Democrats: it's time for a SUMMIT

Democrats need to stop ... just stop ... and listen ... we continue to be a Party that seems to lurch in all directions depending on who is speaking ... we are a Party of individuals rather than a Party of individuals unified by well-defined core values ...

Americans know that fundamentally, Democrats support domestic programs to help the society ... many probably still see us as a "big government, expensive programs" party ... and on defense and security issues, i think they see the Democratic Party as "also rans" ... they see us as "mostly going along with bush" but not having a clear platform on when war is justified and when it's not ... the Party's conduct on Iraq could not have made the issue any fuzzier ...

so we all need to be locked away in a big room ... or perhaps lots of rooms around the country ... we need to define exactly who we are and exactly what tactics are needed to make progress ... every Democrat should be given full access to participating in this process ... ultimately, the Party needs to speak with one voice and needs to be repeating the same core message over and over and over ... there is room for individual variations once the central theme has been presented, but not until ...

right now, elected Democrats are all over the map ... Kennedy says we can start withdrawing troops now and that we should set a timetable; Kerry said he doesn't agree ... Boxer and Kerry vote against Rice but many Democrats vote for her ... Reid and Pelosi back Roemer and Dean wins the Chairman slot ... perhaps it has been like herding cats, and disagreements will always occur, but this is a time that Democrats critically need a sense of "team unity" and it seems like we have no way to get there ... there can be no unity without first negotiating on a unifying platform ...

here's an editorial on this subject from today's Boston Globe:

<skip>

There must be a way to redefine a party agenda, but Democrats have not figured out how to do it without looking silly. There must be a way to challenge a president, but Democrats have not yet figured out how to do it with dignity. Too often they sound petty and whiny, very much the way Republicans did when they demonized Bill Clinton during his stay in the White House. Voters did not like it from the GOP then, including some voters who did not like Clinton; and they won't like it now, including some voters who don't like George W. Bush.

The points of conflict with the Bush administration are legitimate. The battle is over real ideological differences domestic and foreign versus the GOP's flogging of Clinton over personal transgressions. But the tone is too negative and self-serving. The search for the center and for the Almighty is too manipulative.

<skip>

In their postelection despair, Democratic Party leaders are finally prepared to accept him (i.e. Dean) as the fiscally conservative, socially progressive former governor he actually is. It will take time before the country thinks of him as someone other than a Northeast liberal who lost the Iowa caucus with a yelp.

In the meantime, the country listens for a voice that speaks to them, not at them. It listens for honest debate, not partisan rhetoric. It listens for solutions to complex problems. It listens for someone who is not warming up for the next presidential campaign but addressing issues that affect their lives. It listens for new voices, because the old ones are tired and predictable.

Voters are listening for someone who gets it.

it really is time for certain Dean people to understand that Dean is not going to be successful with the kind of alienating attitude that your post conveys ...

the point of a summit, and I hope Dean will see the wisdom in making this one of his first official acts, is that if we don't build unity, we'll be going nowhere in a hurry ...

do you think Dean should reflect the idea embodied in your post that "Pelosi and Reid don't get it" ????? yeah, that will help build unity ...

I have confidence that Dean will be far more open than that ...

and are quite obviously very willful about not getting it. They are thinking about their positions and not about how to fight this goddamned political civil war we are having. We have to unite...sure, but if they keep this up I say whack them at the polls. Perhaps they will wise up before we have to start working on primary challenges to Democratic pols who want to maintain the status quo. We shall see.

i have no problem with trying to oust the entrenched leadership or anybody else during the primaries ... that should be what primaries are all about ...

but threats and divisiveness should not be what we are about today ... battling among ourselves to determine our direction is fine ... it's expected ... it's why we need to have a summit NOW ... but until next year, and even during the primaries, we can't ignore the fact that we are also battling the republicans ...

if we can build unity at a summit, so be it ... there are no guarantees ... but i think we all need to sit down as a Party and make sure that everyone is heard ... if Reid and Pelosi are out of touch, let them hear that message ... and let those who think they are out of touch hear them defend themselves ... then we vote on what will be our Party's message ... straying from the core message should come with a cost ... candidates who are off message MAY not receive Party support and MAY have an opponent in the primaries ... the idea here is that we cannot afford to continue to appear to be a Party with no CENTRAL message ... and that's often how it looks when elected Democrats speak only for themselves ...

