0
   

Okay, Dems, What Went Wrong? And How Can We Fix It?

 
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Dec, 2004 09:37 am
Lola wrote:
Quote:
I'm not sure how many times the cluebat must be dragged out, but the only way your grandson or daughters will be "gotten" is if they v-o-l-u-n-t-e-e-r. Got it? Just an attempt to ease your mind.


Yes, well, we'll see. Don't make any big bets on it any time soon. I know he promised. Something like, "read my lips, no draft." But just in case Mr. Bush decides his promises were a little precipitous.....I'm keeping the car in good running order for the quick trip North. He's having trouble getting all those he's re-called to report, I believe they may have r-u-n-d-o-o-f.

Now, I have to do some real work today. I've been postponing, procratinating and putting it off........and now I actually have to write this article with a deadline of December 15........so I don't have time today for more put-down game fun. When I'm done, I'll come back and play.


Not sure why you consider reassurance there will be no draft a "put-down game" or "fun". The cluebat reference was due to the many postings by several here explaining the myriad of reasons why a draft is not feasible.

Many people are aware of this, as evidenced in the president's re-election despite Kerry's attempted scare-tactic in trotting it out.

Why ignore the facts?
0 Replies
 
Ethel2
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Dec, 2004 09:42 am
Why be literal?
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Dec, 2004 09:50 am
How about a healthy dose of "realistic". Smile
0 Replies
 
Ethel2
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Dec, 2004 10:36 am
Why not learn to distinguish between a falsehood disguised as a literal fact and a more fundamental truth?

To the Democrats among us........let's try the following tactic:

Quote:
And not alone in habit and device,
Exterior form, outward accoutrement,
But from the inward motion to deliver
Sweet, sweet, sweet poison for the age's tooth
Which, though I will not practise to deceive,
Yet, to avoid deceit, I mean to learn.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Dec, 2004 10:38 am
me dearest queen, get to work!
0 Replies
 
Ethel2
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Dec, 2004 10:40 am
my my my, we are bossy today.

I am working......but, well, you know...........
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Dec, 2004 10:46 am
Lola wrote:
Why not learn to distinguish between a falsehood disguised as a literal fact and a more fundamental truth?

To the Democrats among us........let's try the following tactic:

Quote:
And not alone in habit and device,
Exterior form, outward accoutrement,
But from the inward motion to deliver
Sweet, sweet, sweet poison for the age's tooth
Which, though I will not practise to deceive,
Yet, to avoid deceit, I mean to learn.


OK, Glamor Gams, I'll see your Shakespeare, and raise ya a Lewis Carroll:

Quote:
`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.

"Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!"

He took his vorpal sword in hand:
Long time the manxome foe he sought --
So rested he by the Tumtum tree,
And stood awhile in thought.

And, as in uffish thought he stood,
The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame,
Came whiffling through the tulgey wood,
And burbled as it came!

One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back.

"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.

`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.


Laughing Mr. Green Twisted Evil Mr. Green Laughing
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Dec, 2004 10:53 am
In America, as elsewhere, the general irritability level keeps rising. Driving under the influence now refers to Zoloft and is pandemic.
0 Replies
 
glitterbag
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Dec, 2004 12:06 pm
timberlako, You can't be seriously suggesting that Canada intentionally facilitated the revolution in Iran. If you use that type of thinking, someone could say that the American Government encouraged the attack on the World Trade Centers by arming Bin Laden during the Afgan struggle with the USSR. Oh, and by the way, the correct answer to question 2 (who hid the Americans) is the Canadian Embassy, right down to creating Canadian Passports and coaching them in how to sound more like a Canadian.

ticomaya, If urban smog created liberalism, how do you explain the Texas anomaly? Unless having the poorest air quality in all fifty states isn't quite the same as smog.
0 Replies
 
Ethel2
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Dec, 2004 01:04 pm
Surmising 'neath the Tum tum tree
My mind alights on uber-ich
Me thinks tis of religion born
A peace disposed to morbific

Of id, id, id and ego born
Of id and ego I remain
As I go down, as down I will
Pray not my mind to arraign

Of diabolical intercourse
With Incubi and baldersnatch
Give me the Jabberwock tonight
The underground we'll unlatch

Wellbutrin, Viagra, Stellizine
Effexor, Xanax, Billabong
From silthy toves and gimbled wabe
Which of these does not belong?

