
I am so pleased that Bill Scher joins us for an FDL Book Salon on his book Wait! Don't Move to Canada: A Stay-and-Fight Strategy to Win Back America today. Bill is the Executive Editor at Liberal Oasis, and appears regularly on Air America — but he is also an outstanding liberal/progressive voice and a former PR guy, so he knows a lot about the whole image and meme and framing discussions that need to be had, about which we talk frequently here at FDL and all over the progressive blogosphere.
And, I am hoping, a discussion that we can kick-start even more here today.
Bill's book is fantastic — and a lot of the ideas in it give you hands-on approaches to tackling political problems and demanding accountability from your elected representatives. It begins by examining what it means to be a liberal — by taking a peek at a fantastic speech given by JFK back in 1960, which is still as relevent today as it was back then:
What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties — someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."
I previously quoted a portion of that speech here on FDL a couple of weeks ago on the anniversary of JFK's death, and it is worth a re-read in its entirety if you are not familiar with the speech. John F. Kennedy was a man who understood not only the power of words, but that the use of them took away power from those who would seek to use them against you. This is a lesson on which current leadership in the Democratic party ought to take copious notes.
One thing that Bill makes clear in Wait! Don't Move To Canada! is that we have for far too long allowed the conservative smear of the word "liberal" to stand unchallenged. Democratic politicians tap dance around using the label (the Dukakis vignette that Bill shares in the book is spot on), and far too often "progressives" shy away from the label as well. Politicians will not start reclaiming the label unless they feel like folks have their back — isn't it about time we all dusted off the "liberal" label and wore it proudly? Hell, conservatives don't shy away from labelling themselves "conservative," and they are currently led by George W. Bush. We can at least hold our heads high and say "I didn't vote for him, and you can call me his opposite any day."
Please.
"Hello, my name is Christy. And I am a proud liberal." (See, it's not so hard.)
Bill's background in PR work, prior to his start in blogging, gives him a great deal of experience and a unique persepctive from which to view the importance of language and its powerful uses for communicating a targeted message — as opposed to allowing the conservatives and wingnuts control the language. It is essential that we learn how to be on offense in terms of messaging and language, because to cede that field only puts on squarely on the defensive, in a weakened position, time and time again. And to do that allows someone else to control the direction and priorities, because the Democratic party is then forced to consistently defend itself instead of proposing policies that the other side must defend against.
One of my favorite aspects of Bill's book is the practical applications that he finds for applying these theoretical communications questions. Take, for example, the questions of "big versus small" government as compared to "ineffective versus effective government."
It is essential for us to make the case that without a representative, responsive and responsible governing body, there are some things we just can't do, like effectively educate our kids and care for our elders, preserve our environment so we can live healthy and enjoyable lives, and protect our towns and cities from the horrors of natural disasters. If conservative forces succeed in continuing to erode our trust in what we can accomplish together through government, our expectations and standards will wither, our government will disintegrate from lack of support, and too many of us will fall through society's cracks. (p. 37)
Well, that pretty much sums up the opposite end of the spectrum from Grover Norquist's desire to drown government in a bathtub, doesn't it? As Bill says in the book, two great ways of reframing the discussion are (1) to find ways wherein government is doing a good job, and to use those effective means of government as the foundation for a discussion with others on what good government can be; and (2) where government is not working effectively, instead of blaming it "on government" blame it on the poorly designed programs and discuss ways in which reforms could make the situation better. Often the problem is not a particular agency or program, but the pork-barrel riders and restrictions placed on the agency trying to implement a well-intentioned program that got hijacked along the way by cronyism and special interests.
As usual, sunshine and accountability are vital to success on this.
One of the more eye-opening aspects of this book is the results of the Greenberg survey on taxation that Bill cites more fully beginning on page 45. A full 84% of Americans agreed with the following statement: "I don't mind paying taxes because my taxes contribute to making sure we have public schools, clean streets, public safety and a national defense, and a cleaner environment." Not exactly what you hear from the punditocracy on Sunday morning news show, now is it? But honestly, wouldn't we all be happier if our tax dollars were headed to programs which were effective, targeted and showing results, which helped our communities as a whole, and which gave us a good return for our investment in our communities and our nation?
Of course, we would.
The disagreement comes in with regard to which programs fit this and, we're in luck, because Wait! Don't Move to Canada! has some ideas on that as well. One of the biggest areas of disagreement throughout the Bush years has been "culture war" issues. Since Karl Rove and his cronies at the RNC have had no scruples in terms of leveraging Jesus for political gain, we have witnessed a wholesale politicization of some aspects of churchgoing and some battles being waged over issues on which, fundamentally, a majority of Americans agree for the most part — but are convinced through some very effective snake oil and tap dancing to think otherwise.
One of the main beneficiaries of this smoke and mirrors game the last few years has been the placement of some very conservative judges on the federal bench.
We spent a lot of time on the Roberts and Alito fights here at FDL, and across the liberal blogosphere, so our regular readers will know about that — but it hasn't been only the US Supreme Court where this battle has been waged. Each and every time you hear a GOP politician say the words "activist judge," you should be prepared with the facts on who is really legislating from the bench: let's just say that Clarence Thomas has some 'splaining to do. Helpfully, Bill lays a lot of that out for you in clear terms, and offers some ideas on how to combat this sort of spin.
The phone calls that we have advocated each and every time a nomination has come to the floor haven't won the day on every nomination, but they are beginning to have an effect on how hard a lot of our elected representatives are willing to push for liberal principles and to stand up for the Constitution.
What we CAN do is to continue this fight for every issue to come — and to make them understand that we will not abandon our principles any more than the other side will abandon theirs.
Bill puts forward a lot of fantastic, practical, and common sense ideas for a hands-on effort for liberals all over the country to be able to make a difference. From ideas on how to make local grassroots groups more effective, to guidelines for better letters to the editor, to confronting media bias, to finding ways of funding liberal outlets for alternative media and pushback.
…As Daou notes, the blogosphere gives individuals a medium to "put pressure on representatives." "Pressure" does not always take the form of brute force; it can also be applied with constructive criticism. And "representatives" does not only mean your elected representatives. Organizations that are spearheading the liberal movement are indirectly representing you when they campaign for goals that you support.
They need to hear from us. They need to hear from people with an outsiders' perspective who can spot things that myopic insiders miss. They need to hear when they are doing stuff right, and when they are doing stuff wrong so they'll get better.
So, when you notice liberal leaders failing to communicate uniform messages on a particular issue, or focusing on separate issues when they should be joining forces on a pressing issue, point it out to them. Nudge them to get on the same page. Constantly remind them that unless we are coordinated at the top, we will not be able to articulate a compelling vision of America — and, conversely, an unappealing vision of a conservative America — and have it be clearly heard throughout today's cluttered and manipulated media landscape.
Sound familiar? We do this every week somewhere across the liberal blogosphere, and without the institutionalized funding support that the conservative foundations set up long ago to fund their Wurlitzer of conservative blogs, think tanks and mouthpieces. We have a long way to go — but we are working on it, and discussions like this one do a lot to further that work.
One way that we have tried to leverage this new concept of grassroots action was through our Blue America candidates list, which had some great success this past election cycle. Through the genius of ActBlue, lots of blog communities and netroots groups across the counrty were able to do the same thing — and to help candidates $10 at a time, one reader at a time, to purchase postcards and radio time and all the other things that make a small-time campaign a more effective one.
Wait! Don't Move To Canada! is a book that I cannot recommend enough. It's a quick read, but one that you'll pick up over and over again for ideas on what you can do — and how you can say what you need to say — to make your activism more effective.
The big lesson from this book — and from the last election cycle — that I hope we all take away is this: if you see a problem, you cannot sit back and wait for someone else to take care of it. We have all got to learn that everyone has to step up to the plate. If you see something that isn't working well, try and fix it. If there is a local organization that isn't doing the job effectively, get involved with it and try and make it better — or start your own group to counteract the bad one if it is beyond saving.