What if your "summit" drags us even further to the right; would you STILL support it?

Yes or No?

Not one more inch to the right...NOT ONE MORE!

All I hear is compromise, compromise, compromise from people to the right of Hitler. Compromise is weakness and I'm tired of holding my nose when I vote!!!

If we give up that kind of ground, WE HAVE ALREADY LOST BEFORE ONE BALLOT IS CAST!

I'm a Democrat. Deal with it.

It's only about clarity of message, and taking a leadership role. Dean's just a guy who has happened to have to done that very well. He's no Messiah (really- although I think as DNC chair, he's a great start). He can't do it alone. He has to, WE have to, bring us all together to shake off the DLC bruises and deadness that we've become so accustomed to. It's OVER for the DLC, folks! They LOST, HUGE!!! They're just finished, and they're not coming back.

All this craziness, the lack of coordination, it's all a product of that very fact. There's a huge power vacuum in our party right now. It has to be filled. This time, let's ALL fill it, and fill it with something REAL. Put something that we actually BELIEVE in, in there.

NOW is the time to stand up. We WILL take this country back, if we can just get over the fucking FEAR. We are RIGHT!!! Let's start acting like it!!

And honestly, Reid and Pelosi? I might have a small amount of respect for them, but to say that they're really where they should be right now is kidding ourselves. You're right- let's not act like DICKS to each other. But, we're gonna have to break some eggs, here. It's just not going to happen any other way. There are those who aren't going to have it in them to come with us, and they're going to hurt. I don't like it, but we HAVE to do this!!!!!

WE *HAVE* TO DO THIS. FOR OUR ***COUNTRY***, AND OUR CHILDREN.

which is what the Republicans have.

Your unity is about silencing dissent, just like the Republicans do. That is Totalitarianism.

Your unity is about Dean's people giving up our "take our party back from the special interests" goal and not the Dem Establishment humbling themselves to serve the people again. That's promoting tyranny, which is what the Republicans practice.

Dean said that he will pick his fights and speak out against wrongdoings he sees, regardless of what Pelosi and Reid say. Dean will not be silent when the Republicans continue turning this nation into a totalitarian state and the Hill Dems let it slide without even a whimper.

my post called for a summit ... my post called for a meeting of ALL democrats ... my posts in this thread described a meeting where ALL ideas are welcomed ... that does not mean that all ideas will be accepted ... we listen, we discuss, we choose ... nothing is off the table at the start ... and every single Democrat should have a say if they want one ...

you think Dean is the great savior ... do you really believe he is going to dictate his terms to Reid, Pelosi and other elected Democrats? is that what you think? Dean will see his job not just as a reformer ... a reformer who gets no support for his reforms is irrelevant ... Dean will not only succeed with some reforms but he, unlike you, will seek to implement those reforms by building cooperation and support for them with ALL Democrats ...

your post is so totally delusional that i'm not sure exactly where to start ... do you have some sort of twisted view that I'm anti-Dean? is that what you think? well, wrong again ...

do you think Dean is going to "conquer the Party" and make all the elected Democrats tremble at his feet? wrong again ...

Show me where Dean said that he will speak out "regardless of what Pelosi and Reid say" ... i find it hard to believe he would make such a divisive comment about two of the Party's leaders ... got a source for that quote or did you dream that one up all by yourself? if you do, i admit i'll be surprised ... and i'll also consider the remark ill advised ... i think Dean should always speak his mind even if it conflicts with the Party leadership ... by i think making a statement that is as confrontational as the one you said he made is very poor ...

Since you've busied yourself talking about my totalitarianism (btw, calling for ALL Democrats, not just the Deanies, to have a say at the summit is hardly totalitarianism), i'll tell you what i really think ... i think Dean will be a positive force for reform in the Party, but unlike your misguided observations, he will work WITH the Party leadership to craft a new strategy ... he will not cause the kind of rift and antagonism your divisive attitude would cause ...

and where the hell exactly did you get this gibberish from: "Your unity is about Dean's people giving up our "take our party back from the special interests" goal" ... the reason i supported Dean for the Chair position is because I want to see the Party opened up much more to the grassroots ... did you think my call for a summit would only allow Reid and Pelosi to participate ... you make it sound like "your summit" would only be open to Deanies ... how pathetic would that be ???

