[Updated]: There’s A Party Going On Right Here

138 Comments

1. 

   anna in philly on February 16, 2006 at 4:19 pm

   call the looney bin

   last night i had dinner with someone i dated very briefly last year…it was a very intense, passionate, overwhelmingly emotional relationship….he was a he when we met, although a very feminine he who often dressed in womens clothes and looked stunningly beautiful when she did (in my opinion)….but by the end of the relationship had decided to become a she…she went on hormones just a few weeks before i finally threw in the towel…i didnt dump her because of that…in fact i was excited about the transition and very supportive….she announced to me without any warning that she was going on hormones mainly because of me and the support she felt she got to be her authentic self….i have missed out on the past 9 months of her hormone/transition journey and felt bad about it but i was intent on self preservation and staying with her was getting in the way of that….but last week i felt i had moved on enough to contact her and we agreed to have dinner…we spent all last night catching up and at some point she informed me she was going off hormones….i asked how her boyfriend (the one she was cheating on the whole time she was seeing me) felt about that and she said he didnt know since she just decided right there at dinner after talking to me….but that he would probably be thrilled because her becoming a girl was getting in the way of their gay male thing…..when i asked why she was now changing her mind about the whole tranny thing, she said when she realized she was never going to truly pass and how that would affect her professional life as well as her social life outside the gayborhood bubble she lives in she just decided it wasnt worth it and she maybe should work on being comfortable in her own boy skin, and just doing the girl thing in the spaces and places it worked for her.

   confused?

   and why am i telling this story?

   i dont think a third party is going to work in this country….i think a progressive third party will do nothing but take away from the dems and force us to lose more power always and forever….id love to see a conservative 3rd party because it would split the right but they are too smart for that (the left probably isnt)

   sometimes you have to work with what you have, create change from the inside, and accept imperfection.

   or not

   when i say sometimes i dont mean by electing casey over santorum and hoping for the best.

   im in a percoset stupor so dont pay any attention to me

   ps dinner was at rangoon and i let him order….everything was too spicy for me and im still feeling a bit wiped out from fighting the fire….i hope to go back there someday and pick food off the menu that isnt typed in red ink.

   seriously joe i appreciate your frustration but a progressive third party in a country that is really quite conservative isnt going to get very far….dean kind of had the right idea…if you cant beat em, take them over….i think we have a better shot at that merely by the fact that there is such apathy in this country that its not to difficult to take over the dem party at the lowest levels and at some point that trickles up…i firmly believe all those little dfa groups could really insist on having a seat at the table of power if they demanded it….there is some kind of feffort in philly to do some kind of neighborhood network organizing progressive thingamabob but i havent heard much about it since i moved so far away from the city….i think thats the answer though….tranfer all that boots on the ground power and money raising power into local power so someone like rendell will think twice before sticking his dick where it dont belong.

   • 

     BostonJoe on February 16, 2006 at 4:29 pm

     I think I would have to put you down for the work for change from within crowd.  And I appreciate the input.  Your “slice of life” story is sure to draw more readers to this than mine.  🙂  Wish I had some percoset.

   • 

     rumi on February 16, 2006 at 4:32 pm

       How did that meat loaf dinner turn out a few weeks ago?

     • 

       anna in philly on February 16, 2006 at 4:35 pm

       mmmmm meatloaf

       i remember the meatloaf but not much else

       im getting ready for surgery on monday, im in incredible pain, im nervous, and im totally distracted from politics with all this pre surgery stress….im turning off the computer now so i can focus…see you all when i get back to normal.

       • 

         rumi on February 16, 2006 at 4:37 pm

         Good luck and be well.

   • 

     boran2 on February 16, 2006 at 4:52 pm

     Joe, I’d have to agree that a 3rd party will splinter the Dems and will likely result in two smaller and less powerful parties.  I’m as sick of spineless Democrats as you but even if a 3rd party could be constructed, it would likely be years before it had any visible impact, if it ever did.  It’s not that it wouldn’t be worth waiting for, it’s just that so much more destruction could/will occur in the interim.  Look at what Bushco has done in just a few years.  (I actually voted for the work from within, build from without option above, a kind of fence sitting, I guess.)  I recognize that there are no guarantees if this thing does get off the ground, but I’m not sure how much support that it would be get nationally.  My concern in the original diary was that us political junkies hold views that are not likely reflected in the general populace.  I still have that concern.

   • 

     Carnacki on February 17, 2006 at 2:03 am

     Nice metaphor.

     Also in politics, sometimes you’ve got to remember it’s about counting heads. And one way to create change is to educate and recruit among the great unwashed masses of unregistered voters. But like in religion if you get a new convert, they’re going to be the most enthuiastic. And you get enough of them together you take over a precinct or a county Democratic association and then build from there to get the candidates we want.

2. 

   chocolate ink on February 16, 2006 at 4:27 pm

   Quick answer before I go back and read over what you wrote..I must have been trying to sound reasonable and more balanced because as far as I’m concerned the dems can go fuck themselves-big time as Cheney might say..new party it is…is that more unambiguous Joe..ha.  God, I’ve been ranting to my sister I think non stop for weeks about the spineless dems.  Anyway I think the party has really lost it’s way and can in no way be resuscitated.

3. 

   SallyCat on February 16, 2006 at 4:33 pm

   Put me with the new party / new movement crowd….

   If that one fails – I’m going to sit back and watch with rumi. Stocking up on the single malt scotch and wine for killing the pain of watching this country implode.

   After spending the better part of 25 years fighting for change from within the old party…it isn’t working.

   • 

     rumi on February 16, 2006 at 4:39 pm

     🙂

     Do you like to play Scrabble?

     • 

       SallyCat on February 16, 2006 at 4:53 pm

       Although it’s been a number of years since I’ve had a good game – spouse doesn’t spell well.

       Do you play Hearts?

       • 

         rumi on February 16, 2006 at 5:19 pm

           It’s been a long time but I’ll pick the game up quick again. We’ll set up plenty of tables and chairs for the apolitical vagabonds wandering in.

4. 

   ejmw on February 16, 2006 at 4:34 pm

   I think that the reason I am hesitant to choose a path in this that I think is ‘right’ or the most ‘efficient’ way to effect change is because it all comes down to a theoretical argument.

   The fact of the matter is that some people are going to choose one path.  Some will choose another.  Some will make their own.  No matter what we discuss here.  Everyone simply will not just up and do the same thing.  It never happens that way, and probably never will.

   Allow me to steal Markos’ Crashing the Gate metaphor for a moment.  When crashing a gate, we have 3 options:

   1. Focus our efforts like a laser on one specific part of the gate until we break through.
   2. Have everyone line up at different places along the gate, and push until it topples.
   3. Find a way over, around, or under the gate.

   I that the primary point of trying to argue for one path being the best path and gathering the troops is to attempt gate-crashing strategy #1.

   Realizing that not everybody will agree on the path, but that we have similar goals and can help each other attain them is gate-crashing strategy #2.

   I think those are the two realistic options.  Option 3 is in essence either revolution or subversion of the system.  I don’t think we’re there yet.

   I guess that leads me to believe that instead of focusing on organizing people into a new party, or a new wing of an old party, or whatever, maybe we should ignore those details for now.  Instead, maybe we should focus on assembling resources and forging networks that will make it so that honest progressives can be elected, regardless of what party name is next to theirs on the ballot.

   Or does that just make us another special interest group?  I guess I’m not sure.

   Another thing I’d point out is in relation to this.  I think we especially need to prevent and work against this sentiment:

   I read the ideas and said to myself, “If the smart people who wrote this down haven’t been able to make this party succeed, how in the hell am I ever going to be able to form a successful third-party?”  So I quit.

   It’s important to remember that, however cool ‘now’ may be based on the fact that we’re living in it, it is not the apex of history that all of mankind has been struggling to achieve since the beginning of time.  Because a third party has not worked yet does not mean it will not.  And I think it is self defeating to think otherwise because you’ll just end up in a cycle of continually scrapping the foundations before you’ve had a chance to really build.

   So I guess I think that instead of debating what the proper path is, it is more useful to let each person choose their own path and put their heart into it, with the knowledge that as long as the goals are still shared, we should do everything we can to help and support each other wherever the efforts are focused.

   • 

     rba on February 16, 2006 at 9:14 pm

     Or like they say in the movies:  the only way to win the game is not to play.  Markos left off #4:  set up your own group of unaffiliated voters, and make them open the gate and come to you.  (You should have included me in the “Benjamin” group, and added that to the poll.)

5. 

   Madman in the Marketplace on February 16, 2006 at 4:36 pm

   well, too early for a new party, but the old one is a zombie, dead party walking.

   Parties often grow out of blocs of voters, movements, like the Bull Moose party did. If you’re lucky, like me, and you have representation like Russ Feingold and Gwen Moore, solid progressives, you can work w/ the party to help motivate and find more progressives to help take over the party. However, it’s vital to stay independent, because the threat of leaving/withholding votes is the only real power you have (unless you’re rich).

   If you’re in red state hell, or in Clintononia like the poor folks in NY, then you need to nurture and maintain your bloc as an independent pressure center.

   So I guess call me an “all of the above” b/c it really depends on where you live. However, I think we may be too far gone for ANYTHING to work, and there is nothing to do but watch the riots on the streets w/ some good binoculars.

   Anyway, the recent missives from DFA and MoveON are signs that more and more people have had it with the likes of Reid, Schumer, Emmanuel and Clinton. I think we made need to destroy the institutional party before we can either take it over OR launch a successful new party.

   • 

     BooMan on February 16, 2006 at 4:42 pm

     I think I am going to have to write a new story about the 1974 elections every week until the election.

     The history of not only the election, but much more importantly, the reforms of the newbies and their attack on the old guard, is the best thing to keep people optimistic that change can occur even when DINOS are part of the wave.

     • 

       Madman in the Marketplace on February 16, 2006 at 4:56 pm

       I think we’re in a different, more dangerous place now. The intertwining btwn corporate power, political power and immense wealth is MUCH greater now than it was then. Besides, if you stay w/in the party, and you do pull off some kind of leftist insurgency, the scumbags (Schumer et al) will do what Daley did back then and do everything they can to sabotage the run.

       The old guard has to be disgraced and removed. It’s the only way.

     • 

       BostonJoe on February 16, 2006 at 5:06 pm

       BooMan.  I read your piece on 1974.  Or one of them.  And to the best I can remember, I understand the parallels to our time.

       Here’s my question?  And I think you might be the best voice to answer it (as someone I perceive to be in the “stay in the party” and change it camp).  What specifically would you advise a group of 20-40 crazy bloggers who are just beat up by the constant defeats?  Is there something (specific) we could or should be doing to achieve what you believe needs to be achieved?  I’m looking for a plan man.  And I ain’t got a good one.

       • 

         BooMan on February 16, 2006 at 5:16 pm

         not to be glib, Joe, but I recommend substance abuse.

         But only if you have no history of addiction in your family.  You don’t want to become a slave to your habits.

         But, seriously…

         Maybe you just need someone to grab you by the lapels and to slap you every once in a while.

         We have a constitution.  And it doesn’t permit third parties.

         They always benefit the party that is least ideologically aligned with them.  THis is a source of endless frustration and Madman is perhaps the best blogger out there at articulating that frustration.  But even he knows that there is no alternative.

