Why Won't The Dims FIGHT?

After citing, describing, and explaining the utterly incredible, unintelligible, inexpressably cowardly sell-out by the Dims' "leadership" (Prez. Shamwow not only included byut leading the way) to the blue-dawg wing of the "party" over the coverage of abortion in the proposed Health-Care-Reform" bill currently stewing in Congress, American Progress columnist Michelle Goldberg, noting that

We've reached a point where health-care reform hinges on abortion, but the pro-choice movement loses either way. It can't rally behind the existing legislation (by which abortion coverage is excluded AND disincentivized even in exi8sting coverages--W). At the same time, because the future of abortion rights in America is deeply entwined with the future of the Democratic Party, the failure of health-care reform, and the consequent weakening of the Democrats, would ultimately be disastrous for choice. It's a total mess. But was it inevitable?

Aye, that's the question, and Ms Greenberg proceeds to identify mistakes, missteps, and misunderestimations which plagued the bill through the whole process, concluding":

Meanwhile, instead of acquiescing to the idea that federal funding of abortion is beyond the pale, the pro-choice movement would have forced a debate and possibly pushed the center a bit in the direction of justice.

The lesson here goes far beyond abortion. It's not that progressives should be uncompromising or refuse to make concessions to political reality. It's that concessions will never mollify the right or ward off political attacks. It's a mystery why the Democratic Party never seems to grasp this. There's no choice but to fight.

I am afraid that Ms Greenberg, and a lot of other pundits overlook a single, simple truth here, in evaluating the power of the "lib/prog/Dim" wing of the Party of Property to actually enact any measures that significantly improve the lot of its constituents, benefits accruing to the other wing notwithstanding.

The "Dims" don't fight because the leadership doesn't have the stomach for it. And it doesn't have the stomach for a fight because it hasn't enough POWER to win, even if it wanted to (which prospect is debatable, given the avidity with which DimPoPs pursue the corpoRat sheckel) without then compromising away any and every advantage it might have won.

And that is because of the DimPoPs constituents: they are never as "deserving" as those of the other "wing," the GOPoPs. Nothing bespeaks the worthiness of the elect like their earthly accoutrements, as their founding theologer John Calvin decreed 500 years ago. By their poverty, the poor manifest God's displeasure with them; for if they were not evil, they would not be poor. It's perfectly clear. (And it also clarifies the role of Pat Robertson as the spiritual beacon of the movement.) The DimPoPs must therefore be the party of the Devil.

So, because the DimPoPs are the representatives of the "inferior" social orders (colored, poor, disadvantaged, sick, homeless, injured, etc), it therefore requires MORE votes--more POWER--to accomplish their ends than it takes to enact the wishes of the GOPoPs, which are the default conditions in any case.