December 30th, 2005
It’s always hearting to read constructive and hopeful posts, at MyDD.com and elsewhere; posts about how eager many of us are to help the Dems take the country back — even if it’s one. office. at. a. time. At least this is how I read The Hollywood Mythspiracy diary that’s been on the front page of MyDD.com for much of the day. Matt’s brother and many of his acquaintances, is clear from the diary, want to help the Dems craft resonant messages, which is a good enough and laudable thing to offer on its own right; but, as he writes, Dems have not tapped into the eager resource that exist in young Hollywood.
Now, I know that Matt’s brother’s diary over at MyDD.com does not purport to suggest that having Hollywood writers craft the Dems message (i.e., via speeches, commercials and “narratives”) would be the magic bullet that would end the Dems apparent electoral woes. Clearly, the suggestion/offer made in the diary would only be one small — very small — part of the solution. I write and hope that it would be “only a very small part of the solution” because it must be understood that the long-term health of the Dem party, and of the Progressive movement necessitates the creation of a brick-and-mortar infrastructure to mirror/match/surpass what they’ve got on the right. Additionally, aside from the brick-and-mortar infrastructure, we, the Progressive constituency, have got to demand long-term leadership and vision from elected Dems — and from unofficial leaders (i.e., former presidents and non-elected party officials). For a brief encapsulation of the much needed long-term leadership that we need on the left see Rick Perlstein’s The Stock Ticker and the Superjumbo — his essay made the rounds on the internets a couple of months ago.
There’s such a thing as a Progressive philosophy… at the moment we simply want to win; so, we’re content with merely being partisan and will support a candidate that stands up to the right… but, at least I am, we’re ideological and have a strong sense of the rough outlines of our progressive values and ideology, even if these are not being articulated nor defended in the mainstream media by a recognizable leadership — much less by elected Dems. Our Progressive ideology, though, needs to be nurtured over the long-term if a movement is to rise from our ranks to challenge the right and, too, to move the nation’s center back to the middle (and, one would hope, one day, to the center-left).
What prompted me to write this is what I perceived as the undercurrent in Matt’s brother’s diary: an overt reliance on short-term and marketing-driven stylistic responses to the apparent electoral woes of the Dem Party (i.e., as if the Dems’ electoral problems would be solved if only the party made better commercials, told better narratives or gave better speeches. Sure, such solutions would make a difference at the margins in a couple of national races, but we — I think — need more than that.). This is a simplification, I know; it’s just that reading The Hollywood Mythspiracy diary I was reminded of an old Hollywood adage, There are no bad movies, there’s only bad marketing. Such an approach, one that relies too heavily on message alone, is what has weakened the Democratic party and, too, atrophied anything resembling a progressive movement in this country. As critics of the DLC have pointed out, this is precisely what that organization is guilty of: convincing the Democratic beltway establishment to target their message to specific audiences (i.e, the swing voters du jour ), and to mirror whatever the conventional wisdom of the day is on a given subject (i.e, national security, moral values, etc.).
Sure, governing and winning elections requires exploiting short-term strategies (i.e, effective marketing), but wrestling the ideological center of the country away from the right back to the middle will take: building physical networks off-line and creating a message delivery system to compete with the right’s echo chamber. (We gotta build a progressive/liberal competitor to FauxNews, damn it — if only I had a couple of million dollars to build my own media empire — okay, it’ll take more than a couple.)
December 28th, 2005
I came across the original post over at DailyKos.com. The Bulldog Manifesto asks:
Back when former President Clinton was being impeached, many of our current Congressmen and Senators were involved in the process. Men like Tom DeLay, Bill Frist, and Henry Hyde, among others, came out strongly in support of the impeachment of Clinton based upon the highest standard of “rule of law.”
Today, as impeachment makes its way back into the American vernacular, this time related to George W. Bush, the following quotes become quite illuminating.
While reading them, perhaps ask yourself, ‘What happened to the “rule of law?”
The Bulldog then provides us with these gems:
What Did They Say When Clinton Was Being Impeached?
Tom Delay (R-TX):
“This nation sits at a crossroads. One direction points to the higher road of the rule of law. Sometimes hard, sometimes unpleasant, this path relies on truth, justice and the rigorous application of the principle that no man is above the law. Now, the other road is the path of least resistance. This is where we start making exceptions to our laws based on poll numbers and spin control. This is when we pitch the law completely overboard when the mood fits us, when we ignore the facts in order to cover up the truth.
No man is above the law, and no man is below the law. That�s the principle that we all hold very dear in this country.”
Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.):
“I suggest impeachment is like beauty: apparently in the eye of the beholder. But I hold a different view. And it’s not a vengeful one, it’s not vindictive, and it’s not craven. It’s just a concern for the Constitution and a high respect for the rule of law. … as a lawyer and a legislator for most of my very long life, I have a particular reverence for our legal system. It protects the innocent, it punishes the guilty, it defends the powerless, it guards freedom, it summons the noblest instincts of the human spirit.
