One of the things that needs to be considered in the debates on Social Security, Tax Policy, the role of government and othe issues is what the Republicans are saying.  We need to consider the fact that taxes are not uniformly being cut, property taxes are up in many cases, schools are underfunded and a number of potentially explosive budget issues related to helping our elderly are in process as we speak.  

We should be listening to what the Republicans are saying.

Why should we do that?  Simple, we need to glue those positions to them, tar every inch of their political profile with the things they have said, and hold their picture up to daylight.  

Here is my shot at an insight into the dark mind of the Republican noise machine.

In order to frame the debate, I think we need to talk in terms that bring home the negative intentions of the Republicans.  Foremost is that we ALREADY have an investment in Social Security that the Republicans are threatening.  We need to bring home WHY they are threatening this interest.  We need to demonstrate WHAT THEY GAIN by undercutting Social Security.  Their plan is EXTREME.

We also need to go further and talk aobut what we stand for.  We stand WITH the American people.  Our plan is COMMON SENSE.  It has WORKED great.  It has been a great INVESTMENT.

Texas Republican is analagous to Massachusttes Liberal.

Republican=Bush, ownership society, dismantling Social Security

Republican=Benefit cuts, no guarantee, immoral, against seniors, against financial security, risky, Enron and Texas Economics,  Texas Republican, Wall Street, wealthy supporters, corporate power.

Democrats=Support for seniors, financial security, trustworthy, proven track record of trust, faithful support of seniors, support families

I am trying to get an insight into potential wedge issues to break the back of the right wing coalition, I think we need to look at the different opinions that dissent with Bush on the right.  Our goal should not be a frontal assault on the Republicans, we should weaken them from withing, and then attack.  There actually are a number of potentially extremely divisive issues that can be used to take the right wing on and win.

Recent events on Dkos have demonstrated the ability of the blogoshpere to drive the news cycle as a way to counter the Republican propoganda.  We have all seen the effects of the the Republican noise machine, how blogs, talk radio and think tanks feed their noise making industry.  It seems quite clear to me that the Republicans are trying to overthrow the Social Security system as much for their own short term political benefit and to hurt Democrats as anything else.  Given the huge defecits the Republican plan creates, the political benefit is the SOLE PURPOSE of the Republican plan.  It is an attempt to deprive the Democrats of one of our most potent issues, and permanently shift the political debate in their favor.  We need to stand up to that.

I know I may lose some of my Kos Karma by saying this, but Friedman does have a point.  I don't agree with him completely, but the people voting in Iraq had similar reactions to the people voting in the Ukraine.  If we don't acknowledge that reality we will lose credibility.  Iraq being completely screwed up doesn't change the fact that them voting is a good thing.  Our harshest critics  are taking a second look at the situation now and we have the potential to internationalize the problem.  I think the elections have definitely helped the situation.  We now have the potential for a stable government that can give us cover to pull out of the region.

I am sick of those hypocrites.  They moan about the blogs being partisan, and turn around and fund their own blogs that are equally partisan and equally biased.

Lets see how unbiased the WSJ is...this looks an awful lot like a blog entry, it isn't an editorial, it isn't a news story, it isn't journalism.  It is a blog by James Taranto of the WSJ on a Kristof NY Times editorial.

The right relies on different kinds of facts than the left.  The left tends to support science as an investigative tool, the neo-cons support faith based knowledge, otherwise known as 'truth'.  Both systems are polar opposites.  Science is not a value system, it is a tool for investigation that seeks to 'eliminate' all value judgements in favor of observable phenomena that either confirms or disproves a theory.  Religion is driven entirely by value judgements and faith assigning value to the events that occur around us.

For those of you who are interested, we had a meeting with DNC members and the State Chair here in Minnesota.  A couple outstate members didn't show, but the rest did.  About 300 people showed up and the Carpenters Union to voice their opinion on who should be the next head of the DNC.  At the end of the meeting, they took a straw poll.  When the name Howard Dean came up, and overwhelming majority raised their hand in support.  It was an amazing sight.  Rosenberg was a distant second, but the big suprise for me was Max Clelands showing, he had a fairly large group of supporters, perhaps equal to Rosenberg.

We are constantly losing arguments because we frame the debate in terms where the Republicans have the advantage.  For the abortion issue, 'Murder' is how the Republicans frame the debate.  Obviously murder trumps choice.  The root of the 'Choice' argument isn't about choice at all, it is about the rights of the individual and the power of the government to regulate those rights.

I have been reading the same post over and over again it seems.  The progressive/liberal theme at Kos seems to carry a message the repeats itself.  I don't necessarily disagree with the posts, it just seems to carry a certain sameness to many others.  It leads me to wonder, if there are issues of 'groupthink' going on.  On several issues I think there could be debate, but the number one assumption that I think needs to be challenged is the that we are not truly accepting what we must do to win, we are not being self critical.

The Bush Social Security privatization plan seems to be a scam to boost the market.  It seems impossible to imagine that he will ever get enough support to privatize Social Security.

This isn't a fantasy.  The reason Bush is enabled to do this, and the reason he can get the support in Congress: the falling dollar and the current accounts defecit have created a crisis.  They will use Social Security to pay off the current accounts defecit, and protect the investments of the wealthy by propping up the dollar and the stock market.

Some Democrats posits the very stupid idea that there is a specific idea that defines what a 'Democrat' really is.  Anyone who doesn't measure up to their standard, like Clinton (Bush lite), is a fraud, and unworthy of our support.  Thats not right.  Unity does not require conformity. I don't think it is right to attack other Democrats because they don't look or act like someone else.  We are a minority party, we can't afford to do that.

The Bush administration has seen nothing but bad news lately.  But no matter how bad it gets the administration just keeps on rolling forward.  A strange thing seems to be happening though, the worse Bush performs, the more his people rally to support him.  This disfunctional relationship seems strongest in places where Bush's failures are most pronounced.  

What I believe we are seeing is a dramatic shift in the course of history in this country.  The previous era, when Democrats ruled unchallenged is over.  That era was based in part on a memory of WWII, the Great Depression, the Civil Rights Movement and the Cold War.  That time is rapidly fading into history.