Recently in
Best Practices Category

Busy week; lots of activities and struggles, and moments of joy, and fears, and plans made, changed, remade...

And you?

I've been thinking and talking about "the movement", especially in light of last week's "march", this week's arrests, and the MoveOn debacle of yesterday. So here are my questions for a Friday discussion:

Is there a peace and justice MOVEMENT?

Is it actually MOVING?

Are you MOVED by anything the MOVEMENT has done?

What is the engine for the MOVEMENT?

What would MOVE you to action?

Do you ever think about MOVING on?

Last week I wrote about the problems that the antiwar movement has had in generating sustained pressure on members of Congress, citing a story by a Washington Post reporter who traveled around Georgia for three days over the August recess with Republican Senator Jimmy Isaacson and did hear a single comment critical of the war.

In today's Post, there is a story of a different kind, about a recent campaign that worked, paid for by the health insurance industry, and based on mobilizing people at the grassroots. The campaign was led by Karen M. Ignagni.

Ignagni's group, with the help of its members, has been building a list of senior citizen activists since 1999. Known as the Coalition for Medicare Choices, the network is managed by association employees who regularly keep in touch with the seniors who sign up and spur them to action when they are needed.

The network is currently 400,000 strong. In recent months, every senator and nearly 100 congressmen were contacted by multiple seniors in the system. Over the August recess alone, the association clocked about 20,000 calls to congressional offices.

Ignagni supplemented this deluge with a national advertising campaign. Its targeted TV commercials were designed to thank some lawmakers for supporting the industry's position and to remind others who are on the fence that seniors would not be happy if Medicare Advantage were trimmed.

The association also bought newspaper ads to praise the overall legislation, which at its heart expands the popular State Children's Health Insurance Program, or SCHIP. The ad pointedly recommended the Senate's version, which pays for the SCHIP expansion with an increase in tobacco taxes, not a cut in Medicare Advantage.

The effect has been impressive. Congressional aides say they have heard the association's point of view even above the din created by two of Washington's most powerful interests: the American Medical Association and AARP.

I am at the annual meeting I always go to in September; this year in St. Petersburg, Florida. The first day is always catching up with colleagues: who is here, who is ill, who died, who is new...life cycles.

So I have not kept up with the news cycle in the past 24 hours. OK, let's face it, I am Bush-avoidant right now.

However, in the past week, we did see a documentary I want to share with you:

WAR MADE EASY.

Along with the others we have seen recently, it is a powerful reminder of why we all must continue to educate, activate, and empower those who are new to truths.

I plan to host a movie night with friends, and to invite a few who need to think a little more deeply about what is happening to our democracy now. Please consider doing the same; all of the following are available in the theatres or at Netflix. The trailers alone are worth your time:

WHY WE FIGHT

THE GROUND TRUTH

THE ROAD TO GUANTANAMO

UNCOVERED: THE ROAD TO IRAQ

THE VALLEY OF ELAH

NO END IN SIGHT

Can a movie change an opinion? Let's find out...

In addition to the arrival of my students, and the departure of all our offspring, the activists returned to our nation's capital this week.

Believe me, that giant Preamble will find many opportunities for exposure in the next few weeks.

Later that day, we gathered a few folks to do some message delivery INSIDE Congress:

We met at Rep. Barbara Lee's office in the Rayburn HOB, hoping to deliver her Spine Award from the Backbone Campaign, but, for the umpteenth time, she was off trying to end the war, or something. The sign above is outside her office.

Last night Richard and I had another one of those long conversations about the State of Things, one in which we found ourselves once more easily distracted by the momentary needs of children and house, overwhelmed by the sheer number of activities we are asked to support, and challenged by the need to make more money than the world seems interested in rewarding us with.

Does that feel familiar to anyone else here?

So we watched a movie. (A Thousand Clowns, one of the great subversive flicks of the 1960s. We lamented the passing of a world with much simpler problems, but it was good to laugh).

This morning I woke up with the same questions as yesterday, however. The questions add up to something that is covered by the main question:

WTF are we doing here?

I swear, some days I have no idea where we are going or how we are going to accomplish anything, especially when I get requests to hep with events on Sept. 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 15, 26, 29.... none of which are coordinated by the same group.

David Swanson must be feeling the same way, because he sent along today's thread header, bless the man:

Chris Dugan, former military recruiter, countering
photo: K Bradley

Resistance of One

By David Swanson

There is something else we can try. If you've given up on staging marches and rallies, or if - like me - you haven't but you want to try something else as well, and if you've given up on lobbying Congress as pointless, or if - like me - you haven't but you want to try something else as well, and if educating your fellow citizens as to exactly how completely corrupt the whole system is seems like an incomplete answer, and if staging a general strike or taking over the capital only seems like a good idea if you can get millions of others to join you, there is another approach that can be taken right away by a single person, a small group, or a crowd.

"Dear DCP people: please come and rip this website to shreds. Thank you."

Well, that's a bit of a deliberate oversimplification, of course. But it's a legitimate request nonetheless.

It's been a heck of a job Brownie busy week in Washington, not to mention elsewhere in the progressive blogoshperality. So most of our regular lead DCPeeps are in well-earned hibernation this morning, it seems. And that is as it should be.

But it's time for a thread change anyway, and somebody's got to fill it until something more earth-changing comes along. So I'm going to take advantage of this opportunity to hijack the ongoing discussions of what's wrong (or right) with the world and ask y'all to tell me what's wrong (or right) with a particular website instead.

[Photo credit for Dana Lynne Anderson's painting "Zeitgeist": Kosmos magazine]

Why should we care about zeitgeist and what people are talking about in someone else's neighborhood? We should care because it can be the key to making our efforts at pressuring Congress more effective and ultimately, controlling the policy debate.

How?

(Eh? How's that? Get thee behind us, Shrub! Er, I mean, um, Satan that is. Yeah, that's it.)

Ahem.

Anyway.

"Now, as you may have noticed, we here at the Democracy Cell Project..."

No, wait.

Strike that.

As Mark Twain would ask, "Is that the royal 'we', the editorial 'we', or the 'we' of people with tapeworms?"

Okay, then.

So, as you may have noticed, *I* here at the Democracy Cell Project didn't change this thread header until it hit almost 200 comments in the message queue tonight.

That wasn't a deliberate thing, it's not like I held the thread header hostage waiting to see if anybody noticed that it hadn't changed in a couple of days. But since that's how it worked out this time, it does give me a good hook to hang this (pre-planned, ahem) new thread header on tonight.