The rule of law protects you and it protects me from the midnight fire on our roof or the 3 a.m. knock on our door.”
James Sensenbrenner: (R-WI):
“What is on trial here is the truth and the rule of law. Our failure to bring President Clinton to account for his lying under oath and preventing the courts from administering equal justice under law, will cause a cancer to be present in our society for generations. I want those parents who ask me the questions, to be able to tell their children that even if you are president of the United States, if you lie when sworn “to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth,” you will face the consequences of that action, even when you don’t accept the responsibility for them.”
Chuck Hagel (R-NB):
“There can be no shading of right and wrong. The complicated currents that have coursed through this impeachment process are many. But after stripping away the underbrush of legal technicalities and nuance, I find that the President abused his sacred power by lying and obstructing justice. How can parents instill values and morality in their children? How can educators teach our children? How can the rule of law for every American be applied equally if we have two standards of justice in America–one for the powerful and the other for the rest of us?”
Bill Frist (R-TN):
“I will have no part in the creation of a constitutional double-standard to benefit the President. He is not above the law. If an ordinary citizen committed these crimes, he would go to jail.”
Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas):
“When someone is elected president, they receive the greatest gift possible from the American people, their trust. To violate that trust is to raise questions about fitness for office. My constituents often remind me that if anyone else in a position of authority — for example, a business executive, a military officer of a professional educator — had acted as the evidence indicates the president did, their career would be over. The rules under which President Nixon would have been tried for impeachment had he not resigned contain this statement: “The office of the president is such that it calls for a higher level of conduct than the average citizen in the United States.”
You can find the Bulldog’s blog here: http://bulldogpolitics.blogspot.com/
December 14th, 2005
Over at MyDD.com a thread was recently started on what changes and suggestions had for the community blog, I decided to contribute and wrote:
MyDD.com and DailyKos.com offer an invaluable service to the Progressive community — and it’s great that now others have emulated what these two sites pioneered.
That said, I think that both sites, MyDD.com and DailyKos.com — yes, I know that we’re dealing with MyDD.com exclusively here; however, my broad comments are applicable to both sites — I feel that both sites must evolve into “activism” platforms.
I believe that MyDD.com (and, yes, DailyKos.com) is narrowly focused on being a media outlet to progressive causes and that it stops short of providing “tools” for grassroots participants to concretely contribute with. I think that moving from being a media/press outlet, to being a grassroots mobilization site requires a different administrative mind set. Therefore, the site(s) may need to be divided into two distinct sections: an editorial/media outlet side and a grassroots/tactical mobilization side. Of course, there would be no clear demarcation, as users and the website administrators would flow from one to the other with no restrictions. However, the focus of the sections would be distinct and specialized; and, if a plan similar to this were to be adopted, the grassroots/tactical facilitator would be someone whose primary focus would be to “direct and inspire” concrete action (am thinking of the various offline activities, for example, that MoveOn.org puts together; however, since this community (MyDD.com), I believe, is more immersed in the nitty gritty of politics, perhaps we could come up with better activities than just vigils, for example).
Take the conservative TownHall.com website — they go beyond opinion by directing users to take concrete action; moreover, they serve as a gate way to reach conservative activists and pundits.
Of course, building a robust tool box that we could use to take concrete action would require more resources than what might be available. However, if the resources were to be available, I would like the following:
- Require that users provide zip code, so that data (i.e., house races, local government, media, etc) could be personalized/localized.
- Break diaries into categories that include, for example, the following (“editorial” and “activism” diary entries should be separated into their respective sections):
- Most Commented on Diaries
- “Thumbs up” section!? (Check out digg.com to see what I mean. This would be distinct from the Recommended Diaries)
- Recent Diaries
- Recommended Diaries
- Allow users to customize their “user’s page” (mine, for example, is http://bedobe.mydd.com) so that it could function more like a portal to the MyDD.com if I so chose to use it: with feeds, subscriptions, a MyDD.com inbox, a buddies list (so we can network and build off-line communities) — and any other goodies that a user may want to add to their portal/”user’s page.”
Minor website tweaks that I would like see:
- Printer Friendly Link that reformats a dairy entry just like many newspaper sites do with their articles.
- Customization capability so that users, for example, could choose their font size, whether to open links in new windows, etc. — check out http://www.memeorandum.com/ to see what I mean (click on preferences).
- Allow users to see who is online — this, I think, promotes community cohesiveness and participation.
Am writing this off the cuff, so a lot may be jumbled and not all that clear. But I do hope that this contributes in some way. And, again, thanks for building this community.
And another user asked me to flush out what I meant by “concrete action,” here’s how I responded:
Thanks for the question — I agree, the issue of “‘concrete’ action” vs. “commentary” is an important one for online participants.
To begin with, I think that both are important and complementary functions. Moreover, I understand that there are some websites/blogs by individuals that are meant to provide commentary/analysis, and that other sites (MoveOn.org, for example) focus on suggesting “concrete action” around specific issues. Additionally, the commentary/analysis function is important because the web is virtually the only place where progressive voices can be found, given our media landscape. Now, while commentary/analysis is important, there are certain sites/blogs, I’m thinking of community blogs (i.e., MyDD.com and DailyKos.com) specifically, that users go to seeking “action items” that they, we, can take practical action on.
