I am a Democratic precinct committeewoman in a small Illinois town in a very red, gerrymandered county. Our county Democrats are preparing to promote the party to the county with a populist message, despite being so outnumbered. We believe we have something to offer conservative voters.
But today I got some news that gives me great pause. A link to it is at the very bottom of this entry. First I'll set the stage.
Remember the "Are you ready for Hillary?" campaign? I had to unsubscribe to stop the barrage of emails I was getting last year. My favorite T-shirt says, "Elizabeth Warren speaks for me." In my opinion Warren stands front and center with a group of progressive politicians who understand what is at stake in the next election (that is, as the video below will show, "Citizen Equality"). Before she announced, I wasn't so sure Hillary got it like Warren did. I'd always seen Hillary as a corporate Democrat. Quite like Obama, it turns out.
But since she announced, she's partially redeemed herself. She's been running a very low-key, populist (though without Elizabeth's fire) campaign. I approve. So what's the problem?
Unfortunately, President Obama is the problem. Oh, don't get me wrong, he's done a lot of things in the face of absolute obstruction by the other party. But all along I've had huge misgivings, first as the giant banks were bailed out: even though some of them were investigated for wrongdoing in the 2008 meltdown, and ended up paying (what really amounted to) very paltry fines, no bankers were indicted. That just smelled bad.
And now Obama and Warren are engaged in a conflict over Fast Track authority for the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal. I never trusted that deal since Wikileaks exposed what was in it. I agree with Warren 100% on this issue, and am flabbergasted that the President doesn't see the problem as she does.
Because, if it is as great and progressive as Obama says it is, we should all be able to read it for ourselves and see if that's true, in this representative democracy, so we can comment on it and Congress can amend it BEFORE turning it back over to the President. That's all we ask.
But I got another bombshell this morning when I inadvertently came upon this from last January:
DOCTOR'S ORDERS
Why GOP won't dump Obamacare
Exclusive: Michael Master reveals how fat 'n' happy insurance companies have become...
Almost 5 years ago, in March of 2010, before Obamacare was passed into law, WND carried a column by me [Michael Master] stating that the ones who really wanted Obamacare to be passed were the insurance companies.
It specifically stated:
Just like in the “Song of the South” when the rabbit says to the bear, “Don’t throw me in that briar patch,” the insurance companies are saying don’t pass this bill … but they really want it. Otherwise, why would these Democrats be pushing it when they get so much money from insurance companies?
The top three Senate recipients for insurance industry contributions – all Democrats – are Sens. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., Chris Dodd, D-Conn., and Harry Reid, D-Nev., according to the center’s research. And in the House, it’s another trio of Democrats: Reps. Melissa Bean, D-Ill., Earl Pomeroy, D-N.D., and Barney Frank, D-Mass.
The Center for Responsive Politics shows that President Obama received a staggering $20,175,303 from the health-care industry during the 2008 election cycle, nearly three times the amount of his presidential rival John McCain.
Now I ask you, with this kind of information, how different, really, is this Democratic party from Republicans? Obama had run his campaign partly to sell the American public on health reform that was promised to be "the public option." Instead we got the greatest gift to the insurance industry he could ever have handed them — mandated health coverage paid for by taxpayers. They say if you want to know what's really behind any given legislation, follow the money. After Obamacare passed without a public option, I had suspected what looked like the squeaky clean Obama had became beholden to the pharmaceutical and insurance industry, just as I had suspected he was beholden to Wall Street with his "too big to jail the too big to fail" bankers he bailed out in 2009.
And now I suspect the something smelly is behind Obama's defense of Fast Track for the TPP.
This leads me to the point of this diary: how can I defend this Democratic party? What is it, really? Is it secretly as corporate-friendly as it appears? Hillary is sounding more populist than I'd ever seen her, but Obama had sounded great on the campaign trail, too, and look what we got. We already know Hillary is backed by the biggest money that will likely flow to Democrats, and is heir-apparent as the Democratic candidate. I frankly don't see how any of the dozens of candidates on the right can compete with her, so she's likely to be our next president.
But how can we handle any more of this? How can I defend, much less try to promote, such a Democratic party beholden to corporate interests? Especially when there is one giant alternative: Elizabeth Warren.
It's time to restore small "d" democracy to our country, and so far the current Democratic party is not delivering. If you watch nothing else to inform you what is at stake and what we must do about it, please watch this to the end.
We desperately need Elizabeth Warren to run for president! Only then will I be able to defend the Democrats in good conscience!