well, at least it's not home to a burning river anymore, although the Republicans who will gather in Cleveland two years from now want to weaken environmental regulations so that the Cuyahoga River could be set on fire again, which would be an absolutely terrible thing to happen.

Establishment Democrats are no longer interested in fighting for anything

Hillary Clinton, one of several possible candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination, has sounded guarded in recent media appearances. For example, she isn't willing to take a firm stand on a number of issues, such as the Keystone XL pipeline and legalization of recreational marijuana.

This is a considerably different Hillary Clinton today than the one we all saw in the 1990's. Back then, Hillary publicly spoke out in favor of universal health care and railed against the "vast right-wing conspiracy" against establishment Democrats, such as herself, and progressives.

Since Hillary Clinton is considered by many to be the standard-bearer of the establishment wing of the Democratic Party, that leads me to ask this question: Has the Democratic establishment stopped fighting for anything?

One of my biggest grievances about the current leadership of the Democratic Party is that the current leadership of the party is more concerned about getting themselves and their cronies elected than fighting for anything that would make America a better place to live. Granted, on a few issues, such as marriage equality and, more recently, student loan reform, most establishment Democrats are fighting alongside progressives. However, on many other issues, most establishment Democrats are either siding with the far-right Republicans or distancing themselves from the issue altogether.

The Democratic establishment has completely given up on the idea of political courage these days. Instead of fighting for ideas that will make America a better place to live, the Democratic establishment is more concerned about sucking up to special interests and rewarding their cronies. It's time for progressives to divide and conquer the Democratic Party and lead the party into a new, more progressive generation of leadership and courage. It's time for progressives to start fighting for pro-middle class, pro-worker, pro-woman, pro-civil rights, pro-civil liberties, and pro-democracy values, and start realizing that both the Republicans and the Democratic establishment are adversaries in this fight for America's heart and soul.

Could Brian Schweitzer run for President or Vice President as a Republican?

Former Democratic Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer recently attended Mitt Romney's Republican retreat in Park City, Utah, which is unexpected for someone who is considering running for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Here's my speculation as to why Schweitzer attended the Romney retreat: He may be considering running for president or vice president...as a Republican.

For those of you who are not familiar with Schweitzer, he's no fan of the Democratic establishment, having been a vocal critic of Democrats like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. While I'm certainly not a fan of the Democratic establishment myself, I'm considerably more progressive than Schweitzer is. Sure, he's taken stances to the left of mainstream Democrats on some issues, such as health care and campaign finance reform. However, he's also taken stances to the right of mainstream Democrats on issues like guns and the environment. Schweitzer was personally endorsed by NRA head Wayne LaPierre in his 2008 re-election bid for Governor of Montana, and Schweitzer has criticized President Obama and other Democrats for supporting clean air and clean water laws.

It's not completely out of the question that Brian Schweitzer may run for president or vice president as a Republican. If he did that, he would lose all of the respect I have for him, to put it mildly.