Just don't move to Canada — try fixing things here first, instead. And now, please join me in giving a big welcome to Bill Scher.
[As always with Book Salon threads, please stay on topic with the discussion below. Please be polite and give a big welcome to Bill. If you have issues you'd like to discuss which are off-topic, please do so in the prior thread. Thanks! -- CHS]



193 Comments





Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Fitz! And FDL…
I’m also hoping I can pick up some tips on how to help us Dems survive and prosper down here in the deep South…
Is 3 at the top a record? I’m going to drop downstairs and let them know I’m talking to myself…
Now we’ll see if anyone trots up the stairs…
Bill has always been one of my favorite bloggers — his ability to think very pragmatically and concisely has always made him a great source of inspiration for me. And I love the book. I’m really glad he’s here today to discuss it.
(As always, please remember to keep Book Salon conversation on topic — if you want to talk about something else, feel free to do so in the previous thread.)
I promise to buy your book tomorrow (I will!!). Give me the top two reasons I shouldn’t move to Canada. I am so depressed about my (formerly) wonderful country!!!
Welcome Bill! And yay, Marion — quick typing!
Bill -
What do you think of the idea that the GOP will become a regional party?
.
As for me (going for a record [?] 5 here… I make it my business to engage the more reasonable conservatives at work, and they’re starting to come around. Humor helps…
well I just arrived, haven’t been downstairs so welcome!!
With out finding like minded souls on line, I would have thought about moving to Canada a lot. But I am still pretty depressed by our media and by folks who know they are right…
any words of hope?
Hellllooooo, Bill!
My name is watertiger (well, not really), and I’m a proud progressive.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 7
It’s what I get paid for… That and being what I call myself: The Office Crypto-Commie…
My local cable access channel has been running Ed Begly Jr.’s symposium on 9/11 and “Loose Change” all afternoon. Everytime I see that stuff, more than anything else, makes me want to move to Canada.
Thanks Christy for having me today, and for all of your kind words about the book. There’s so much work we have left to do after the election if we are to have a truly representative, responsive and responsible government again, and I hope you’ll find “Wait! Don’t Move To Canada!” a useful guide to realizing our vision. I’m looking forward to discussing with all of you what we can do together to build and broaden the Democratic mandate, and withstand the inevitable right-wing counterattack. Thanks for being here, and staying in the fight, Bill
I’m not about to move anywhere. I’m here to stay. And help change us back to blue. Dark blue.
One of the things that I found most useful with Bill’s book was the quick summary endnotes and the practical tips that he has in them. Very useful stuff for quick reference on a range of issues — from separation of church and state questions to protesting and other activism. Great stuff!
This is an unusually slow Sunday :-D
.
I don’t know about the rest of the country, but down here in the Deep South where all is red I try to find one or two folks where I am and plant small seeds… They’ve been germinating lately. I print out news articles, and blog posts and cartoons (the more humor the better, if it’s germane) and drop them on desks. I’ve had the recipients engage me in substantive discussions of issues, and some of them have actually told me they will change their votes for either candidates or ballot initiatives. I do better one-on-one.
Bill — have you gotten much feedback from any of the Democratic party apparatus types on the “get a message and stick to it” discussion in the book? I sure wish they would listen to you on that. And soon.
I am a proud liberal and humanist and I ain’t moving anywhere.
I want this country to be much better and I pledge to make it so.
(if I were gonna move, Costa Rica is nice)
THANX FOR YOU WISE AND GOOD WORK BILL . . . love the book and the radio spots with the great SAM SEDER!!!!
Marion in Savannah @ 18
Good on ya!
To answer Sha and Ruffian, two reasons not to move to Canada:
1. The midterm election shows we can win if we stay and fight. The American people are not fundamentally right-wing, and not fundamentally opposed to the liberal vision.
2. If we all move to Canada and leave America to conservatives, then they will eventually invade Canada anyway, and we’ll be right back where we started.
A question for Bill… Thomas Schaller’s book “Whistling Past Dixie” seems to want to kick me to the curb simply because I vote in a “red” state. How do we down here combat that mindset which, frankly, pisses me off?
My country, our country, is worth fightin’ for. Damn sure, I’m staying!
My name is Charles, and I am a proud Liberal and Progressive and an FDR New Deal Democrat.
America needs a New Deal for the 21st Century, and the Democratic Party needs Progressive Populist Southerners like Larry Kissel and John Edwards.
And nobody’s kicking me anywhere. Let alone to the curb.
The painful reality is that the US is so powerful in terms of its military, economic, media, cultural, technological and environmental influence that there is nowhere in the world that one can go to escape it. Canada is not a realistic haven, when the US behemoth spans its entire southern border. So it’s up to us to do our best to influence what this country is doing.
To answer Spork Incident’s question, will the GOP become a regional party:
They certainly are in risk of that, but we can’t just assume it will happen.
There’s a risk because they governed for six years, and it was six years of complete failure. There is not a single thing the average American voter thanks the Republican party for. I don’t consider that opinion, but fact. You can’t name a thing.
But we have to make the case to the public that that is because of their governing philosophy, not mere incompetence. You can find competent Republican politicians. You can’t find a Republican politician who believes that representative, responsive and responsible government is essential for a thriving America.
The conservative ideology is one that is reckless with our resources, not responsible. Callous to our basic needs, not responsive. And elitist in serving crony corporatists and fringe fundamentalist religious leaders, not representative. We need to make that case, and keep the GOP on the ropes, so they can’t regroup and become competitive in more states.
Canada’s too cold- I’d be willin to move to Hawaii though if it would help.
Bill sez:
2. If we all move to Canada and leave America to conservatives, then they will eventually invade Canada anyway, and we’ll be right back where we started.
We could move them to Texas.
That would work.
.
-ck- @ 26
Yep!
It’s not fair but it’s a fact that we have less than two years to begin to undo what W and company have wrought. If the American don’t see signficant improvement in their everyday lives, whether better Medicare for aging parents, more benefits for returning veterans, reduced higher education costs, etc,as well as an assurance that their tax dollars and our young people’s lives won’t be wasted on counterproductive military misadventures, they may return to Republican fold. I don’t think we have the luxury–for now–to engage too much in ideological arguments.
Maria Leavey @ 33
Twenty-four very short months. We need to come together.
To answer Marion in Savannah’s question about Tom Schaller’s book, which argues that Dems should focus more on the West and Midwest, and not expect short-term gains in the South:
I understand your frustration, though I’ve read his book and there’s a lot good information and recommendations in there. But I would disagree with his argument that we need to explicitly go after “Southern Conservatives.”
Schaller argues that would not be attacking all of the South, but I suspect that distinction would be lost on many. And I think making such an explicitly geographical based attack conflicts with the inherent liberal vision of “representative” government — one that represents everybody.
Schaller, I suspect, is right that tactically, short-term resources may be better spent in the West and Midwest. But I still support Howard Dean’s 50-state strategy, and I would note, so does Schaller (he believes we can win the South long-term and should be building infrastrucutre. there.) We need to be present in South, listen to their needs and concerns, and proudly make a liberal case that responds to those concens.
Maria Leavey @ 33
Alternatively, that could be turned into a positive because we have 2 years to a) get our ground game going, and b) keep hearings happening that point up all of W’s and the boys’ failures and corruption. (And yes, my glass is ALWAYS half full…)
Maria at 33 — it is wholly unfair that we have to show some substantial progress in two years when they have had 6 years to make an enormous mess. But there you have it. Nothing like one-sided accountability as demanded by the corporate media, I suppose…then again, when you compare what a mess things are now, we really do have a quite a bit of “better than this” to work with in terms of improvement.
BTW, here is an interview I did of Schaller, and one Schaller did of me:
http://www.liberaloasis.com/20…..ler_au.php
http://gadflyer.com/flytrap/in…..00643#3054
Marion at 18 — I find that here as well. With so much wingnut talk radio on the air here — and NO Air America or other liberal programming whatsoever, it takes individual conversations to reverse engineer some of that Limbaugh input. Once people start to question the Faux News line or whatever else, suddenly it starts to dawn on them that some of the things they have been told might not be so accurate. That little wedge can make all the difference.