If you had read all my posts in this thread, you'd quickly see that I think unity is necessary for the Democratic Party to succeed ... through what twisted logic did you infer that that meant that Dean's reform movement should be squashed? you're so biased and so partisan in your thinking that you believe everyone is out to get you ...

the vision i discussed for a summit sets unity as a goal ... i clearly stated there is no guarantee that goal is achievable ... and if it isn't, there will be a battle for power ... but unlike you, i start by hoping that Dean and other party reformers can convince Reid, Pelosi and others that we can offer a better way ... you seem to think you're the new sheriff in town who gets to make all the rules ... i'll start by hoping for cooperation; you seem to think that confrontation is the only way ... aside from the fact that you're wrong and that Dean will not seek confrontation with Reid and Pelosi, what success will any of us have if the Party splits in half?

of what Pelosi and Reid say. Dean will not be their slave. He will be the servant of the Democrats, and that means the majority of us who live outside of Washington DC.

Would Dean prefer to work with Pelosi and Reid? Yes, but he is not going to remain silent while they betray Democratic values and make his job of getting Democrats to win elections again harder. Dean won't cross them on every issue, and his intent is to battle the Repuke ideology, which unfortunately some Democrats on the Hill support.

Here's madfloridians post on comments Dean made on an online chat http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1573267

Dean's appeal is his blunt outspokeness and telling the truth even if it hurts some Democrats along with Republicans. Dean has always opposed the Democrats selling out their principles in the hope of winning elections. That Democratic strategy has gotten us in the habit of losing elections.

Anyway Tom Harkin said that there are at least 45 different messages in the Democratic party, so why should Howard Dean remain silent?

What I've been trying to emphasize in my posts is NOT that Dean should remain silent ... the reason I've supported him for Chair is because the Party critically needs to change ... that's why your statement that "Your unity is about Dean's people giving up our "take our party back from the special interests" goal" made no sense ... i think the exact opposite of what you're accusing me of ...

but your earlier posts, and perhaps this one to a lesser extent, have not acknowledged the essence of my posts in this thread ... in fact, I guess we now have two essential themes ...

first, the Democratic Party will not succeed if unity (or some semblance of unity) is not achieved ... my vision, or at least my hope, will be that those with a stranglehold on power in the Party will recognize that they need to share power ... if they don't, and a major power struggle occurs, we are all doomed regardless of who prevails ... that's point one ... and if a power struggle does occur and the outcome is not honored by ALL Democrats, i hope that those currently in power lose the battle ... but if this is what occurs, our victory will be a somewhat hollow victory because we will not ultimately succeed against the republicans ...

and second, here's what I think Dean's mission must be ... job one has to be to negotiate a framework for shared power ... that's my main objective in calling for a summit ... this task will not be about defining a platform or arguing about Dean's views on how legislators should and shouldn't vote on the issues of the day ... my strong preference is to get the grassroots MUCH MORE INVOLVED in defining who we are as a Party ... during this phase, it's fine for Dean to speak out as much as he wants to but his primary role should be to summarize the key views of those Democrats (right down to the grassroots) who participated in the summit and then to try to craft these views into a political strategy ... now, if elected Democrats refuse to go along with the values, policies and tactics defined by the grassroots and ALL other Democrats, then, and not until then, we are at a crossroads ... Dean's job at that point, should be to protect the validity of the "summit process" ... he should not allow party insiders to reject the process ... if a reasonable compromise cannot be worked out at this point, we're all in trouble ...

just to be extra clear, since you seem to have misinterpreted my message and indicated that i want to put a muzzle on Dean, i think he needs to have the highest respect for building party unity and shaping the message and the voices of ALL Democrats into a coherent platform ... and btw, i'm absolutely convinced this is exactly what he will try to do ... but at the same time, he must make it clear to "insider" Democrats that the old ways must change if we are to change the republican tide and start doing better ... the goal is openness and cooperation, not confrontation ... if the changes we're seeking to open up the Party are rejected, then we're in a very different situation ... but that must not be the starting point ...

and btw, i read the post that you referenced looking for a quote from Dean about Reid and Pelosi ... correct me if i'm wrong, but i didn't see one ...