Take a look to the left and right of this column of text. If you're reading this as an above-the-fold threader intro on the blog's 'Main' page, then you'll see sidebars on both sides of the page. Those two sidebars are common to many parts of the site, but not to all of them. If you're reading this as the entire threader plus comments on its own secondary page, you'll only see the left-hand sidebar. On some parts of the site, such as the forums, you won't see any sidebars at all.

Sidebars are very useful things, which is why you see them on practically all websites. They can contain links and information that's always accessible from any of the various content pages. They can be used to provide ancillary items that can be related to the main page content but aren't part of that content itself. They can display blogrolls, RSS newsfeeds, links to other parts of the site, calendars, photos, widgets -- indeed, practically anything that can fit into a narrow space on one or both sides of the page can and has been used in sidebars.

It's an unfortunate fact that the sidebar(s) on the DCP site are static in design, which means they need to be updated manually or their content grows outdated and stale. And there's no question that the sidebar content on the site hasn't been updated in quite a while. There's a lot of accumulated dust and layers of cobwebs on both sides of the pages these days.

That's one of the goals we have in redoing the DCP site design: we want to make the sidebars more dynamic in design and more useful in content. We want to use those spaces more effectively, to include more information and make sure that it's updated frequently. We want to provide more of what you DCPeeps want to see in the sidebars on this website. That's why we're asking you to tell us what you want to see when you look to the left and the right of what you're reading here.

Okely-dokely! As previously noted, we're actively seeking input from the DCP community about what you fine folks do and don't want to see as part of an upcoming revision/redesign/rebirth of the Democracy Cell Project website. Some of you have posted some comments on that in passing already, but now we'd like to encourage you to get a bit more granular about certain components of the site (and, by extension, the relative importance of those components to why you come here to democracycellproject.net in the first place.)

"Whither goest thou, America, in thy shiny car in the night?"
-- Jack Kerouac, 'On the Road'

Greetings, DCPeeps. Today's blog threader is going to take a somewhat different tack than what we usually write about in this space. In fact, several blog threaders over the next couple of weeks are going to be taking the same kind of different tack.

The Democracy Cell Project was started at the end of 2004 with a set of hopeful goals and ambitious aspirations. As is the way of such things, over the years some of those remain intact while others have fallen by the wayside. And as is also the way of such things, the situation around us has changed significantly and new goals and aspirations have been added to the mix along the way.

One core tenet has never changed, though: that the Democracy Cell Project is a community, not a preconfigured entity. What we do here is participatory, not pontificatory. This is not a top-down enterprise. It has always been a concept, a community, a place in cyberspace where things happen from the ground up. And it was what it was and is what it is because of the people that are part of it, not in spite of them.

A lot of time has passed since the Democracy Cell Project was first given virtual life. A lot of things are different now than they were back then. Old paths have turned to other destinations. Old arrows have found other marks. Old voices have fallen silent, while new ones have come to be heard here. Change is an inevitable fact of life, and the DCP is a living thing.

So as times change, as lives change, the DCP inevitably changes also. Which is what brings us to the subject of today's threader:

Whither goes thou, Democracy Cell Project, in thy shiny car in the night?

One thing that we all agree on quite strongly here at the DCP is that most of what we read and hear from the various mainstream news media sources is bogus to some extent -- incomplete, inaccurate, in many cases biased.

How can we tell when we're being told the truth and when we're being misled or lied to? How do we know who we can count on to tell us the truth and who we can safely assume is blowing smoke at us? How can we tell the difference between good journalism and bad?

It's difficult to separate the news wheat from the spin chaff, because every time we look at a new article or listen to a new story we have to keep asking ourselves the same questions time after time:

Is this a good story?
Is it informative?
Is it fair?
Is it well-sourced?
Does it show the "big picture"?
Can we trust the publisher of this story?

That's a time-consuming set of mental hoops to jump to every time we see a headline or hear a lead-in to another piece of news. If the answer to all or most of those questions is "yes", then we don't want to miss out on exploring and learning from the story in question. If the answer to all or most of those questions is "no", then we don't want to waste our time or bandwidth wading through it at all.

The Catch-22 here is that we can't answer those questions until we've already invested our effort in reading or listening to the story in the first place. If only there was some way to find out whether it meets those criteria before we bother experiencing it for ourselves. If only there was someone we could trust to hip us to what's good and warn us away from what's bad before we allow it to enter our own personal news streams.

If only there was some kind of news vetting service, someplace where we could go to get news stories that we can safely assume to be trustworthy, because we know that other people with the same cautious criteria to apply have checked them out for us and can vouch for their value. If only there was a reliable source on the web where we knew we could find news we could trust.

If only there was something like NewsTrust.

A dictionary definition of the term "iconoclast" says that it refers to "someone who challenges or overturns traditional beliefs, customs, and values." By those standards, W. Leon Smith definitely chose the right name for the small-town Texas weekly newspaper he launched seven years ago.

You've probably never heard of Leon Smith, but the odds are pretty good that you've heard about his paper. The Iconoclast pole-vaulted into the national spotlight on September 29, 2004, when it had the audacity to endorse John Kerry for president.

The Iconoclast is based in tiny Crawford, Texas (pop. 705 as of the 2000 census, though that number has now grown due to an influx of new residents that include Cindy Sheehan and a certain individual by the name of George W. Bush.) And when The Iconoclast published its editorial endorsement titled "Kerry Will Restore American Dignity", the locals didn't take too kindly to what the paper had to say during the deeply divisive election cycle of 2004.

When news of a small-town Texas newspaper from Crawford endorsing a Democrat for president over the who bought a ranch there for photo-op purpses hit the wires, it went national in minutes and global in hours. Leon Smith's little small-town weekly newspaper, with a grand total of 920 copies sold each week by subscription and on the local newsstands, suddenly found itself in the center of a firestorm of epic proportions.

Local residents were up in arms. Subscriptions were canceled. All three newsstands in town refused to carry the newspaper any more. Most advertisers pulled their ads at once; those who didn't were boycotted. Hundreds of angry letters and emails poured into The Iconoclast's offices, threatening to overwhelm Smith and his three-person staff. (Some of those letters and emails threatened to do a lot worse than just overwhelm them.) Not everyone in town turned against Smith's paper; like the rest of the country at the time, Crawford was sharply divided. But the majority of residents in President Bush's adopted hometown were seriously disgruntled.