The obvious follow-up question:
The “Fifty-State strategy.” Yay or ney?
(And for what it’s worth, I’d never leave this country. Canada is quite nice and I’m told that New Zealand is aces but I’m an American and proud of it.)
Bill Scher @
23
My concern is that “we” didn’t win in November. I will not be happy if the result is a “Joe Lieberman” congress…which is what I am concerned about.
However, I understand point 2…THEY’RE EVERYWHERE!!!
Religious conservatives have moved from bein the deal makers in american politics to bein a curse on the party who invites em in…Goopers can’t hold their coalition together in the long run- the libertarians and the “fiscal conservatives” hate em.
There’s not a lot of time left. We have to decide. Who are we going to support for 2008? There is so much work to be done.
Hi Bill,
Glad to have you here at our blog “home.”
A couple of questions. How has the conversation changed as you have been out on the book tour since the mid-terms?
Have you had a chance to follow the recent developments in MA with the election of Deval Patrick and his bringing in the bloggers (specifically David at BlueMassGroup) to join in what he calls “Civic Engagement?” and will you become engaged yourself on a local level since you live in MA? I think it will be a very interesting experiment.
rw at 42 — Bill has a great discussion about dealing head on with the “culture war” meme in the book. Great stuff.
Redd- Thanks- I’m about to start Carter’s book- this one sounds like a great next read.
Can I imagine? The ‘choice’ in November 2007: McCain or Clinton.
Regarding Christy’s question about have Dems responded to my calls to coordinate better on message:
On the upside, there are people in both the House and Senate leadership offices who have copies of the book, though of course, that is no guarantee that they will implement the recommendations.
And I haven’t been terribly impressed with the message coordination in recent days. There are still too many Dems freelancing.
In particular, while I like Rep. Charlie Rangel, and he raises interesting points about the draft, and who is really fighting in Iraq, he’s not working in a way that helps Dems collectively lay an ideological foundation and narrative, so the public understands how Dems will and want to govern.
Washington Dems need to let Reid and Pelosi lead. And at the same time, Reid and Pelosi have to step up, articulate a clear principled vision, and propose legislation based on that vision — so people fully understand the direction Democrats would take the country.
Christy/Jane, thanks as always for hosting interesting authors for discussion at FDL. I hope more progressive/liberal bloggers are able to do this over time and provide more exposure to progressive writers.
Bill, hope you are enjoying you book tour. It was great to meet you the weekend before the election. Unfortunately, I have to confess I have still not had a chance to read your book. :-( My question to you is this (and you can feel free to refer me to page X of your book if it’ already there :-)): How do we partly redirect the significant amount of money that progressives donate to progressive causes into building the kind of infrastructure that would allow for the communication and presentation of broad ideas and frames? Namely, ideas and frames on what Democrats and Republicans *really* stand for (values-wise and policy-wise)…Put another way, what are some of your ideas to bring about a sea change in how the time, attention and money of progressives can be shifted from focusing merely on short-term electoral or policy wins to also focusing on long-term strategic planning and strategic realignments?
Christy Hardin Smith @
19
Any DC Dems who have supported (e.g, even read) your perspective?
OK at 47 — one of the great things about Bill’s book is that he talks about any number of ways to get involved — with party infrastructure, with influencing local opinion, etc., to enable you and everyone else to get involved in how that choice is made. Not just having to sit back and wait for someone else to make the decision.
It’s about taking the power of your vote and your voice back into your own hands. I know we work on stuff like that here every day — but it is well worth a reminder, and a very concise and well-thought-out one like Bill’s book is — that we have the power to make enormous changes. We just have to choose to step up and use that power.
Back in June, 2004, Laurie Spivak of the Commonweal Institute wrote on Alternet ( http://www.alternet.org/story/19029/ ) about the elephant in the room–failed conservative policies. Bill has taken it a step further, in identifying the underlying problem as the conservative ideology itself. He’s also bravely made a stab at articulating some elements of progressive philosophy–particularly “responsive, responsible, and representative government.” If one pushes this concept further, one might find it yielding fruit in the areas of “we’re all in it together”, corporate and media responsibility, recognition of the commons, etc. I’m not sure how 3-Rs gov’t would play out in focus groups and on the tongues of speakers, but that research needs to be done.
spork_incident @ 40
Absofreakinglutely YEA. There are 50 states in the Union. Which do you choose to write off? Or what would you do instead?
Hey, Bill.
I pretty much know from reading the book how you recommend we deal with an environment where we don’t hold any of the power.
Now that we do, and we have to deal with the backbiting from a media that doesn’t want to admit that they got it wrong, what do you recommend?
Oklahoma kiddo @ 47
{holds the cross up in the vampire’s face…}
Welcome Bill and thanks for your hard work and dedication. I have no problem labeling myself a Liberal, bleeding heart type actually. I also consider it a position of strength rather than weakness.
Do you really think we can overcome the highly organized, well funded rhetoric factory of the (ultra)Conservatives? Isn’t there a basic difference, in considering opposing thought, between liberals and conservatives that put liberals at a disadvantage?
Marion in Savannah sez:
Which do you choose to write off?
I write off none of them; keep the Republicans on their heels.
.
Just throwing out an idea here for all of you who do pundit duty on TV or radio. The other day on C-Span’s Washington Journal, caller after caller after caller defended the administration’s latest (in a long list) of violation of our civil liberties with that reliable old saw: if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about it. Leaving aside the faith that places in bureaucratic competence and the belief that laws and policies are applied to all equally without political consideration, and even further leaving aside the slippery slope argument, we can counter that line of reasoning by asking if the proponents of terrorist lists and the like are also willing for all purchases and uses of guns and ammunition to be tracked.
The Republicans are busy. Hillary is busy. We must be busier. We must be engaged. We must be in aid of our ideals.
I’d never move to Canada, I can’t stand cold.
But the thought of moving to New Zealand has been in my mind since 2000. Within five years, I hope to be gone.
Why?
Because People in the US are too stupid. The right is a bunch of mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging neanderthals, the center, collectively, are farts in the wind, goin g with the prevailing direction, susceptible to “terror alerts” and inflammmatory rhetoric from the mouth-breathers, the left are far too weak to ever get a real foothold, recent elections notwithstanding. No one was willing to get out there and try to force the DSCC to substantively support Ned Lamont. Not one single Democrat has called for an immediate and total withdrawal from Iraq, which is hte ONLY practical solution.
Every time I read someone admonishing TRex, me or someone else who’s really pissed, about our “rage-based” positions, I am forced to believe they’re just too weak to accomplish anything.
You see, given the current state of American society, rage is an appropriate response to anyone with a brain. I know that won’t sit well with a lot of you, but most of you are too weak to effect any real change. The Democrats are too willing to sell us out in order to be able to continue feeding at the rough of Saudi Oil. They;’re used to sleeping with the Devil.
So I hope to be in the Southern Hemisphere by 2010.
My name is (Redshift), and I’ve never been afraid to say I’m a proud liberal. Conservatives have been effective in demonizing the word ‘liberal’ and their caricatures of what a liberal is, but it hasn’t made the country less supportive of real liberal policies.
Marion–You had a dem senator until just recently- so Georgia is not a dem proof lock box..
I would imagine that the right candidate can win there still?
Maria @ 2:43… Sweet! But won’t they say that goes to a privacy issue??? {snort…}
The Republicans are busy. Hillary is busy. We must be busier. We must be engaged. We must be in aid of our ideals.
Well said.
.
“Taking power”. That’s what it’s about! We did it, and we will do it again.
RevDeb @ 44, great to talk to you again. Yes, I saw that Gov.-elect Deval Patrick included BlueMassGroup in one of his transition team working group. Very exciting.