finally, and this is beyond the scope of this thread and is totally my own subjective view of Dean, I have great hope that Dean will be a successful reformer of the Party's very closed processes ... but i also don't think Dean is as progressive on the issues as I would like ... at times, some of his staunchest supporters seem to convey an attitude that Dean is more than a reformer ... they seem to argue that he's a progressive (or a lefty) that will stand up to the republican-lite policies of the DLC ... i say this here not to get into a debate of whether my views of where Dean stands on the issues are right or wrong ... rather, my intent is just to convey that some of us on "the left" see Dean as a moderate ... we look forward to opening the process up to ALL Democrats ... but we do not necessarily look to Dean to be the ultimate definer on where WE ALL stand on the issues ... we want him to succeed at making the process more open, but for many of us, he was not our candidate because we did not see him as being as progressive as we see ourselves ... i say this not to criticize Dean but to convey to some of the die-hard Deanies that we may disagree with Dean on policy and don't see our choice narrowly between Dean and the DLC ... those of us to the left of Dean want a seat at the table as well ... to the extent that Dean wants ALL Democrats to have a say in their Party, we are with you all the way ...

I also agree that there should be some kind of a summit or similar type process involving all Party members, as the "official"/DLC style of acting like a commercial enterprise and shutting us all out except to give us orders, has ultimately infuriated most of us and killed the meaning of our Party. This reminds me of an actual Democratic summit a while ago on C-SPAN with Midwestern Dem. Governors, on unemployment; it was really good. Republicans don't give a goddamn, but as Bush's approval ratings sink into the toilet, and we know we will be back, we should become an entirely national group again.

The days of the old-time convention are gone, the candidates generally do not meet the people in Town Hall type meetings anymore to hear and discuss opinions--(there was a fabulous one on C-SPAN from Feb. 3rd I think, with Rep. Ben Cardin of Maryland and a fabulous audience of knowledgable older people, on Social Security)--and so rank and file Party members are getting more anxious and angry at not having their concerns addressed. When the most outrageous Republican lies and criminality is not even criticized, missing one golden opportunity after another to expose these bastards, you can only stand it for so long, and I wish the DLC types would be at long last officially removed, and a truly communal, Town Hall/voters approach be returned to. The people left our party, to the extent that they did, because the official party kicked us out, and replaced us with consultants.

The kinds of responses you have gotten on this thread from Dean supporters is exactly why I did not support Dean for Party chair, but will as a matter of unity and hope for the best. I hope Dean will have the intelligence to make a place for Martin Frost amongst all this Party strategizing, remembering Frost's longtime role as a party organizer, get-out-the-vote campaigner, and one of the group attacking the criminal DeLay with Rep. Chris Bell. We are not helped by the fractious in-fighting of various groups that make us up; remember the incredibly stupid MoveOn "ultimatum," "Now it's our Party. We bought it, we own it, and we're going to take it back." Take it back from who, dear--me? You had two really good paragraphs on this, too--(copy and paste)--

first, the Democratic Party will not succeed if unity (or some semblance of unity) is not achieved ... my vision, or at least my hope, will be that those with a stranglehold on power in the Party will recognize that they need to share power ... if they don't, and a major power struggle occurs, we are all doomed regardless of who prevails ... that's point one ... and if a power struggle does occur and the outcome is not honored by ALL Democrats, i hope that those currently in power lose the battle ... but if this is what occurs, our victory will be a somewhat hollow victory because we will not ultimately succeed against the republicans ...

and second, here's what I think Dean's mission must be ... job one has to be to negotiate a framework for shared power ... that's my main objective in calling for a summit ... this task will not be about defining a platform or arguing about Dean's views on how legislators should and shouldn't vote on the issues of the day ... my strong preference is to get the grassroots MUCH MORE INVOLVED in defining who we are as a Party ... during this phase, it's fine for Dean to speak out as much as he wants to but his primary role should be to summarize the key views of those Democrats (right down to the grassroots) who participated in the summit and then to try to craft these views into a political strategy ... now, if elected Democrats refuse to go along with the values, policies and tactics defined by the grassroots and ALL other Democrats, then, and not until then, we are at a crossroads ... Dean's job at that point, should be to protect the validity of the "summit process" ... he should not allow party insiders to reject the process ... if a reasonable compromise cannot be worked out at this point, we're all in trouble ...