         And I’ll tell you another not-so-secret.  Any third party that succeeds will be personality based, not ideologically based.  Ross Perot lost because he wasn’t sane enough.  But it is conceivable that a third party candidate could rise up that could win.  But not a party.  

         Look at Jesse Ventura, for example.  Where is the Reform Party in Minnesota today?

         Kinky Friedman could win, but not on the back of any issues.

         • 

           BostonJoe on February 16, 2006 at 5:24 pm

           Okay.  I’m accepting your premise.  Third Party — No way.  What I’m asking is a very practical question (I probably wasn’t clear enough).  I’m not a leader.  I don’t have a good plan.  I’m a guy that works well with a plan.  I’m a sheep waiting to be led.  Albeit an obstinate one at times.

           But I’m sincerely asking you — if you had 20-40 wildly dissatisfied Democratic/Progressive bloggers at your disposal — and you were convinced third party is an awful idea — and that they need to work within the Democratic Party somehow — what do you think would be the highest and best use of their time, collectively?  Is there something they could do as a group, using their power, albeit minor, on the Internet blogs?  Or would you just counsel them to disband, and go work on individual campaigns in their district?  Just give me a two or three line plan?  If you have one.  (Sometimes things don’t sound like they would when spoken/written — but my tone here is one of honest inquiry — because I value your insight and would love to evaluate your plan for “us” versus some of my own crazy ideas).  I think you might have the best idea.

           P.S.  — I just got word that there may be an alternative in MI-08.  Something that gives me great joy.

         • 

           BooMan on February 16, 2006 at 5:30 pm

           okay Joe.  I’ve thought about this for two years.  I’ll write it up for you.  But maybe not until the weekend.  It will take me some time.

           I actually have been putting this off because I wanted to consult some other bloggers about it before I floated it.  But, I’ll just put it out there.

         • 

           BostonJoe on February 16, 2006 at 5:34 pm

           Well — I don’t want to compromise your work.  You don’t have to rush because I’m throwing a tantrum.  I just wanted you to know that’s what I was asking — despite my relative lack of clarity.  By all means I’m eager to hear it — but by the same token I feel selfish for asking you to declare the solution to the problem in my head.

         • 

           Street Kid on February 16, 2006 at 8:35 pm

           Joe, you know where I’m at.

           But, part of the problem is that what happens in 1 district doesn’t happen in another.  And i get the distinct feeling that people think that what applies to 1 will apply to another.  But the fact of the matter is that it doesn’t!!  And this has been going on in the 8th for too long.

           Even though this is a blue state, for all practical purposes, we may as well be in a red one, given our choices of candidates (so far).  

           And I am sick of it.

         • 

           furryjester on February 17, 2006 at 11:16 am

           I know you didn’t ask me.  And this answer may not be all that useful.  But you know what, if I had 20-40 dissatisfied progressives and I could do ANYTHING I WANTED with them…

           I would have them all move to my county and join the Democratic Committee.  We would all be members of the __ County Democratic Committee, but we would also belong to our own little club called the __ County Progressive Democrats.  We would meet at my house (or someone else’s house, or the county HQ) either every week or every two weeks.

           Then we would have some CLOUT.  I think the first thing we would work on would be to find a real progressive to challenge the horrible Republican state senator in my district.  We would each chip in some $$ to get that person’s fundraising started.  We could also look at other areas in the county where better candidates needed to be recruited.

           We would get as many of our members on the standing committees as possible.  I don’t know what all the committees do (if they do much of anything) so beyond that we’d have to figure it out.  But with 20-40 of us I am betting we would.

           See the only thing is, I bet these 20-40 people aren’t all willing to move into one county to work together, even a nice big blue-trending county like mine.  So essentially I have no effing idea what to do with them.

           But I sure can sympathize with your frustration.

         • 

           BostonJoe on February 18, 2006 at 7:49 am

           Moving to one place to concentrate power or a minority group.  Sneakingly suspicious idea.

         • 

           Madman in the Marketplace on February 16, 2006 at 6:47 pm

           Any third party that succeeds will be personality based,

           Yes, indeed, but the great danger, if the left doesn’t find some kind of progressive populist to rally around, inside or outside the party, the right WILL produce a populist demogogue, then the “fascist-lite” we’re living under could easily become the real thing. We’re at one of those historical periods where EVERY institution: businesses, the press, religious institutions, the military, law enforcement and political parties are badly compromised and corrupted. This corruption is interlocking and self-reinforcing.

           The Republicans were a third party. They eventually replaced (the Whigs, iirc, {and I’m too lazy to look it up}). The Constitution doesn’t FORBID more than two parties, but the structure within it is biased toward compromise and consensus, which is easier to forge w/ two parties. There are different crystaline forms that ice can take, but the overall conditions bias water into assuming only a few of them. The two party system precipitates out of our Constitution in much the same way.  

           There will be no change w/out an independent progressive movement. The right changed the Republicans that way. They were NOT welcome in that party when I was a kid. Now they own it.

           I am 100% willing to destroy the Democratic Party for ’06 & ’08 in order to build something better in the long run. I think the current party is too broken, too corrupt, too comfortable w/ 2nd place to change. Even if it “wins” nothing will change. The entrenched leadership fights nearly every attempt at change, and has all but forbidden primary challenges. Without those contents, there will be no growth, only continued stagnation.

           Look at the lonely fight Russ Feingold is fighting over the PATRIOT Act. The cowards in his party abandon him over and over again. Yet the question of privacy, both from the government and corporations, is a HUGE issue with many Americans. It could be the kernel around which to build a winning progressive agenda, yet Vichy Dems like Reid, Schumer, Hoyer, Emmanuel and Clinton(s) will NEVER seize it. They ALL are too tied to the current system, especially the military industrial complex and it’s wife the energy/petrochemical industry.

           No one wants to say it, but Nader turned out to be right.

         • 

           DuctapeFatwa on February 16, 2006 at 7:09 pm

           And of course, since then, anyone who dares to point out that US has essentially a One-Party system is immediately pegged as a Naderite, which I most assuredly am not nor have I ever been.

           While he did advocate universal health care, if I remember correctly, what I remember quite clearly is that his position on the crusade was the standard outsource the wetwork that all the “Democrats” continue to spout to this day, taking unfair advantage, in my opinion, of people who truly believe that Iraqis would not mind so much being tortured and slaughtered by people wearing blue hats.

         • 

           Madman in the Marketplace on February 16, 2006 at 7:16 pm

           oh, sure. I’m not saying that he was right in all of his positions, but he was certainly right about the two parties. Shoulda been more clear.

         • 

           DuctapeFatwa on February 16, 2006 at 7:25 pm

           That Nader was finagled onto the Green Party ticket to ruin any credibility it had or would hope to have, and do the same to Peter Camejo, and I will never know why he agreed to be part of such a thing, maybe because his mom was sick and he was not all there, who knows?

           But it also had that effect, that now to say One Corporate Party will bring the response, oh like Nader says, not either, the parties are very different, just night and day they are, and the one I like does not work for the corporations and only says the things he does to get elected, he secretly agrees with me, so let’s all send him money.

           Kind of like they do with the various “tapes” of this or that Emanuel Goldstein, where they say really obvious stuff, like US should stop invading countries and maintaining client states, etc, so then of course anyone who suggests that US should stop invading countries is agreeing with the terrorists and aiding “the Enemy.”

         • 

           on February 16, 2006 at 9:15 pm

           Ralph Nader…I have always thought he was ok. Never minded anythinç he did or said.

           This problem of the parties…democrat and republican not opposing each other is becoming a theme throughout the world. People are running against each other who are really saying the same things. Homogenity is reaching a new level all over the planet. This is about the effects that technology (and those who control the wealth resulting from technology)seems to be having on human perception. We are perciving less. There is less variation in all aspects of communication. A Uniform view is forming worldwide and it´s of course being peddled everywhere by the media…even in the form of “art” …as in American Film throughout the world. People are watching shitty American movies for example and the influence they have here is spread over large parts the world. THe American business model is being copied, the control of business in the form of treaties that nations have with each other creates less diversity. It reflects itself in philosphy and religion. We see fundamentalism spreading everywhere.

           >Whats happening here is happening everywhere and AMerica is the engine but not the driving force. The driving force I think is technology and those who control it. Oddly those who control science and technology promote a fundamentalist posture in terms of their philosophy becuase it serves thier purpose of control.

         • 

           Street Kid on February 16, 2006 at 9:24 pm

           You’re right–damn  near impossible to tell the 2 apart, except when the dems try to con people.  why even bother when you know they are going to cave?

     • 

       Kidspeak on February 16, 2006 at 7:37 pm

       Yes, keep it on your short list. Reminding is necessary for those who didn’t live through it, especially.

6. 

   rumi on February 16, 2006 at 5:07 pm

   I should clarify a few points first. I’ve always been Ind but identified-voted Democrat but I don’t like politics. It always seemed that any effort was futile so I wasn’t involved in the debate part. That changed in 2002 in the runup to the Iraq war. The situations and claims didn’t make sense. I came into the research with pretty much a blank slate of opinion. It didn’t take long to get an idea of what was happening but I didn’t know if the warnings then were true. I spoke out some and listened more. This admin has exceeded the dire warnings from the beginning…consistently. I started speaking out more in trying to stop the madness or make some change. I got thoroughly trashed by GOPrs and even bad mouthed by Dems for a while but I kept going because the message was/is important.

     I’m not always right but I can see things in a different way than most people…not better or worse, just different. I’ve been through the 5 stages a few times and I still haven’t completely quit. I did start earlier and less attached to a party though so I’m further into an acceptance that I considered might be unavoidable. It’s not so much the fun of sitting back and watching it burn as it is accepting that factors are beyond my control.

   Insanity is repeatedly attempting something the same way while expecting different results.

     I’m all about compromise to achieve common goals but it has to be done with mutual respect. While I was still supporting the Dem party resurgence to correction, I never felt that mutual respect returned. Beyond that, when the Alito flop further disillusioned more avg dems, it sounded like the realistic chance of a 3rd party push. When you fired up that intensity in others here but dropped it just as quick, it made me rethink the 3rd party idea. I read all the opinions here and it made sense to see the wisdom of putting the energy into the dem party.

     Once again, with a glimmer of hope and others as fired up as I’d been before, I started putting out some ideas for consideration but they didn’t get much attention. Basically, it’s the concept that embraces the respect of special interest without having to have an opinion on it in order to band together in coalitions to have power in one voice. It’s an organized, structured system of ready response for political support based on policy not party but working within the Dem party to effect change right now. It would address issues now and let the candidates rise to the challenge in a natural process that represented the people’s needs. Kind of a mix of 3rd party, dem based coalition association. Small groups could all be represented when their issues need help. These are all issues central to all of us anyway. These groups are all over the place and already established. This would just enable us to speak for each other while working in a democratic chain of command.

     So, anyway, something else happened and you started firing up the 3rd party talk again and I said Fuckit, this is insanity right now. I think I’ll just watch for a while.

   • 

     rumi on February 16, 2006 at 5:44 pm

     Did I misunderstand the question?

     • 

       BostonJoe on February 16, 2006 at 5:57 pm

       No.  I don’t think so.  I’m not even sure what the question is, rumi?