Smith's associate editor disassociated himself from the paper's endorsement of Kerry, but he and his other employees refused to back down. They expected to be driven out of business by the vitriolic anger of Crawford's citizens that resulted from the editorial statement they published that day in September. But a funny thing happened on the way to the bankruptcy court: bloggers came to The Iconoclast's rescue.

NonnyO wrote something yesterday that stopped me in my tracks for a moment, and so I thought I would try to write about it today. As you, dear reader, know, part of my purpose here at the DCP is to help educate, activate, and empower YOU: the citizen-activist. I get to see, in the offices of Congress, the power of the informed and passionate citizen, and the way the place starts hopping when those phones start ringing.

But until NonnyO wrote "Even with phone calls and emails, physical presence counts (or, at least it would if I were in their shoes). I'll concede that all avenues of communication with Congress Critters are important: in person, by phone, by email...(Posted by: NonnyO at February 9, 2007 01:42 PM), I hadn't thought much about that in-person part, at least not the way that I do it.

You see, I have no voting representation in Congress, so there is no one person for me to dog; no one to speak truth to directly. And so I have decided to be a witness of and for those who can act.

I worry that it's a passive role, and I think about what I might be doing that would be more effective. And so I decided to do some research on the act of witnessing, in the hope that I would understand my chosen role a little better, or at least, do it a little better so I could feel more effective.

I came across this website. Dr. Kaethe Weingarten, Ph.D. founded and directs the Witnessing Project. She is an Associate Clinical Professor of Psychology at Harvard Medical School. Her latest book, Common Shock, Witnessing Violence Every Day, How We Are Harmed, How We Can Heal resonated with me. Although I would not characterize the actions of Congress as violence, at least not in the way we think of violence, regular shockwaves move through me. I often feel as if I am witnessing a train wreck, or a horror movie when I sit in hearings or offices and observe what passes for critical thinking in the halls of this government.

And so I delved further into the website, until I came to this model:

EDITOR'S NOTE: We're all pretty dismayed by the detainee bill passed in Congress last week, and disgusted by the shocking revelations made on the heels of Rep. Mark Foley's resignation last Friday. The question in our minds is: "What are we going to do about it?"

We found Otter's post in one of the threads below. We think this will help.

We're only one month away from what may well turn out be the most watershed national elections of modern times.

Today we are at the height of -- and with luck and hard work, at the tail end of -- what Maureen Dowd recently referred to as "this chilling time when the Bush administration has Photoshopped the Constitution, portrayed critics as traitors, and spurred terrorism with a misconceived and mismanaged war in Iraq."

The presidential elections of 2008 are still far in the future. But the mid-term elections of 2006 are right around the corner. And this year's mid-term elections are, in many ways, far more significant than those that are still two years away.

What happens in a few short weeks will determine the makeup of Congress for years, even decades to come. What happens in a few short weeks will strongly influence what happens in the presidential elections of 2008. What happens in a few short weeks will make a major difference in your life, my life, and the lives of everyone around us.

What happens in a few short weeks matters, y'all. It matters a *lot*. In fact, it will probably matter more than anything like it in our lifetimes.

This is a watershed election year. So if you've been sitting back at your keyboard up to now, then it's not to late for you get up out of your chair and go put your boots on the ground where you live.

If you know people who are doing nothing, who are thinking nothing, who are planning to blow off these midterm elections this year (because after all no votes really matter except during presidential election years and even then they don't count anyway), then it's up to you to educate them and convince them otherwise.

If you know pro-war people who are having their strings pulled, their knees jerked, and are responding blindly to the bogus mind-control tactics of the professional spinmeisters on the reich-wing side, then it's up to you to make them wake up and smell the coffins.

If you know people who are still clinging desperately to old single-issue voting patterns, then it's up to you to make them see the big picture this time.

If you know people who are paying no attention to what's going on around them, then it's up to you to make them understand that attention *must* be paid.

If you know that every vote counts and every opinion matters -- and since you're here reading this on the DCP website, then it's safe to assume that you do -- then it's up to you to reach out to those around you and make sure that their votes count, too.

We're only one month away from what may well turn out be the most watershed national elections of modern times.

And what happens next month is up to you. And me. And all of us.

So don't just go out and vote next month -- get out the vote, every day from now till then.

Get out the vote as though your very lives depend on it this year.

Because, ultimately, they do.

photo courtesy of AP

[Editor's Note, this is culled from the comments: I found coverage of the event at this government site]

Today, Monday, I plan to join with others at the Dirksen Senate Office Building, Room 226, to witness the end of democracy, humanitarian values, and concern for human dignity.

Actually, that is what I expect to witness. It is always possible that a miracle will happen and the American people will wake up and do something about it.

Not likely, however.

And so I will witness and observe, and then I will decide what I need to do.

Here is what YOU can do:

Call the Congress. All day long. Call your members and the Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Email all your friends and tell them they must call too.

There will only be a few of us who will get into the hearings, so please support those who do. Watch C-Span to see if this is covered. Call the media. Write letters.

I ask you to do this in the name of those who died and are dying as a result of torure; those who have been tortured at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere, those raped and mudered in Iraq, those about to be tortured in Iran: all those humans who are bystanders in the race for profit and empire to which this administration adheres.

I ask you: if you do not speak up today, when? Who will speak up in the future?

Ray McGovern's words haunt me: "the worst word in the English language is the word blase." Howard Zinn reminds me that every action, no matter how small, gives hope to others.

Give us hope. Help.

Last week, we began a discussion about creating your own talking points. Carol helpfully posted a link and information to part of the Campaign for America's Future literature on this.

This morning I open my e-mail and find that Democray For America is offering night school with no less than George Lakoff, author of the book on framing political speech, "Don't Think of An Elephant". Dr. Lakoff will be teaching online with DFA-Link on Tuesday, September 19, 2006.

As some of you know, I had the pleasure of meeting Professor Lakoff last year. He is one of the most interesting people I have ever met, and I am sure going to night school with him as our teacher, is an extraordinary opportunity for us all.

Here's the link for information on how to sign up for DFA-Link and register for the class.

From the registration site (which you can't get to until you sign up):

The workshop will start at 8:30pm Eastern Time and continue for approximately one hour. It will consist of a conference call with an accompanying downloadable slideshow which you can save to your computer in advance.

You are not required to be online during the presentation, you simply need to dial into the conference call with a regular phone. The call-in number will be sent to you before the event, as long as you have RSVPed.

