How to get back our country

[johntao]

When we look at the map of America, we see a lot of "red". Question is: Why do those in the "red" states think the way they do? Howard Dean tapped into something when he pointed out "God, guns and gays". The strategy this year was to distract from those issues with other issues such as the economy and jobs. Only problem is that you can distract someone only so much before they are reminded about God, Guns and Gays again. So what do we do? I think we meet them head on with God, Guns and Gays in a kind of dialog that will make them think twice about their position. It seems like I'm stating the obvious but this may be the only way to reach those rural voters. I say this because I truly feel they haven't thought completely through their positions.

I have more to write but I'd like to hear what others hear have to say about this first.

[Still_Notafraid]

1. The

Problem with the gun,god,gays issue is that Republicans see it as black and white issues all the way or nothing at all

where as we see the correct grey area each category falls in,problem with the grey area is you cant explain it in 5 seconds or if you put it on a flyer its more then a one sentence explanation.

people that see in black and white have 5 second attention spans.

[Jack_DeLeon]

2. Dean should have been the candidate.

maybe in 2008.

[johntao]

3. Dean would have lost

because he had NO Foreign intelligence credentials. Kerry had many and probably would have destroyed Bush in this election if it wasn't for the Swift Boat Jerk-Offs.

Bush got so many votes this time around for one reason - 9/11. The post 9/11 rally around the president was burned into the minds of so many voters, it didn't matter how badly the rest of his policies were carried out. In the end, fear won.

[Jack_DeLeon]

5. I disagree...

Bush had no credentials, Hell he still doesnt.

Kerry's credentials didnt help him much.

[Beearewhyain]

4. Bravo!

You have touched on the issues that sway voter: emotion. I would say that those issues could be effectively dismantled for 06.
First..."I believe that Jesus taught us to care about our neighbors, to make sure that my brother has the opportunities that God intended him to have"
Second, and this will freak a few here..."I believe that our founding fathers intended that individuals should have arms so as to make sure that the gov't couldn't go beyond its intended function" Note: This leaves regulation of said arms undefined.
Third..."I am against the gov't involving itself in what people do, I will not, ever, propose that the gov't should take any role in telling you what to do" Note: Sure it says nothing but it recasts the issue.

Bottom line is if we don't overcome these issues we will constantly loose.

[HereSince1628]

6. #1 is good, #2 is antiestablishment, #3 is not well defined

I like your position on #1. As a progressive interested in expanding the reality of Liberty, Justice and Equality for Americans I could adopt that statement to demonstrate its consistency with the position of the religious right.

Your position #2 is a not very veiled threat to the establishment. You seem to be suggesting that those who govern should always be aware that armed rebellion is a real possibility. I don't think most of the things progressives hope for can be achieved through blackmail.
While I accept that there are times in the course of human events when revolution is necessary, I hope a party built on political and a militant wings is not part of our immediate future.

Your position #3 needs further thought. Society and government MUST tell people the limits of lawful behavior. Darwinist approaches to stop signs, speed limits, pharmaceutical sales/use etc are going to hurt innocent people.

I am with you on the concept of not interfering with how people live lives that are private. I think Dean's argument for equal protection for all (including GLBT members of society) is better.

What you have said seems overly broad and actually encompasses what the Republicans say about retirement savings and the enabling of behaviors that are currently prohibited and that protect the population from racism, religious bigotry, sexism and ageism.

[i_c_a_White_Ghost]

7. What Country? This country is finished

[HamdenRice]

8. The gay issue -- question for our LGBT brothers and sisters

I think you are right and Dr. Dean is right that the Democrats need some nationally viable position on god, guns and gays.

This is a question for gay folks. By coincidence, I had just read the major gay rights and gay marriage opinions -- Lawrence v. Texas in the Scotus and Goodridge in Mass and the Advisory opinion in Mass.

Basically what they say is this: Lawrence says that no state can make gay sex illegal. I think that there is a broad consensus, even with the evangicals on this.

