In tonight's debate, Clinton slammed Sanders for his "negative personal assessments" against President Obama -- the primary of those being a supposed "forward" to a book, which was written as a progressive critique of president.
First off, it was a "jacket blurb" not a book "forward".
Second off, it is a rather innocuous and common critique -- some say a statement of simple fact -- about how a president needs to keep rallying the people "on behalf of progressive causes".
Third off, Bill Press a noted progressive, was the author of the Book in question -- not Sanders. And Mr. Press makes note of Obama's many Progressive accomplishments in the book as well, as he explained here, the first time Clinton brought it up.
…..
by Bill Press, chicagotribune.com -- 02/04/2016
[...]
First, the book. Which is all mine, not Sen. Sanders'. It's called "Buyer's Remorse: How Obama Let Progressives Down." In it, I begin by giving President Obama credit for all the good things he's accomplished, including saving the auto industry, re-establishing relations with Cuba, negotiating a nuclear arms deal with Iran and bringing the country back from economic disaster. But I also point out many ways in which he has disappointed liberals by not being more aggressive or, in some cases, downright nonprogressive.
...
Now, the blurb by Sen. Sanders, which is not in any way an endorsement of everything I say in the book. But which merely repeats and reinforces a point he makes in every campaign speech: the need for a "political revolution." Here's the blurb in its entirety:
"Bill Press makes the case why, long after taking the oath of office, the next president of the United States must keep rallying the people who elected him or her on behalf of progressive causes. That is the only way real change will happen. Read this book."
It would be hard to find any Democrat or progressive who could disagree with that statement. No criticism of President Obama. No disloyalty. No attack on anybody. Just stating the need for progressives to stay involved in the issues, and for the next president to make sure they do.
I guess this is the new cloak of indignation, upon which the Clinton campaign will be staking their Obama coat-tails on, since tonight is at least the second time they went there.
As Sanders answered, Is no one allowed to even disagree with the President? Has Clinton herself never disagreed with the President?
Strangely, Clinton could not honestly answer either of those direct questions, as that would have the uncloaked "Loyalty" illusion, she have just so carefully woven for herself, and against her progressive opponent.
It's "a wedge issue" she can use against him, as one pundit noted. One that distracts and redirects from all that unhelpful recent focus on her Wall Street fund-raising connections.
Trading in her Wall Street Loyalty, for her Obama Loyalty -- nice trick, if she can make that convenient Legacy-grab stick.
……...
Who's the real progressive again? The one who wants to learn from our progressive mistakes, and improve on them next time? Or the one who doesn’t?