Here's the e-mail information I got:

With less than 8 weeks to go until November 7, it's time to put the final touches on your campaign plans. Whether you are a part-time volunteer, a first time candidate, or managing a swing congressional race -- Democracy for America's Night School can help you win. And... it's free!

Night School is an interactive lesson that couples an on-line presentation with a conference call that puts you in touch with expert instructors. The first class of the fall semester of Night School is on framing with Professor George Lakoff next Tuesday, September 19 at 8:30 p.m. Eastern. Sign up for next week's lesson now

This is part of the fall semester program, so while you are at the site, check out the other classes offered. It's a great opportunity for anyone who wants to increase their skills as an activist at any level. And it's FREE (the magic word!).

And now to the disclaimer: DFA is a PAC. As such, the DCP does not endorse, nor necessarily share the views of the organization. We are agnostic on the subject. The reason we have posted this is that many people here are working on campaigns, or will be, and have asked for this information. Also, this is what we do. We seek to bring the classroom to you, and to help all of us find ways to increase our political skill set to use however we may wish.

I am signing up right now.

"Street theatre is a form of theatrical performance and presentation in outdoor public spaces without a specific paying audience...The logistics of doing street theatre necessitates simple costumes and props, and generally there is little or no amplification of sound, with actors depending on their natural vocal and physical ability...The performances need to be highy visible, loud and simple to follow in order to attract a crowd."

A thousand years ago, strolling and traveling "players" were cultural and political ambassadors, bringing news and innovative ways of understanding the world at large to remote corners of a realm. Through song, dance, and storytelling, actors informed the spread of modern ideas, practices, and news items.

In the 1960s and 70s, street theatre became a way of confronting the status quo and of protesting the war in Vietnam. By presenting sometimes violent and shocking images right in front of folks walking down the street, people were often startled into paying attention to an issue they would rather not think about.

For the past five years, individuals and groups in Washington have engaged in street theatre, dressing up in black robes as Supremes, to call out the Supreme Court justices' meddling in the elections, dressing up in orange jumpsuits with hoods and nooses and silently kneeling in Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House, and, last Tuesday, demonstrating in front of the Dirksen Building at the hearings for Michael Haynes, torture-supporting judge.

That's Pat Elder, playing the "Man" in the suit. Pat is a longtime Washington peace activist. I did not get the name of the man in the nude suit. But I can tell you that as Pat yanked on the chain and yelled at the man on the ground, people were roused from their stupor, even if briefly.

The sudden appearance of artifice that reveals truth may be the highest form of art. Certainly the tradition of spreading news through entertainment is an old and mainstreamed effort; witness Fox and CNN. But adding the confrontational nature of what protesters have been doing means a less soporific form of entertainment; one that crosses over into art.

Consider the value of public storytelling in simple, straightforward and graphic terms. How much clearer can we be? Torture is wrong and we are condoning it.

"You're either part of the solution, or you're part of the problem." Eldridge Cleaver

Yesterday I attended a small protest against big oil in Congress, which took place on the corner of 2nd and Massachusetts Avenue, NE, here in DC. There is an Exxon station there; it is where almost every national story on the high price of oil gets filmed, because their prices are always higher than surrounding stations (location, location, location), AND the lines are always long anyway. Great photo ops. It is also the location of the Heritage Foundation.

I spoke with an earnest young man (it was like going to the gym: mild workout, good for the abs) who was willing to engage with me about several issues: the Iraq War, the Vietnam War, the Economy, Education, and John Kerry. We bantered about these issues; he with his Rush Limbaugh scripted remarks, me with my own experiences and knowledge gained from doing actual research. He quizzed me on numbers; I chided him on a lack of investigative skills. I have heard the numbers quiz many times (“Do you know the % of soldiers who have reenlisted?” “Can you tell me how much we spend on social programs vs. the War?”, etc.) It is true that I do not carry these numbers with me; that many of us on the left don’t care for statistics and are, in fact, suspicious of numbers.

We tend to argue more from the larger patterns. I referred the young man to several sources for different budget numbers: the Common Sense Budget, for one. We actually agreed that No Child Left Behind started off as a better notion than it ended up. He asked me how I would change it and I told him: I believe in better public education and we ought not to be promoting private sector solutions that won’t work with the majority of urban or rural children.

On the Iraq War/Vietnam War he would not budge; the litany of already-tired and inaccurate lines came forth. When he went from terrorism in Iraq today to 9-11 in under a minute, I pointed it out. I asked him why we didn’t attack Saudi Arabia? He said, “They have too much oil”. Hmmm.

Our understanding of John Kerry was quite different too. Seeing as how I actually had some numbers and facts on that, he backed down. I told him he needed to rent and watch “Winter Soldier” so he could see where JK’s 1972 testimony came from. He allowed the possibility that he was under-informed on the quotes he claimed JK said. I told him google is a great thing. You can find the actual testimony and transcripts and think for yourself. The conversation ended when I mentioned Halliburton and other war profiteers. He stalked off. I think he thinks he won the argument.

I share this discussion because I want to encourage us to talk to such folks more often. This boy was bright and sweet and he took me on, as I did him, for practice. I also want to recommend a book. I propose we all read: He Talk Like A White Boy, by Joseph C. Phillips. The subtitle is Reflections on Faith, Family, Politics, and Authenticity. Joseph is an actor, a father, and a columnist/commentator on NPR; perhaps you have heard him. He is African-American and a conservative. He is also a good friend of mine and a former student.

I am reading his book with both joy and concern. I love this man and I know his struggles and his triumphs. Periodically he sends me emails asking for my opinion on something; I encouraged him to develop his one-man show, and was proud of the results.

His writing is truthful, often self-effacing and amused as well. He is an incredible husband and father and will break you of any stereotypes you may have about black men or Hollywood marriages. He is a man of faith in the way I wish others could be: when he wanders he is called back by wise and loving voices and he listens. He is tolerant of other faiths.

He is as authentic a conservative as anyone I ever talk with, and I find myself agreeing with him on many issues. We have talked about arts education, for example, and he would love to take on that issue, in support of more accessible arts programs for kids. He knows the value of creativity and innovation. But where his logic and arguments fall down are in the political arena. And it is here that his story, the young man’s from yesterday, and mine collide.