       I kind of understood the tenor of some of your comments (about being fired up by my BS, and then left to drift).  It is what I hate most.  I feel like this is deja vu all over again from just a couple of weeks ago.  I don’t know jack about the stages of grief (I’m assuming that’s what the stages you’re talking about refer to).  But I think I must be in them.  Really very angry and confused.  Trying to think my way out of it with help of group.  Like the folks here.  You included.

       So that said, I didn’t get the idea that you were sharing in that last paragraph.  I read it a couple of times, but I think my neurons are on overload for any high level thinking.  I’ve been thinking about this in some kind of circular loop for the past 130 hours or so.  And it is not getting much clearer for me personally.  But I’m still trying.  So you can tell me again (if you write it like at six year old level, like a USA Today article, I might actually get it  🙂  ).  Otherwise, I can go back and re-read what you wrote and I’m sure I’ll get it.  I probably just need a few hours of sleep to understand it (I’m saying my failure to grasp is in my own disorganized state of consciousness — not in your writing).

       And even if I got it wrong — I still love your and DTF’s humor.  The ability to see from a different perspective.  A funny one.  I’ve got that on good days.  And it makes everything — no matter how shitty — a lot better.

       • 

         rumi on February 16, 2006 at 6:11 pm

           All of the special interest groups that need representation are already established like voting reform, medical choice, veterans, fair taxationn, judicial interests and the list goes on. If the democrat party is going to recover then it has to be based on support of policy-issues-ideals and not by pre-picked candidates with more hope and promises. We have issues that need addressed right now and the attention/interest of most Americans. They are tired of the same old way of doing business with politicians seemingly ignoring the public’s needs.

           Organize a system based on the blogs-groups who want to participate. Run it like a pseudodemocracy to show how that system is supposed to work. Each blog or group can have a few representatives and the organization runs uphill to a committee (smaller ones at different levels or interests) and this way we could address issues on a national level with a unified voice.

         It forces the focus on the issues and forces the candidates to establish a platform by actions. This way the candidates are more proven and everyone has a better idea of the people we’re supporting. It also forces compromise while still addressing crucial issues now instead of waiting until after the elections.

         It can be based in the democrat progressive structures but it would represent issues instead of parties. Let it develop naturally as it works and it will decide what party it is.

       • 

         rumi on February 16, 2006 at 6:35 pm

         So anyway…

           Utilizing the maximum potential of the skilled talents of so many people, as a larger group, would benefit everyone. Each group and individual could still have the freedom to disagree with anyone at any time but a commitment to a coalition would take precedent while allowing dissent.

           For instance, as disagreements need settled, the best thing to do is conduct informal voting to decide what the majority or reprenetative opinion will be. The election/voting advocates would be the logical choice to organize that part as a member. Those with media expertise and connections could help get a spot in various places while analysts collaborate on pieces to present when an issue is hot.

           Every talent is valuable and we’re all working on the same thing over and over and over but when the issue is hot in the media our voices go unheard.

       • 

         rumi on February 16, 2006 at 6:42 pm

           The participating members would have some area set aside for organizational resources and that could have a consistent theme for group identification. Issues, campaigns, drives, ideas and suggestions could even be a good start. What people need are a few leaders and a way to identify as a group. This still allows full individual expression or goals but the strength of support and identity in a large group.

7. 

   supersoling on February 16, 2006 at 7:04 pm

   I’m pretty sure I commented that the Working Families model wouldn’t work on a national level and now when I think about it more, it sounds less feasible.
   I’ve been torn between giving the democrats back the FU they’ve been giving us and going green, indy, whatever for better or worse, and hanging on to that last thread of fear I have that doing that will mean years of struggle that will have no immediate effect if at all on our present dangerous situation with the little Adolphs running things.
   In the end though I’m breaking away but will support certain democrats that will embrace a wider spectrum of voters. Not either or.
   The best situation would be if coalitions could be built between the democrats and the independents but that just another dream….

   On the other hand, drinking scotch with SallyCat and Rumi while we play games sounds cool too.

   • 

     rumi on February 16, 2006 at 7:17 pm

       Hey, good timing on the card game.

     🙂

       The broad coaltion I’m talking about would be inclusive of many smaller parties and basically nonpartisan as a whole. This would be based on productive, serious consideration of what a prospective party stands for…nothing destructive.

   • 

     susanw on February 16, 2006 at 8:47 pm

     There are a lot of us “special interest groups” on the left.  If we made a concerted effort to support each other, the way unions used to, we’d be a powerful force.  That means that environmentalists stand up for GLBT, feminists unite with people of colour, etc. Now, I don’t just mean marching together and refusing to cross pickets lines.  I mean standing up for progressive principles around the water cooler, in the classroom and in the market, so all Americans who share our values know we are not afraid to speak out for what’s right.  And I want all the right wingers to know that we’re here, too, so they can’t comfortably assume that everybody agrees with them.  I’m sure I’m preaching to the choir.  We passionate progressives have been out for years, but if the millions who support liberal principles actually voiced them, we could breech the fortress.

     • 

       rumi on February 16, 2006 at 8:54 pm

         That’s exactly what I’m talking about. Instead of working against each other, we can find the issues that apply to all of us in broader terms. It also allows, even encourages accepting diversity without passing judgement in destructive ways. That encourages more participation for a louder voice on some issues and better cooperation in general.

         We can show the world how people who disagree can work together to achieve common goals that benefit all of us.

     • 

       Tehanu on February 16, 2006 at 9:09 pm

       So let’s make a Union of progressive groups!  In a way, that’s a easier place to start because we can find the folks running each group.

       We need a list- or  a place for these groups to gather online, and formally join.

       • 

         rumi on February 16, 2006 at 9:13 pm

           People in marketing skills and general group organization would help. A newsletter of sorts, to start and a request to determine interest at each site for participation. Each site could have a spokesperson designated to an issue and they could contact through either a mailing list, feed or common site….for a start

         😉

         • 

           Tehanu on February 17, 2006 at 7:17 am

           Excellent.  Let me see who I know…

   • 

     Cali Scribe on February 17, 2006 at 10:10 am

     go “decline to state” for a while — let all the candidates fight over my precious vote (and money). 🙂

     In the meantime, it might be a good idea to see what killed off viable parties in the past (anyone remember the Whigs?), and if history is repeating itself in the death of the Democratic Party…or if there’s still enough there that a concerted effort from within can restore it. And who knows, if we’re able to either reclaim the Party from the ashes or build a successful new movement, it might give good, honest Republican voters (yes, such creatures do exist) the impetus to seize their party from the clutches of the neo-cons and Religious Reich, or go off on their own and build a new organization as well.

     • 

       Cali Scribe on February 17, 2006 at 10:17 am

       be getting more active — CodePINK has finally got a South Bay group in San Jose starting up, and there’s interest in groups in Palo Alto and Santa Clara (both a relative stone’s throw from my current town of residence) — I’d like to work within and expand the focus from just protesting the Debacle in the Desert to issues of social justice that affect everyone, such as the obscene Bush budget that slashes the safety net for the poor, elderly, disabled, etc., while extending tax cuts to his fat cat cronies (I hate that term “fat cat” — most cats I’ve known have been more pleasant than Bush and his ilk, regardless of size).

8. 

   rumi on February 16, 2006 at 7:04 pm

   shuffle….shuffle….tap-tap…shuffle
   .cut.
   shuffle….shuffle…-tap..

     How many cards do I deal for Hearts?

   • 

     SallyCat on February 16, 2006 at 7:10 pm

     13 cards to 4 players unless we are playing cutthroat hearts which only has players….

     Then deal everything and the extra’s go in the middle.

     See my next comment….

     • 

       rumi on February 16, 2006 at 7:19 pm

       cutthroat hearts which only has players….

       This is the one! Was there supposed to be a number in there?

       • 

         SallyCat on February 16, 2006 at 7:23 pm

         The idea is that you deal everything and then the leftovers are placed in the center. Whoever takes the first trick gets the cards in the middle.

         Since the Queen of Spades (aka “the Bitch”) is worth 13 of 26 points and the idea is to take as few points as possible you could accidentally end up with 13 points on the first hand.

         The Hearts game on the windows operating system is the same game…but it is way more fun after a bottle or two of wine in real life!

         • 

           rumi on February 16, 2006 at 7:37 pm

           Thanks,

           …about that scenario, it’s all just another collection of useless ideas. I’m happy to watch from the edge of the fray. My voice is not represented in our political system but I’ve made peace with that and I can accept it.

9. 

   SallyCat on February 16, 2006 at 7:18 pm

   At least from Booman Tribune….I find myself so much in the minority here in many ways. And I am tired of the whole “what the hell do we do next” scenarios, and all the rest.

   This is a busy time for me and I’m tired of the B.S. and navel gazing. I’ll be doing a few of the following…
   – primary campaigns coming up, working evenings and weekends on real life campaigns instead of scenarios,

   -trying to get local coalitions together

   -to work defending Buyblue.org against Polipoint Press

   -to work on Take Back Red California

   -to donate money to primaries across the country

   So…you all can keep trying to figure this out…I’m going to go out and do something. I’ll be posting a lot more on DailyKos – because it’s a bigger audience and action items might get noticed (or flamed).

   This is not a GBCBT comment…it’s a I need a frickin’ break from all of this…and maybe time for a hearts game or scrabble game without talking about politics.

   Good luck with whatever scenario you choose. Rumi – the scrabble game’s at my house – you bring the popcorn, I’ll bring the scotch.

   • 

     rumi on February 16, 2006 at 7:22 pm

       The tasks you mentioned are exactly what I’m talking about getting organized. What better way to reach your geographical audience through groups that are basically nonpolitical in interest?

     • 

       SallyCat on February 16, 2006 at 7:39 pm

       and there was lots of agreement and yet no plans were forthcoming.

       I can only do things locally and regionally with the occasional donation to Conneticut or Texas for good measure this month.

       One of the complaints on DailyKos….and it applies to every blog I’ve followed…we have a place to step forward with our opinions but we have no blogosphere leaders.

       So…I’m off to do my part to take back CA CD-11 from Pombo and elect my local DA that is a progressive and walk precincts in Modesto or Tracy or anywhere Red CA may be. Reading these diaries and comments day is feeling fruitless and totally useless.

       I’ll read and watch…someone let me know when a plan is developed.

       • 

         maryb2004 on February 16, 2006 at 7:45 pm

         I wish you well Sal.  You’re doing exactly what needs to be done.  I too am not clear why navel gazing is such a beloved activity in the blogosphere when there are so many useful activities that could be done and are being done by actual activists.  Please check in though! You inspire.

       • 

         rumi on February 16, 2006 at 7:49 pm

         Just for the sake of conversation, the leaders would come first from the participating blogs and organizations. Each community chooses their leaders and the leaders represent their communities as needed. Special interests in each blog/group/community would cross many lines as different associations are formed. This would also increase cross-site traffic and that usually good for sponsorship traffic.

         • 

           SallyCat on February 16, 2006 at 8:20 pm

           Either the ‘name’ bloggers like Booman or MSOC or Markos to assist.

           Then we need individuals to step up…like Boston Joe and Man Eegee on the 12 days of Justice. I can only see that happening for short spurts without a major name stepping up. Even then for the 12 days there was trouble getting participation.

