May 4th, 2008
Here’s a taste of the reason why I was a Deaniac back in 2004; because the man is a real no-nonsense straight talker — unlike McCain, whom just posses as one.
And now, Mr. Dean on faux, er, fox news:
Dean: Chris, the Republicans… for the last 30 years, the Republican (play)book has been to race bait and to use hate and divisiveness. In 2006, the American people said no to that; I think they’re going to say no to that in 2008. It is true that the economy, the war and healthcare are more important to the American people. They are tired of the divisiveness of what the Republicans have done to them. And that’s why the Republicans are in trouble. Deep trouble. Another four years of George Bush is not what we need…
Wallace: Governor, are you suggesting that bringing up Jeremiah Wright is “race-baiting” and hate and divisive?
Dean: Yeah, I am suggesting that kind of stuff. I think when you start bringing up candidates that have nothing to do with the issues…uh when you start bringing up things that have nothing to do with the candidate, nothing to do with the issues, that’s race-baiting. And that’s exactly what it is. Just like Willie Horton was race-baiting so many years ago. I think we’re going to take…we’re going to turn the page on this stuff. I’ll tell you, there’s a lot of difference between the Republicans and the Democrats on issues, but the biggest issue of all is we don’t use this kind of stuff. We never have used this kind of stuff and we’re not going to start now. America is more important than the Republican party and that’s the lesson the voters are about to teach the Republicans.
April 24th, 2008
Yes, please! Reid and Pelosi hint that the party’s leaders will seek a way that will help put and end to this quixotic primary fight, via the HuffingtonPost:
Reid said he would consider writing a joint letter with Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) demanding that superdelegates make their endorsements public.
“The three of us, we may write a joint letter [to superdelegates],” said Reid. “We might do individual letters, we are in contact with each other.”…
However, when asked by a reporter if he would be forced to intervene if the undecided superdelegates did not make up their minds, Reid replied “I might have to.”
At this point even I, someone that’s strongly interested in politics, am eager to arrive at a resolution. So, yes, please, pressure the so-called superdelegates to make up their mind long before the convention.
August 12th, 2007
We’ve come a long way baby!
Yes, WE: grassroots, netroots, the wild-eyed Washington-outsiders — no matter the label –, we’ve progressed light-years from where we were just a short three years ago. During that time the collective efforts of the grassroots helped elect Howard Dean to the Chair of the DNC and, in 2006, we were the boots on the ground that elected a Democratic majority to the House and Senate.
And, today, the Washington Post — the Beltway’s paper of record — has allowed two of OUR best voices to talk back to the Kool Kidz. Markos and Susan, of DailyKos.com, have an editorial piece responding to the DLC’s threat to the Democratic presidential nominees that they best not get too close to the party’s grassroots, for fear that we’ll scare off some imaginary voter that, according the DLC, resides in the "vital center."
Markos and Susan waste no time in laying out the DLC’s trite and stale arguments:
A new day is dawning for the progressive movement. The distrust between Net-roots activists and more traditional progressive players in the party establishment and issue groups has given way to respectful cooperation as we all adjust to new technologies and the promise they hold for institutional change.
Last week, at the YearlyKos convention, all these players came together to celebrate our newfound unity and to organize for the coming battles in 2008 and beyond. The DLC was nowhere to be found — unless you looked in Nashville, where its members continued to preach, in empty halls, about the “vital center.” Even the Democratic presidential candidates have figured out where the heart of the party now lies: with the new, unashamedly progressive movement.
The DLC had two decades to make its case, to build an audience and community, to elect leaders the American people wanted. It failed.
The grassroots now have a seat at the table, even as establishment insiders, like the DLC, would prefer that we were seen but not heard.
UPDATE: Markos and Harold Ford, Jr., of the DLC, went head-to-head on Meet the Press today.
June 19th, 2006
Here’s just one more example of why it is that many of us in the Democratic Party grassroots are such fans of Howard Dean, the DNC chair: he’s simply one of a handful of Democrats willing to go toe-to-toe against the Republican mouth pieces.