One of the funniest conversations I ever had with JCP was about six months after O.J Simpson made his escape on a white Ford Bronco, down the interstate, with helicopters flying overhead, while we all watched on national television. Joseph had decided that he, JCP, needed to buy a white Ford Bronco. No other color would do; he wanted THAT car. His wife, the ever-grounded Nic, refused to let him buy one. Joseph did about 15 minutes of monologuing about his right to have the car he wanted, most of which had us falling off our chairs and weeping with laughter. The fact that a Bronco is not the most fuel-efficient car was trumped by his right to own what he wanted to own.

How important was it to Joseph that his personal identification with such an instantly recognizable symbol of a successful black man overcame his values of conservation and a healthy planet for his children? (Full disclosure: I have had similar conversations with white men. Never with women, however.)

Where do identity and authenticity collide? Where is the authentic concern I know he feels for the future? To what do we owe our sense of ourselves; our beliefs and values in the way of truth? In his book, Joseph repeats untruths when he talks politics; he does not know these are untruths, but they are. The young man yesterday repeated untruths as well. And in all honesty, some of the talking points I have been handed at rallies and protests do not always ring true to me. I have to do some research, and come up with accurate and forward-looking frames.

On his website, Joseph has a video clip of appearances he has made. In one of these, he says George Bush has been better for black people than Bill Clinton. He is challenged on this point and stumbles over some stuff about small business loans and home ownership (either of which could be traced, with research, to Clinton policies). The young man yesterday and his friend told us that slavery had been abolished in this country and black people are better off now. While they did not draw a line between George Bush and the emancipation of slaves, the implication was clearly to the new black prosperity that Joseph points out.

The identity stories of prosperous African-Americans who can buy the global-warming cars of their choice, who are able to live by their core values and who are living better lives than their parents did are propagated throughout the conservative ideology. Joseph is a living, breathing example of same.

Aside from the arrogance of such ideology, one has to notice that, for most African-Americans, the ideals do not hold. Bush and the Republicans are outsourcing jobs, and cutting student loans. For too many young black men (and others), the military becomes an unexamined opportunity to build a future—if you live through it.

Authenticity then might need to include a more comprehensive understanding of the lives of everyday people in the United States today. But that perspective is part of the progressive identity code, not the conservative identity code. The conservative identity code asks its adherents to ride over the “negative, America-hating” stories of pain and suffering.

Of course, our side has these issues as well. The progressive identity code contains unprovables, and statements we make about “not fighting back” and “voting for the war” have us sharing common ground with the conservatives. These too are inauthentic but identifying statements. They just happen to be about ourselves.

The tension between authenticity and identity is palpable for all of us. How can we possibly reconcile them? How can we be inside the club and serving the interests of the club, while being truthful to the facts in the most comprehensive sense?

These conversations lead me to think about the differences in approach between the right and the left. I think our side tends to think forwards, not backwards, and we want things to be better for our children. I suspect conservatives want things to be like they think they were, better for their children, as they were in the past.

In the opening of the video on Joseph’s site, he says he supports the Bush-Cheney 2004 effort because he wants to overcome “forty years of failed liberal policies.” The fact that forty years precedes the passage of the Civil Rights Act is not addressed. In his book, he tells stories about his dad, and his sons, and there is a nostalgia for a simpler and clearer time, when the rules were clear and identity and belonging did not require so many inauthentic beliefs.

Conservatives like my young man, and like Joseph, can learn from the projecting forward nature of progressive thinking, just as we can learn from looking back, as conservatives do, to family and faith, and core values from childhood. We need to understand the longing they have for safety and a lifestyle of prosperity.

And they need to know that we are not reckless disregarders of those core values, but constructors of improved designs, building on the models of democracy and participation to fit the new width and depth of the world.

Evidence for beliefs and values must not be based upon what goes on inside an echo chamber. Nor can evidence be limited to what we heard yesterday but failed to examine, repeated within a closed system until it takes hold as belief. In that sense, the authenticity of who we are as a nation depends upon the shared marketplace of ideas, depends upon blogs, forums, book clubs, chats, conferences, phone calls, coffee, and all forms of media. We need to transcend identification as Americans, and become authentic citizens of the USA and the planet. Only then will our identity be, first and foremost, human being.

(EDITOR'S NOTE: We are, of course, elevating Tut's comments from the previous thread header, to thread header status. This brings the total of times this has been posted to three--on this website anyway. We also would like to share her post with other blogs. We believe she has a voice and something to say that needs to be heard. We hope that 5-10 times posted may be enough to get through to folks.)

I voted the other day. Voted again, in a precinct with over 500 registered voters, and I was number 87 at four in the afternoon. Voted, and came away discouraged because hundreds of my neighbors did not. They were busy, or it was raining, or they didn't know or like anyone on the ballot. It's enough to make me weep in frustration and outrage, and to imagine with bitterness what silence and apathy is going to do to all of us.

You can't move a certain segment of people. If they never registered and never voted, they probably won't, even now, and when they are agog at their freedoms being taken away, they will be shocked, but it won't ever occur to them that they should have voted when they had the chance. And, if they are registered, and they only vote in the 'big' elections, they will still feel like they did their duty.

I'm past, over and done with blaming the media, and the punditocracy, and the talking heads, and the pollsters, and yes, even the politicians themselves over how bad things are. Whomever they have sought to reach or stir up has been reached or thoroughly stirred. Rabid right or angry left, it's all the same, all the time, every day.

Everyone is dissatisfied somewhere along the line. I feel bad for the rabid right sometimes, because I think they might be realizing their ideals aren't working out quite so well with the people they put their faith in. Something isn't clicking and ticking along the way they planned with their big majority in place, and they don't seem to be able to figure out why. If they voted 'R' with their religion on their sleeve, and they now feel like their religion was used, that's a hard pill to swallow. If they went 'R' to increase their wealth, well, how come they are paying more while making less, but all those big biz 'R's' that promised them they were going to get wealthy too - well, it hasn't worked out? Golly, that has to hurt. And, if they were part of the safety, war-winning, WMD believers, geez, that didn't pan out either.

There is an important piece of legislation before the Commerce Committee in Congress this week and everyone who reads this should get involved.

The Democracy Cell Project, as a 501(c)(3) will not argue one way or another on this piece of legislation, except to point out that we think neutrality of access on the net is a principle of democracy, part and parcel of freedom of speech, or in this case, freedom to be heard.

One commentor, as noted over at Eschaton this morning, called this legislation, Medicare Part D for the internet. Kevin Drum doesn't understand it, or why people think it's so bad. You see the problem.

Fortunately, there are MANY MANY posts on blogs about this issue that will help you to understand the fate of the internet is this legislation passes.