Out with the traitors who pander more to the personhoods of corporations than to the living, breathing people.

With plenty of grassroots participation....EVERY DAMNED YEAR. Just so folks know we are fighting still.

These jerky editorialists are all writing the same tired garbage. I hope DU Globe readers write some scathing letters to the editor to refute that garbage.

For one thing, the Dems do have a legislative agenda -- you can cite Harry Reid's 10-point legislative plan (Bush stole two of his budget increase proposals from it -- the ones for increasing Pell Grants and the one for increasing the death benefits paid to soldier's families).
http://democrats.senate.gov/cosponsor-form.html

Also, see the great "birth tax" chart on the Senate Dem's website:
http://democrats.senate.gov/index3.html

There's a damn good reason Pelosi says Bush's budget and SS proposal is immoral!!!! See also this WP summary:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6230-2005Feb7.html

Even the wall Street guys say the way Bush is cooking the numbers smells to high heaven!

one, thanks for clarifying that my post wasn't "manure" ...

and two, i don't think Vennochi (a well respected Massachusetts Democrat, btw) was suggesting that Democrats don't have a legislative agenda ... I think her focus was much more on how Democrats communicate with the American people ...

do you really believe there are more than 5 people in the whole country who could tell you anything about Reid's "10-point legislative plan" ??? it might be a great plan ... it isn't helping the Democrats politically ... bush steals ideas and bush gets the credit ...

on the other hand, i think the public has heard the Democrats' message on Social Security ... and I think the public agrees with us that bush's plan will be a disaster ... but I don't think the Democrats will get much political mileage from this and that's because the public doesn't understand the Democrats' counter-proposal ... we do have one you know ... well, actually, typically, we probably have a dozen or more ... it's time to negotiate "THE" Democratic solution to Social Security and fight for it ... opposing bush is fine but it's not enough ...

1) Darn good thing that I clarified the manure reference.

2) I still don't like the thrust of the writer's criticism of Pelosi (even though the writer's a respected MA Democrat). I like Pelosi's strong, harsh criticisms and her and Harry Reid's recent attempts to "draw a line in the sand". Unfortunately, I think it's the only way to get attention these days since the media is a vast wasteland. In fact, I actually wish we'd go even MORE negative!! I actually like the Democratic strategy of NOT saying what our SS proposal is -- the Bush propaganda machine would just jump all over it and twist it (especially since it will undoubtedly involve raising taxes). Since the media are morons, all they're doing is focusing on opposition to Bush's proposal and I say, "Great, let them go to town."

3) Now that I've calmed down a bit, yes, the idea of gathering Democrats together to discuss our beliefs is a very good one. We do have many Dems running around saying vastly different things, don't we? I tried to get a "message discussion" going yesterday on DU but it dropped like a rock. The centrist/progressive divide is a bit of a false dichotomy in my mind, and I really feel that most Democrats could sit down and work something out if we really tried (at least us grassroots types). This was my post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1575220

WT2 read your own signature and there's your answer!

Why are you asking for us as a party to give ground???

first, here's what I said in an earlier post ... i've put the key words in bold to highlight a point:

if we can build unity at a summit, so be it ... there are no guarantees ... but i think we all need to sit down as a Party and make sure that everyone is heard ... if Reid and Pelosi are out of touch, let them hear that message ... and let those who think they are out of touch hear them defend themselves ... then we vote on what will be our Party's message ...

if you thought I was calling for some kind of wishy-washy compromise of "core values and beliefs", I wasn't ... without getting into my personal views, I'll tell you that I'm not at all sure whether I will, or won't, remain in the Party ...

you can see from the above quote that I have no idea whether a summit will actually lead to party unity ... what i do think is that it will be very difficult for Democrats to win, whether you're a far left Democrat, a Dean "reform" Democrat, or a centrist, if our national candidates are not "on message" ... the Party may need to be ripped into pieces but we won't know that until we make a real effort to communicate party-wide ...