Massachusetts is a supposedly “liberal” state, but hasn’t had liberal leadership in years. We need liberal executives who can show how liberal governance can work, so we’ll have models we can show the rest of the country, and I think Patrick is extremely promising, perhaps the most important Gov race we won this year. His outreach to the blogospehre is indicative of the fresh thinking I expect him to bring to the office.
I’ve only lived in MA for a little over a year, and I’m still learning the lay of the land, but hopefully I can find a way to get more involved locally.
I’d never move to Canada, I can’t stand cold.
There is that, yes. :-D
.
Maria at 58 — I made that point with a couple of people recently here in WV. The thought of gun registration for people who don’t have anything to fear makes people turn white at the knuckles. It’s a VERY effective counter-argument.
Guitar- How cold does it get in New Zealand?
Doesn’t get to -40C.
Bill — what have been the points that you have been discussing most on the book tour? Have they been what you expected — or have you been surprised by the things most on people’s minds as you have toured around?
Christy:
Considering how quickly the self-identified libertarians and “small government” types were willing to abandon their principles once their cult leader got into power, I’d have to say we’re unlike them in our unwillingness to abandon our principles.
My guess is that British Columbia is more moderate (in temperature) than New Zealand.
Bill –
Can you explain a bit more about Mass.?
It’s a stereotypically “liberal” state but they seem to like the odd Republican.
(Take “odd” as you will.)
.
Oh, and Bill — thanks a lot for coming to our local Drinking Liberally (Alexandria, VA), though unfortunately I had a family obligation and couldn’t be there.
rwcole @ 62
Our Dem senator was Max Cleland. A Vietnam triple amputee. They beat him by putting his face up in an ad next to Osama bin Forgotten’s face. My congresscritter is Republican Lite John Barrow. I think what we can accomplish down here in the next 2 years depends on 2 major factors. First, even the military is turning against the Iraq debacle. The 3rd Infantry is going right now for their 3rd deployment to Iraq. Second, I think we can make inroads on the living wage issue. The caveat is illegal immigration. If immigrants are “illegal” why aren’t the folks who hire and pay them less than American workers being fined or jailed? Just asking…
Rumi @ 56, I hear a lot that we are disadvantaged because the conservative mind-set makes it easier for them to work in lock-step, and liberals are too free-thinking and independent to match their coordination. I think this notion misundertands how conservatives got to where they are.
They are riven with factional squabbles and disputes, but they have created structures to help smooth them out, in particular the infamous Grover Norquist Wednesday Group. The whole idea behind it is to get corporatists, fringe fundamentalists, gun rights groups, libertarian extremists, home-school advocates, etc. to meet privately, work out their difference, and craft messages that they all can use across the board, so they can present a strong coalition to the public.
That’s why you’ve seen fringe fundamentalists leaders blend tax cut messages with faith rhetoric, even though there is nothing the Bible about tax cuts. That takes work, it’s not something that came easily for them, it just looks that way because they’ve worked at it for so long.
We should not assume we are incapable of articulating true liberal principles that can have broad appeal — though we should recognize that it takes diligence.
Cool but humid in Christchurch.
.
This is a struggle for the very heart and if need be, the soul of the Democratic party. We are up to the challenge! We won the House and the Senate. Eyes turning to the big prize. The WH.
We have Gore, Feingold, Edwards, Clark. Take your pick. They have McCain.
Hey, Bill. Good to see you here. Sorry I could not be around the week you came by Alexandria, VA Drinking Liberally.
Cooler in Vancouver.
Bill, do you have any plans to do speaking tours with your book?
Just a reminder: please keep the discussion on topic for the Book Salon. If you have off-topic issues that you would like to discuss, please take them to the prior thread. Thanks much!
I’d never vote for anyone who didn’t campaign for Ned Lamont, so Edwardes and Clark are the only ones of those two I’d vote for. I’d never *ever* vote for Feingold after he helped throw Ned under the bus. Ditto for Gore. If I’m mistaken about any of these, please correct me.
I know Feingold did not campaign for Ned.
spork_incident @ 74
The “odd” republican thing started back when Dukakis left the state house and ran for pres. The party convention process is rather convoluted and we wound up with a jackass named Silbur running for gov. in ‘88 I think. He was such an ass that many good dems voted for Weld who seemed a reasonable guy. I was doing my internship in Portland OR then and wasn’t home to watch the whole thing play out, but I would have voted for Weld myself, that’s how bad Silbur was. Since then, Weld left early and put his lt. gov., Paul Cellucci into the office and then Cellicci did the same thing with his lt. gov., Jane Swift. Willard arrived on the scene and muscled Jane out.
The repigs in MA are in total disarray right now. Part of their past success, such as it was, had to do with the dems holding both the house and the senate and they sold the people on the idea of checks and balances against one party rule. Any of this sound familiar?
At least that’s my take on how it all came down.
Add to that, that MA is not as liberal as those outside the state seem to think. But, hopefully that will change for the better with a good liberal governor about to take the helm. We have an opportunity to really do some great stuff and Patrick is already opening the doors and opening his ears and mind to hear from us all. It has the potential to be very cool.
Gutar at 84 — please go back and re-read Tim Tigaris’ update. And please keep the discussion on topic for the Book Chat. Thanks!
Christy @ 71, what have I heard on the book tour from people, was it what I expected or was I surprised by anything?
Most importantly, I was concerned that people would get complacent if we did win big on election day, but I’m proud to say I had healthy crowds on the tour both before and after the election. Perhaps “surprise” is a little strong, but I was very pleased to see people quickly grasped that there was more work to do post-election, and there was no time for victory laps.
Before the election, a lot of folks were concerned about voting machines — and I would say that the only way to solve that problem is to overwhelm the system with strong election, so we’d have people in office who would actually address the problem. After the election, people were concerned that voting machines are still a problem, but would get even less attention now. I think that’s one issue Dems are happy to deliver on, but of course, we have to keep making noise so it doesn’t fall through the cracks.
There’s plenty more I can say about the tour, but I’ll try to weave in other book tour reflections as I answer other questions…
Follow the Scher route. It’s a winner. The map to success.
Guitar_Playing_Bastard @ 84
Forgive me, but you may be cutting your nose off to spite your face…
Guitar_Playing_Bastard @ 84
Hillary?
Hi, eriposte (#49). In March ‘06, the Commonweal Institute, which is a thought-leader regarding progressive infrastructure, convened the first Progressive Roundtable for leading activists (>50, from all over the country) to address what the priority areas should be for funders. You can see the results here: http://www.progressiveroundtab…..ncereport. The working group’s consensus was that the top investment priorities for building infrastructure are message development and testing, coordination, strategy, marketing, human capacity, and message placement in new as well as existing channels. Proposals were developed and were sent to “all the usual suspects” that had expressed interest in funding infrastructure. But a lot more action–and money–is needed. If any of you know potential funders, tell them where to look. And remind them that, even though some of those recommended priority elements might not sound “sexy” and “new”, they are the fundamentals for how to get things done.
Kate at 91 — Amen to that.
Scher is lucid. The man is telling us how to win.
Bill, as I see it, the USA is lost, irrevocably lost.
Think about this: It too SIX YEARS for the so-called “center,” to see what a fuckup Clusterfuck is. SIX YEARS!
They’re far too swayed by Xian idiots who use wedge issuies to obscure the fact that the Clusterfucks are NOT looking out for them at all, but simply using them.
And Liberals are too stupid to punish those who betrayed us. Anybody pimping Russ Feingold has a shorter memory than I do, and that’s hard to do, as ADD as I am.
It’s lost.
Think about this – NOT ONE SINGLE DEMOCRAT has called for the only logical and sensible course of action in Iraq, which is total and immediate withdrawal.
The game is lost, November notwithstanding.
I sure hope i can get NZ to take me.
RevDeb –
Thanks!
I remember like it was yesterday: Weld being attacked as a liberal.
Good times, good times…
.
Guitar at 94 — that is a pathetically defeatist attitude considering the Democrats haven’t even had the opportunity to prove what they intend to do — because they don’t even take back Congress until January. Don’t you think you might be jumping the shark a bit with the whole “we’re doomed” attitude?
