The response I typically get is that no one who is progressive would have been involved with the DLC.

The moral of the story is that if no one is criticizing a Democratic administration from the left, then there is no rationale or political space for that Democratic administration to operate on the left. Such criticism is thus even useful to, and desired by, a Democratic administration. If the left stays quiet, it will not be relevant."

unlike President Clinton, President-Elect Obama has the opportunity (indeed the necessity) to enact much bolder policies.

I hope Obama learns from Bill Clinton where it's appropriate to do so, and shuns other lessons that are best shunned.

The dumb thing is, that I actually mostly agree with people like Bowers and Sirota if we were to talk about the issues only.

However, the tone in which, for example, Sirota often writes just irritates me to no end. Also, it is still possible to disagree with someone and still appreciate their qualities and achievements. I disagreed with Bill Clinton on a number of things, but he was a good president.

And, while they won't admit it, all those years of rightwing attacks on anyone named Clinton have been internalized by people on the left too.

All that you list are indeed progressive accomplishments that I fully credit President Clinton for, but it also true

he backed off more encompassing health care reform after one ill-fated attempt in first term,
school uniforms,
welfare "reform,"
supported deregulation including Glass Steagall repeal,
"era of big government is over" (ironic in light of current events under Bush II),
favored capital punishment (still repulsed by his going back to Arkansas to see to it a retarded man would be executed),
foreign & defense policies and budgets that maintained without question the empire, (probably because most Americans Clinton's age and over are intellectually unwilling if not unable to question the premise of American empire, Noam Chomsky excepted),
backtracked on opposition to GOP "free" trade policies.

I am grateful for Clinton having served when he did and accomplishing the acheivements you list.  I can, to some extent, accept the less than progressive "acheivements" I list as the cost of doing politics in the still very conservative 1990s USA.  But today is not the 1990s.

Folks today are hungry for progressive government, weary of and evermore opposed to GOP social wedge issues, and disgusted generally with the GOP.  It is time to further the progressive accmplishments of the Clinton Adminstration without having to compromise to squelch or pre-empt GOP "outrage."  To Hell with what the GOP thinks for now, nobody but its most hardened supporters cares.  Now is not the time to make decisions worrying about how the GOP will attack you for whatever you decide.

I do think Obama will be more progressive than Clinton across the spectrum of issues but not because it is his inclination to so act, his appointments indicate to me it is not.  Events are demanding radical change and I believe that that change will include a restructuring and, hopfully, responsible dismantling of the empire and a reallocation of a good percentage of the trillion dollars annually that goes to its maintenance.  Not to mention the human resources that are tragically wasted on the effort.  

We can no longer afford empire and when center to right of center baby boomers are faced with the choice of its continuing or their entitlements, well, the voting history of that generation demonstrates pretty clearly they vote for their own individual interests in a big way.  As the boomers retire government social programs like SS and Medicare will override concerns over high taxes which led most (or enough) centrist boomers to support Reagan and the Bushes.  

Then I was stunned to discover that many on the left hate the Clintons just as much as the right--and seemed oblivious to the fact that they mostly parroted old anti-Clinton memes invented by the right in the 90s: ambitious, lying, conniving, do-anything-to-win, etc.

And now I'm just amused--most days. I'm glad Obama is the president because he's the closest thing to Hillary we could get. And it's hilarious to see him praised for doing much of the same stuff Clinton did--often to catcalls from the same people who applaud Obama.

It looks as if Obama is what he said he would be: Clinton, except wanting to more formally and forcefully reach across the aisle in an attempt to form bipartisan coalitions.  Whereas the actual Clinton in the race, I think, wanted to be Clinton except less constrained by a conservative electorate and establishment.

Digital Millenium Copyright Act

Near elimination of Federal Habeas review of State sentences

Built the architecture for Bush spying