Bring on the pandemic, Alice! And may Seseme Street inherit the Earth.

We need to out-smart these Republican suckers.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Dec, 2004 01:44 pm
Not suggesting anything re Canada, glitterbag. I merely rendered information re the financing of The American Revolution, and followed that up with an observation pertinent to France.
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Dec, 2004 04:16 pm
Lash wrote:
DTOM--

Smile

Merry Christmas! Happy Hannukah! Great Kwanzaa! May You Miss All The Deer.


this is my favorite time of year! not leastly because it's the only time when so. cal. actually pretends to have more than one season! Laughing

hey, i had gotten hold of the laugh in clip with nixon doing the "sock it to me??" thing. i was going to turn it into quicktime and put it up for you, but the dvr wigged out and i had to reinitialize it. darn! i just hate it when that happens! Crying or Very sad

so i guess you're just getting a card this year. :wink:
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Dec, 2004 10:15 pm
Hey Lola - was that little ditty back there a few posts ago your own? Pretty good - even if I'm not there with its sentiment :wink:
0 Replies
 
Ethel2
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Dec, 2004 10:33 pm
Why yes, Timber........I made it up, all on my own.....it was fun. It's the first poem I've ever written. Sorry you don't agree with the sentiment, I wish you did, as you know. But I'll love ya anyway......
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sun 5 Dec, 2004 10:40 pm
Reciprocated
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Feb, 2005 06:31 pm
Quote:
Ernie Cortés came to see me in Washington last September. Ernie is a legendary community organizer. In 1974, he set up the Communities Organized for Public Service in San Antonio, which helped get the city's Mexican-Americans involved in politics and was partly responsible for making San Antonio one of the most progressive cities in the Southwest. Since then, under the auspices of the Industrial Areas Foundation (IAF)--which another legendary organizer, Saul Alinsky, established more than a half-century ago--he has built a network of community organizations in Louisiana, Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, and California. [..]

Periodically, each year, Ernie convenes his organizers and elected group leaders and invites a speaker to address them. The IAF organizations have scored their greatest victories reforming schools, getting money for health clinics or housing, and winning living-wage provisions [..] The last time I attended one of these get-togethers in 1992, there were 15 or 20 people gathered in a small motel conference room. This time, about 250 people are jammed into the ballroom of Austin's Hyatt Regency. There are many clergy and ex-clergy (many of the groups are still based in churches), a few lawyers and aspiring party officials, and people of modest backgrounds who have risen up through IAF's ranks. [..]

When I had seen him in Washington, Ernie had insisted that George W. Bush was going to win because Karl Rove and Ralph Reed knew how to organize and the Democrats did not. He feels vindicated by, although unhappy with, the outcome. "The Republican strategy was developing organic infrastructure," he tells me. The GOP, he explains, worked through churches and urged parishioners to get their fellow parishioners or their neighbors to the polls. By contrast, he says, Americans Coming Together (ACT) and MoveOn "parachuted" volunteers into places where they had little in common with the people they were trying to organize. Afterward, they vanished. "They left nothing behind," he says scornfully. He thinks that, if Democrats want to win elections, they have to rebuild the "institutional infrastructure" that used to exist around churches, union halls, and precincts, but he doesn't think ACT or MoveOn have any interest in this kind of patient, person-to-person organizing.

Ernie and his colleagues, many of whom come out of Latino communities in the Southwest, are also disturbed by Bush's success among Mexican-American voters. They think Bush got at least 40 percent of that vote but should have gotten no more than 20 percent. In an article Ruy Teixeira and I wrote after the election, we cited Austin's Travis County as evidence that Democrats were making inroads into postindustrial metropolitan areas, but Ernie finds this laughably irrelevant. "What about Cameron County?" he asks me. "You should have written about that. It's always been a Democratic stronghold, and it went for Bush this election." After breakfast, I go up to my hotel room to look it up. It's a largely Mexican-American county at the southern tip of Texas. Bush won it 50 to 49 percent. Al Gore had carried it by nine percentage points in 2000, and Clinton by 29 percentage points in 1996.