CT-Sen, So ya wanna know what happened by Tim Tagaris
[…]
[…]
Guitar_Playing_Bastard @
84
Actually as it turned out Feingold did volunteer to campaign for Ned early on, they just didn’t take him up on it until the last minute and his schedule was booked (literally with like 2 days notice at the end). Tim Tagaris noted that when he stopped by here, and I’ve heard him say it other places. He didn’t know that at the time and felt bad about it. Feingold was totally willing to be there for Ned.
But I’m glad you brought it up, because that got out there and some people didn’t see the correction.
Bill @ 77
I understand what you’re saying and I agree with most of your assessment of that part. To clarify my earlier question, I’m referring to the top-down messages that come from these estate funded foundations for the past 30 years.
A few quick examples
I’m not concerned about the specific people/foundations but the established system we have to overcome. Can the Liberals accept a dominant message center to speak generally for all of us? Can we create one to rival the Right’s?
Spork @ 74, RevDeb @ 85 can speak more intelligently about MA than I can, but in general, I think there are a lot of us liberals like to see ourselves as “independent” and in turn, are fairly willing to cross the aisle as proof. That’s in part why you’ve had a lot of Northeast GOP governors and Senators, why you have Gov. Ah-nuld in CA, etc.
We need to make a strong case that being part of the liberal “team,” and working in coordination, doesn’t mean checking your mind at the door, and is the only way to actually bring about the kind of government the public wants.
eriposte @
49
Thanks for stopping by, eRiposte — my question to you: when are you going to write YOUR book?
It is essential for us to make the case that without a representative, responsive and responsible governing body, there are some things we just can’t do, like effectively educate our kids and care for our elders, preserve our environment so we can live healthy and enjoyable lives, and protect our towns and cities from the horrors of natural disasters. If conservative forces succeed in continuing to erode our trust in what we can accomplish together through government, our expectations and standards will wither, our government will disintegrate from lack of support, and too many of us will fall through society’s cracks. (p. 37)
My gawd. It simply doesn’t get any better!
Guitar_Playing_Bastard sez:
Bill, as I see it, the USA is lost, irrevocably lost.
Horseshit.
Never stop fighting.
.
Guitar_Playing_Bastard @
84
ABSOLUTELY! I agree!
Bill @ 77, it takes coordination, as you say. And for us liberals, who love the notion of our individuality, it will also take a bit of SELF-discipline. It’s more important that we (in aggregate) win this struggle than it is to have our own unique, individual thoughts triumph, to the detriment of the whole.
Sha at 104 — please see Jane’s comment at 98.
Sha @
50
Bill…anyone come to mind? It’s important to me in my evaluation of Campaign 2008!
Rumi @ 99, it too the Right a long time to build that infrastructure. We’ve just gotten started, and hopefully we can do it faster and better. The blogosphere is a piece of that puzzle, and as I quote Peter Daou in the book, the most important thing anyone can do is be part of the blogosphere, because the bigger this community is, the better we can articulate what we stand for and positively pressure the media and political establishments.
Bill at 100 — Absolutely agree. Would help if we had a much better “team” concept going as well, between the powers that be in DC and the rest of us out in the hinterlands (known as “voters” in lay parlance). *g*
Bill Scher sez:
but in general, I think there are a lot of us liberals like to see ourselves as “independent” and in turn, are fairly willing to cross the aisle as proof.
The famous New England orneriness.
Vermont elects a Socialist and New Hampshire has a Sununu.
Go figure.
.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 106
Will do – my last post crossed yours. Sorry to duplicate!
Christy Hardin Smith @
96
Christy, with all due respect, your attitude toward Barbara Boxer is one of the primary reasons I have a defeatist attitude about this. If someone as seemingly smart and fiery as you is ready and willing to give this traitor a pass, what hope is there?
Had even one Democrat been willing to come out and say “We need to get out of Iraq now, just pack our shit and get the fuck out,” I might have hope. No one has said that, even though that’s the only logical course of action.
That is why I’m defeatist.
The thing that terrifies me is that, once again, in 2008 the Dems will form a circular firing squad during the primaries and let the MSM make that the meme. As Kate Forrest said @105/3:14 what is needed is SELF DISCIPLINE, which is not the same as marching in lockstep. How do we go about nurturing that?
I have a little theory, not supported by anything, really, that Canada has served as a kind of North American genetic repository for liberal democratic values since the 60’s.
Prior to the Trudeau/Nixon era, one might not have seen a lot of difference. But from the time of the Vietnam War, the countries have diverged.
The draft dodgers who moved to Canada were highly regarded and welcomed with open arms. (The average Canadian wants to welcome the current crop of war resisters, though the government is more careful to not quarrel with the US too often now.) These draft dodgers have been powerful cultural and political leaders in Canada.
The same issues that defined the 60’s and 70’s in the US have been resolved politically and legally over the last 35 years in progressive ways.
The fact that Canada has been able to gain a progressive consensus on abortion rights, equal marriage, women’s equality, and the decriminalization of marijuana is a testimony to the possibility of achieving such a consensus in the US. The fact that this has happened without damage to the economy or the political system can be seen as a reproach to those who predict doom if such positions were to be adopted in the US.
Canada is such a testimony to progressive possibilities in the US that Focus on the Family and other regressive organizations have now opened up lobbying offices in Ottawa.
However, the right wing campaign for Canada is going nowhere. The Liberal party just selected Stephane Dion, likely the most progressive of the 4 candidates. The vote to reopen equal marriage will go down to defeat this week. The Greens are about to elect their first MP. In a recent by-election, the Conservative star candidate was brought back from her volunteer work for Elizabeth Dole to run in London North, where she came in third to the Liberals and the Greens. The Conservative Party will retain a minority government until the Liberals have purged the old guard and not much longer.
The border is porous: all kinds of people and ideologies move back and forth. If progressive people need to move to Canada to survive, let’s find ways to make sure their impact is continental. Our own Mrs Robinson is an American living in Vancouver and blogging at Orcinus.
I think that there is a real argument for LGBT people to leave the US until they can live in peace and equality. I was on a flight yesterday in which I sat next to a prominent “Holy Hip Hop” artist from Virginia, who told me that lots of gay professionals were moving to Canada. He thought that might be necessary. I think so too.
Finally, I would recommend Michael Adams’ Fire and Ice to those who want to understand the difference between American and Canadian values.
Guitar at 112 — you mean, like Murtha?
Bill @ 108. The blogosphere is a vibrant part of it, but most of the population (even the liberal parts) aren’t bloggers. So we need to get articulate voices out there though other media–and just talking to our friends and neighbors. [Relatives are a greater challenge for many…..]
Where would our children be without government? Now I ask you.
eriposte @ 49, I talk about that very issue on pages 155-6 in Chapter 10. Obviously, if wealthy donors put more money into big picture infrastructure, as opposed to only funding and micromanaging short-term projects, that would go a long way. But we can’t just sit back and wait for that happen. And further, we are striving to be a small-donor fueld movement and party anyway.
So I go back to my comment here, at 108, the bigger the blogosphere community, the bigger the pool of small donors, the more resources we have to fund big picture infrastructure.
A big concern of mine lately is all the negative PR being thrown at the blogosphere (today’s NYT op-ed the more recent example). We have to mindful about our own PR. A lot of people think blogs are a waste of time, diddling in our parent’s basements, a hysterical peanut gallery, etc.. We have to continually explain why blogs are good for our democracy, civic engagment, for advancing the liberal message, for improving the media, sharpening our representatives, etc.
Marion in Savannah @ 113
I share your concern on this.
What kind of fool am I?
Not Hadley’s fool anyway!
Canada is not home to the illusionists. Hollywood is.
Yeah, that’s right, Republicans have Hollywood values.
(Apologies to my Hollywood friends.)
(UPDATE — OK, I’ll call it Hollywood, D.C. from now on.)
