

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
On the eve of the Republican-dominated mid-term election, working people were told to vote Democrat to prevent a "truly dangerous" Republican party from taking power. There is an element of truth in this: the Republican Party has been sprinting to the far right for decades, to the point where they are incapable of speaking sensibly about political issues.
But in a close second place in this rightward scramble are the Democrats, who've spent decades racing into the arms of the corporations that dominate both political parties unchallenged.
This mad dash to the right did not stop at the midterm election; the Democrats are preparing to unleash their hidden second wind, kept from public view until after the elections.
The first step to the right occurred in the commentary over the lost elections. The Democrat's fake analysis about why they lost will push them to "correct their mistakes."
Contrary to all evidence or common sense, the Democrats now claim that their agenda was "too progressive" while in power, to be fixed by shifting even further to the right. In effect, the Democrats are now agreeing with the Tea Party's analysis of the Obama Administration.
Democratic Senator from Indiana Evan Bayh explained this false narrative in The New York Times, in his op-ed entitled Where Do Democrats Go Next? His answer could only be interpreted as to the right:
"It is clear that Democrats over-interpreted our [progressive] mandate. Talk of a 'political realignment' and a 'new progressive era' proved wishful thinking." (November 3, 2010).
Bayh suggests that the Democrats adopt numerous Republican policies to compensate, such as cuts to both corporate taxes and Social Security.
Obama wasted no time in agreeing with the Tea Party in his concession speech. He had "lost contact" with the American people, meaning, that he had acted too progressively. To compensate, Obama implied a move to the right, by serving corporations even more obediently:
"I've got to take responsibility in terms of making sure that I make clear to the business community [Wall Street and corporate America], as well as to the country, that the most important thing we can do is to boost and encourage our business sector...,"
Obama also promised to "negotiate" with Republicans over the Bush tax cuts, energy, and education policies.
Social Security is an additional area that Obama has agreed to negotiate with the Republicans. Obama's bipartisan Deficit Reduction Commission purposely waited for the midterm elections to end before it announced its recommendations, which will reportedly include cuts to Social Security and Medicare.
Both Republicans and Democrats are set to unite in attacking Social Security, in the same way they have united over the Bush/Obama wars; the Bush/Obama bank bailouts; the Bush/Obama destruction of civil liberties; the Bush/Obama education policy; and the Bush/Obama general favoritism of corporations over working people.
Both parties agree that the U.S. deficit is a more severe problem than creating jobs. They will thus unite to reduce the deficit by cutting or destroying valuable social services to working people, including Social Security, Medicare, public education, and other federally funded programs. This is their only option, since both parties agree that raising taxes on the rich and corporations or cutting military spending are "off the table".
These bi-partisan, anti-worker policies will further expose the Democrats as being extensions of the very wealthy and the corporations. Working people will refuse to vote for this "lesser evil" in the future and demand that their labor and community groups move towards political independence.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
On the eve of the Republican-dominated mid-term election, working people were told to vote Democrat to prevent a "truly dangerous" Republican party from taking power. There is an element of truth in this: the Republican Party has been sprinting to the far right for decades, to the point where they are incapable of speaking sensibly about political issues.
But in a close second place in this rightward scramble are the Democrats, who've spent decades racing into the arms of the corporations that dominate both political parties unchallenged.
This mad dash to the right did not stop at the midterm election; the Democrats are preparing to unleash their hidden second wind, kept from public view until after the elections.
The first step to the right occurred in the commentary over the lost elections. The Democrat's fake analysis about why they lost will push them to "correct their mistakes."
Contrary to all evidence or common sense, the Democrats now claim that their agenda was "too progressive" while in power, to be fixed by shifting even further to the right. In effect, the Democrats are now agreeing with the Tea Party's analysis of the Obama Administration.
Democratic Senator from Indiana Evan Bayh explained this false narrative in The New York Times, in his op-ed entitled Where Do Democrats Go Next? His answer could only be interpreted as to the right:
"It is clear that Democrats over-interpreted our [progressive] mandate. Talk of a 'political realignment' and a 'new progressive era' proved wishful thinking." (November 3, 2010).
Bayh suggests that the Democrats adopt numerous Republican policies to compensate, such as cuts to both corporate taxes and Social Security.