The organizers from New Mexico attribute part of Republicans' success to Latinos' belief that the military is the best career choice for their young. But the Texans point to cultural conservatism among Catholic Latinos. One priest from San Antonio says, "Abortion was a major issue for Hispanics. There was confusion in the messages from the bishops. My congregation in San Antonio was in a lot of pain over that." He says that some Catholic Latinos who did vote for Kerry went to confession afterward to seek absolution. Ernie and the IAF organizers don't suggest that Democrats should oppose abortion, but they criticize Kerry for failing to address Catholic concerns the way Clinton did when he called for making abortion "safe, legal, and rare." Ernie says Catholic prelates tell him, "We don't expect Democrats to overturn Roe v. Wade, but give us something. Something that we can cite when the right wing attacks us." He adds, "They feel that they helped build the labor movement and the Democratic Party, and now they feel jilted."


Link
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Feb, 2005 08:14 am
Two key points in here for me nimh...grassroots organization and Rove's strategy of moving traditional dem voters over to republican through social issues of (mainly) abortion and gay marriage.

I think the latter of these the more important. Ralph Reed said, after the 2000 election that the dems had a better ground operation than the republicans. I grant the statement credence.

But I doubt the change, by this election, was the key factor, though it was a factor.

Scarey thought...Dick Morris is pushing for the repubs to push Rice for the presidency next time. His notion is that this will really undercut the dem base, and I think he's right.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Feb, 2005 09:24 am
Rice for President! Now that would be sensational, and it would indeed cause strong shifts in the electorate, especially if the Dems put up another white man. (But imagine if they wouldnt - two women or two people of colour running against each other for President would be even more sensational.)

Sensational, but not at all necessarily a negative thing tho. In the end, electorates change parties, in the long run through their involvement and input, and in the short run by how they force the party top to adapt its rhetorics and strategies to them.

Regardless of how much I disagree with everything Rice stands for, the day the Republican Party runs a black woman for President, its a brave new world. And the mere fact - regardless of programme - would have impact; just like Fortuyn's popularity did more for gay emancipation than a generation of activists because he made the right-wing folks who would never have been reached by the activists feel an affection / loyalty to the gay position.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Feb, 2005 10:12 am
Just one illustration of "how the Dems are 'fixing' it", I suppose.

Quote:
Democrats Getting Lessons in Speaking Their Values

By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG

ASHINGTON, Feb. 10 - Ever since the November election, Democrats have known that the hottest V-word is not "veto" or "Viagra," it is "values." Now, as hundreds of the party's elite descend here to select a new chairman and chart a course for the future, Democrats are enlisting a bevy of consultants - church leaders, a marketing guru from Silicon Valley and even a linguist - to redefine themselves and discover a message that will sell at the polls.

To George Lakoff, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, who spoke at a retreat of the House Democrats last week, striking a resonant chord may mean a simple twist of the language used by the ruling Republicans.

"Republicans talk about tort reform, but nobody talks about the tort justice system," Mr. Lakoff said. Of the Democrats he said: "I urged them to talk in details of their values, but they're not used to talking that way. They're used to talking in terms of programs, and that's a disaster."

So the use of the word "values" or value-laden phrases has proliferated on Capitol Hill these days, spinning out in a new morality play in which everything, from Social Security to the driest spending cuts, is cast in terms of right and wrong. Democrats are freely quoting the Bible, as they did in a recent letter to President Bush. Senator Harry Reid, the Democratic leader, denounced the White House budget this week as "immoral" and had earlier offered up "old-fashioned moral values" in his response to the president's State of the Union address.

On Friday, a left-leaning evangelical Christian author, Jim Wallis, will visit Democrats for the second time in recent weeks, this time to instruct Senate press secretaries about how to "discuss the budget in terms of moral values," according to an invitation to the closed-door event. Meanwhile, Richard Yanowitch, a former Internet company executive, is borrowing the business concept of branding to help Democrats come up with what he calls a "new vision for governing."