Guitar_Playing_Bastard –
Cut it out.
Never give up!
Now, Mr. Scher has been gracious enough to come here. Let’s engage smartly…without the defeatism.
.
Christy Hardin Smith @
115
You have me there. How many have joined in the call?
Murtha for Secretary of Defense! After we win the WH.
Bill at 118 — it is one of those things that I can never quite figure out: why conservative money backers stick their money into a think tank or slush fund and then let it run according to what the needs are at the moment, but liberal money is given with massive micro-management strings in so many cases where it could do a lot of good with very little seed money, but is never allowed to do so. It’s weird. And counter-productive.
Julia @ 54, you’re right that the book was written when Dems were totally out of power. But just because we have obtained some power, the nature of our national conversation has not changed. “Liberal” is still a bad word. “Government” is still a bad word. “Tax cuts” are still reflexively seen as the only viable political position a pol can take.
Having perches in Congress give Dems new tools with which they can reshape the national conservation, so it can be safe for them to propose ideas that entail utilizing our government. But they have to use those tools to make any difference.
I’m not terribly convinced that Washington Dems are bold and visionary enough to wisely use those took to shatter the GOP frame that still controls our debate.
We in the grassroots are going to have to take lead, use what media perches we have available to use (blogosphere, liberal talk radio, etc.), show that messages rooted in core liberal principles can get traction, and then Washington Dems will feel comfortable following our lead.
Bill, I’m sorry I haven’t been able to read your book yet.
Is it OK if I skip the chapters about the various climates of Canada and the possible ‘08 US presidential candidates?
Guitar at 122 — I’ve been polite about asking that things stay on topic during the book discussion. If you want to continue this, please head to the prior thread. Bill is here to talk about his book, and we should be nice enough to do that with him since he’s taken time away from his real life to hang out here with us for just that purpose. Okay?
Scher. One of da men.
Bill sez:
A big concern of mine lately is all the negative PR being thrown at the blogosphere (today’s NYT op-ed the more recent example).
They’re frightened.
For the first time the Big Media are being challenged on a day-to-day basis. And they don’t like it.
.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 119
Well, we can watch what we do ourselves, and we can talk about it in a non-judgmental way with the other liberal idea folks we encounter. It’s talking about process–HOW are we going to be most successful–not just about content or ego. Kind of like when you have kids–help them figure out how they are going to share that piece of chocolate cake, instead of fighting until mom takes it away from both of them.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 124
This is exactly where the Blue America PAC may start to make a real change. I don’t recall anthing even close to this before… It takes a lot of snowflakes to make an avalanche, but the more of us who pile on…
dipper @ 82, I was doing a lot of speaking engagements on the book from late Sept. to mid-Nov., and I have one more panel discussion on tap for this Wed. (at The Tank in NYC, with Eric Boehlert and Michael Berube.) Most of what I;ve done so far was on the coasts, and I’m looking into doing some additional appearances in the MidWest and elsewhere in the new year.
Bill @ 108
Absolutely. It’s been frustrating to hear all of the talking heads attack Dems/liberals in the media as not having a message or plan when the speaker has just clearly articulated one. The MSM is so well trained to believe the RW think tank talking points that they end up reinfoprcing the negative false stereotype.
We do hurt ourselves by focusing on divisions rather than simmering down the issues to the lowest common denominators. The MSM zeroes in on this and exploits it.One example would be the issue of gay marriage. I’m a middle aged straight male so the issue isn’t personal but I believe in standing up for others’ rights. As I’ve spoken up/out on the issue, mostly as an ‘equal legal rights for all’ I’ve been taken to task for not fully supporting gay marriage. I understand the institution of marriage is sacred to some, and I can respect their beliefs, but the legal rights of an equal civil union should be consistent for all of us. The MSM jumps on the division but we could counter that by focusing on the most common factor that affects all of us…but it seems we defeat that by our own efforts. Any chance of a broad effort to identify commonalities to support?
Christy Hardin Smith @
127
OK.
Oh boys and girls. Do I like this or what!
One thing that Bill makes clear in Wait! Don’t Move To Canada! is that we have for far too long allowed the conservative smear of the word “liberal” to stand unchallenged.
Bill -
Any chance of you coming to Pittsburgh?
If you’re interested I can round-up some local liberals.
Just a thought.
.
Guitar @91,
While I don’t share your perspective exactly, I agree that we live in a system which isn’t going to change fundamentally…until it runs into a brick wall. The brick wall will force people inside and outside government to confront and understand where the old system failed and what features of a new system must look like. Legislation will eventually be crafted in support of that system, and popular understanding of why it’s needed will precipitate it. That’s not at critical mass yet, but it’s gathering steam. You might express the popular sentiment as sustainability, Better Energy, generative growth, or what have you.
Few Democrats have demanded we pull out of Iraq because our economic system and the solvency of our currency are based on resource extraction generally and control of cheap hydrocarbons specifically. If we pull out of Iraq, one of many unattractive consequences is that we will lose currency control, and our debts will become real. Right now we simply print money to pay off our bonds; then, we’d have to generate foreign exchange to pay. Yet everybody knows keeping Iraq is too expensive and will break us. So we’re caught in a tautological loop, like the chimp with it’s hand in the cookie jar. Nobody can let go of the cookie.
There’s really no smooth transition possible between the systems at issue, a point which has been debated for nearly 10 years in financial circles. The common wisdom which has more or less emerged is that financial elites can make more money, or come out better, from a fast crash than a slow one (through speculation and buying up alternative energy assets and rights while they’re cheap). So it’s not surprising that no Democrats have called for a cold-turkey retreat from Iraq. Doing so is tantamount to saying, “Let’s make our currency worthless, impoverish our rich people, and let foreigners move in to buy our country’s assets in a fire sale.”
It’s going to happen anyway; but who wants it to happen on their watch? Anyhow I sympathize with your sentiments. Gaining control of the House and (sorta) of the Senate is definite progress, but it doesn’t solve our problems, and no one is yet proposing a coherent solution to them. Gore comes close with a technical message, one palatable to elites, but he never once questions the philosophical assumption that got us here in the first place: why we must worship Growth and let a Tapeworm Economy run rampant across the earth.
Marion at 131 — I think you are right about that. It certainly was an eye opener to all of us how a few, targeted bits and pieces could add up to half a million dollars so quickly. And what a huge difference that was able to make for so many candidates who weren’t on the Beltway radar screens. And with that, they were able to get some notice in their districts and with the powers-that-be in DC, and then get more campaign donations and volunteers. It truly was a snowball rolling down the hill, gathering momentum as it went forward for a whole lot of those folks.
Mr. Scher…
Do you have a hard, short, concrete suggestion for those of us (on the grass roots and liberal level) working to win the WH in 2008?
Rumi @ 133, I believe the solution is consitent articulation of core liberal principles (which is what “Wait! Don’t Move To Canada!” is all about). That means consitently rooting arguments about particular issues in those principles. That way, when there is a tactical disagreement, it still is clear — to ourselves, the media and the public — that we are all still working towards the same overarching goals.
Republicans do this with their “bumper sticker”: less government, lower taxes, strong defense. Even when they are arguing for government bans on abortion, government bans on civil union, etc. it is argued within the frame of “less government,” For example, “activist liberal judges want the government to impose their fringe values on you.” Of course, Roe v Wade, Lawrence v Texas do not impose an abortion on anyone, gay sex on anyone. That’s what conservatives want to — but by rooting things, however superficially, in a principle of less government, the social conservatives and libertarians stay on the same team.
If we consistently root our arguments on the basis of “representative, responsive and responsible government,” or something along those lines, I think that will be a big help
Christy:
Audio of that portion here
Wow
I haven’t read the book yet but what I’m reading so far about it is very important.
Thanks Bill
Oklahoma kiddo @ 139
And would that candidate best use the word centrist, liberal, progressive, or progressive liberal to describe themselves?
Marion in Savannah @ 131:
What about Blue America PAC funding progressive infrastructure, so we can train some speakers who can start moving the agenda and getting some of Bill’s good ideas out there?