I AM NOT CALLING FOR COMPROMISE !!! not by a long shot ... what I see happening right now is that almost everyone sees the need for some kind of change ... Reid and Pelosi have, at least to some degree, taken a more adversarial stand to the republicans than we got with Daschle and Gephardt ... but then they turn around and push a guy like Roemer ... Kennedy is left out in the wilderness like an old gray wolf with his calls for withdrawal from Iraq ... I happen to agree with his position ... but what does it say about the Democratic message when no one backs him up? nobody really knows ...

with Dean's nomination, the message to the Party insiders seems to be "it's time to make some serious changes" ... but i don't see Dean's becoming Chair, and i guess i'm sorry about this, as a move to the left ... I see it as a move for "process reform" ... most of the "lefties" in the Party supported Kucinich ... many of them, myself included, supported Dean for the Chairman post because the Party critically needs to be opened up to the grassroots ... our internal processes need to change ... power has to be decentralized ... and the DC consulting team has to go ... Dean's the guy to accomplish these things ... policy battles, however, may not take their direction from Dean ... if you see Dean as moving the Party to the left, we don't agree ... I think that battle is yet to be fought ... Dean is a reformer, not a lefty ...

so, we, as Democrats, have forced reform on our Party's internal processes ... that's a great start ... as part of my call for a summit, perhaps we could have numerous town meetings in every state in the country ... perhaps this could be done in a way that no one would have to drive more than an hour to get to one ... perhaps they could even be televised within each state or maybe even on C-Span ...

the goal of these town meetings would be to expose the public to the thinking of insiders (e.g. why didn't Reid push for a filibuster against Gonzales?) and to expose the insiders to the thinking of the grassroots ... when people don't think they are being heard, they are not as invested in the process ...

let me offer this example ... i hated that the Democrats didn't filibuster Gonzales ... the guy approved torture of human beings ... Rumsfeld allegedly cancelled a trip to Germany because he was afraid of being arrested for war crimes due to the torture in Iraq!! so, that's my position ... now suppose Reid came to a town meeting near me and said that he wanted to "force all Democrats to filibuster" but was talked out of it ... suppose he said that he agreed not to filibuster because he became convinced that, when Democrats eventually filibuster Supreme Court nominees, which he saw as more important, that he felt the Democrats' position would be weaker if they had already used the filibuster ... suppose he said he was "keeping his powder dry" and that the Democrats could be hurt politically if the filibuster was overused ... i might not agree ... we might debate the issue ... but at least i'd understand why he made the choices he made and at least he would understand that this was unacceptable to me ... the idea of a summit is to clarify positions, to learn from each other, and to COMPROMISE only if it's possible and reasonable to do so ...

btw, to answer a question you posed earlier, and i'll give you a very straight-forward answer, "NO", if the Party moves to the right, i will not compromise ... going along with more of bush's eternal war, selling out on important social liberation issues like a woman's right to choose and gay rights, and "finding a middle ground" on Social Security would be unacceptable to me ... things like that would ultimately drive me out of the Party ... but let's have some dialog first ... we disagree over policy ... we disagree over tactics ... but perhaps we share a set of core beliefs that can become the centerpiece of the Party and its candidates ... the rest we'll have to negotiate to see what happens ...

It is so ironic... We are the party of social empowering, the party who is tolerant of all, the party of a clean environment, education, health care, solid fiscal policies, and civil rights. Yet we fail?

The 'conservatives' want to and are doing *everything* to ruin our country. I truly do not understand... How can the Repuk party win behind a fake oath to God and morals, yet they are the ones who are intolerant of others, start wars and kill people, ruin our environment, loot our treasury, could care less about the people, and and and...et.al

They can easily live in our world - I cannot live in their world.

We are NOT tolerant of the intolerant.

We can't be or else we fight against the definition of tolerance.

That would be similar to saying we are tolerant of killers - we are not...

To address how to free America from BushPutinist Tyranny. To address what we have learned about the weakpoints of the Old, nonfunctional (except as window dressing for BushPutinist Tyranny) Constitution.

As it was that everything Hitler did was "legal" to enslave Germany, so is everything the Busheviks has done to enslave Amerika has also been legal.

It is impossible to save from Tyranny a societ that openly and willingly embraces it, but future historians will study BushPutinism as we study Nazi-ism to answer the question fo how you stop a Tyrannical Totalitarian cabal when they decide to "legally" dismantle a nation from within.

We didn't answer the Nazi Question, so the BushPutinists have merely modified the Nazi Plan and it worked like a friggin' charm AGAIN!

