MoveOn and ACORN are joining forces to pressure Democrats who voted against the bankruptcy bill that made it easier for folks to emerge from bankruptcy and allow judges to impose new conditions on delinquent mortgages.
Ads are due to run in districts of the Dems who opposed the bill. I like the move, but not the language the progressive groups use.
“We think it is significant that progressives are joining forces to hold congressional moderates accountable for their votes affecting working families,” ACORN Executive Director Steve Kest told POLITICO. “We think that it signals how seriously we take these issues in the face of the economic meltdown.”
The liberal coalition doesn’t seem to mind taking on Democrats, though it’s unclear if the ad campaign would extend to backing more liberal Democrats in primaries against moderates like Ellsworth and Hill next year.
"We were appalled to see some congressional Democrats side with Wall Street while families in their districts are struggling to stay in their homes," said Robert Greenwald, president of Brave New Foundation, an organization spearheading the effort. "That is just unconscionable."
“Moderates” is not a word you want to use against your opponents. “Moderate” hardly sounds bad. Progressives shouldn’t use it against anti-middle class, pro-bank, reactionary Democrats.
And while they’re at it, they should insist Politico refer to them as “progressives,” not “liberals.” “Liberal” implies a lack of standards, values or limits, whereas progressive implies moving forward, making things better.
For the most part, “moderates refers to wishy-washy Democrats afraid of their own shadows, as this story suggests. To turn its back on labor after all the unions did to elect Obama and many congressmen and women and senators is unconscionable. Even if you think workers should be able to have a secret ballot, “card check” is something labor unions earned, and they shouldn’t be denied.