I’ve seen a lot of comments on community sites (MyDD, DailyKos, HuffingtonPost and others) asking, What can I do on this or that issue? A lot of us are often looking for some off-line organization or group to get plugged into, to feel a part of and grow the progressive movement (a lot more needs to be said about that, but I don’t have the space here). Accordingly, we come to the better known community sites in search of info on how we can tap into an off-line “movement” and, too, we come looking for “action items” that we can contribute towards.
I subscribe to the idea that on-line and off-line participation are complementary, and that one does not exclude the other. Therefore, I don’t subscribe to the idea the there exists something called the “netroots.” Instead, I belive that there only exists the “grassroots,” and that we, the grassroots, go to the web to communicate with each other and in search of information. Now, because I see on-line and off-line participation as complementary, and because grassroots participation exists in both forms, I belive that community sites/blogs need to offer specific tools and serve as a repository of “tactical” advise for the grassroots to take action with.
Too often, I think, community sites/blogs neglect “action items” and advise on “tactical lessons” learned on the ground; which are, I think, essential components to building a progressive movement. Instead, most of us, the average community blog participant, focus on offering commentary on current events and on offering “strategic” advise to Democratic party leaders — which, I fear, is too easily ignored. Please keep in mind that I’ve not suggested that community blogs stop offering commentary/analysis; rather, I’m merely suggesting that community blogs spend more time and dedicate more of the site’s resources on “action items” and on serving as a grassroots coordinating mechanism for off-line action.
I hope I’ve clarified my post above a bit more… and, yes, a lot more needs to said about defining and about building a progressive movement.
December 9th, 2005
Over at MyDD.com Michael in Chicago sounded a little disheartened after being confronted with strong opposition from the Democratic establishment in Chicago. Michael writes:
I owe my political awareness to Howard Dean. Because of him I started blogging, volunteering and donating to Democrats. Dean’s rallying cry in the 2004 campaign was “You have the power.” The more I learned about the Republicans in control of our government, the more I wanted to use this power to help elect Democrats.
This is why I started supporting a local candidate running for Congress in my own district. Henry Hyde’s district. With Christine Cegelis’ campaign as a rallying point, I saw more Democrats active in my district than I’ve seen in my lifetime.
But now, as the Democratic primary approaches, I read of the DCCC again passing over a candidate who newly energized Democrats in my district overwhelmingly support. I read of the DCCC’s backing of a candidate with no political experience and few ties to my district. I read of the advantages of military credentials and “wounds” – not issues that matter to the district. I read of the finest political consultants money can buy working for a candidate who hasn’t even done any fundraising in the district yet.
As I watch this unfold, I wonder what power I really have.
[...]
The real power for Democratic fundraising in Illinois is Emanuel, not small donors like me.
[...]
It is Emanuel, not me, who has the power to shut down a campaign by choking off it’s sources of high dollar donors. Donors in Chicago. Donors in his district. It is Emanuel, not me, that has the power to provide a network of top dollar consultants…
[...]
Gov. Dean told us “You have the power.” In 2004 I believed him. As I watch what’s happening to the Cegelis campaign, I’m not so sure anymore.
After reading his post I was compelled to respond:
You do have the power. Dean, however, should’ve completed that thought more frequently, I’m afraid to say. Because, while you, I, and every one of us have the power to challenge the status quo and bring about change, it ain’t gonna be easy.
I saw Dean at UCLA when he was out in LA during the 2004 primaries and he, of course, ended the small rally with that infectious yell, You have the power, You have the power, You have the power! As the crowd dwindled and my girlfriend and I walked away from the small outdoor stage, I remembered what Dean had said as he opened his remarks that evening, It’s not going to be easy… but YOU have the power.
It’s never easy. Every activist has known that… and needs to be reminded of it now and then; because we’re going against entrenched interests for whom the status quo works just fine, so why fuck with it. Therefore, entrenched interest count on that fact alone, that it’s never easy to dislodge them, to remain securely in power; that’s why incumbents and entrenched interests gerrymander, hoard political contributors and, thereby, make it nearly impossible for third parties and challengers to arise.
Accordingly, the only thing that’s left for us, the grassroots, to do is to organize and mobilize — and, again, it’s not easy and I don’t know that an easy formula exists. However, out here in CA, the nurses, teachers and firefighters have shown us that, indeed, it can be done. Man, the nurses, teachers and firefighters brought down Arnold — I mean, remember, not that long ago Sen. Hatch was talking about amending the Constitution so that Arnold could one day run for president; and, well, now that this mighty Goliath has been brought down, I don’t think there’ll be any talk of an Arnold amendment to the Constitution.
Perhaps the entrenched Democratic establishment in Chicago, especially Rep. Emanuel, need to start hearing from Cegelis’s supporters every where they go — and don’t forget their friends, too.