April 13th, 2006
There’s some talk around the liberal, Democratic leaning blogsphere about what it is that the Democratic party can do to energize and motivate the base, given the apparent grassroots passivity that some observe. The apparent grassroots passivity seems counter intuitive, given how poll after poll shows that Democrats are preferred over republicans to take control of Congress after the November elections; and, yet, Democratic voters do not appear to have turned out in large numbers in the recent CA-50 special election for. Understandably, one wonders, What can the Democratic party do to motivate the grassroots and the general public?
Here are my suggestions:
1. For better or worse, all movements need a leader… a central voice that crystallizes the aspirations and motivations of the countless of faceless, and voiceless masses. Elected Dems have not provided that single voice/leader that crystallizes our hopes and frustrations. The 2006 elections, even though they are “just” a midterm election, should be approached by the Democratic party as if the elections were a presidential election — even going so far as to hold a national convention to present a New Democratic Deal for America (think of it as a New Deal 2.0) to the country.
Dems must capitalize on the “perfect political storm” that exists at the moment. But to do so, the Democratic party must designate one person to be the voice of the party, and then the party must make sure not to undermine that voice by keeping saboteurs from running to FauxNews and/or the Hannity radio program. For my money, I’d love to see either Dean and/or Feingold as the voice of the party that crystallizes my aspirations and motivations. Unfortunately, the inner circle of the Democratic party establishment would never allow Dean nor Feingold to be the voice and face of the party; nonetheless, although I will not get my ideal Democratic representative to speak for me, Dems should consider designating one person to be the voice and face of the party because it’ll facilitate communication with the public. (Please note that, even though I’ve suggest the designation of a single voice, I understand that this is unworkable; accordingly, the next best thing is to designate a handful of representatives (2-3) to be the voices of the party — that is, select 2-3 voices that can speak to different audiences (clearly, centrist/corporatist Dems would think it intolerable if they don’t have a seat at the table)).
2. Though some elected Dems have moved closer towards a draw down/pull back position on Iraq, more Democratic representatives must come out in favor of a pull back from Iraq; moreover, elected Dems need to speak with one voice on this issue. We, the American public, are disillusioned with Bush’s Iraq invasion and are actively looking for alternatives to simply “staying the course” and other such lame slogans as “A Plan for Victory.” It’s clear that elected Dems are split on this issue on policy grounds, and not merely on the politics of the situation — that is, some elected Dems do fear that a precipitous pull back down of troops from Iraq would create even worse repercussions over the long term; however, the Democrat hawks are not presenting an alternative to the current course, which simply unacceptable, because the public craves something different, period. I, along with the vast majority of the Democratic grassroots, and an ever increasing number of the John Q public support immediate pull back from Iraq. The bottom line is that Americans want to be presented with an alternative plan on Iraq, because we know that simply staying the course is, in fact, a plan for failure; unfortunately, Democrats have not coordinated the formulation of an alternative plan, even though they have at their disposal an imminently credibly, digestible and workable Democratic response to the quagmire in Iraq. That plan, of course, is the Murtha Plan — which: Every. Single. Democrat. Should. Support. It’s good politics and good policy.
3. Follow the Ross Perot model. Perot spent millions of dollars on long-form infomercials during his ‘92 bid for the presidency; an act that, to my mind, was the biggest single factor to propel his insurgent candidacy in that election. Dems need to do the same thing. Create half-hour or hour-long infomercials wherein the designated voice(s) of the party intimately walk the American public through a narrative presenting, in stark contrast, what the Democratic Party stands for and, too, how the New Democratic Deal for America will touch and improve our lives. The key of these long-form infomercials is that Dems would control the message and presentation, with no moderator to interrupt with some pretension at objectivity. Moreover, the long-form infomercial would allow for an adult conversation, on a myriad of issues, with the American public.