[If Obama were a progressive…] he wouldn’t continually accept Republican framing of issues and perpetually treat Republicans and “Conservative Democrats” (read: corporatist Democrats) as honest actors whom sincerely want to do what is best for America[.]
Always Question Authority
One of the beginnings of human emancipation is the ability to laugh at authority. ~ Hitchens
Always Question Authority 
Pingback: Help make “fauxgressive” a recognized word – and Obama its poster child « Death By Trolley
Plenty of truth to that.
Ron,
I thank you as well. I truly enjoyed your article, and disappointingly so, wholeheartedly agree.
I especially appreciated your framing of the word “Conservative” as “[C]orporatist.” True Progressives, the Eugene V. Debs type, of which I consider myself, would be well served to practice the art of framing. One could learn how to do so by either 1) reading George Lakoff’s wonderful 2004 book titled, “Don’t Think of an Elephant!: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate–The Essential Guide for Progressives, or 2) simply watch the “Corporatist,” they are, much to Progressives dismay, absolute experts concerning such.
I appreciate the link as well. I liked your blog, and have philosophical interest as well.
In Reason,
Madison
Thanks, Madison.
I don’t think that conservativism is inherently corporatist at all. In fact, corporatism is in good part at odds with real conservativism, because it is frequently anti-competitive, anti-free market, in that it is not about open competition but about favouring those already at the top of the heap.
However, with the whole political system in America being totally bought, corporatism has infused both parties to the point of super-saturation. And really, in terms of promise-keeping, I think the Republicans may well be far more trustworthy than the Democrats. Why? Because the Republicans have an easier job of integrating their messages and framing to their various major stakeholders than do the Dems. The Republicans get most of both their votes and their campaign financing by championing conservative values and policies like low taxes, small government and national defense. The Dems, in contrast, get a large chunk of their campaign financing by engaging in corporatism similar to the Republicans, but they get most of their votes by painting themselves as defenders of social safety nets, progressive taxation and standing up for the little guy. The Republicans’ 2 primary sets of stakeholders – their voting and financing bases – have interests that are far more congruent than do most of the voters and bankrollers of the Dems. Furthermore, all high level politicians of both parties are socioeconomic elites who benefit from corporatism and elitism. As such, it is far easier and more self-interest-serving for the Republicans to walk their talk than the Democrats. I plan on doing a post on just this soon.
Ron,
To cut down to the chase, the fight has never been, and never will be between the “Corporatists” and the “Progressives” as the politicians, and their corporate masters would like the uninformed/ill-informed to believe. No, the fight has always been, is, and always will be, between the “haves,” and the “have nots.” The object of the game is for the politicians to see how much money they, every one of them, can transfer from the public coffers to their corporate benefactors. All else is show.
In Reason,
Madison
Thx for the link.
-Ron