Maggie says:
One of my most valuable lessons of the last few years has been discovering all the many and varied ways that my Democratic Party loyalty only goes so far... I've disagreed with the Dems heartily on many occasions, such as:
- Supporting the Iraqi War
- Confirming any number of Bush nominees
- CAFTA
- Tolerance for Joe Lieberman (Go Ned Lamont!)
- Acting like bumbling idiotic wimps
- Throwing away any number of opportunities to stand for something that matters to people
- Operating with a Beltway-politics-as-usual mentality, regardless of what's at stake
And yet, I remain optimistic. Such is my sickness. Another progressive optimist, David Sirota, agrees that there's cause for hope. Sirota quotes the Denver Post on the turning tide of progressive politics:
"Political corruption comes in two varieties," the Post notes. "There are brazen payoffs, and then there is a kind of gooey rot: the venal abandonment of principles, spurred by the favors of corporate lobbyists and the need for campaign cash." Ultimately, "All but the toughest pols and pundits get seduced, and over time, the party establishment starts to stipulate: globalization is a blessing, free trade is sacred, billionaires need tax breaks, job loss is inevitable, workers are expendable, wages will decline, the war in Iraq is necessary."Sound familiar?
In 2006: The Year the Progressive Movement Became Real, Sirota counts off example after example of progressives saying "enough is enough," many of them in key Senate races where suddenly the primary is the race to watch, not the general election. Ned Lamont is one of these progressives, mad as hell about the fact that the solidly progressive state of Connecticut has been putting up with a sham of a senator for this long. Lamont came out of nowhere - when everyone said he had no chance, that Lieberman was the shoo-in no matter what - and is now neck-and-neck with Lieberman in the upcoming primary, the budding star of the progressive political movement. Montana senatorial candidate Jon Tester (who has the most old-school tough-guy haircut ever) similarly had it with agricultural deals that help no one but corporations and decided to get pissed about it publicly. By talking real about real issues, these candidates have electrified residents who have gotten all too used to no one saying anything that really matters anymore. Hell, we've all gotten used to that.
This brings me to Marty, the mayor we all love to hate. Actually, that's not true. I have no patience for him and would gladly someone else - anyone else! - be in office rather than continually getting pissed at him. I couldn't help but be amused with the Journal story this morning: Chavez Endorses Domenici's Reelection Bid. Among the goo:- "I am decidedly nonpartisan in the way I run the city, but I am a Democrat."
- "I have every intention of endorsing Pete Domenici, and I'm going to catch a lot of heat for that."
- "He is a great asset to the city of Albuquerque and also the state of New Mexico."
These quotes surprise me for a couple of reasons, but not the ones Marty thinks will be surprising. First, does Marty really think we're surprised that he'd endorse a Republican? This is the man who hemmed and hawed over a decent living wage for Albuquerque residents, who openly hates the brown youth of this city, who has lined his pockets, budgets, initiatives, and vetoes with developer money and interests, and who, in sum, is a complete and total jerk. So given all that, why would he "catch a lot of heat" for endorsing Domenici? Hell, we wish he'd just go ahead and join Domenici across the proverbial aisle. At least then we wouldn't have to shake our heads when national progressive groups give him campaign money over Eric Griego, clearly not understanding the craziness that are local politics here.
And what does it means that Marty runs this city in a "nonpartisan" way? If by "nonpartisan," Marty means willing to govern based on the whims of his donors, sure. If by proclaiming he doesn't run Albuquerque as a Democrat, he means that he has no core values to speak of, sure. But listen to that phrase, said like a reminder: "but I am a Democrat." That just makes me chuckle... You know, Albuquerque's never been a cutting-edge kind of place. We tend to be behind-the-times a bit here in many ways, which is just fine by most of us who like living here because of the interesting ways things happen here, a little slower and a little differently than everywhere else. So given all this, I guess it's no surprise that Marty would think just by using a label - "I am a Democrat" - he can get somewhere with voters.
If this were 10 years ago, and politics as usual meant everyone was sucking up to free trade and running on the same platform they always had without a primary opponent, maybe blind Democratic loyalty would work. But now? Ned Lamont is (hopefully) going to kick Joe Lieberman's ass in Connecticut. Real farmers in the South and the West are coming out and exposing the bullshit that is our corporate agribusiness policy that destroys not just our family farmers, but farmers the world over.
Times change, Marty. No one gives a shit about party loyalty anymore. Get with it. Move on. Your cards have been shown through your actions, regardless of what comes out of your mouth. Albuquerque knows who you are, and that tells us so much more than your lame statements about being a Democrat ever could. Kind of scary, isn't it?
|