Please get involved. Here's a short list of blogs that are posting on this matter with links to the issue. There are also several blogs that have been started to deal specifically with this issue.

My DD - Has a good round-up on the issue

Taylor Marsh guest posting over at FireDogLake with a more in-depth essay and great links

You Tube - This short video explains the issue.

SaveTheInternet.com - The name says it all

Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo - Josh gives the crisp explanation

Political Animal - Comment section helps to answers the questions on the issue that Kevin poses that you may share.

Get involved now. The vote could come as soon as tomorrow. The National Journal reports that the raised profile of this issue is making a difference. Be part of that difference.

Go visit the links and make your voice heard today on this important issue.

When I started to even THINK about writing letters to the editor, Gore had lost the recount and Bush was installed. I thought, but I didn't do anything.

Eight months later I had a baby, and six weeks after that I was nursing my baby at about nine in the morning and watching the Today Show. The date was September 11, 2001.

A week later, as I watched the manipulation of fear turn into a grab for what would eventually look an awful lot like a fascist government in our midst, I knew I needed to DO something.

I was a political and media professional. I had skills and experience. How could I stand by and do nothing?

I began to feel real terror, but not from the terrorists who attacked us in New York. I felt terror at watching the freedoms and liberties I was raised to fight for, be traded off like the cheap items and a silent auction. A very silent auction.

But I had a big problem. I had a new baby.

What if Mommy says a word that the government doesn't like and they drag Mommy off to jail? Shortly after 9-11 the Congress gave the President the power to determine who is an enemy, and then pick them up, never to be seen again.

Of course, we come to find out five years later that both Congress and the Courts are just an irritating formality to the Executive. The President did not need Congress to pass legislation approving that. He would have done it anyway. And that is what I suspected in the first place.

If I had been single and childless, it would have been much easier, but now I had a baby to consider.

I called my sister (not the Bush supporter, the one who believes in the Constitution), to complain about the government. I call her everyday with a "Daily Disgrace" political report. She had been already getting these calls for sometime, when finally one day in October she asked me pointedly, "Look, when are you going to do what you know you should be doing about this? When are you going to get involved and start writing and going public with all of this stuff?"

I said, "I can't. I'm afraid. What if they don't like what I am saying? These are some seriously scary people."

I still remember the tone of her voice when she said to me, "That's why you have to do it. Because these are very scary people."

I looked at her hard. "Hey, I'm not kidding. These are scary people and they are NOT going to like what I am saying."

She put her coffee cup down, and as she stood and turned to put on her coat to leave she looked down at the baby and said, "Well then, you better be sure that whatever you have to say, you shout from the rooftops so as many people hear as possible. The more people that know what's going on, the safer we'll all be. Really, it's our only hope."

And she was right. She still is.

One foot in front of the other. Keep moving, keep going. Each thing builds on the next.

Hope conquers despair, and action vanquishes fear.

As we have discussed in this space many times, the media skews right. It's almost impossible not to notice the mulititude of conservatives vs. neutral reporters/very occasional progressive, on Sunday morning newschat shows. And yet we have seen something of a debate taking place over at Media Matters over just that fact.

Media Matters produces a study, states its methodology, and then the television folks from the traditional media strain credulity in their eagerness to refute the study's findings. In separate letters/columns to Media Matters, CBS's Public Eye's Vaughn Ververs, and Meet The Press' Executive Producer Betsey Fischer snipe at Media Matter's findings for not studying things that Media Matters never claimed it was studying in the first place, and, in fact, specifically claimed it wasn't going to study. It's roughly the equivalent of me doing a study on Idaho potatoes and including the methodology that I was studying only Idaho potatoes, and you sniping at me because I didn't include in my study the fact that there are also potatoes grown in parts of Russia.

Here's an excerpt from the back and forth between Media Matters and Fischer:

Betsy,

You ask why our report did not discuss Clinton's first term, and you say that "perhaps it's because statistics from Clinton's first term do not support their ill-defined 'conclusion.' " Later, you call our study "intellectually dishonest." You seem to be suggesting that we analyzed the data from those years, decided it didn't fit the point we wanted to make, and thus excluded it from our public report. That would have been appallingly dishonest, and it is frankly offensive for you to suggest that we have done so. I have been asked in a number of interviews why there is an imbalance on the Sunday shows, and I am always careful to say that we ascribe no sinister intentions to the producers. It is unfortunate that you apparently couldn't bring yourself to extend us the same courtesy.

Let me be clear: We didn't examine the guests from those years, so we have no idea what doing so would have showed. We decided to go back only as far as the second Clinton term because there were gaps in the Lexis-Nexis data, and we had to stop somewhere. Gathering and analyzing the data for all the nine years was itself an enormous task. Since you seem to have a complete list of guests on Meet the Press available, if you send it to us, we would be happy to analyze the first Clinton term.

As for the numbers you provide, it is you who have mixed apples and oranges. You say that for the first Clinton term, the guest breakdown was 56 percent Democrats to 44 percent Republicans. Since you are speaking only of Democrats and Republicans, the relevant comparison in our data is not the overall guest list, which includes not only elected and administration officials but all guests, including journalists; the relevant comparison is the list of elected and administration officials.

The complete inability for the traditional media to even hear the word bias, let alone be willing to examine that bias honestly and forthrightly is disturbing. This sort of snarky knee-jerk response that Fischer gave to Media Matters provides nearly as much insight into the problem as the Media Matters study itself. For how can you solve a problem, when you spend all of your time denying its very existence?

[Editor's Note: The following essay was submitted by DCP blogger Ladytechie (and somehow the original editor's note was omitted). Her point reinforces the concept mentioned by William Raspberry that Otter brought to our attention several weeks ago here and here.]


Wherein I timidly propose that, once in while, we should watch O'Reilly or Hannity or Joe Scarborough.

Now I know that most of you have raced to the bottom of the page to hit the comments section to question my sanity. Hear me out.

We have talked much about where do we go from here. Most of us agree on one thing whatever our pet issues are: that the climate has suddenly turned and administration change is now possible. Not only possible, but probable.

How do we make sure that it happens? One voter at a time, of course. Now is the time to reach out to those whom before we would have assumed were so hardened in their beliefs that we would waste our time talking to them.

