"Left neo-liberalism" is a perversion of the English language.

There is obviously an intent going on to pervert the meaning of words, ideas and ideology and to use language to confuse people in order to prevent movements from getting off the ground in opposition to Obama's thoroughly reactionary Wall Street agenda.

For instance; Obama's "progressive" supporters have concocted the term "left neo-liberal." I have never come across a more bastardized use of language. The term makes no sense at all. Neo-liberalism is reactionary as all hell; "left" is progressive. How can anyone be a "left neo-liberal?" Yet, this bastardization of language has gone unchallenged.
The official ideology of neo-liberalism is pragmatism as first developed by John Dewey as an alternative to Marxism.

Dewey's entire theory of pragmatism revolves around the idea that it is okay to overlook Wall Street's imperialist wars as long as some reforms are provided to the American people.

For over 100 years the labor leaders in this country who have supported the Democratic Party have been adherents of pragmatism.

These same labor "leaders" using this pragmatism to justify their silence in the face of Wall Street's dirty imperialist wars provide they were thrown a few crumbs were also complicit with Wall Street in helping drive the "Reds" from the labor movement after these "Reds" built the industrial unions into powerful organizations workers could use to stand up to capital.

It's like folk singer Utah Phillips used to say, "You ain't done nothing if you haven't been called a red."
Dewey and his pragmatism are often touted as "liberalism" when in fact such thinking, like pragmatism which supports neo-liberalism, is reactionary as hell.

In my opinion, one of the big problems for the left in dealing with Obama has been to refuse to deal with these concepts, ideas and ideology. To refuse to become involved in this battle of ideas.

The biggest phony of them all is New Leftist Carl Davidson who by his own admission claims to be an adherent of Marxism AND John Dewey's pragmatism.

And it is this bastardization of using Marxism as a "left" cover for Obama's reactionary agenda which has guided these "Progressives for Obama/Progressive America Rising."

Just look at all the outright contradictions you have here.

How can anyone be a "pragmatist" and a Marxist at the same time?

How can anyone be a "progressive" and support Obama with his Wall Street agenda?

Yet, here we have these founders of "Progressives for Obama"--- Tom Hayden, Bill Fletcher, Jr., Carl Davidson and Barbara Ehrenreich all claiming to be adherents of either Marxism or socialism and at the same time claiming to be "pragmatists" as justification for supporting Obama.

This is nothing more than Obama being the reincarnation of Mussolini who claimed to base his fascist thinking, ideas and actions on socialism. Mussolini was the ultimate "pragmatist" until Obama came along.