           It’s hard enough going to work and then doing real life politics without coming to read this. And maybe because B.T. is so small…things feel more personal here. At DailyKos it is large enough that now there are small communities inside the giant blog it has become.

           I’m already in leadership roles elsewhere. For now I’m just tired Rumi…

         • 

           rumi on February 16, 2006 at 8:33 pm

           Hey, we’re all tired. This would just be a way of getting everyone on the same page with the stuff they’re doing anyway, not exclusively more work for certain individuals. I would think people who are good at leading and organizing who have the time and energy would step forward.

             It’s really just a common name or identity to share that people can follow, doing the same work they’ve been doing or choose to do. Just the concept of a bigger community. Honestly, most sites can work from archives for a lot of it. It’s the same now as it was a couple of years ago.

         • 

           BostonJoe on February 17, 2006 at 7:13 pm

           Just catching up reading all these SallyCat.  I can’t disagree with you.  Hate to be the navel-gazer that pushed you over the edge.  🙂

           Seriously, though, reading all the various thoughts — it is fucking hard to come up with a viable plan that would mean shit.  Haven’t given up just yet.  But some Scrabble and Scotch and nose to the grind stone on local issues don’t seem like a bad alternative.

           Best on your sabbatical.

   • 

     dada on February 16, 2006 at 8:27 pm

     Be well SallyCat, safe journeys and much hope that we can have some success in the coming elections.  I’m in sympathy with every thing you’ve said, and I’m giving it one last shot.  

     If there isn’t a major shift in the body politic as a result of the 06 elections, I’ll join you and Rumi.

     Peace

10. 

    cotterperson on February 16, 2006 at 7:43 pm

    Though I said third party, I think Booman is right, that they’re unlikely to succeed. I’ve voted for numerous third-party and Independent candidates in the past, but they don’t win the national races. That said, though, the perils are great and some of the people are waking up. My off-the-top-of-my-head, simplistic view is that a successful third party would have to draw from both red and blue and unite around something simple, such as protect the constitution. For instance, did you see George Will today?

    terrorism is not the only new danger of this era. Another is the administration’s argument that because the president is commander in chief, he is the “sole organ for the nation in foreign affairs.” That non sequitur is refuted by the Constitution’s plain language, which empowers Congress to ratify treaties, declare war, fund and regulate military forces, and make laws “necessary and proper” for the execution of all presidential powers [Italics in original].

    Part of your diary sounds like you’re focusing on what we commenters with strong feelings could do to change things. You mention all the readers at Kos, which makes me think of groups like ePluribus who publish diaries there and make a concerted effort to get it to the recommended list. I like those and always learn a lot.

    We could do that with an action item, though it would take some consensus-building and coordination. We’d need to choose an item and agree on a course of action we’d take and ask others to take. I suspect that could be done, and you’d be great at leading that effort.

    Is that at all what you mean?

    • 

      BostonJoe on February 17, 2006 at 7:20 pm

      I guess I went around the block to make that point.  But you have hit on exactly what I think “our” power is here.  And I think, with the right idea, we could completely have a large scale success.  Perhaps even change the world (delusions of granduer).

      But pulling the right idea out of the hat is difficult task.  I have a hard time disagreeing with anything that has been said in this comment section.  And yet I don’t see any one idea where people are saying — yeah — that’s the ticket.  That’s where we need to go.

      (I’ve got an idea — but it might not be all that good — thinking of diarying it — perhaps Sunday or Monday — and then again — I might just eat it — because I don’t know if I even like it yet — or what exactly it would do — it is more method that movement — and I’m also interested in what the BooMan has to say on this issue — he mentioned he might diary some idea or thoughts he had on the topic this weekend — and his leadership in any contructive direction would be invaluable, I think — and I’m not calling him Kos in any way here, to the contrary, I think if BooMan wanted to lead a group somewhere, he probably could — but then, maybe this is all much ado about nothing — hence these run on circular comments and diaries).

11. 

    GreenSooner on February 16, 2006 at 7:45 pm

    I missed the Rotting Corpse diary, but I don’t think you should overlook the Green Party of the United States.  We may not be perfect (who is). But we [www.gp.org/tenkey.shtml stand for good things]. And we have started building a party. We’ve had a couple hundred elected officials around the country. And, at the local level, we’ve already started making a difference in people’s lives.

    It’s unfortunate that people know about the Greens largely through our presidential runs, because we’re a very decentralized party, and most of our work is done at the local level.  So consider looking up your state Green Party, and getting involved!  

    • 

      BostonJoe on February 17, 2006 at 7:23 pm

      I would not overlook them.  When I read their ideas on the website, I am completely in agreement with about everything.  I suspect that perhaps a third or more of voters would agree with them on issues only, if people were inclined to vote on issues.

      And I’ve been close to just bailing individually, and going Green.  I even contacted my local group — and they were defunct.  It seems they have withered some in my neck of the woods since 2000.

      Completely respect their platform, and your work, and this is a real option for me personally.  But as far as getting 20-40 bloggers together on this idea, I don’t see that we have that here.  And even if we did, I’m not sure where we would go.

12. 

    Kidspeak on February 16, 2006 at 7:53 pm

    Oh, my, the classic psychology experiment, Prisoner’s Dilemma.

    And as it applies now, do you see us as the kid who sits on his card and refuses to sign up with the cooperators, e.g. as commonly portrayed, the DLC-ite/Reid/Rahm/move to the right crowd?

    That’s the usual role of break-away parties. [And I want to tease you a bit, your role in that MSU class was to lead the group in getting everyone to cooperate. So, among other things, your protests in recent diaries about not being a politician, etc etc, are just a bit out of sync with your own history.]

    I still keep thinking of the Freedom Democratic Party. They won. They changed the Dems profoundly, and had a harder task in doing so than what needs to be done now, in my opinion.  

    That’s what I keep thinking about. I don’t want to start a new party, I want to energize what we have and push it into better ways.

13. 

    tampopo on February 16, 2006 at 8:12 pm

    BostonJoe – I, too, am swirling round and round trying to decide where I can put my energy and time – political action or preparing for DTF’s cave, possibly both?

    When I read about anything that requires a thirty year building process, all I can think is, “No time, no time, no time.”

    We are losing even the pretense of a functioning government with a constitution.

    We have this marvelous tool and ability to connect. Yet we are continuing in so many ways to strategize and act as if the political world was the same as days of “yore.” I keep thinking of the military forces of Poland going off to battle on horseback, meeting German tanks.

    What if we consider the government and both parties to be “of the corporations, by the corporations, and for the corporations.”

    Can we come up with different strategies directed to different places? Create corporate conflicts? Involve groups in different ways? I don’t know – I’m spinning round and round.

    There are so many knowledgeable and creative people here. I just keep coming back to we have to do something different.

    And rumbling around in my mind is the thought that it is tax season and my taxes are funding this government.

    • 

      BostonJoe on February 17, 2006 at 7:34 pm

      I have had a thought similar to this, as I read my way to your comment.  Maybe my real problem is not with the “political” situation we face in this country.  Maybe — I’d say probably — my real problem is with the “economic” and “political” systems we live in.

      In theory, I’m always drawn to Chomsky’s criticisms of the capitalist-state and multi-national corporate power.  And while he is always long on wise criticism, I rarely see him outlining specific alternatives.  But to the extent I’ve read/heard alternatives he has offered, I hear him talking about anarcho-syndicalism (whatever the fuck that is).  The idea that heirarchacal governments like ours are doomed to be repressive in some ways.  The idea that profit motives are inherently harmful to human communitary existence.  I think it is almost Jeffersonian, in the sense of that famous quote, “The government that is best, is that which governs least.”

      But I don’t even bother writing a diary like that.  To have those ideas take hold.  That is truly revolutionary.  And I don’t think people are willing to discard all that they know.  You know.  The basic indoctrination of an American youth in terms of, say, property rights.  Try and debate the fundamental American belief that we should fundamentally have the right to own the land — that the highest and best use of land flows from private ownership.  Even the most left of left people want to own a home — because in America, I believe we have elevated selfish individualism to the complete detriment of shared community existence.  No “commons.”  Even the idea of “taxes” are heinous.  No reason to pool your money for the common good.  Fuck, we have a dominant ruling party that has run, and won, on the idea that it is always good to cut taxes, and never good to raise them.  And it seems to me that the ultimate place for an idea like this is a state that has no funding, so that the true power lies in those who have great private resources.  It is nonsensical.  But it is ingrained and Americans love it.

      (Head shake).  Wow.  Didn’t accomplish much with those three minutes of life, huh?

14. 

    Tehanu on February 16, 2006 at 8:49 pm

    BostonJoe, I want a new party.  All the points about weakening the dems donn’t recognize that we could endorse all the progressive dems we want while we biuld up our strength.  I tried the old way in the last election, and Rumi’s right that expecting anything different in 2006 would be insanity.

    I want real change, a chance for America to look up again and imagine the best we could be.  What could humanity become given the chance?  Let’s do it.

    Have you read The Dispossessed?  

15. 

    on February 16, 2006 at 9:21 pm

    I think the Democrats are no different from the Republicans except in nuance. So the Democrats should be fractured, in the long run it offers some hope, but I am afraid we are up against historical forces that we don´t understand and they are far more powerful than we can imagine.

    But trying at least slows down what appaars to be man´s inevitable self destruction. George Bush is such an unnecessary hyper catalyst for this.

16. 

    DuctapeFatwa on February 16, 2006 at 10:16 pm

    that Joe did not put “email other nations to liberate the US” as the obvious and most practical choice, is it now time for my obligatory posting of the Peace and Freedom Party platform?

    • 

      on February 17, 2006 at 1:34 am

      “email other nations to liberate the US”

      I’ve been trying to get that idea going for the longest time. Seems there’s some kind of xenophobia or refusal to admit that we are no longer the “champions” and could really use some outside help here.

      Judging from what I have seen from the American ‘there-is- no-left-left, I really think this is the most practical solution.

    • 

      James Benjamin on February 17, 2006 at 1:39 am

      I would suggest putting Venezuela and Cuba at the top of the list of potential liberators.

      • 

        BostonJoe on February 17, 2006 at 7:37 pm

        I heard Cheney invited Chavez and Castro to go quail hunting next weekend.

    • 

      BostonJoe on February 17, 2006 at 7:36 pm

      That is a pretty fucking good idea.  Should I just send my e-mail to you DTF?  Can you pass it on to the Bureau of Liberation in your neck of the woods.  You always have the best ideas.  Fuck.  Problem solved.  You’ve got my e-mail if you want to give me the address, so I can do my part anyway.

17. 

    spiderleaf on February 16, 2006 at 10:30 pm

    I’m not undecided. I just can’t fucking vote so my opinion doesn’t matter on this issue. The Dems are fucked. America is fucked. This blog is fucked.

    All I was saying is that I am walking away and shutting the fuck up since I have no reason to participate any longer. No one cares what a socialist Canuck has to say about American politics and that’s okay. Why would you. It was arrogant of me to think otherwise… probably something about being married to a yank that gave me perceived cachet in my own mind, but now that that’s over, my cachet is worth as much as Anna Nicole Smith’s.

    If I thought I could make one iota of a difference I would stick around. But I can’t and it’s obvious the most left blog on the internets is more concerned with what the CIA has to say than anyone else on the left. So I know when I’m just beating a dead horse and causing more strife than good.

