Is A True Progressive Agenda Possible?

'Twas a busy and wacky weekend, working on a musical project for a friend and other sundry tasks. So nothing really new to rant on this morning, except the anticipation of the District 3 Democratic Party convention this coming weekend. The buzz is that there actually may be enough delegates committed to Howard Dean to be viable; that is, have an official presence at the state convention. Remember, Dean has "suspended his campaign," but has not yet released his delegates.

At the county conventions, there was considerable pressure for the Dean people to join up with John Kerry, but a number of county Dean delegations decided to pool their numbers with other candidates for the purpose of influencing party principle. In Polk County, for example, Dean delegates elected at the precinct caucuses aligned with people who were committed to Dennis Kucinich.

For the record, at the county convention your correspondent advocated joining with Kerry in a sea of party unity. But that was before it became known that the Presumptive Democratic Party Nominee was strongly indicating Clintonesque center-right leanings (see "The Call of the Bratwurst" published on this blog on Saturday).

So in the interest of full disclosure, I freely admit to flip-flopping on this issue of whether to insist on a progressive agenda -- which some argue will attract dormant Dems who voted for Ralph Nader in 2000 and sat out 2002 -- or to abandon progressivism entirely to back a center-right Kerry, who will try to appeal to the great uncommitted.

What happens if we do this? Would progressivism permanently die in this country, or just take a holiday till things right themselves? How long might that holiday last (see the unending "war on terrorism")? Is a truly progressive agenda of national health insurance, actual oversight of megabusiness, gay civil unions and however more you can add -- ever possible for this country? We'll examine these issues in the days ahead.

Contact Ira Lacher here.