"Unfortunately, much of what the president offered weren't real answers. You know, today is Groundhog Day. And what we saw and heard tonight was a little like that movie "Groundhog Day." The same-old ideology that we've heard before - over and over again. We can do better."
-Harry Reid, February 2, 2005 in response to the 2005 SOTU
Senator, one year ago today, you gave this creative response to Bush's set of legislative Ponzi-schemes. I and many other Democrats and progressives got a good laugh out of it. You also did a bit of "framing" in your use of the term "birth tax" -a blogosphere creation- to describe the budget deficit and its potentially insurmountable burden on young Americans. From time to time, I have read some of your remarks in interviews with members of the pundit class. From what I can tell, you seem to "get it" - that is, you understand OUR frustration with the political landscape and strategy. For example, during the Social Security "bamboozle-palooza" you called out Frank Luntz and his ilk for disseminating the term "personal accounts" as a way to ameliorate the public's rightful concern over the planned phasing out of the cornerstone of the New Deal. You've been compared to Harry Truman in rhetoric; even in physical resemblance by some of your supporters among the blogosphere.
While I appreciate the work that you have done for us, I have my frustrations about how we as a party are going to combat the Republicans this year. You see, as you said a year ago, the movie Groundhog Day and the February 2nd SOTU both signal a "more of the same" approach on behalf of the administration. What I see on February 2, 2006 is not "Groundhog Day," but "Groundhog Year." That is, I feel that 2006 will be more of the same in the world of politics and another repeat of the debacles of 2002 and 2004. More of Karl Rove's scare tactics and breathless evocations of 9/11, more of aversion and beating around the bush (pun intended) on behalf of Congressional Democrats on the issue of Iraq in favor of solely focusing on domestic issues, and more of the same when it comes to poorly framing the other party. Year after year, I have seen a party that has the pieces, but not an assembled puzzle. For the past five years, I have seen milquetoast surrogates babble on cable TV shows bleating out "deficit!" or "tax cuts benefit the wealthy!" or, particularly after 9/11 "we agree with the President on the issue, but we just want to do it in a different way." Supposed "Democrats" who disagree with us half the time, or can't rebut Republican talking points populate the proverbial echo chamber. With the exception of you and Chairman Dean, the response from our TV talking heads towards the question of the Abramoff scandal being "bipartisan" has been pitiful and lacking. Now how on earth are going to win over voters like this! I know that you've heard this from many of your constituents and many other progressives, but for some reason, even though that you "get it," it's been hard for you to combat the Republican onslaught. I can understand why Senators such as Ben Nelson and Kent Conrad voted for Alito considering that right-wing hack groups such as "Progress for America" or "The Judicial Confirmation Network" bombard their home states with ads claiming that anyone who only agrees with the President 90% of the time judicially is a Godless commie heathen. However, when they say "boo!" it is no excuse to cut your caucus loose and let them vote "strategically" in favor of "keeping the powder dry." When Wolf Blitzer and Chris Matthews try to paint us with the "obstructionist" narrative because we want to ask fair and just questions, it is no reason to be afraid to stand up and do what's right. We HAD more than 41 votes against Alito, yet several of our Senators publicly denounced the idea of the filibuster and used the GOP's narrative against us (I'm not calling any of our Senators pseudo-Republicans, but on the issue of framing, some of them adopt political frames that originated from the bowls of the Republican noise machine!) Senator Obama of all people did this in his interview with Tim Russert! So have Senators Cantwell and Salazar and others. And yet a majority of Americans in polls related to the issue of the filibuster support keeping it and using it,
( http://media.washingtonpost.com/... )
and a majority of Americans wanted to stop Alito's nomination if he were to overturn Roe v. Wade (all evidence in his actions and testimony show that he wants to.)
(http://www.cnn.com/... )
We can't even act on behalf of our silent majority, because the vocal conservative minority has browbeaten members of our caucus into supporting someone as conservative as Alito.