    Good luck to you all, I know that I’ll miss the majority of you and let me know when the East Coast meet up is happening because if I can get past the border without being strip searched and sent to Gitmo, I’ll be there.

    Peace
    Namaste

    • 

      rumi on February 16, 2006 at 10:56 pm

      You should stick around.

    • 

      DuctapeFatwa on February 16, 2006 at 10:59 pm

      Declare jihad. Post links. Say the obvious over and over again. Create macros if you are a nerd.

      Call the CIA the CIA, whether it is operating in Iran, Turkey, or at a theatre near you.

      • 

        spiderleaf on February 16, 2006 at 11:17 pm

        Damn Ductape, occupation is just so against my character and how I was raised… just doesn’t seem right somehow.
        Okay, let me sleep on it and get back to you.

        one question though… is it still an occupation if it’s full of pointed snark? 😉

        • 

          DuctapeFatwa on February 16, 2006 at 11:22 pm

          can prevail without tureens of snark. Fat, shiny ones.

          Remember the CIA consists of simple, child-like people. They will require extra shiny snark.

          Rest well, my fellow Mujahid. Our job has just begun.

        • 

          James Benjamin on February 17, 2006 at 1:24 am

          I usually order my occupation with extra snark – plus a doggie bag of snark for the ride home.

        • 

          BostonJoe on February 17, 2006 at 7:40 pm

          The only reason some people here might seem to ignore socialist Canucks is because we are jealous as hell.  You can’t fucking leave.

          Of course, I’m feeling that way too.  Only with the shame of an American whose tax dollars are paying for wanton bombing and torture.  Oh the pride.

    • 

      supersoling on February 16, 2006 at 11:49 pm

      See, that’s exactly what I meant by forming coalitions when I joined your clique Spiderleaf ;o)

      Hope to see you at the East Coast meetup and if you see a guard at the border with a ponytail and a peace sign tattoo you’ll know it’s been prearranged.

    • 

      on February 17, 2006 at 1:26 am

      Don’t know whether it counts as a “blog”, more a message board, but there’s always Progressive Independent you know. And there’s been a lot of talk about third-party movement over there.

    • 

      Cali Scribe on February 17, 2006 at 12:54 pm

      …if this doesn’t work, we’re going to need you to help us figure out how to get the blue states annexed as part of Canada. 🙂

      Hey, I’m already a hockey fan — and I’ll vote to move both the Panthers and Devil Rays out of Florida and back to Canada Proper… 😉

      • 

        BostonJoe on February 17, 2006 at 7:41 pm

        If I’ve got to be annexed by Canada, which I’m rooting for, I want to take the Red Wings with me.  Republicans think they are communists anyways.  So it shouldn’t be a problem.

18. 

    James Benjamin on February 17, 2006 at 1:20 am

    What can 20-40 bloggers do about American Solidarity? I think Cernig (the cat who coined the “American Solidarity” concept) lays it out a bit better than I:

    There is a way in which the “insurgent” left can pressure the establishment of the Democratic party and still walk seperately from that establishment when it feels the need. That way is by something akin to the old Polish Solidarity movement.

    I wrote this back in October:

       

    For the sake of the Left rather than the sake of the Dems we don’t need a schism between those two opinions that would weaken our voice.

        The objective, then, is not to convince the left to join the Democratic Party but to convince the Democratic Party to wholeheartedly join the left. The internet and advocates for the left such as bloggers will have a huge role to play in this effort. We must outreach to the unions, to interest groups, to smaller parties of the left and to Democrats and forge a true leftwing coalition. By not being part of the Democrat party apparatus we can advocate for fusion politics. We can convince Greens and Dems not to run against each other but instead to put up the best candidate and party in any given election, for instance. We can help workers unionize or at least organize in trade associations. We can aid the Coalition for Change to become stronger by backing their campaigns and by encouraging them to remain independent of party affiliation while aiding all parties of the left with funding and manpower in campaigns. We can form a fundraising base, a think tank and a possible pool for future staff and even elected officials who hold the interest of the people as paramount as well as being a voice to the media or in the absence of mainstream media coverage. We can be facillitators of communication and policy reform at every level.

    The name for that coalition, independent of party and thus able to pressure Democrat leaders just by the possibility of backing others (think Pennacchio as an Indie in PA, or Bernie Sanders, as two for instances), is American Solidarity.

    American Solidarity should not be a party or even affiliated to a single party but a communications, focus and fundraising umbrella for all kinds of lefties. Hells, even lefties who want to stick with the Dems can join (maybe they CAN convince the Demlicans to change) – just dont ask that American Solidarity restrict itself to supporting the Dems because it should be casting its net of support wider than a single party. Folks who don’t like it don’t have to join but the tent should be big enough for every Leftie.

    So, what can 20-40 bloggers do? Spread the word, for a start. Spread the word that existing civil rights, feminist, antiwar, labor, and other progressive or potentially progressive groups have much more in common than we may have realized.

    I don’t think there’s much need to reinvent the wheel, here. Someone else somewhere mentioned that there are already folks like ActBlue who have data bases in place. Sounds great. I’ll leave the nuts and bolts stuff to those who know what they’re doing there.

    Anyhoo, in the end, lefties need to act as a unified and ultimately nonpartisan front, as our goals are generally overlapping goals to begin with (and we have common enemies: practically the entire GOP and regrettably quite a substantial portion of the Democrat party). Your civil rights and civil liberties concerns are mine too, and so forth.

    The key is to never align with any existing political party, but instead to offer unified support to those individuals (be they Dem, Green, Independent, etc.) who share our concerns and who will do what they were elected to do once in office. The mistake we lefties have typically made is to get party leaders thinking they have our votes and our $ in the bag – and once they think that, they can treat us like doormats.

    The idea is simple enough: spread the word that there is this solid base of progressive folks who are willing to act in as a unified front, who expect candidates to come to us rather than take us for granted, and who if satisfied with those candidates – regardless of party affiliation – we’ll work and work hard to help them achieve election, and we’ll keep on supporting them to the extent that they walk their talk.

    Again, I’ll leave the nuts and bolts stuff to those who understand it – my basic reading is that the components for a successful Solidarity approach exist to one degree or another, but have not been plugged together properly.

    Mi dos centavos.

    • 

      rumi on February 17, 2006 at 8:09 am

      I don’t know if this particular group is the answer but it, and your comment, incorporates all of the elements I’m talking about.

        Everyone needs an identity that is greater than any existing party we have right now and to support it without having to sacrifice party affifliation. The goal isn’t to promote greater splintering but to form a stronger structure through cohesion of the existing splinters.

      Sounds great. I’ll leave the nuts and bolts stuff to those who know what they’re doing there.

      I agree completely and they are out there.

      • 

        BostonJoe on February 17, 2006 at 7:56 pm

        I’m liking the sound of this.  I saw rba’s diary before I ever got around to getting to my own comments section.

        To my discredit, I have still not managed to read through all of James Benjamin’s links on American Solidarity.  But this explanation helps me undestand it a bit more.

        Thanks JB for answer.

        A further question.  While I love your comment and rba’s diary as a theory/process, I think the nuts and bolts are necessary at some point in the conversation.  And I’m not saying there were no nuts and bolts in rba’s diary, because it is practically a diagram for how to do something (I think my own tech deficiencies might be a part of the problem there).

        But let me ask this hypothetical:  You are elected emperor of 20-40 multi-talneted bloggers.  They’ve got varied skills.  Doctors, lawyers, scientists, computer engineers, writers, etc.  They are interested in donating some time to your idea of American Solidarity.  What does the work roster look like?  What would you direct them to do?  If anything?  Even to just get moving in the right direction?  Like planning activities?  I’m just asking.  I obviously couldn’t commit for all the varied individuals here.  But I bet with a good plan, you could have a working group in place.  Or am I missing some fundamental point in my understanding of how American Solidarity (or at least a small contingent’s involvement in American Solidarity) would work?

19. 

    Carnacki on February 17, 2006 at 1:41 am

    A celebration. To last throughout the year.
    So bring your good times. And your laughter too.
    We’re gonna celebrate and party with you…

    Kool and the Gang.

    • 

      James Benjamin on February 17, 2006 at 1:50 am

      One Nation Under A Groove
      {G Clinton, G Shider, W Morrison}

      So wide can’t get around it
      So low you can’t get under it
      (So low you can’t get under it)
      So high you can’t get over it
      (So high you can’t get over it)
      Da-yee do do do do do do
      This is a chance
      This is a chance
      Dance your way
      Out of your constrictions
      (Tell sugah)
      Here’s a chance to dance our way
      out of our constrictions
      Gonna be freakin’!
      Up and down
      Hang up alley way
      With the groove our
      Only guide
      We shall all be moved

      Ready or not here we come
      Gettin’ down on the one which
      We believe in
      One nation under a groove,
      gettin’ down just for the funk
      (Can I get it on my good foot)
      Gettin’ down just for the funk of it
      (Good God)
      ’bout time I got down one time
      One nation and we’re on the move
      Nothin’ can stop us now
      (Aye aye aye aye aye)
      Feet don’t fail me now
      Give you more of what you’re funkin’ for
      Feet don’t fail me now
      Do you promise to funk?
      The whole funk, nothin’ but the funk

      Ready or not here we come
      Gettin’ down on the one which we believe in
      Here’s my chance to dance my way
      Out of my constrictions
      (Do do dee oh doo)
      (Do do dee oh doo)
      (You can dance away)

      Feet don’t fail me now (ha ha)
      Here’s a chance to dance
      Our way out of our constrictions

      Gonna be groovin’ up and down
      Hang up alley way
      The groove our only guide

      We shall all be moved
      Feet don’t fail me now (ha ha)
      Givin’ you more of what you’re funkin’ for
      Feet don’t fail me now

      Here’s my chance to dance my way
      out of my constrictions
      Givin’ you more of what you’re funkin’ for
      (Feet don’t fail me now)
      (Feet don’t fail me now)
      Do you promise to funk, the whole funk,
      nothin’ but the funk
      One nation under a groove
      Gettin’ down just for the funk of it
      One nation and we’re on the move
      Nothin’ can stop us now
      Nothin’ can stop us now
      One nation under a groove
      Gettin’ down just for the funk of it
      One nation and we’re on the move
      Nothin’ can stop us now
      Nothin’ can stop us now
      One nation under a groove
      Gettin’ down just for the funk of it
      One nation and we’re on the move
      Nothin’ can stop us now

      Do you promise to funk?
      Do you promise to funk?
      Hah
      Do you promise to funk, the whole funk?