In the House, the Democratic leadership last week tapped Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, the son of a minister, to lead a "faith working group" to encourage lawmakers to sprinkle references to God and religion into their speeches. Mr. Clyburn sees plenty of possibilities. "Look in the Book of James," he said, using the biblical admonition to feed the hungry to rail against Mr. Bush's proposed cuts in food stamps.

Beyond the search for a unifying theme or a clear message - the absence of which many Democrats believe cost them the November election - Democrats have another goal: to turn the values debate away from what Representative David R. Obey, Democrat of Wisconsin, calls "below the waist" morality issues like abortion and same-sex marriage and toward the programs and policies that Democrats support.

"The Republicans are trying to corner the values debate, and we Democrats want to expand the values debate," said Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, the chairman of the Democratic Governors' Association. "We're talking about values including better schools, access to health care, personal behavior, and I add a Western value, and that is protecting God's creation, which is land and water."

The effort is playing out against the backdrop of a much deeper struggle, one that goes beyond language to the more fundamental question of what the Democratic Party should stand for. As Howard Dean, the former Vermont governor, prepares to take the helm of the Democratic National Committee after a formal vote on Saturday, Democrats have been engaged in a bruising internal battle over whether to shift toward less absolute positions on issues like abortion, as Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, the New York Democrat, appeared to do in a recent speech urging tolerance of abortion opponents' beliefs.

Some Democrats say that internal squabble is misguided. "Right after the election, people really misinterpreted this moral value thing," said Mark Mellman, a Democratic pollster who recently examined the roles values played in the White House race. "People assumed moral values meant abortion and gay marriage. That is completely unsupported by the data."

Instead, Mr. Mellman said, the election turned on "a sense of shared values"- whether voters believed Mr. Bush or his Democratic opponent, Senator John Kerry, shared their moral compass. So Mr. Mellman, who advises Mr. Reid, has been urging Democrats to do a better job of explaining the moral underpinnings of their political stands. But he would not share strategy memorandums or talking points.

"There is not some central values speech stamp," he said, "where everybody's got to send their speech to the values office."

To Republicans listening to the Democrats' oratory, sometimes it sounds that way.

"They've learned the lessons of the battle but not the war," said Frank Luntz, a Republican strategist who helped formulate the language behind the "Contract With America," a manifesto of principles that helped his party reclaim the House in 1994. "The battle is that you have to be able to say 'God' and not flinch. They are picking up the language, but they don't have the genuine emotion behind it."

Mr. Lakoff said authenticity was essential. "I'm not advising them to quote the Bible," he said, "unless they really know the Bible."

Still, some Democrats are flinching.

"I'm Catholic; it's an intensely private part of my life," said Representative Ellen O. Tauscher, Democrat of California. "Does it aid me in my decision-making? Yes. But it's mine and mine alone, and it's one of the few things I still have. Not everything needs to be known."

Others say that in today's sound-bite society, Democrats need to say more. "If you are silent on these issues, you will get defined by the other person," Mr. Clyburn said, "and I think that's what's happened to us."

The Democrats' advisers say they do not expect any transformations overnight, either in the language Democrats use or the way voters react to it.

"We don't need just a few Bible verses or some cheap God talk," said Mr. Wallis, who is the founder and editor of the Christian magazine Sojourners and the author of a new book, "God's Politics." He added: "This is more than a language issue. It's a content issue. So I said to the Democrats: 'This isn't going to be a sprint. It's going to be a marathon.' "

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/11/politics/11values.html?pagewanted=all&position=


The only problem I see with this 'fix' is that (in my opinion) you can't get away with pretending to be something you're not. Not for long, anyway. Despite popular opinion on the Left, voters are not 'that stupid' and won't be influenced so much by how a politician speaks as by what he or she does.

Unfortunately (for me LOL), now when I hear a Democrat refer to "God" or "values", I'll be wondering if they're speaking that way because they took the workshop on how to appeal to voters on 'values'.

Did I mention this is just my opinion?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Feb, 2005 10:20 am
Hillary has taken this class. Good of you to post this JW, but remember the leaked Democratic playbook from the last election?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/22/2024 at 02:55:26