The Alito debacle gives me worry of things to come, even if Election Day is still nine months away. I am afraid that our Senators and Congressmen will give Bush what he wants yet again because some moneyed conservative groups is trying to scare their constituents. I am worried that we won't be able to have a CLEAR message for our party and to define the Republicans ("there is a better way" just won't cut it. A more forceful message with brute strength is needed.) I am also afraid of keeping the party unified. I am afraid that our party will come untied yet again, with moderate and conservative Congressmen and Senators voting rightward in order to give themselves a false sense of political security, while at the same time, liberals and progressives responding by staying home (even though voting for a "bluer" House and Senate will give those Democrats less of an incentive to stray on legislation.) I am afraid of, for example, Bob Casey or Amy Klobuchar or Harold Ford saying something conservative-sounding in order to appeal to voters that won't support them anyway, all the while people on the blogosphere start calling them "DINOs" and traitors for doing it while settling into disappointed apathy.
Senator, if you want a more forceful Democratic Party, I have a handful of suggestions for framing and message, and I encourage other responders of this Daily Kos thread to add on. These "memes" are focus-group and consultant-free.
-The Republicans are the party of CORRUPTION, INCOMPETENCE, AND CRONYISM. Repeat as loudly and aggressively as possible, and make sure that we have TV surrogates who know their facts to back it up.
-Talk of how the Republicans are the party opposed to personal liberties and their hypocrisy on the issue of "big government." Stress, for example, on how they overreached on the issue of Terri Schiavo, in terms of using government power to placate conservative interest groups. When they try to bring up gay marriage or their irrational hatred of evolution, call their actions for what they are - wedge issues. Say something to the effect of "the President cares more about our lifestyles than about our livelihoods." Also, please do not avoid the NSA wiretapping issue. If something illegal did happen, point it out and do not fear whether or not the pundits attack us for it.
-The GOP is the "Reverse Robin Hood" party. They cut Student loans while giving out more money to Paris Hilton and Bill Gates!
-Instead of allowing Rove to make "national security" an issue, expand the scope of what issues can be called "national security." For example, talk of America's lack of intellectual security in science and math, or lack of energy security in foreign oil, lack of economic security in that real wages are stagnant and millions go without healthcare. On the War on Terror, hammer home Bush's disingenuous stance on going after Osama. Run ads referring to Tora Bora and of his March 2002 statement where he said Bin Laden is not a top priority (and his response to this question in the debate, and how he lied when asked.) Co-opting the right on the national security theme will steal their thunder not only on foreign policy, but on domestic policy.
-The incompetence and cronyism narrative. Link Social Security, Iraq, and Katrina together. Bush wants to destroy Social Security to help stock brokers and corporations. He's helping contractors such as Halliburton make money while he's cutting soldier's benefits (run ads stresses the benefit cuts. The public needs to know how Bush is treating our veterans!) Most important, Katrina. Run ads detailing how he cut FEMA's budget and funding for flooding. Expose Michael Brown for the imbecile he is. Don't be afraid to do this. If you are afraid of the GOP dragging out a Katrina survivor to denounce the ad or the pundits saying that you are politicizing Katrina, also realize that there are progressives who were hurt by Katrina and who will campaign against cronyism and point out the incompetence theme
-Divide and conquer, pit economic conservatives against social conservatives. Talk about Republican government waste on projects such as Senator Stevens' "bridge to nowhere" and link it with the K-Street Project and Abramoff. Propose bold initiatives to reign in the Republican tide of pork. Also, emphasize how the GOP's economic and foreign policy is IMMORAL and against the values of the American people. Privatizing Social Security does not honor thy mother and father. Michael Brown and Jack Abramoff lied and cheated this country and acted in ways to undermine the integrity of our government.
I hope that you take to heart my letter and advice. Senator, I trust you to lead us into "battle" against Bush, Rove, and DeLay. However, I can only be truly confident in your ability to do so if you can make sure that 2006 is not "Groundhog Year," that Punxsutawney Phil sees more than his shadow. I want him to see the BLUE sky, and a bluer Congress.
Respectively,
Progressive Moderate