      One nation under a groove
      Gettin’ down just for the funk of it
      (Here’s my way to dance my way out)
      Gettin’ down just for the funk of it
      One nation
      And we’re on the move
      Nothin’ can stop us now

      Do you promise to funk, the whole funk?
      You can’t stop us now
      Givin’ you more of what you’re
      Funkin’ for

      • 

        James Benjamin on February 17, 2006 at 2:00 am

        I just want to celebrate

        Rare Earth (Fekaris, Zesses)

        I just want to celebrate another day of livin’
        I just want to celebrate another day of life
        I put my faith in the people
        But the people let me down
        So I turned the other way
        And I carry on, anyhow
        That’s why I’m telling you

        I just want to celebrate, yeah, yeah
        I just want to celebrate, yeah, yeah
        Another day of living,
        I just want to celebrate another day of life

        Had my hand on the dollar bill
        And the dollar bill blew away
        But the sun is shining down on me
        And it’s here to stay
        That’s why I’m telling you

        I just want to celebrate, yeah, yeah
        Another day of living, yeah
        I just want to celebrate another day of living
        I just want to celebrate another day of life

        Don’t let it all get you down,
        Don’t let it turn you around and around
        And around and around

        Well, I can’t be bothered with sorrow
        And I can’t be bothered with hate, no, no
        I’m using up my time by feeling fine, every day
        That’s why I’m telling you I just want to celebrate
        Aw, yeah
        I just want to celebrate yeah yeah
        Another day of living, yeah yeah
        I just want to celebrate another day of livin’, yeah
        I just want to celebrate another day of life

        Don’t let it all get you down, no, no
        Don’t let it turn you around and around,
        And around and around, and around
        Around round round
        ’round and around round round round
        don’t go ’round

20. 

    Alice on February 17, 2006 at 6:47 am

    Joe, I am always inspired by your passion and intense desire to solve a problem, so my first response is the most radical and extreme, but then I read Floridagal’s What have you to offer me? and decide to remain uncommitted, and try to keep my emotions from dominating my intelligence.  

    Something new is always exciting, but change comes slowly.  A separate party is too divisive, we need to work on uniting.

    When I look at your lists of people, I can see that I belong with all of them.  I’m sure we can get it together.

21. 

    alohaleezy on February 17, 2006 at 9:15 am

    I am going to repost a comment I left on floridagals diary here.

    I too felt that the only way to defeat the republicans this year and coming years is to hold my nose and stick with the dems, as recently as the past few months. I don’t feel that way anymore.To do so is like rewarding bad behavior in a child. As long as you keep bailing the child out and there are no consequences, the bad behavioe will continue. Why would it not? When there are no consequences you end up with a Bush.
    As long as we keep saying, well ok, you didn’t vote to fight the most important nominations for the Supreme Court in our lifetimes, will let that one go but please investigate NSA spying ok? They just shut that down yesterday. I am appalled by the republicans power but I am just as deeply appalled by the Dems lack of spine. They are not fighting for anything. Wait til November? For what? A bunch of republican lite candidates that Shumer and Reid have picked? You want a Casey? You vote for him. I won’t. Shumer doesn’t even believe in the primary system anymore. Look what they did to Hackett. The system, on both sides of the aisle imho is broken and continuing to wait and see is no longer working for me. The Greens may not be strong right now but boy if everyone took the energy they have been expending on the Dems and gave to the Greens or a completely new party we might have a chance for change. I think it is too late to change the Dems at this point. They haven’t shown me one good reason in five years to stay with them.

    • 

      rumi on February 17, 2006 at 9:21 am

      I agree with what you see except I am nonpartisan in all of this. I think if we can promote policy that is effective then the candidates will have a need to support it.

        The politicians haven’t had to work for the votes and that should change.

    • 

      on February 17, 2006 at 10:11 am

      A couple of points:

      First, all the calculations I see on this issue leave out one of the largest block of citizens in this country: NON-voters.

      Who are the non-voters? Why are they not voting?

      With the “get out the vote” campaigns on both sides in 04, I think we pretty much maxed out the potential for enticing non-voters out of their holes with the existing two-shades-of-the-same-party system.

      I have no stats to back it up, but it makes sense that the non-voters are not voting because they, like many of us, are tired of both parties.

      The third party is the option that has the potential to draw these voters out–whatever can or cannot be said for Perot and his Reform Party, they almost did it, and I don’t think the reason he failed was that (as booman says) he wasn’t “sane enough”–I think he was all too sane, and the propaganda machinery on both sides tried to portray him as a nutcase. Because he was a huge threat to the system that sustains them both.

      These quotes from the Wiki article on him

      “If you can’t stand a little sacrifice and you can’t stand a trip across the desert with limited water, we’re never going to straighten this country out.”
      “Something in human nature causes us to start slacking off at our moment of greatest accomplishment. As you become successful, you will need a great deal of self-discipline not to lose your sense of balance, humility, and commitment.”
      “The activist is not the man who says the river is dirty. The activist is the man who cleans up the river.”
      “If someone as blessed as I am is not willing to clean out the barn, who will?”
      “If you see a snake, just kill it – don’t appoint a committee on snakes.”
      “Inventories can be managed, but people must be led.”

      don’t sound like the words of a nutcase to me–au contraire, first time I’ve ever heard anything that made any sense coming from the mouth of a Texas billionaire in a business suit.

      Perot was too big of a threat to the two-shades-of-the-same-party system and both parties saw to it that this threat was immediately eliminated.

      Money was a big factor  in that campaign, and when thinking in terms of a third-party candidate, that person is going to have to come with his own pocketbook. Esp since, as Ductape points out, most of the “theys” that floridagal refers to are not likely to have the resources needed to fund a campaign.

      OK, so let me go down with nutcases like Ross Perot in the annals of historical footnotes and propose, once again, what I suggested a few days ago:

      My assumption is that politics today is “personality driven”; the American people are just suckers for personality cult–it’s the way it is. So it doesn’t matter what the hell you call your third party, what you need is a Führer (sorry, but that is the dynamic we’re working with here). The  third party option needs to have a   popular personality as a CANDIDATE–preferably one with his own financial resources.

      Essentially, this is what the Repubs did when they ran Reagan in 1980. They pulled a two-bit actor out their asses (probably the only actor they could find who was insane enough to accept the job), preened and pruned him and presented him to the American public as the “great communicator”. And it worked. It worked for Arnie. It worked for Jessie Ventura.

      I think this strategy could succeed in a campaign around someone like say George Clooney, or, for god’s sake, even supersellout Oprah.

      Talking to a friend about this the other night, he said, no way, no way, we need someone who can get things done (the implication being, someone who knows the ins and outs of the existing system, in other words, someone who can better manipulate the filthy fucking corrupt system that is de facto in place).

      I looked at him and said, you know what? HOW? HOW on earth can ANYONE possibly do a worse job than the people we now have running this country into the ground?

      This proposal brought to you by your least favorite self-described and happily so nutcase!: recruit a major Hollywood star who has major “brand name” recognition and major resources at his/her disposal, someone for whom attracting media certainly wouldn’t be a problem either (paparazzi: on your marks!)–put that person on the ticket, call the fucking party whatever the hell you want, and let him run. Let him do what he does best: woo and wow the American public. And give him a shot–certainly can’t fuck things up any worse (this is the advantage of scribe’s “accept the death of democracy” stance–it forces us to look for solutions that might not have seemed plausible before we decided to pull the plug: when you’ve got nothing left to lose, thinking WAYYYYYYYYYY outside the box is not so hard to do. And again, as the examples of Reagan, Arnie and Jesse Ventura show, this idea isn’t even that far out of the box. It’s been done before.)

      Based on his politics and his father’s legacy, seems to me Clooney would be the logical and most-likely to succeed candidate.

      So call me a nut. There were people who were taking Cindy Sheehan seriously as a Senatorial candidate–as if Cindy Sheehan were somehow any more or less qualified as a politician than someone like Clooney (or some other Hollywood figure).

      I’d say the biggest hurdle would be to convince such a candidate to sacrifice 4 years of his/her life (and the attendant pay cut) this would involve. You’d have to recruit him. You’d have to beg on bended knee.

      But I do believe a Hollywood Superstar DOES have the potential to come out of the box and upset this whole fucking applecart–if enough people get behind it.

      I say: recruit Clooney.

      • 

        BostonJoe on February 17, 2006 at 8:09 pm

        A couple of things.

        First off, as far as the third party solution (which, based on reading everthing I’m reading — schizophrenic me is thinking Boo people just won’t buy it, so let’s do something Boo people will but), I think your idea is the best thing I’ve read.  It is simple.  And I think sound.  And could work.  $.02  And I like Clooney, too, as your selected icon.  I just read an interiew he gave (can’t remember which diary) and he was great.

        Second, just a note about Perot.  I saw him speak in ’92 at our State Capitol.  In the same place where I now do anti-war protesting.  I was a law student at the time.  The crowd was a carnival.  And he gave a standard stump speech.  He had a certain endearing quaility.  But the thing I will always remember about that rally, was a comment that was made to me by a man I was standing next to.  He was maybe 50 or 60.  And he overheard my wife and I talking.  We thought Perot was a little loony (but, I take your point, that he did talk some straight shit, too).  But we both had the sense that we were watching something like a cult of personality.  Something like Hitler preaching to a riled up crowd (absent all the evil and trappings of Nazism — I just mean in a fired up speaking kind of kooky way).  But this older guy heard us talking.  And he said, “You don’t know what you are talking about.  I heard Eisenhower speak.  This is the most honest man this country has ever seen since Ike.  You kids wouldn’t know the truth if it hit you in the face.”

        We thought he was a crank.  (And obviously, he couldn’t have said all that, it is just how I remember it now).  But, looking back, I think he may have been onto something.  Your post reminded me of that.  And it also reminded me of how close that Reform Party came to taking over America.  Close.  Surely couldn’t have been any worse that the current fascist regime.

        I like the Clooney idea.  Fuck it.  Call it the Clooney Party.  You gonna call him?  Or do I have to?  Because I am busy as shit these next two months.  🙂  

        • 

          DuctapeFatwa on February 17, 2006 at 8:43 pm

          Maybe you should do a new poll.

22. 

    alohaleezy on February 17, 2006 at 9:21 am

    that really is telling. We have well over 3000 users here and only 48 bothered to vote on this issue. But then again, maybe this is indicative of the group. A poll generally shows the norm. If and it is a big if, we could convince the 19 that haven’t formed an opinion that it is time for a third party then maybe it would have some legs. Take the 45% of registered voters that didn’t bother to vote in 04 and work on them. Find out why they didn’t vote and go from there. You will not convince all to join a third party but its a start.

    If not now when? IMHO it is the diehard dems that keep saying it won’t work. Let’s prove them wrong!

    • 

      rumi on February 17, 2006 at 9:24 am

      😉

      I didn’t vote in the poll but I’ve been active here.

      My vote has power by not voting.

    • 

      rumi on February 17, 2006 at 9:27 am

        The voting participation might be different if this was brought to the attention of more people, say… on the front page. Evidently, the issue is not of great enough concern to warrant that or it would have been there already.

      • 

        alohaleezy on February 17, 2006 at 9:38 am

        But it is important to the majority here, no matter which side you voted for. I agree this should have been front paged. Susan? Boo? What do you think?

        • 

          rumi on February 17, 2006 at 10:25 am

            My comments attempt to show a reasonable possibility for a peacefull. multiparty, inclusive association to benefit everyone. It’s centered on supporting our government through compromise and cooperation. I think it’s possible but if it isn’t, I can accept that too and choose not to participate, peacefully.

        • 

          BostonJoe on February 17, 2006 at 8:14 pm

          I think BooMan indicated he was going to write something inspired by this.  Or at least something he has ruminated on for a couple of years.  And I like that.  I am truly interested to hear his thoughts.  Even if they are just along the lines of working in the party.

