War on foolishness.

[gulliver]

We talk about how the Repubs need an enemy (commies, terrorists, etc.). Well, Dems need one too. We fought against poverty, against discrimination, against literal war. We fought for freedom of speech and civil liberties. The problem is that we "won."

Now comes the backlash. Repubs are fighting to increase poverty, restore discrimination, rehabilitate war. They are fighting against freedom of speech and civil liberties. And they are making headway. On every front, legal means of discrimination are being found or created. Rationales for war don't have the burden of proof. Social Security, the greatest bane to poverty ever created, is being toyed with by a man-child.

The Dems need another enemy. I propose "Foolishness." The Dems should declare war on foolishness.

[CindyDale]

1. Good one

[tabasco]

2. Dems definitely need to change the mindset.

The repugs are destroying everything that made this country great. The Dems need to fight them like it is a war and stop trying to get along. I consider what the repugs are doing a war on America.

I would rather see a fight for something. Maybe a "War for the Working Man & Woman."

[cruadin]

3. I agree with your thesis, Dems need a clear, identifiable...

opponent or issue against which to focus our energy and resources.
"Foolishness" is just too vague a concept to bring about a confluence of effort.

I think we should go after the Soc. Sec. issue. It was the Dems who initiated the social programs that are now recognized as an integral part of our lives, it is our natural legacy. Allowing shrub & co. to hijack the issue will be a disaster for years and years to come.

[mrdmk]

4. Thank you for your thoughts

I will use this one!

On edit: This is a response to post #3!

The Republicans would love to have the left wing hung on one issue. There are many issues that need to be addressed here. These issues need to be addressed and re-addressed to the point of being blue in the face. The "War on Foolishness" ,is a big tent calling, not a particular point.

The Republicans are using at this time two major controlling factors in this society and they are Big Business and Religion. These controlling factors have no roots what-so-ever in a "Free-Democratic Society", the controlling factors are preforming exactly as they are suppose to.

This thread is a general thought!

[LWolf]

5. War on dishonesty.

War on greed.
War on arrogance.
War on corporate power.
War on propaganda.
War on nationalism/fascism.
War on one-size-fits-all "my way is the only right way" systems and policies in every arena.
War on fear.
War on the very idea that we "win" anything by going to war; war on our war mentality.

How about, instead of going to "war," thereby legitimizing war and the strategy of finding enemies hiding behind everything in sight, we turn it on them? How about if, instead of going to war, we stand up. We take a stand.

How about if we take:

a stand for peace
a stand for social and economic justice
a stand for honesty
a stand for integrity
a stand for democratic principles
a stand for sustainable environmental practices
a stand for respect
a stand for personal and social responsibility
a stand for partnership
a stand for privacy
a stand for choice

[neebob]

8. Yeah, what she said. nt

[thinkingwoman]

6. ok but

let's not sugarcoat it. Call it the war on stupidity.

[neebob]

7. Dems need to take a moral position

What's right vs. what's wrong. This foolishness is not only foolish; it's immoral.

Black and white, right-vs.-wrong is the only kind of talk they understand. And they can't stand having their morals called into question.

The only success I've ever had with my mother - the only time I felt she was actually listening and I might have made some inroads - is the time I took a moral position. I began by telling her that being a liberal is a moral position and a consistent one. Then I laid that out for her, point for point. And she listened for a change.

It was quite a sweeping discussion, covering everything from war to abortion, which is her big thing.

It was the only time I didn't get the "La-la-la ... I'm not listening ... everything you say is bouncing off my handy-dandy shield of denial" kind of response.

In the end, she said I was trying to shake her faith - which was weak, because I was only laying out my position - but I think I actually did shake her faith. And I don't just mean her religious faith, but her faith in George Wonderful Goodpersonbush.

That was also the last time we discussed politics and religion, because she's usually the one who brings up something that starts the discussion, and I don't think she wants to go there again. BECAUSE SHE DOESN'T WANT TO ADMIT THAT THE THINGS SHE'S SUPPORTING ARE IMMORAL. She even said as much. And it'll be okay with me if we never discuss it again, as long as she considered the possibility.

Of course this is just me and my mom, but taking a moral position worked. And I'm not going to support another candidate who won't take a clear, strong moral position, who won't say, "This is wrong and this is right," who won't shoot at all these bogus notions that wingnuts hold so dear.

Trying to appease them and find common ground just validates them.

[BeFree]

9. How soon we forget?

They stole the election three times now, and they will do it forever the way things are going.

We wouldn't be talking about any of this if they hadn't stolen Florida from Gore in 2000, but I see no mention of it in any of the posts above....

How soon we forget. I propose we declare war on dems forgetting!

[mrdmk]

10. BeFree, you must have forgotten!

We are not suppose to beat on that dead horse otherwise the Right Wing will call us names starting with, "Liberal Crybabies", and all time favorite, "Sore Losers". Just a reminder in case you have forgotten.

[Gabi Hayes]

11. thanks for bringing this up...somebody linked Bill Moyers on this

One of the biggest changes in politics in my lifetime is that the delusional is no longer marginal. It has come in from the fringe, to sit in the seat of power in the Oval Office and in Congress. For the first time in our history, ideology and theology hold a monopoly of power in Washington.
Theology asserts propositions that cannot be proven true; ideologues hold stoutly to a worldview despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality. When ideology and theology couple, their offspring are not always bad but they are always blind. And there is the danger: voters and politicians alike, oblivious to the facts.

Remember James Watt, President Ronald Reagan's first secretary of the interior? My favorite online environmental journal, the ever-engaging Grist, reminded us recently of how James Watt told the U.S. Congress that protecting natural resources was unimportant in light of the imminent return of Jesus Christ. In public testimony he said, "after the last tree is felled, Christ will come back."

Beltway elites snickered. The press corps didn't know what he was talking about. But James Watt was serious. So were his compatriots out across the country. They are the people who believe the Bible is literally true -- one-third of the American electorate, if a recent Gallup poll is accurate. In this past election several million good and decent citizens went to the polls believing in the rapture index.

That's right -- the rapture index. Google it and you will find that the best-selling books in America today are the 12 volumes of the "Left Behind" series written by the Christian fundamentalist and religious-right warrior Timothy LaHaye. These true believers subscribe to a fantastical theology concocted in the 19th century by a couple of immigrant preachers who took disparate passages from the Bible and wove them into a narrative that has captivated the imagination of millions of Americans.


http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/02/309882.shtml

link to his essay