Hmmm. The mind is rolling...
I think a start in defining language is pertinent. The focus on party selection needs to be abolished. Encouraging all people to think outside of the dichotomy, even if it means abandoning all political parties, might get people to examine the issues in more realistic terms. There has to be a middle ground.
Question is: How to get these ideas off of this webpage and into the minds of people who do not read sites like this.

What a great question Shawna! The half empty glass part of me suggests that those who don't read website such as this, also don't read newspapers, alternative or otherwise, do not have conversations at dinner with others that is flexible, thoughtful or even 'big' enough to consider that someone else might have a (gasp!) different perspective or point of view other than what their clergy has uttered the previous Sunday. (I said "glass half empty")....preaching fear doesn't open many minds or doors!

You are not alone in your question....many of my friends - some actually living in middle (Republican land) America were asking that very question today......
I believe continued small conversions, grass-root peaceful efforts and one mass movement (remembrances of the 70's and the voice heard then are still very fresh) if we can find a voice that will carry.....I can't continue to move forward without some semblance of hope.

I know this might sound novel, but how about actually selling your ideas? Instead of repackaging and relabling them, how about actually persuading people? It's not the label but the content under the label that has turned sour. You can slap a new name on it, but the fact is that the vast majority of the public opposes gay marriage.

But I didn't vote based on that issue. I voted based on the war on terror. This is the first time I've voted republican, and I voted republican across the board, and on all but two California propositions.

I'm a resource here, ready to field questions. Just let me know if I can be of service. If you insist on viewing the groundswell of support for Bush as being driven solely or even mainly by "evangelicals," you will misdiagnose the problem and arrive at the wrong cure.

To win, the dems need to be more concerned about killing terrorists than about promoting terrorist rights. That's a good starting point.

I don't believe that I said anything about same sex marriage. Maybe I'll do a post at some point about my views on marriage. But to downplay the role of so-called "evangelicals" in either the Republican Party or at the voting booth is shortsighted.
From Christian Coalition Applauds Republican Party National Convention Platform for Supporting Tough ProLife Position and the Federal Marriage Amendment "Christian Coalition over the years has trained hundreds of thousands of activists, in both parties, who are active in the political process. Christian Coalition has many national delegates represented at the Republican Party National Convention including a number of Christian Coalition State Chairmen. Many activists are also on the Platform, Rules and Arrangements Committees."

Or Religious conservatives go mainstream

Or George W. And The Christian Right: "Sheldon chairs the Traditional Values Coalition, a network of 43,000 conservative churches nationwide. ... "George W. Bush is one of us," he says proudly, speaking from the Republican National Convention in New York. "

In fact, somewhere over 40% of the delegates at the RNC this year were members of the Christian Coalition.

However, the focus of what I said was on the 40% of folks who didn't vote.

We live in a time of uncertainty, high levels of confusion and contradictory "information." I still say that the best strategy is to talk with people, share with people, and have alternatives.

Any successful social movement is able to frame the problem in a way that makes sense to folks, offer and analysis that people can grasp, and offer solutions that seem to resolve the problem.

There has been a tremendous mobilization among the "progressive" movement. We see it with the multi-issue, multi-organization anti-globalization movement. We see it with organizations such as MoveOn, TrueMajority, and ACT (to name a few). The problem is that a broader message is not getting out because communication is largely confined to those with access to the "people's" media, and to the internet. This is where talking face to face, being part of groups that engage outside their circle, joining with community groups, etc. becomes important.

It's an interesting question. How many Bush voters are innocent people who believed that any party as loud as the Republicans must actually be competent to protect Americans against terrorism, and interested in doing so...how many are in agreement with Bush's social agenda...how many are in agreement with his economic agenda. (The last group consists almost entirely of optimists, voting in the interests of the tax bracket they hope to attain one day.)

It's an interesting question. How many Bush voters are innocent people who believed that any party as loud as the Republicans must actually be competent to protect Americans against terrorism, and interested in doing so...how many are in agreement with Bush's social agenda...how many are in agreement with his economic agenda. (The last group consists almost entirely of optimists, voting in the interests of the tax bracket they hope to attain one day.)

I wanna kill, I wanna kill, I wanna Kill

Arlo
Alices' Restaurant

Sorry, it just came to mind. Prior to the election I read a very good book which, in my view, explains exactly what occured and is occuring. "What's the matter with Kansas" by Thomas Frank. I am a fan of Mr Frank who is the editor of a little known, very little read magazine called The Baffler. If you want to get some insight how Republicans are winning and why they are winning, read the book

I agree, Christine, preaching fear has achieved nothing but submissive silence. That is exactly what the Bush Administration is doing. We will not be secure unless we sacrifice our civil liberties and allow them their "divine mission." NOT!!

As for those who think I just fluff on this website, I am constantly emailing legislators at both the federal and state levels. They should know me by name by now. I participate in such groups as the ACLU, TrueMajority and a variety of others. I am looking for some on ground sources that I can more physically participate in. I am looking for an internship with the ACLU. Who knows, maybe my children and I will attend a march somewhere? I would love the opportunity. Yes, I include my children in what I do. They are the future. I want them to know what it means to me to be an American citizen and what they have the power to do once they are grown up. My oldest already wishes she could vote. Where do you see the words "political party" here in this ideology?
For the record, I am one of the many Republican party deserters. Neo cons and the right wing own them now. I want no part of that. I want my civil liberties back and want those who live in more fear than me to feel safe in America. Let's live up to the principles we teach our children. Let's truly help the less fortunate sustain themselves free of bureaucratic indifference.

Shawna
My husband also has left the R party....mainly due to the lost of privacy and civil rights issues and the war....I have just finished reading S. Coontz's American Families and the Nostalgia Trap (aka "The Way We Never Were) on the train home and published in 1992 - these were just a few of the "facts" that I gleaned (hoping to reinforce some social program ideology here at home) "Redistributing just 1 percent of the income of America's richest 5 percent would lift one million people above the poverty line" and this "a 1% tax on the net wealth of the richest 2% of American famikies would allow us to DOUBLE Federal spending on EDUCATION and still have almost $20 billion let to spend on somewhere else" and this was in 1991-92.....before the boys got rich from dot.coms.... there wwa more but it would take me forever to recreate the page....it was FASCINATING!
But I totally agree with you.....I'd love to feel proud of American (a global kind of proud....that our country was using its power and resources for good rather than evil, is what I mean.)

Redistribution could come about by these CEO's at the top gaining some business ethic and remembering to care about all the employees from top to bottom. Unfortunately, there are too many Uncle Scrooges out there who could care less about the crippled boy loved by his weakest paid employee. (I hope everyone understands the analogy I used here.) Profit is great, but not without ethics.
We could go on and on about the many ways to redistribute wealth without a socialized welfare system and new taxes, but it would take all day. But consider the price of technology and the jobs lost due to it, and out sourcing to countries that allow outrageous work schedules for pennies an hour.

Of course, a bartering/work trade system instead of capitalism would set the world in a position of fair trade (not the same as free trade)- I will give you A, if you will give me B of equal value. Some indigenous societies do just fine without currency in a manner similar to this. And they do not have the poverty type issues and other social issues like us capitalists do. There is a story we read about the people of Ladakh that make a great example. Rowan might still have a link to it. Otherwise, I have it in a book called "The Case Against the Global Economy," edited by Jerry Mander and Edward Goldsmith. The article itself is titled "The Pressure to Modernize and Globalize," by Helena Norberg-Hodge. The story does not have a happy ending, but it does show that people can survive equitably without capitalism.