          I don’t know if diaries like this are good or bad alohaleezy.  Seems like I’ve driven a couple of good bloggers right out the door, just by whining and thinking out loud.  And I surely didn’t mean that.

          Anyway.  I don’t feel bad about only 40-50 commentors/voters.  I think that is a boatload.  I honestly think that 40-50 united bloggers volunteering  some time around a central, well accepted idea, could do wildly good things.  Just need the right vehicle.  And I bet we will find one.  Even if not in this diary.  People are talking.  Ripples in the water.  Some idea will emerge.

          • 

            DuctapeFatwa on February 17, 2006 at 8:32 pm

            As I said in the other thread, in my opinion, the window for a political solution closed some time ago.

            However, if one were possible, if that window could be pried back open, if there were people willing and able to mobilize the Democrats’ Weakest Link (see footnote) then this would be it.

            It would take at a minimum, tens of millions to overthrow corporate rule, and give the US a chance to move toward legitimate statehood, to move toward democracy, but if there are people willing to do it, there are tens of millions who do not receive a benefit from corporate rule, and if you can convince them that you are not offering just another incarnation of it, just another box of I want you dead but send me money and vote for me first, NEW! Improved! Fancier suit! More hair gel! then there is a very small chance that you could effect a correction before it happens in a way that might not be as considerate of the interests of ordinary Americans.

            Whether you can do all that or not, and it is admittedly a long shot, Joe, you have become one of my Most Admired Humans. And my honorary great grandson. Now get out of my lap and stop looking through my pockets for peppermints and go make me some tea. No sugar. sigh.

          • 

            DuctapeFatwa on February 17, 2006 at 8:36 pm

            The link above has some dated material, as it is from the 2004 “election campaign,” however especially in the last half, it is also very relevant to both my comment, and this diary itself.

          • 

            BostonJoe on February 17, 2006 at 9:00 pm

            I don’t know if you read all my belated comments DTF, er, I mean, grandpa (or is it grandma).  But I think you will like the one with the “Block by Block” idea in it.  It tracks your diary.  There are literally millions sitting in their homes.  With the TV IV in their brains.  They know it is all wrong.  They know the war is screwed.  That it is fucked to kill children of any color or religion.  They know that corporations have their entire lives by the balls, or ovaries.  And they are waiting for someone to walk into their living room and rip the IV out of that place on their necks where it is plugged in (think Neo from you know the movie).  And they could do something.

            Or maybe not.  Because the Dukes of Hazzard reruns are on after the Olympics.  Fuck it.  Doritos.

            (And you weren’t shitting about your material being a little dated grandpa(ma).  It wasn’t the 2004 references that got me though.  It was the Rocky Horror Picture Show schtick.  Right over the heads of the grandchildren set.  Wasn’t that an album or something.  In mom’s obsolete stack of eight-track cassettes).

            I’m seriously voting to just say fuck it.  It doesn’t bother me that much that my culture is undergoing a profound descent into abject horror.  (I mean, we’ve been there for decades right, but it doesn’t even matter that I’m now forced to watch with newly opened eyes).  I can take all that.  As long as there are people of extreme good humor to comment on the fall.

          • 

            DuctapeFatwa on February 17, 2006 at 9:19 pm

            I can only open one comment at a time, and even for that I have to close all other windows and reboot.

            so I think instead of saying fuck it you should start a part 2. And do not insult your honorary great grandfather by implying that you mistake him for a very tall lady with a moustache.

          • 

            DuctapeFatwa on February 17, 2006 at 9:23 pm

            Not Rocky Horror.

            I was trying to make it accessible to white people in New England.

          • 

            BostonJoe on February 17, 2006 at 9:56 pm

            Well.  You know me.  Just a country bumpkin really.  I could mistake a classic musical for an eight-track tape.  I’m out.  Taking a weekend to breathe.  Be well.

    • 

      on February 17, 2006 at 10:22 am

      “Take the 45% of registered voters that didn’t bother to vote in 04 and work on them.”

      He. I was writing the same thing (see comment) while you were posting that.

      45% of registered voters, add to that others who aren’t even REGISTERED.

      My thesis is that those who voted in 2004 represent 90-99% of all citizens who still give a fuck about politics under the existing system.

      The rest of the CITIZENS in this country must be mobilized, and I doubt that they can be mobilized under the same-old-same-old banner.

      People keep accepting poll results and stats compiled from traditional MS sources and take this as representative of the populace. I don’t think it is. I think there is a huge under-the-radar population not being taken into consideration in any of these stats (either b/c they don’t have phones, don’t have cell phones, no internet access, whatever).

      And there is substantial LIBERAL, PROGRESSIVE potential in that crowd. But that liberalism and progressivism is going to have to come up with something NEW. Not this same old bullshit.

      We need to think in terms of majority population, not “majority voters” and attendant “polls”–b/c w 45% of the population NOT voting, there can be no talk of a “majority opinion” in this country.

      • 

        BostonJoe on February 17, 2006 at 8:27 pm

        Might as well throw this in here.  I plan on diarying the idea.  But I’ve read so many comments that make me want to share the idea, I’ll just throw it down here.

        I’ve already shared it in the real world with the peace group.  It is a method.  Probably not very revolutionary.  But I’m thinking it could be powerful.

        I got the idea yesterday.  I was scouting the location of the major local peace rally to protest the third anniversary of the war.  One of my jobs was to find some private space we could use for a staging area.  The protest will be on public grounds.  Sidewalks, etc.  So it is legal, but you have to keep moving, and we need a place to stage the event.  For signs.  Pamphlets.  Coffee.  Whatever.  And you know, in America, free public space is hard to come by.  They will move you along if you pitch a tent.  So we were looking for private property from a sympathetic source.  I.e., a homeowner nearby.  Found one with a sign in window — “War is Not the Answer.”  Walked up to porch.  Knocked.  And talked to her.  Basically, just, “Hi, my name is BostonJoe.  I’m an anti-war activist.  Can I have just a minute of your time.  Do you hate this War in Iraq as much as me?”

        And the look on her face.  People are just sitting in there homes.  Maybe a quarter of them.  Maybe fifty percent or more.  And they all hate this stupid lying war.  And they are waiting for someone to walk up and say, “Hey, this is what we are going to do about it.”  That’s my sense anyway.

        So it spawned this idea.  (I’ll put it in Internet terms).  Get 20-40 anti-war Boo people with a couple of hours to kill on a Saturday afternoon.  Maybe a couple can go together if they live close enough.  But probably it will start as 20-40 individuals.  On a given Saturday, we all go out to a neighborhood near us.  Just find three or four blocks square in a town near you.  At random if you want.  The goal is to knock on every door.  And find those people inside who hate the war as much as you do, and want to do something about it, but don’t know what to do.  Take thier names, addresses, phones and e-mails.  Tell them you are going to organize them.  Put together a list for that neighborhood.  A small cell of anti-war activists in one neighborhood.  Set up a small event for them the next week.  A small rally.  Or a coffee talk to plan.  Just to get them together so they can feel the power in their number.  Then organize them to go out and canvass a neighborhood the next week.  Basically make them into a cell that does what you just did.  Collect the names.  Have a neighborhood captain for each cell.  Let them grow, “Block by Block.”  Then when the numbers get up.  Start planning and executing Local, Regional and National actions.  Put the pressure on pro-war Congressional Candidates.  Put the pressure on pro-war businesses.  Put the pressure on pro-war networks.  Etc.

        Just a thought.  Some thoughts are hard to get out of your head.  Hence — diaries.

    • 

      on February 17, 2006 at 10:27 am

      Be realistic. The “majority” on this blog (correct me if I’m wrong) is and remains tied to the dead horse of the Democratic party. There’s no way a third-party campaign is going to succeed or get any substantial attention here. From what I can see, this blog is only slightly less partisan than the Frat Club. Thinking slightly outside the box (kind of like where the cat piss lands when my cat misses his mark) will be tolerated, perhaps even promoted.

      But thinking WAY outside the box. Well, “get a room”….;-) “Getalife,” “Get real,” whatever…. just don’t try to move the litter box.

      • 

        rumi on February 17, 2006 at 10:31 am

          That would imply that any effort introduced here to provoke support for anything not of the democrat party might be a deliberate way to pre-emptively crush any potential.

        • 

          on February 17, 2006 at 10:36 am

          Not necessarily. Obviously there are some “Stray cats” in here. I guess the acid test would come at the point at which  the third party option ever started to look like more than idle chatter.

          Remains to be seen.

          • 

            rumi on February 17, 2006 at 10:41 am

            not necessarily = might

              The world is full of improbable possibilities.

          • 

            on February 17, 2006 at 10:51 am

            Just saying: think outside the box. Way outside the box.

            (historical, catty nutcase footnote on this subject:
            from Mary Daly, Wickedary, p. 222)

            What we have going on right now is the political equivalent of what Daly describes as “re-search”:

            re-search: a function of patriarchal scholarship (including pseudofeminist scholarship): circular academented game  of hide-and-seek: pseudosearch for infomration which, in fact, has been systematically hidden by previous re-searchers, and which, when found, is then ritually re-covered by succeeding investigators, only to be re-discovered and re-covered endlessy: syndrome often described by Catty Crones as the ‘kitty litter box syndrome of patriarchal scholarship.”

            And with that, I have a cat litter box to change. 😉

23. 

    Steven D on February 17, 2006 at 10:34 am

    The extreme right stuck with the GOP and took it over from within.  That would never have happened if they had  seperated themselves from the GOP to create a new third party.

    And that’s all I have to say on that.

    • 

      on February 17, 2006 at 10:42 am

      Great. So you’re suggesting that we follow the example of the biggest scumbag idiots  on the planet?

      I say: do the opposite of whatever they’ve done (whereby my Clooney proposal is everything but the diametric opposite of what they did in the case of Reagan and Arnie–it’s taking their ‘strategy’ and improving on it.)

      • 

        Steven D on February 17, 2006 at 1:12 pm

        I’m saying that they didn’t go the third party route, but worked from within the party to make their views and their positions the dominant ones.  I think that is something it behooves progressives to copy, in terms of strategy.  Breaking the progressive movement off into splinter groups weakens us, and cements in power the right wing crazies.

        • 

          rumi on February 17, 2006 at 1:18 pm

            Do you think the democratic party would be willing to support and inclusive association that is greater than the party itself? Does it believe in it’s principles strongly enough to endorse all people who feel the same way but might have a different party name?

          • 

            rumi on February 17, 2006 at 1:19 pm

            grrrr
            willing to support and inclusive association
            and = an

          • 

            Steven D on February 18, 2006 at 12:17 pm

            I believe the Democratic party is only as strong as those who participate in it.  Republican conservatives decided to become active and take over their party.

            Progressives need to do the same.

24. 

    BrendaStewart on February 17, 2006 at 12:26 pm

    seeing as how I am an independent, I suppose I do not have the right to declare much of anything.

    I could see many selections of revisions on party agenda.  But again I am not in the party.

    I do see staying and making life miserable for the ones who really are trouble causing in the party.  I mean such as making phone calls on a daily basis to everyone in the democratic party and including the senators and reps too. Make life totally so miserable for them that even answering their phone would be hazardous to their health…:o)  NOw here is what I mean.  If they really knew that they were not satisfing a major part of the voting block, if this should not work, then one has to go to greater measures to get their opinions and voices heard.  I see and hear the frustration in everyone here, and this is not good for the party.  Dean, most of all, knows this, I think.

