Just hoping for a bit of discussion here. Of course, a lot has been said about the importance of 'message' - especially the quality of slogans and naming. Invariably, the left has been described as being underachievers. Even the term "welfare state" shows up in an article in Nation magazine (2.6.12 -p9) as if it's a given fact of life. Boy did my teeth hurt when I read that---and I don't have a lot of teeth left.
So...here's my personal duo of terms that might be helpful (or not) to the cause:
1. We call a lot of DINO's "Blue Dogs". How about a term for the Democrat who is willing to work on campaigns, serve conscientiously? That person, if elected, would be know to work (usually, without pay) or serve in whatever office (high or low) in the SPIRIT of serving the people, as opposed to the corporations/moneyed interest groups and anyone else whose actual goal is fascism as opposed to representative democracy, even if they're other Democrats(as in DINO).
....I call these people "DEEP DOGS"
2. So much has been shown about the power of corporate lobbyist. Hell, they own congress, right? The only way, for instance, labor has been able to stay in the game has been to join the zoo and lobby, too. This is true especially for federal (& often state) employee unions. Nationally, the restrictions of the Hatch Act restrict fed employees from a lot of the normal rights to campaign for political candidates. In the spirit of fairness, shouldn't there be an equivalent (general) law that addresses obvious equivalences in the corporate world? Since they usually(?) depend on state charters, perhaps remedies to violations would apply to their rights to do business...
....I would call this "HATCH ACT FOR CORPORATIONS"
Anyway, a lot of people say that a name(or phrase/slogan) is everything in politics (see "Santorum"). We need more of these on our side, I believe.