And here is where we need to stop avoiding the mainstream press, and even television. It is a golden rule of debate that in order to win a debate you must be able to argue both sides of the proposition.
That's where O'Reilly comes in, as does ABC, NBC, CNN and don't forget that CBS does still have a news broadcast. Whether we like it or not, the majority of those around us still get all of their news from these sources. It is so much easier to expand a conversation when you understand the other person’s frame of reference.

"I don't have to watch to know what the mainstream is saying, I can read it on the blogs, or catch a clip", you say. Yet by reading just the sound bites we miss much. We take more away from a viewing experience than just the words. The non-verbal often says as much or more. Just watching O'Reilly for example, is a wonderful exercise in interpreting body language, both his and his beleaguered guests’.

I don't for one minute suggest that we're watching to become informed. All of us here have learned about the wealth of resources on the Internet. What I am saying is that it is still true that the majority of people in the United States don't use those resources. We need to understand the world view of the nonpolitical to bring them into the process. In order to do that, we have to start where they are, not where we want them to be.

Not long ago I ran into a lady who remarked to me, “Oh, if I see it on Fox, then I know it's true.” My reaction was just as knee jerk as any good liberal… How dumb can this woman be? Yet, if I only get my information from the Washington Post, or Rawstory, or just this blog, I am as narrow minded as she is.

Civil discourse can only happen if we listen to both sides of the discussion, pay as much attention to what Condi says as we do Kerry or Kennedy. It is civil discourse that will change the direction we are taking, not a hardening of the attitudes. This is true on both sides of the aisle.

The listening has got to start someplace, let it begin with us.

~Ladytechie

The Democracy Cell Project is reporting live from the Capitol, and will be doing so all evening.

WASHINGTON D.C.-Live Blogging the SOTU, and the Alternative SOTU happenings around Washington DC from today's activities and the plans for the evening events.

Karen is reporting in to us right now.

She is standing directly front of the Capitol. A cold wind is blowing in Washington tonight. Interestingly enough, there are about 14 FEMA trucks between the protesters and the Capitol itself. It's possible, though hard to believe, that these trucks somehow got lost on their way to provide relief in Louisiana, for what other purpose could they be here, when help is still so desperately needed there?

It's sadly heartwarming to see that flags are flying at half-mast in observance of the death of civil rights icon Coretta Scott King. To the program tonight for the Alternative SOTU, we have added a bagpiper who will be playing Amazing Grace at the beginning of the event, to honor Mrs. King's memory.

Right now nationally known performers Chris Chandler and David Roe are setting up the and sound checking their instruments. They will be contributing spoken word and musical performances this evening, along with geurilla poets, jazz musicians, folk musicians, a few tap dancers (and you thought they were all tap dancers in Washington were members of Congress, busily answering corruption charges), along with The Rhythm Workers Union, who will be bringing in the "mother drum ship". We're not quite sure what a "mother drum ship is", but it is certain to be more interesting than watching Mrs.Sob Sister Alito in the gallery sitting with the self-styled Laura "I AM a Desperate Housewife" Bush.

Earlier today, Karen wandered through many alternatives to the State of the Union. One highlight of the afternoon was the large "Impeach Bush" sign being driven around the neighborhood, courtesy of The Velvet Revolution.

Gold Star Mother Cindy Sheehan is doing many events today and Karen has run into her several times, and can report that it's much warmer in Venezuela than Washington, in more ways than one.

As the day wore on, it became clear that more people than ever before, are coming out of their homes and into the street to protest this president's policies and the lies and deceptions he and his administration have used to sell them to an unwitting, and sadly, and unquestioning public. But the public of years before, is not the public this administration will be facing this evening. The public is sending this President a message-his popularity is at 39% for a reason. People are angry, dissatisfied, and remember the sixteen words from the State of the Union of two years ago. And they remember that they were lied to. And the anger and the questions have just begun.

The limosines are beginning to arrive, carrying the scions of political power once more behind the gates, and away from We the People. But not for long.

Evening has fallen in Washington, and the perfume of dissent is sweeping briskly through the air.

Written and reported by Karen B. and Casey Morris, The Democracy Cell Project

[Editors Note: Cross-posted at The Daily Kos. There will be live blogging of the SOTU this evening beginning at 8:45 here on The Democracy Cell Project Blog, and in the IRC Chat Room. Please come join us.]

In response to the completely asinine way The Washington Post has handled the Deborah Howell vs. The Truth fiasco, Washington Post Executive Editor, Jim Brady, will be holding an online chat, billed as a "panel discussion".

This time, he will actually have a guest, the fabulous Jane Hamsher (of firedoglake blog) who knows what she is talking about. Jane will be representing the community of people who have a liberal blog that accept comments, as opposed to Brady's last blogging expert, Hugh Hewitt. It is nothing short of bizarre that Brady would turn to Hewitt for expert insight and online whinathon about mean old liberal blog commenters, since Hewitt is a conservative with a blog that does not accept comments.

It's about damn time that Brady sits down with at least one member of an online community about which he has been complaining for days, but actually knows very little about.

The online chat is TODAY at 1 PM.

Click here to submit your questions.

[The rest of the panel includes Jeff Jarvis of BuzzMachine, Jay Rosen of PressThink, and Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit.]

If you haven't been following the story of the WaPo's aggrieved Public Editor (ombudsman), Deborah Howell, who was harshly criticized both because she has yet to represent the public, as is her job, and is sloppy with factually challenged reporting, you could go to this link and start clicking to hear the Post's er, um, highly questionable version of the story. To hear something which would actually be true, go here, here, and here.

As Josh Marshall put it:

T]he whole blow-up has created this subdiscussion about whether honorable press types like Howell and others are being mauled and knocked around and generally abused by cyber-ruffians who have been on her case over the last few days.

This stuff isn't always pretty. But, really, thank God those folks are on her tail because shoddy reporting isn't pretty either.

Bloggers hold people who post to one standard - tell the truth and be prepared when we start asking for things like proof, or facts, to post links to your proof and facts. If you don't or can't, then you print retractions. Period.

Why is that such a bizarre concept for the traditional media and in this particular instance, the Washington Post, to understand?

Maybe that's the first question to submit.

Memo to Media: Get used to it.

[Editor's Note: DCP blogger and staunch Democrat, Christy, relates her hilarious experience of "reaching out" to folks on the other side of her aisle in a piece entitled, "How It Came About That I Thanked A Republican Today". As you will see, it's not about being a Republican or a Democrat, it's about doing something, and getting involved. Thanks for showing us how it's done, Christy!]

How it came about that I THANKED a republican today....

