It's dangerous to focus only on Bush!

[JackRiddler]

Never mind that you don't like him. Bush is the front man for a particular gang, within larger networks of elite influence who don't need him. 45 percent of everyone, minimum, is utterly focused on getting rid of the man and his uglee crew. He is too much our version of the Anti-Christ. As "Hitler," he's merely another case of how history does the first time as tragedy, the second as (deadly) farce.

Anti-Bushism can turn into a giant trap, unless we understand and make clear that it's about the policies, the elites (especially their media stranglehold), and the overall history they have produced, meaning the whole world mess - not the man!

To take one scenario, if he's switched out in the summer, this would serve to demobilize the rage against him and clear the way for a Giuliani or McCain alternative, among other possibilities. That pair can play it secular, and the minor losses among ultra-"Christians" will be amply made up by the centrist appeal. Kerry will scramble to do the Homeland mania and Iraqi strongman thing, unconvincingly, and drop the left. That left (or whatever you term the opposition) will be in disarray by having lost their head campaign organizer, George W. Bush.

In that context, a New York convention suddenly makes sense, the state (which went against Bush 65-35 and will probably hit 75 percent against Bush in '04) would be back in play and suck up huge resources from the Heartland efforts.

Bush has his solid base among heartfelt Dominionists, yahoos and open fascists. As a base, this is a 20 percent proposition. The rest of the conservatives are oriented to economy and performance. If Bush is keeling - and he is - it's a snap for the more bottom-line-oriented elites to drop him for a New Homeland Centrism (read Secular Corporate Fascism).

Beware the anti-Bush focus.

[JaySherman]

1. Agreed. We should be paying attention the Congressional races too.

Kerry won't be able to do anything until we the GOP stranglehold on the House and Senate. The Senate is the more winnable one in the short run. Dems have got a shot this year if we support the candidates. Realistically, the Dems' next good shot at regaining control of the House is the 2006 Midterms, but it would be nice to win back some seats in the meantime.

[lostnfound]

2. True. This ugliness is hydra-headed. nt

[Paradise]

3. KICK! (my very first :) n/t

[xchrom]

4. bush = symptom not disease

i agree.
the left has a monumental job in front of it -- educating people about corporate fascism and it's effect on the america economy and our daily lives{i.e. enron and the rape of states economies and the continuing shift in off-shoring are two examples}.
but that is indeed the goal -- and it's a yeoman's work and very unglamorous.
the left has to learn to get in front of this issue with some very concise language that is easily digestible by lot's of people.

[no_hypocrisy]

5. Another challenge for dems: convince the public that fascism already has

a foothold and is growing rapidly. This is such an awful truth that I can understand the standard "suspension of disbelief" by the uninitiated and uninformed (and don't want to know).

If the dems are going to attempt to redefine the issues as such, they have to do it in a manner that doesn't scare their listeners (even though this method seems to work well for Smirk).

If they can convince this guy I know, then they can convince anyone. Whenever I've given him several articles are about the administration limiting civil liberties and civil rights, he always responds that "things really aren't that bad" or "maybe these changes have to be made". This is the proverbial "Everyman" that the dems have to go after.

[Avalux]

6. Good post

and I agree. Kicking shrub out of the WH will not solve the problem; we have a lot of work to do. The direction of our government and it's policies must be changed on all levels.

[AskAlice]

7. ABB is all we have right now

Because I sure don't see anything coming from Kerry lately. Where has he been? Did he lose interest?

[JackRiddler]

8. Well, that's exactly the problem.

"ABB is all that we have right now."

The U.S. opposition is lead by George W. Bush. He is the number one organizer. His face, his mannerisms, his evident shortcomings. Everything far too focused on him. Without him nothing changes directly, except that the opposition is demobilized. Everyone will "breathe a sigh of relief" and get what? McCain?! Giuliani? There are guys out there with "centrist secularist" reputations who can make the Bush crew look like pikers!

[TimMooring]

9. Amen Brother

He's the tip of the assberg. Repug majority in congress must change. I also think its foolish to believe that some dems have not helped to get us where we are.

Down with the mega-corps. They are a blight on our democracy.

[DemoTex]

10. "If he's switched out in the summer .."

A big "if," but stranger things have happened. Who might "switch" Bu$h out, and how would they justify it (short of impeachment proceedings)? How would they justify replacing Bu$h with - say - McCain, absent any help from GOP primary voting?

[RedEagle]

11. You can't beat any of this without taking care of voting

Voting has got to be reflective of the people's choice.

If you don't fix the vote, you won't fix anything.

www.blackboxvoting.org

Call your representatives to sponor HR 2239

Call your senators to sponsor S 1980, Graham's bill
(I think I have that number right)