Kate at 143 — it was all we could do to raise enough funds for Blue America PAC to run some commercials on behalf of some of the candidates we supported this past cycle. One step at a time.
Kate Forrest @ 143
Absolutely, which is why contributing to the PAC rather than to an individual candidate is important. As we are the PAC, we’ll have a say in what we build, I hope. Grassroots, in the neighborhoods, voter-by-voter is how we’re going to have to rebuild here in the South. It’s probably different in other parts of the country. Maybe a “PAC Steering Committee” with regional representation? Just spitballing here…
Bill @ 140
I understand your advice and I agree that it will make a difference in directing future discussions. I’ve always believed that our blog posts, comments and contributions are done for the benefit of readers as they seek information to form educated opinions. Our choices here can make a positive change for the future. Thanks again for your time, experience and dedication.
One last thought…can the Liberal side put together a blended spiritual(general) and secular movement to benefit others in the ways that the faith based initiatives were conceived to do?
Sorry if I’m repetitive…have any DC Dems acknowledged reading your book and understanding what it says>
Sha @ 107, Oklahoma Kiddo @ 139, both ask about 2008. And for Christy @ 71, this pertains to what I heard on the book tour to.
Everyone always asks about who we can rally around in 2008. And my initial response always is: Don’t Wait For A Savior.
You might have read the Bill Bradley NYT op-ed a year or so back, where he describes the GOP infrastructure as a pyramid, with layers of foundation — money, think tanks, media, etc.. And at the top, is the presidential candidate. You can swap out the top piece, and the rest of the pyramid is still in good shape.
Dems have an inverted pyramid. Every burden is put upon the prez candidate, while too many us sit back and expect one person to articulate everything that we stand for in a two-month sprint, when every smear in the book is being dumped on that person.
It’s more important for us, between now and ‘08, to articulate our principles, and rally support for them, show that they have resonance among the public, so ideally, ALL of the ‘08 nominees are singing off of our songbook, and it doesn’t matter as much which one gets the nod.
Having said all of that, the ones that strike me has having the most promise are Edwards, Clark and (yes, he’s thinking about it) Chris Dodd. I put Dodd in there because of his Military Commission bill, that’s the kind of leadership (assuming he continues to follow through) we should encourage all prospective candidates to take. He has more to prove, as does the whole lot of candidates, and we should be setting bars for them to clear.
Sha @ 147, not yet!
Christy @ 144–
I’m glad, glad, glad that so many good candidates won. So thanks for your work.
I want to put forth an idea, get some reactions. It’s related to Bill’s book & ideas. What do you all think about the idea of folks tithing with their donations (and increasing 10% in the process)? That is, give your usual to candidates/party, plus another 10% for infrastructure for the liberal/progressive movement?
Bill at 148 — Absolutely right. And that inverted pyramid that the Dems have been using as their party power structure for years tends to come back and bite us in the butt far too often. That needs to be turned on its head, and fast.
Bill, your pyramid (or Bradley’s) analogy is brilliant. It is precisely what we do, and what we must stop doing. Thanks for stating it so very clearly.
MarcLord @ 142,
I’m not a big fan of semantic debates, but I think “Liberal” is a crucial word to embrace, define, and defend. It’s embeded in our lexicon. How many times will Speaker Pelosi be called the “liberal Speaker Pelosi,” even though she runs away from the label like pretty much everyone else in DC? She’s going to get called it whether she likes it or not. “Liberal” and “Conservative” is just how the parameters of our debate are defined.
Conservatives of course, use “Liberal” as a slur. If they use it as a slur, and we don’t use it all, then it’s a slur by default. And slurs are powerful. They demean and dismiss ideas before you get a chance to discuss the merits of anything. Rehabbing the word is no easy task, but it’s essential if we are to win election after election after election — not just the occaisonal fluke election.
“Having said all of that, the ones that strike me has having the most promise are Edwards, Clark and (yes, he’s thinking about it) Chris Dodd. I put Dodd in there because of his Military Commission bill, that’s the kind of leadership (assuming he continues to follow through) we should encourage all prospective candidates to take. He has more to prove, as does the whole lot of candidates, and we should be setting bars for them to clear.”
Dodd? I shall give this man more thought.
Bill Scher @
125
You’re right, we still have work to do.
Bill, if you’re still here, what do you think about Frank Luntz? And his part in the GOP message machine? And the GOP message machine?
Up here, Stphane Dion, our ex-Environment Minister just won the leadership of the Liberal Party. He is likely to become Prime Minister if they play their cards wisely. The current Conservative PM, Stephen Harper has a minority government.
Watching Dion’s convention speech was like watching Gore in An Inconvenient Truth. There is an interesting alignment underway…socialists in Nicaragua, Venezuela, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, and Argentina…Democratic renaissance in the US, and a renewed Liberal part in Canada.
Here’s Dion’s speech, for those who want to compare the ‘mainstream’ left in Canada with that in America.
Here’s a taste:
The main issue of the century, the one on which all others depend, is the junction between the economy and the environment. In other words, no less than the reconciliation between the people and the planet. It is the responsibility of Canada, as well as its self-interest, to tackle this issue.
I say that a country so blessed – with 10% of the world’s fresh water, 7% of the world’s land, and 14% of the world’s energy reserves must be a responsible custodian to the world. As the aboriginal proverb says, “ We do not inherit the planet from our ancestors, we borrow it from our grand children. “
I say that we, as a country of 33 million people, who are consuming as much energy as the entire continent of Africa with 800 million people, our duty is to be part of the solution. When the former Chief economist of the World Bank warns that humanity may lose, because of climate change, a fifth of its collective wealth over the next decades, I know that we Canadians are listening.
I am hoping that a Liberal PM and a Democratic President might be able to bring the two countries into socio-political alignment.
John in Sacramenteo @ 155, Luntz’s tactics are an example what conservatives needed to do with langauge because their ideology inherently lacks broad appeal.
As I discuss in the book, when you ask most Americans if they want their government to be responsible for protecting the environment, eliminating poverty, regulating big corporations, guaranteeing health insurance for all, the vast, vast majority say yes.
The numbers are so big, they have to ecompass those who say they are liberal (20%), moderate (40-45%) and even some of the 33% who say they are conservative. (Which is why I argue that 1) there is great common ground between self-described liberals and moderates, and 2) the problem is not with liberal ideas, but with the stigma that has been placed on the “liberal” label.)
We don’t have to mask our ideology to win over the public. They do. That’s why they needed a Luntz to counsel them to call anti-environmental proposals “Clear Skies”, “Healthy Forests” and so on.
They have shown themselves to be extremely good at playing weak hands, but we should recognize they are still weak hands, and not fool ourselves into thinking we’re in a permanent minority when we are not.
spork incident @ 136
I would love to come to Pittsburgh. Feel free to email me offline (click the “Contact” link over at LiberalOasis.com) if you have ideas about how we could arrange an event. Thanks!
Bill Scher @ 153
Webster’s or the OED could help in the re-hab; popping those reference works open and looking up the definition of “conservative” could be useful on the attack, as well. Thanks for the answer and insight.
“Inverted pyramid..a need to articulate principles” and funding progressive ideas via ACT Blue Pac all good thoughts..This is a good time to put a few bucks into the pot. I just looked at Howie’s Act Blue Pac page.. there have been ten donors over the past month..we can do better. Is there a current Act Blue page for FDL?
I haven’t read the book yet, but I’m curious what’s something practical to get a grassroots group started or growing?
We don’t really have any kind of Democratic party in Illinois for people to get involved with. It’s just a machine.
Steve at 160 — we do have a 2008 page — but thus far the only thing on it is the Blue America PAC. That’s because we are not yet able to add candidates as yet for the 2008 cycle. We’re working on how to switch our page link over at the top — but haven’t done so as yet because several of our ActBlue candidates still have debt from 2006 to retire. Any funds they receive over and above the debt levels may be rolled into their 2008 campaigns — and that’s the best we can do for the moment.