Obama wasted no time in agreeing with the Tea Party in his concession speech. He had "lost contact" with the American people, meaning, that he had acted too progressively. To compensate, Obama implied a move to the right, by serving corporations even more obediently:
"I've got to take responsibility in terms of making sure that I make clear to the business community [Wall Street and corporate America], as well as to the country, that the most important thing we can do is to boost and encourage our business sector...,"
Obama also promised to "negotiate" with Republicans over the Bush tax cuts, energy, and education policies.
Social Security is an additional area that Obama has agreed to negotiate with the Republicans. Obama's bipartisan Deficit Reduction Commission purposely waited for the midterm elections to end before it announced its recommendations, which will reportedly include cuts to Social Security and Medicare.
Both Republicans and Democrats are set to unite in attacking Social Security, in the same way they have united over the Bush/Obama wars; the Bush/Obama bank bailouts; the Bush/Obama destruction of civil liberties; the Bush/Obama education policy; and the Bush/Obama general favoritism of corporations over working people.
Both parties agree that the U.S. deficit is a more severe problem than creating jobs. They will thus unite to reduce the deficit by cutting or destroying valuable social services to working people, including Social Security, Medicare, public education, and other federally funded programs. This is their only option, since both parties agree that raising taxes on the rich and corporations or cutting military spending are "off the table".
These bi-partisan, anti-worker policies will further expose the Democrats as being extensions of the very wealthy and the corporations. Working people will refuse to vote for this "lesser evil" in the future and demand that their labor and community groups move towards political independence.
On the eve of the Republican-dominated mid-term election, working people were told to vote Democrat to prevent a "truly dangerous" Republican party from taking power. There is an element of truth in this: the Republican Party has been sprinting to the far right for decades, to the point where they are incapable of speaking sensibly about political issues.
But in a close second place in this rightward scramble are the Democrats, who've spent decades racing into the arms of the corporations that dominate both political parties unchallenged.
This mad dash to the right did not stop at the midterm election; the Democrats are preparing to unleash their hidden second wind, kept from public view until after the elections.
The first step to the right occurred in the commentary over the lost elections. The Democrat's fake analysis about why they lost will push them to "correct their mistakes."
Contrary to all evidence or common sense, the Democrats now claim that their agenda was "too progressive" while in power, to be fixed by shifting even further to the right. In effect, the Democrats are now agreeing with the Tea Party's analysis of the Obama Administration.
Democratic Senator from Indiana Evan Bayh explained this false narrative in The New York Times, in his op-ed entitled Where Do Democrats Go Next? His answer could only be interpreted as to the right:
"It is clear that Democrats over-interpreted our [progressive] mandate. Talk of a 'political realignment' and a 'new progressive era' proved wishful thinking." (November 3, 2010).
Bayh suggests that the Democrats adopt numerous Republican policies to compensate, such as cuts to both corporate taxes and Social Security.
Obama wasted no time in agreeing with the Tea Party in his concession speech. He had "lost contact" with the American people, meaning, that he had acted too progressively. To compensate, Obama implied a move to the right, by serving corporations even more obediently:
"I've got to take responsibility in terms of making sure that I make clear to the business community [Wall Street and corporate America], as well as to the country, that the most important thing we can do is to boost and encourage our business sector...,"
Obama also promised to "negotiate" with Republicans over the Bush tax cuts, energy, and education policies.
Social Security is an additional area that Obama has agreed to negotiate with the Republicans. Obama's bipartisan Deficit Reduction Commission purposely waited for the midterm elections to end before it announced its recommendations, which will reportedly include cuts to Social Security and Medicare.
Both Republicans and Democrats are set to unite in attacking Social Security, in the same way they have united over the Bush/Obama wars; the Bush/Obama bank bailouts; the Bush/Obama destruction of civil liberties; the Bush/Obama education policy; and the Bush/Obama general favoritism of corporations over working people.
Both parties agree that the U.S. deficit is a more severe problem than creating jobs. They will thus unite to reduce the deficit by cutting or destroying valuable social services to working people, including Social Security, Medicare, public education, and other federally funded programs. This is their only option, since both parties agree that raising taxes on the rich and corporations or cutting military spending are "off the table".
These bi-partisan, anti-worker policies will further expose the Democrats as being extensions of the very wealthy and the corporations. Working people will refuse to vote for this "lesser evil" in the future and demand that their labor and community groups move towards political independence.