an effective use of computing technology to provide a central clearinghouse for general political information (with a Democratic/liberal slant, of course). And yes, it would have to be open to the public, and free.
It could take the form of a searchable cross-linked database: just type in "Texas Republican Platform" (as in: What is the Texas Republican platform, and how has it changed US politics?), and the database would return not only the full text of the platform, but cogent and powerful critiques of the most damaging and regressive aspects of the platform, together with hyperlinks to entries on some of the authors of the platform, as well as to similar politically regressive documents and programs (Project for a New American Century, anyone?), also complete with explanations of their effects and heavy on critiques of their failings.
Why do we need it? It's about education, stupid. Bush has been able to spin his way out of idiocy after idiocy because 1) the national media hasn't confronted him on his distortions 2) the political opposition hasn't been as vocal as it should be 3) the American public has, as a whole, been remarkably uninformed.
By providing a central clearinghouse for basic political information (think of it as a political encyclopedia, providing basic political background info for the interested neophyte), the DNC or American Majority Institute--or whoever--could provide a quick and relatively inexpensive antidote to Republican spinning.
The advantage such a database would have over blogs is that it would not be time delimited--it would always be there. Blogs provide a very important function--several of them, in fact--but their primary advantage, speed of response, is also a stunning shortcoming. All the political argumentation of months past is quickly, if not fully, lost in time.
Not even google makes it easy to find information in blog archives as quickly or as accurately as I--at times--have wished.
Another advantage would be authority. By presenting full text documents side by side with informative and authoritative argument or counter-argument, it would be simple to create the (I hope accurate) impression of political wisdom for the ages.
Some things to watch out for would be:
Democratic infighting. Best to keep that out of such a database, no?
Meretricious arguments. We don't need them, and they won't help.
Stick to the big guns: why the gold standard is and should remain history; why the compassionate conservativism of George W. Bush is not just oxymoronic but profoundly hypocritical; what Bush really said on dates X, Y, Z, and Z-squared... etc.
Go visit Encyclopedia Britannica, poke around through their free demo options, and think about what it would be like if there were a free liberal political encyclopedia for the world to view.
What better way to counter the misperceptions about liberal ideas?
And before you tell me that the average person probably wouldn't bother reading it, think about:
a) how many people have subscribed to a pay service like salon.com, or britannica, etc...
b) the geometric, branched nature of information dissemination in human conversation, be that verbal, pedagogical, editorial, or blogged.
Just give it a thought.
love and peaches,
writerCarl
