After hearing that Kerry and many of the Democratic Leadership are pushing for Vilsack to be DNC Chair, I decided to write a letter to him and other leaders advocating Dean for the DNC. Let me know what you think. Thanks.
Dear Senator Kerry,
I have been following the discussion regarding the future of DNC and who should be the one to lead it. According to reports, you and your allies are pushing for Tom Vilsack to be the new chairman of the DNC. I strongly oppose this choice and ask you to reconsider Howard Dean as the new leader for the Democrats. Vilsack represents the status quo and can lead to nothing but failure for the Democratic Party.
For the last 30 years or so, the Democrats have been fighting the right in a world defined by the right. And the leaders of the Democratic Party haven't had so much as an idea that this is happening. Every day we see capitulation to the right. We cede our values and integrity every time the Democrats choose to fight another day. And to the public, even to many liberals, all that shows is a party that has no values. We are playing a game of compromise with a foe that has no desire to compromise. I'm not arguing that we need to put our foot down every step of the way. I'm not arguing to filibuster every cabinet or Supreme Court nominee. But when Joe Biden tells reporters the Alberto Gonzales is not that bad of a choice for AG, we've already lost the battle before it began. And for the record, this guy is just as incompetent and values secret government just as much as Ashcroft has. The argument may be made that because the public does not know Gonzales' transgressions; we cannot put up a fight. Well there's only one group out there that can fight to get this known. And the Democrats have been failing miserably.
After the 2002 midterm elections, many of us could not see how we could possibly fight the tide of the radical right and the damage being inflicted on our country. I think we saw a huge disconnect between the ineffectual party leadership and people who hold liberal ideals so dear. But then the Dean campaign emerged and reached out to the people on the liberal side. His campaign showed the Democrats how to build from the bottom up, to reenergize the people that are proud to disagree. And without that, we never would have come as close as we did in this election. Don't get me wrong, there were many factors that contributed to the eventual close election, most notably Iraq, but Dean showed how to start to push back.
I'm not saying Dean should have been the presidential candidate. I think in the long run, it is probably better he wasn't. But there is a reason he received the standing ovation at the DNC this past July. His grassroots networking and fundraising are just what the Democrats need to become the party of the people. Too often, the Democrats have been seen as beholden to corporate and special interests. What better way to build a new legacy than with someone like Dean at the helm.
To me Vilsack represents the timidness of the Democrats. Not too timid to move left, but too timid to embrace the very people who make up the Democratic Party. This past election with a lot of help from a motivated base, we came very close to beating a 30-year-old machine. Between MoveOn, ACT, the blogosphere, and many others, we built a network in 2 years that nearly toppled the right wing machine. A machine that has been fine-tuned to a degree we can only dream of. This is just the beginning. And Dean is the man to lead the rejuvenation of the Democratic Party.