The Vermont Guardian reports:
After months of tacit approval, Vermont Democrats made it official: Bernie Sanders is one of them, at least for this election season.
Despite the endorsement — and the campaign cash is likely to follow — Sanders still keeps the Democratic Party at arm’s length.
As recently as December, Sanders laid blame for the lack of organized outrage at the agenda of the Bush administration squarely at the feet of Democrats, who, he said, weren’t providing a “real alternative” to the Republicans.
“Given the fact that poverty is growing, more and more Americans are losing health insurance, health care costs are going up, the middle class is shrinking, the gap between the rich and the poor is growing wider, and we have lost 2,000 soldiers in Iraq, we’re spending some $300 billion there, and Bush as no idea of an exit strategy. Add all of those things together and the real questions should be asked, how is it conceivable that he is even at 40 percent?” Sanders told the national, left-leaning publication The Progressive. “That speaks to the weakness of the opposition. People do not like George Bush. But I think it’s fair to say that they are not flocking to the Democratic Party, or see the Democrats as a real alternative.”
Sanders added that despite some inroads made by progressives, including those in Vermont, there is a time and a place for third parties. And, now isn’t one of them.
If Bob Kuttner can have socialist
Harold Meyerson around the
American Prospect,if the New York Times can have socialist
Barbara Ehrenreich around,why can't the Democrat party have a socialist around? As the Vermont Guardian says:
Sanders founded the 60-member Progressive Caucus in the House and served as its chairman.
The Democratic party is expanding its' base to include outright socialists.