Yep. A Third Continental Congress. Of course, if we tried to do that, the BushPutinists would declare us "enemy combatants" and ship us to their Torture Archipelago.

The problem is that some are STILL working off of their...fear.

They have to let it go. They HAVE to, for all of our sakes. If they can't, they have to just leave, or shut up entirely. They are NOT HELPING.

A series of 5 summits around the state - Democratic Town Meetings.

They'e planned to listen to the grassroots activists and to give them a chance to question the party leadership - including the Governor and Members of Congress.

i'm afraid to say that the rest of us are a bit slower on the uptake ...

Town meetings are exactly what i'm hoping for ... and perhaps, the best ideas coming out of those meetings could then be brought up again in regional town meetings and then in a national meeting ... these meetings should be televised whenever possible ...

this process should occur with some regularity ... i'd like to see at least one meeting in each state occur every 3 months ... some will say this is overkill ... i disagree ... we complain and complain that we have a "participatory democracy" and that no one cares and no one participates ... well, let's go with the idea that if you build it, they will come ... let's provide a forum for Democrats to get involved ...

Lock us all in a room and whoever lives to tell the tale gets to set the agenda. :evilgrin:

I'm all for deciding who the hell we are, but first you've got to deal with those in the hierarchy who are dictating that identity.

that's certainly true ... if the big boys don't want to have discussions with all Democrats, then the rifts remain until one side prevails ... and in the meantime, while we fight each other, the republicans play their fiddles and dance on our graves ...

there was a post earlier, though, showing a significant loss of support for the Party among Democrats ... perhaps that will losing the grip of those at the helm ... and if not, perhaps Dean will call for these summits I'm advocating ...

your skepticism has a long basis in history ... but these are the most extreme times ... no one is unable to see the horrors bush is bringing ... even the previously dazed Democrats have awakened ... we may not all agree on what is to be done, but let's hope that everyone is open to all suggestions ... if we're afraid to even talk to each other, what fool could hold out any hope for progress ??

"Politics" and "politicians" have a duty to SERVE "the people".

They have a duty to PROTECT "the people" from ALL PREDATORS such that a free and democratic and happy society can evolve.

My party for "the people" is being crushed by a self-serving governance.

As a result, a free and democratic and happy society is DYING.

When, WHEN we,...WHEN WE ALL focus on the basics which bind us,...THEN, THEN WE WILL ALL get back to progession.

perhaps led by Dean and/or Reid, or DNC staff. It would help a lot if a few senators and reps could be there also to LISTEN.

i'd go a step further and REQUIRE all Senators and Reps attend all of the town meetings within each state ... so, let's say the average state would hold 5 town meetings in different parts of the state ... these meetings should be held over several weekends, perhaps on Saturdays and Sundays, and all elected Democrats from that state or district (including local pols) should attend ...

i want to see real voters talking and debating directly with our elected officials and with DNC, DFC, PDA, unions, special issue groups ... i'm not sure exactly what the best format would be but discussion of party policies, values, tactics etc. by a broad spectrum of Democrats is the goal ...

and this shouldn't be just a one time thing either ... this needs to be an ongoing process ... if we want people to work for the party and fund the party, they have to be given a real opportunity to be heard and also to understand why their elected officials made the decisions they made ... perhaps the "big summit" should occur once a year but smaller gatherings should be available to all Democrats once every three months ...

The oil barons that run this country have figured out how to keep power and make the Dems and the people completely impotent.These realities are being completely missed here.This makes future campaigns moot unless this is all dealt with. Consider:

1) Kerry won. Electronic voting machines and voter suppression stole the election...again. Dems won the last four presidential elections.

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0225-05.htm
(Diebold, Electronic Voting, And the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy)

http://globalresearch.ca/articles/KEE501A.html
(The Strange Death of American Democracy)
Someone here at DU actually found the evidence of hacking in the Cuyahoga County vote totals. It's there for all the world to see but to no avail.

2) Basic psychology has been used as a weapon against the masses for almost 100 years to hide the truth from us from the day we are born.

http://www.thedoctorwithin.com/index_fr.html?content=articles/doors_of_perception.html
(Why Americans Will Believe Almost Anything)

http://www.rationalrevolution.net/articles/rise_of_american_fascism.htm
(The Rise of American Fascism)

http://www.mackwhite.com/tv.html
(The TV Hive Mind)

http://www.tscm.com/CIA_PsyOps_Handbook.html
(1979 Army Manual 33-1 Psychological Operations in Guerrilla Warfare)
This weapon has actually been used on the American people as though they were the enemy of the White House. They are.