Oklahoma kiddo @
135
DITTO
I hope that everyone who hasn’t read the book will consider doing so. It’s well worth the read and, as I said above, a concise look at a lot of problems we need to tackle. Great framing information in it. Really, a great job, Bill!
Bill, the immigration debate often founders on the knee jerk reaction of the right to anything with a whiff of amnesty to it. How can this “bad word” be rephrased? I think there are some echoes from the draft dodger debate from the VN war era, but it may be more than that.
Maybe start calling the pass the corporations get when they hire illegals for what it is, an amnesty in fact? Good for the goose, and all.
Rumi @ 146,
In Chapter 6 of the book, I talk about the importance of building a coalition of the religious and nonreligious. Not only do I think it can be done, I believe it can be done without caving in on reproductive freedom, equality for gays and church-state separation.
Without getting into too many specifics from the book, let me just note that talk about a meeting I had with members of an evangelical church in N. Carolina who mostly voted for Kerry (albeit reluctantly in many cases). When asked about if they required their candidates to talk about the faith explicitly, they said no. They certainly didn’t mind it, but what was most important to them was sincerity and principle. They want to know what drives politicians. If it was faith fine, if it’s something, then say what that is. But pandering really rubbed them the wrong.
So we don’t have to “get religion” to win. Though I do think we need a religious-nonrelgious coalition, partly to be true to our “representative” principles, party to neutralize the attack that when we fight for reproductive freedom, church-state separation, etc., it means we are “hostile” to religion.
CHS @ 162 I am having trouble finding the FDL 08 Act Blue Pac page. Help
Steve at 167 — you can donate via the page we link above if you like. Same PAC, same donation — it goes in the same pot of money. It doesn’t have to be done via the 2008 page. That said, give me a minute and I’ll try and scrounge up the link. Howie put it together quickly for us right before he went on vacation, so it’s going to take me a minute…
Steve — here you go:
http://actblue.com/page/blueamerica08
Oh, and by the way, this book is perfectly sized to be a lovely stocking stuffer for the hard-to-buy-for-wingnut in the family. *g*
I was encourages by the Bill Moyer’s America piece that discussed the fractures among some of the evangelical right on the issue of global warming, and the need for action there. I think there is much room for cooperation because it does not require that the parties agree on every issue. There is an opening in the way some on the right are dismissing the poor, to the dismay of those who are following the Word and not the spin of the Robertsons et al.
jeffreyw @ 165,
The anti-immgrant forces pretty much lost this debate. The “amnesty” charge didn’t have legs. Most Americans favor a pathway to citizenship. And the littany of anti-immigrants ads this season only drove Latinos away from the GOP.
Having said that, I think Dems can do better than simply following Bush’s “guest worker” lead, which is simply an attempt to keep cheap labor flowing to his corporate backers (and, secondarily, to get more Latinos into the GOP over the long-term.) I discuss in the book a more comprehensive immigration reform, which includes investment in Mexican infrastructure to eliminate the economic disparity that drives illegal immigration, and linking any guest worker/path to citizenship plan to a real minimum wage, so no worker is exploited.
Bill Scher @
148
Any Californians wanna follow Bills advice?
Find out where and when you can become involved in the decision making of your Democratic Party.
Here
Click on your AD and contact the officers to find out what you need to know
There are elections for California delegates coming up on the weekend of Jan 13&14. In order to vote and/or be a delegate all you have to do is be a registered Democrat in your AD.
You can be involved in the decision making process.
Thank you all. Great discussion and input!!
Christy Hardin Smith @ 170
I’ve got so many wing-nuts in my family it all but overwhelms. But believe or naught, we adore each other.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 164
Can’t speak for anyone else, Christy, but I need about another 3 weeks notice on book salon books to have them read in time. Always have more books than time to read.
CHS..thanks for the link..it’s the same for DWT..I guess I was hoping there were three different pages and I had missed donor activity.
HeirofPatriots @ 161,
I can’t speak to the nature of the IL Dem Party specifically, but you might consider hooking up with one of the Drinking Liberally chapters in your state: http://drinkingliberally.org/locations.html#il
I did several book tour appearances at DL chapters, and in general, I found people there know the political landscape of their own communities very well. They may have good counsel and guidance as to how to get involved in the party infrastructure, or how to influence it from the outside.
Heir at 176 — we did notice on this one a while back to give folks time to read it. We try and give advance notice where we can with scheduling — but sometimes, an opportunity comes up that we have to schedule on the fly. Sorry you missed the notice on this one, though, it’s really a great read. :)
Bill — thanks so much for being here and chatting with all of us on FDL this evening. This has been a great chat, full of lots of practical information and framing discussion. Loved the upside down pyramid analogy, for starters!
Really appreciate you taking the time to be here tonight, and I’m sure everyone else does as well. Great book!
Thank you Christy, and Jane as well, for hosting the Salon, and for all of your kind praise. Thanks too to everyone who participated for your thoughtful questions and comments. I hope I typed fast enough to respond to everyone! If there’s anything I didn’t get to, or something comes to mind after reading the book, feel free to drop me an email (click the Contact link over at LiberalOasis.com).
There’s so much work to do, but we are better prepared to do it than ever. Thanks for staying and fighting!
Ach I completely forgot Bill was going to be in the Salon today. Arriving way late.
I just wanted to say that I think Bill’s book is fantastic. I reviewed it shortly after it’s publication and I would recommend it above probably any other book written by a blogger or political operative in the last year. I abhor quoting myself, but I wanted to put out a few paragraphs from my review that I think get to what makes Bills’ book great.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 180
Oklahoma kiddo @ 183
“Really appreciate you taking the time…”
Thanks CHS and JH. Merry Christmas!
HeirofPatriots -
search for a Democracy for America group in your area by going to this link http://www.dfalink.com and search by zip code.
DFA is the outgrowth of Dean for America campaign, they have groups in all 50 states and 40 countries. They are a “Democratic Club” with a goal of recruting, training and getting progressive candidates elected.
I attended my first meeting the month after the 2004 election loss. They moved me past my depression and now I am the chair of our country group. Give it a try, I love working with DFA.
It will be tough to undo the violence wrought upon our language and culture. Words don’t mean what they used to mean. For example, take … compassion.
Folks are going to be flummoxed when they wake to a world stripped of [faux] enlightenment.
At least Liberalism has some structural underpinnings.
Funny how goopers just can’t handle that.
There are two things you can call me. Okie. And liberal. So long as you smile when you’re doin’ it.
Kate @ 91…nice to see you here Kate. Dave has been telling me a bit about the goings-on at Commonweal. Perhaps it’s time for a kaffeeklatsch to catch up? :-)
Jane @ 101…I’m happiest when I can provide useful content for others’ books :-)
Bill @ 118…I’ll take a look at the pages you mention. I look forward to discussing this with you in more detail next year!
Thanks for the interesting thoughts and comments.
Hey — who’s that liberal Okie?
:~}
neokneme @ 189
our friend!
neokneme @ 189
Ah, but you smiled. ;)
Pach’s got a mighty fine new thread upstairs.
Folks,
This book was so good, that I bought one for my Mom in KC, one for my daughter attending university, and two extras to give to my fine right leaning ex-democrat friends. And I intend to buy more copies forpeople Idiscuss/rant about politics with.
Bill has long been one of the voices I turn to to understand the current situation in Washington, and I am very impressed with how simple and straightforward (and quick and easy to read), the book is, the 3 Rs, and the layout as a how to guide. I am also appreciative for the actual polling data on issue after issue showing how many of us are really liberal, whether we realize it or not.
This bookis one of the most cost effective ways to educate your friends and family, and makes for great talking point at those family dinners. I am even going to give a copy to my brother who does not speak with the liberals in the family anymore, (though that one may gather dust, but maybe, just maybe, he will look at some of it).
Go out and get Bill’s book if you don’t have it yet, and if you do, get some more for stocking stuffer for Christmas.