Another Counterpuncher pointing out how distant some anti-war voices are from their words; Lance Selfa writes about the Progressive Democrats of America:

[T]he majority of liberal candidates the PDA backed in Democratic primaries lost to more conservative Democrats–many of them backed by the party establishment. Many of the winners–especially those, like Illinois candidate Tammy Duckworth, who were recruited and promoted by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and its pro-war leader Rep. Rahm Emanuel–are pro-war themselves.

This has put the PDA in the same position as previous formations like it: working for the election of Democrats who not only don’t share their views on the war or health care, but are actually opposed to them. Yet in the interests of party unity and a broader outlook, the PDA has urged its members to work for these candidates.

Selfa doesn’t mention Cindy Sheehan, but I’m reminded that Sheehan is a member of the PDA Board and widely known as an anti-war voice (probably the one person credited with keeping the anti-war movement going on a national stage). But I have to wonder what does she really stand for? In her essay “Supporting Hillary” she told us that she “will not make the mistake of supporting another pro-war Democrat for president again: As I won’t support a pro-war Republican.”.

PDA supports Democratic Party candidates. But the Democrats are the loudest voices against progressive candidates, telling voters how voters are wasting their vote on third-party or independent candidacies, excluding third-party and independent candidates from debates; in short, encouraging voters to forgo their values and adopt the values of the corporations that fund the Democratic Party.

If you give them the opportunity, the Democrats and their agents (MoveOn.org, PDA, etc.) will sell your interests down the river. Don’t buy into the two-party trap.