Goodridge, the first Mass case says that it is unconstitutional for the state of Mass to deny gays the benefits of marriage. So the Mass govt passed a constitutional amendment creating civil marriage for a man and woman and civil unions for same sex unions,with all the same substantive rights and privileges. Oddly enough, even on this issue, most conservatives are in favor of civil unions.

The const amendment was submitted to the Mass S ct and the majority ruled that using different words -- civil marriage vs. civil union --was unconstitutional. That mass had to call both unions marriage.

This is what the evangicals and cultural conservatives hate -- that they can't have a word all their own for their unions. Even the dissent in Mass said basically, this is silly, we are fighting over a word, not substance.

My question is, can the Dems simply say we are in favor of civil unions and letting the cultural conservative straight families keep the word marriage?

We are really getting killed on this issue. Please respond.

[Bluebear]

9. Fine with me, marriage is 'sacred', unions are 'secular'

As long as the CU imparts the same benefit I don't care what it is called. However, I submit that it was far far more than gays. The reds don't want stem cell research, abortions, think that Iraq is a holy war....in other words, we are two nations. I don't know how the chasm of philosophy can be reached via compromise.

[HamdenRice]

10. Let's just pick our fights carefully

I agree with you but it's time to begin the post mortem. And I don't mean crying, but a real analysis point by point, issue by issue. Just heard on the news that every single ballot initiative on gay marriage (ie to prevent it) passed. It was a big repug vote getter. If we can put it behind us, on the culture front there's just god and guns. As for god, they are all fucking hypocrites -- Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II and Kerry -- going to church to please the blockheads of the south. So that's easy to fake. Guns -- keep your fucking long guns down south out west and let your high school geeks massacre your kids from time to time, but just let us keep handguns out of the cities and sue the shit out of gun manufacturers for every urban murder.

Sorry, did I subtly shift from analysis to venting?

[OutsourceBush]

13. We as Dems are F'ing idiots

Just like the Repukes are willing to fuck themselves for these stupid ass issues, so are we. look what we have done to ourselves and to the world. We fucked up and we continue to fuck up.

What would it hurt for Dems to just say...

1. We don't give a sh*t about gay marriage, give them civil unions period.
2. We don't give a sh*t about guns, buy em all up, go for it idiots.


You can take each issue, we gotta get in the middle with reasonable rhetoric or we will spend 1,000 years in this 'Christian' BS theocracy.

[TransitJohn]

11. The GOP

has successfully corralled this issue into their camp. They have locked up the evangelical vote. Let's face it, most Christians in this country are the worst kind: in denial of evolution, in denial of the age of the Earth, hell all of science, disobeying the teachings of Christ, and it goes on and on. What we need is to get liberal intellects and consciences into seminaries to try to retake the Christian church, to make it into a kind and compassionate institution again. And that'll take a centure, which we don't have.

[UNIXcock]

12. Sadly, my brother is a democrat. but I could not convince

... him that John Kerry was pro=gun. He is so damned rigid on the gun issue that he voted * yesterday :mad:

[Romulus]

15. read some JPS posts

(I think I saw you in JPS once)

We shot down 99% of the NRA talking points about Kerry, and had good info that you could have used with your bro.

I guess it's a moot point, now. :shrug:

[johntao]

16. It's moot

because in politics, perception IS reality.

Perception: Bush will save you from terrorists.
Reality: Bush makes more terrorists.

Perception: Bush is a good Christian man.
Reality: He attacked an unarmed country (thousands dead). This is not something Christ would do.


What we need to do is change the current perception. We have an advantage because we have logic and intellect on our side. We just need prominent politicians to call these people on their hypocrisy. And if it means challenging their religious faith, so be it. If they are willing to include their religion in politics, than we have a right to use it against them.

[Tsiyu]

14. kick

[deadparrot]

17. We have to hit rock bottom first.

I know, it seems like we're close, but with a second term, I think this administration will put some drastic plans into action (re: draft), and America won't be pleased.

It's a very selfish anger ("I don't want to go to war!") but it's anger nonetheless.

Political parties can only build up to a point, then they break apart. I think, with a healthy majority in the Senate and House, more moderate/liberal Republicans will be less likely to support this administration in its right wing push.