    I could go on with more; however, until the definations are defined for the problems of which we are describing here, are not stated well, then all if frutiless.

    This is just my opinion totally and I grant there is a lot that  is wrong and  dysfunctional here in the party as a whole.

    • 

      BostonJoe on February 17, 2006 at 8:30 pm

      Yeah.  🙂

25. 

    Planet B on February 17, 2006 at 12:45 pm

    BostonJoe, just wanted to say since you updated that my vote to this poll would be: None of the Above/The Answer Lies Outside of Electoral Politics.

    • 

      BostonJoe on February 17, 2006 at 8:32 pm

      I got knocked off the computer by freak February storm.  So realtime updates became pointless.  I think the diary is already off the list, and destined for the dustbin of blog history.

      But I wasn’t ignoring you. And would have totally created a category for you.  If it wasn’t for global warming fucking with the weather patterns.

26. 

    Our Man in Redmond on February 17, 2006 at 2:16 pm

    I’m sorry I missed the first diary. I’ll have to go back and read it, and would like to follow this debate a little more.

    Had I seen the first diary, I would have given you three other options that may be anathema to some, but isn’t the way to have a lot of good ideas to have a lot of ideas?

    Reinvention: The Party is dead, long live the Party

    I diaried this a couple of weeks ago but haven’t had a chance to follow up on it. Basically, at some point Howard Dean says that the DNC is disbanding the Democratic Party and giving all its assets to a new party, let’s call it the Progressive Party for now although I think there may already be a progressive party. This progressive party will be chaired by Dr. Dean and will accept anyone as a candidate who adheres to a certain set of core principles drawn up by the party leaders. (Yep, I stole this idea directly from the Greens. It’s that good.) Anyone who wants support from the Progressives has to sign on to these core principles and work to effect them. Anyone who doesn’t can either be an independent, pretend there is still such a thing as a Democratic Party, join the Republicans, or whatever. They just won’t get any help from the Progressives.

    Oh yeah, and this new party would not just accept help from the grassroots and netroots, it would count on it. It would be the basis of the party’s economy. This would almost merit calling it the People’s Party if that term hadn’t been forever associated with Communist parties.

    Some have thought a name change is so transparent no one will fall for it. That’s not the point. The point is that is if the brand “Democratic Party” is damaged goods, create a new brand. Something that Republicans haven’t had a chance to tar and feather yet. Something that would be responsive to people, not huge corporate donors. Something that wouldn’t have to be built from the ground up. Would it work? Who knows. All I know is, what we have now doesn’t.

    Flight: If the system is broken route around it

    Call it what you will. Flight. Exile. Running away. But he who fights and runs away shall live to fight another day. Work from way outside the system to change the system, or if it’s so broken as to be untenable, get out of the way while it collapses. (I notice that no one chose the “sit back and watch while Rome burns” option above; that’s actually a good sign. It means this country is still worth fighting for.

    But are there times when it becomes necessary to go abroad to effect change? Happens all the time in other countries. Khomeini was in exile in France before the Iranians finally held their revolution.

    I’m on record as saying that this country is still worth fighting for. Damn it, it’s my country. But if the government (I almost typed “my” government, but you know, it’s hard to think of it as “my” government anymore) starts actively targeting my granddaughter because of her gender, or the color of her skin, or her religion — any of which could happen — I figure I have two choices. I can be a martyr and no good to her at all, or we can find a place where she will be safer. Will I do this? I honestly don’t know. Ask me when it happens.

    Revolution: The option that dare not speak its name

    We have a government that is unresponsive, funded by the moneyed classes who have shown no compunction about rolling over anyone and anything in their quest to stay in power and make more money. You have the makings of a permanent underclass that, eventually, may find a spokesman who, whatever he thinks of Lenin and Mao, can convince those masses that political power comes from the barrel of a gun. What happens then?

    I don’t want to see a civil war in this country. I truly hope it doesn’t come to that. But I’m afraid it could happen, and afraid of what will happen if/when it does.

    OK, now that I’ve written this it should probably be three separate posts, but I wanted to put the ideas out there. Please, put any time you would spend flaming these ideas or dismissing them with a simple “it wouldn’t work” or “you can’t do that” with a positive criticism (and not my usual positive criticism or “OK, I’m positive it wouldn’t work”).

    • 

      BrendaStewart on February 17, 2006 at 4:09 pm

      Yes, I think that everyone will agree that the party is broken or headed in the wrong direction, definately.

      I do think if everyone is serious in here about redefining this whole processs, we need to sit down and map out the wrongs vis the rights or plus vs the negative.  Then start from there to sit up new goals and standards.  Define I mean what is our mission.  Then this will require a committee of those progressive sites that agree with our argument.  As I have seen, there are great and smart ppl all over the net that can do this in accordance with Dr. Dean or who ever it is that is required to do this change and get it off the ground.

      If everyone is very serious on this, then we better get very busy doing our work.  Time is short.

      Anyhow, like I said, I am not a democrat, just a Independent that is proud as hell to stand with you folks here.  

    • 

      BostonJoe on February 17, 2006 at 8:47 pm

      I think they are alternatives that at least should be included in the conversation, and I’m glad you posted.  Always good to be joined by a storyteller.

      On Reinvention — Surprise, surprise.  As I was bellyaching at weekly protest today, I got invited to a PDA meeting.  Sounded a lot like what you describe.  I missed the whole blog/Deniac movement.  I was a CNN watcher then.  So I didn’t know about all this.  But this group that is here in my community seems positive for Progressives who want to work from within.  I haven’t heard the whole “abandon the Dem” label thing from anyone yet though.

      Flight — I’ve seriously considered it.  I still do.  I don’t know that these battles aren’t fought in every culture.  And I could probably find a worse place than the U.S. for the coming fascism.  But I would run if given a decent chance, and the right motivation.  That’s how my wife’s family survived the holocaust.  Get out when the time is right or perish if you are in the wrong group.  Hate to think that we are there yet.  But this place is getting a little fucking creepy.  All this law breaking with impunity just has me scared.

      Revolution — It wouldn’t shock me.  I’m not advocating it though.  Not unless it were peaceful, and you know, with those things, they tend to get out of hand sometimes.

      • 

        Our Man in Redmond on February 18, 2006 at 3:02 am

        There are revolutions and there are revolutions. One possibility that I think is more possible than most (gawd, that’s an awkward sentence) is a military coup. Eventually some of the brass may get tired of Bush over-committing the military, coming up with insane ideas like going to war in Iran when they’re mired in a quagmire in Iraq, and stage a palace coup where they basically put His Nibs under house arrest for the rest of his term.

        You have to wonder whether someone isn’t thinking about it, at least in private.

        • 

          BostonJoe on February 18, 2006 at 7:46 am

          I would have never seen that as a remotely plausible possibility — until “W.” came along.  Now, not much would surprise me.

27. 

    Into The Woods on February 17, 2006 at 5:25 pm

    Because I could not say it any better, a couple of relevant quotes from Paul Wellstone’s book “Conscience of a Liberal”:

    “I ran for the Senate to shake things up, especially the Democratic Party, which to me had lost its soul, its sense of justice.”

    “Some counsel that the problem is too large or too complex for societal response.  They are wrong.  We know what we need to do.  We may not know all the answers, but we know enough of them that we have no excuse not to act.  Too many focus on the difficulty of the problem as a means of evading responsibility.”

    “The way in which money has come to dominate politics is the foremost ethical issue of politics of our time.  The corruption is far more serious than any wrongdoing by an individual officeholder.  It is systemic corruption, in which there is a huge imbalance of power between the vast majority of the people and those few who have the financial wherewithal to count more.  We have as a nation moved dangerously far away from the central principle of representative democracy:  Each person counts as one and no more than one.”

    “It is not that people don’t want to change the system.  They do.  The problem is that the majority of people are convinced it will never change, that big money will always run politics.  This sense of powerlessness corrupts.  What could be accomplished is never attempted.  

    The challenge is to mobilize millions of Americans from all walks of life to participate actively in a historic movement to restore our democracy.  We need to invite ordinary citizens back into American politics to work for what is right for our nation.

    Quite often, it’s important as a senator to take on vested power.  I think this is where the Democratic Party is weakest.  On large questions dealing with power in America, on “class issues”, most Democrats are nowhere to be found.  When it comes to funding for Head Start, affordable childcare, more investments in job training, housing, health, and education, the differences between Democrats and Republicans make a difference.  But not when it comes to challenging economic power in America.   The same powerful investors control both parties.  I hate saying this – it is the most discouraging thing about being a senator – but it is a reality.

    The challenge is to make a place for all Americans at the decision-making table, to force our political leaders to listen to their concerns, and for them then to take action.  Renewing democracy will not happen overnight or without a very difficult fight.  But it is a dream that can be realized.  There are three critical ingredients to democratic renewal and progressive change in America: good public policy, grassroots organizing, and electoral politics.  Policy provides direction and an agenda for action; grassroots organizing builds a constituency to fight for change; and electoral politics is the main way we contest for power and hold decision makers accountable.”

    “We need to build not a third party but an independent political force that does a lot of organizing within the Democratic Party – especially candidate recruitment and elections.  This new political source must introduce fresh perspectives into the political dialogue of our country; recruit candidates; provide the training, skills, and resources for winning campaigns; build an infrastructure of field directors and campaign managers; have a savvy media presence; apply effective grassroots organizing to electoral politics; and build political leadership at the local, state, and federal levels of government.”

    Pretty much sums up my stand.

    If we start a third party, without changing the underlying system, how long will it last as a viable voice of the people?  If we can change the underlying system, can we also change the Democratic party to be part of a living democracy that protects the changes we make in the system and will it flourish under those changes?  Mostly depends on how much people power is behind all of this.  If we have enough, we don’t need to re-create the wheel.

    A place to start might be to force the Democrats to take a real stand against the big money of which Abramoff and Delay are just the dirty, incompetent tips of the iceberg.

    • 

      NorthDakotaDemocrat on February 17, 2006 at 6:12 pm

      The wisdom of Paul Wellstone continues to amaze me. I think I need to better acquaint myself with his views.

      It’s becoming more apparent all the time why “some” felt it necessary to “remove” the Wellstone “threat.”

      Obviously he would have been the main spokesman and  leader in opposition to all that has gone wrong since then.

      • 

        BostonJoe on February 17, 2006 at 8:36 pm

        Wellstone = great Senator = DI Wrestler.

        Just saying.

        • 

          Into The Woods on February 18, 2006 at 2:45 am

          Just like a wrestler to come up with one like this:

          “Sometimes if you want to win a fight, you have to pick one.”

          (Can’t find the quote, but its close.)

    • 

      BostonJoe on February 17, 2006 at 8:35 pm

      That was a great speech.  Thanks for posting it.  They killed him, didn’t they, er, I mean he died in a complete accident, didn’t he?  Strange how that happens to people who want to take on economic power.  As my friend ND Dem might say, “Conspiracy theorist?  No, I’m not a conspiracy theorist.  What are you?  A coincidence theorist?”

      • 

        Into The Woods on February 18, 2006 at 2:48 am

        Tin Foil Hat:  Conspiracy Theorist
        Red Propeller Hat (on and locked):  Coincidence Theorist