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0712-01.htm
(Trading on Fear)
Wars and cars have been sold to us with this basic tool.

3) Public schooling was designed by robber barons in the early 1900s with the intention of turning out obedient worker drones and cannon fodder who are afraid of each other and welcome a police-state.
It works.

http://4brevard.com/choice/Public_Education.htm
(The Shocking Origins of Public Schools by John Gatto)

http://www.sntp.net/education/education.htm
(How Psychiatry & Modern Psychology Subvert
Education, and Harm Children and Society)


4) The mainstream media has been completely controlled to create a fascist mentality that blindly follows the fuhrer for over 60 years now. That's three generations of brainwashing to get to this point where they STILL have to steal the election.

Operation Mockingbird has had the CIA massaging and working in the ENTIRE MSM for over 50 years now! This is an old old story which is being minimized into the 'Few Bad Apples' technique of damage control due to the internet.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/MOCK/mockingbird.html
(Operation Mockingbird: The Subversion of the Free Press by the CIA)

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-overclass.html
(The Origins of the Overclass)

>snip<

MOCKINGBIRD was extraordinarily successful. In no time, the agency had recruited at least 25 media organizations to disseminate CIA propaganda. At least 400 journalists would eventually join the CIA payroll, according to the CIA’s testimony before a stunned Church Committee in 1975. (The committee felt the true number was considerably higher.) The names of those recruited reads like a Who's Who of journalism:

* Philip and Katharine Graham (Publishers, Washington Post)
* William Paley (President, CBS)
* Henry Luce (Publisher, Time and Life magazine)
* Arthur Hays Sulzberger (Publisher, N.Y. Times)
* Jerry O'Leary (Washington Star)
* Hal Hendrix (Pulitzer Prize winner, Miami News)
* Barry Bingham Sr., (Louisville Courier-Journal)
* James Copley (Copley News Services)
* Joseph Harrison (Editor, Christian Science Monitor)
* C.D. Jackson (Fortune)
* Walter Pincus (Reporter, Washington Post)
* ABC
* NBC
* Associated Press
* United Press International
* Reuters
* Hearst Newspapers
* Scripps-Howard
* Newsweek
* magazine Mutual Broadcasting System
* Miami Herald
* Old Saturday Evening Post
* New York Herald-Tribune

>snip<

That's why there was a blackout on election fraud again. TOTAL CONTROL.

Has anyone talked about Operation Vigilant Warrior? The NORAD exercises 'simulating' multiple hijacked planes crashed into buildings the morning of 9/11? No. TOTAL CONTROL.

http://www.oilempire.us/wargames.html
(9/11 Wargames Before and During the Attacks)

The NYT just edited the transcript of Rice's damning tsunami remarks at her confirmation hearing out of the online transcript. Why? Someone at the NYT is helping out the neocons. TOTAL CONTROL.

Just before the Em-poor-er's Inaugu-urination recruiting speech TIME magazine ran a cover story about young men who still live at home with the shaming headline 'Why Won't They Grow Up?' This was intended to push them into the military. TOTAL CONTROL.

Does anyone think this is a coincidence? These MSM organs are STILL all part of the Mighty Wurlitzer of organized propaganda that shape the attitudes of Americans so they will drive around and buy crap or pick up a gun and kill on command.

Americans have no idea what is going on and most of what they think they know is wrong.

This gives them the innocence of ignorance. Sad but true.

And it's time for a housecleaning. You can't "come together" with people who have values that are diametrically opposed to each other. In very generalized language, either the new "democrats" are going to win or the democrats of traditional liberalism are going to win. You cannot have a party of "both" and have any kind of cohesion, unity or voice.

Don't we have Summits already? Isn't that what the State Conventions are supposed to be?

a big fat blue line.

Here's the majority consensus on each major issue & you're either with us or you're not. No nuancing, no armies of aides armed with encyclopedias, just clear cut positions.

"there can be no unity without first negotiating on a unifying platform"

Bingo.

The revolution. Don't miss it.