Here is how it went down. Big lunch at my house. Dead mans lunch even since we wound up with 13 participants. Of those 13... 7 are LIFELONG republicans. Never ever been registered or even considered registering as a dem.

But, as was pointed out often, they have VOTED for dems, as with most of us it just depends on the candidate.

I must say I was honestly SHOCKED to hear these life long repells, along with the other mod repells or dems start bashing bush.

It seems even southern women can comprehend what warrantless spying means. Anyway...

The conversation, to my delight, turned to IMPEACHMENT.

An argument ensues. Not about whether he NEEDS to be impeached but whether or not the republican controlled house and senate would actually take such an act SERIOUSLY.

I admit I started the argument by pointing out he will NEVER be impeached as long as the republicans are willing to just LET Bush commit open CRIMES.

I told them ALL it did not matter THEY were lifelong yellow dog ticket republicans because NONE of the repell leaders CARED.

Ohhh it got very interesting. In the verbal melee... I had a bright idea.

I said Ok ladies hush and listen. I got my phone book popped it open to the oft overlooked gov. section and picked out one of our state's repell leaders in the senate. I will call him senator blah blah.

I dialed the number and put the call on speaker phone..

This is not the EXACT transcript of what followed but it was damn close. (I woulda recorded it but a little birdy told me that is a crime.)

The assistant, a lady, answers... The group around me goes still as mice.

Last weekend, thousands of people in 32 countries demonstrated in favor of programs to limit global warming. 189 countries met in Montreal to set environmental policy starting in 2012 when the Kyoto Accord expires. As we know, the Bush administration has been a thorn in the side of this effort, refusing to participate in a meaningful way or to show a positive intent to comply. They have used the excuse that curbing greenhouse gas emissions would slow growth and hurt our economy.

It is gratifying to see a local and elective effort to keep our global environment healthy. My city, Seattle, is a leader, but many others are uniting with us. It will be with pleasure that I take my car in for its emissions check, reduce my commute from 5 days to 4 and increase types of materials recycled. It is gratifying to read that our Mayor has helped persuade 192 other cities to agree to cut emissions 7 percent from 1990 levels by 2012.

Mayor Nickels said "We reject the idea that is put forward by our national leaders in the United States that we have a choice to save the environment or save the economy," Nickels said on Tuesday on the sidelines of the 189-nation United Nations conference on climate change. Mayor Nickels hopes results on the local and state levels will eventually lead the United States back into the Kyoto protocol for post-2012. "It is inevitable that after the cities and states show it is safe, the politicians in Washington, D.C. will join and again the United States will take its moral responsibility," he said.

At least 40 million Americans will join us to voluntarily curb their own greenhouse gas emissions! This is a bipartisan effort! The cities will join several states such as California and New York, as well as selected corporations have been following the Kyoto lead, showing that they can be more proactive than our government. Cities and individuals are pledging to use renewable energy and alternative fuels, build green buildings and cooperate with auto emission reduction efforts.

(sources: Reuters, Seattle Times, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, National Public Radio)

The DCP began as a learning and teaching community--we are all focused on using the internet to bring democracy back to this country, especially in the realms of voting reform and media reform.

We ARE the media now. And we need to utilize our not inconsiderable skills to inform, train, and motivate concerned citizens to ACT.

Over the next two months, this country needs a massive effort to speak truth to power. It must be the largest and most coordinated effort ever seen.

The pernicious acts that have been perpetrated in our name must end.

We do not believe a single action or event will make the difference; we believe that a series of well-constructed and coordinated actions will provide the backdrop for the natural evolution of political change, and that Congress will have to act to catch up with the people.

We need every single person in the progressive blogosphere to help with these efforts. This means much will be asked of each of us in terms of researching, informing, training, encouraging, writing, blogswarming, emailing, and ultimately, possibly traveling once again to Washington D.C. in January for the largest pushback yet.

There are many organizations coming together for this massive effort, including United for Peace and Justice, The World Can't Wait, Progressive Dems, the BackBone Campaign, Cities for Peace, Military Families Speak Out, and us. We have a role to play, as educators, as writers, and as activists.

Who is in? What role will you take on?

SIGN UP HERE.

Welcome to the 2005 Holiday Season!--time to start thinking ahead--not to Christmas (we hope everyone is avoiding Wal-Mart, for sure!), but to the next few weeks and January.

December 3 is the Climate Change mobilization in Montreal. Find local events or start some.

December 6 is the day Congress resumes after the holidays. Call, email and fax your Congress members to call for an end to the war in Iraq. This National Call-in Day, organized by PDA together with United for Peace and Justice and many other peace organizations, aims to flood Congress members' offices with the message for bringing this war to a close.

January 7, Progressive Democrats of America (PDA), After Downing Street, Back Bone Campaign, Democracy Cell Project, and other organizations, including United for Peace and Justice, want to encourage activists to organize public town hall meetings about ending the war, while Congress Members are home in January. These events can be meetings with supportive Congress Members or undecided or pro-war members. They can be held with a Progressive Member in a red district. They can be held without a Congress Member. Smaller groups can hold house parties or other types of events. January 7 is the national day chosen, but you can accomodate the schedules of the Members. SIGN UP HERE.

January 24 or whenever the State of the Union event is, drown out the Bush regime. PLAN NOW for drum circles, choirs singing, tap dancing, noisemakers, etc. during the speech in your local areas.

The following Saturday, come to Washington D.C. for a huge message--the END of the Bush regime.

--------------------

Democracy is not something you believe in or a place to hang your hat, but it's something you do. You participate. If you stop doing it, democracy crumbles.
- Abbie Hoffman

Yesterday was a very full day in the land of ever-changing power structures. After a few days off to recuperate from Mr. Chalabi's visit and the Election Day Pushback, the Washington DC progressive community got back in gear for the next phase.

First off, I met Stephanie at the train station--she has returned in order to go to court tomorrow morning. You may remember Stephanie from the September 26 nonviolent civil disobedience actions. Both she and Cindy Sheehan (and many others) will be in court at 9 am to have their say. Stephanie told me she would like to remind the court (and the media) that not only does she have the right to speak up to this country's leadershop, she has the responsibility to do so.

Then we hoofed it over to a reception the Progressive Dems were having. The first person we saw was Rep. Maxine Waters, who was touting a press conference for 9 am tomorrow morning. Stephanie was thrilled to meet her, but told her she had a prior engagement with the DC Court.

Rep. Waters chats with the actress Mimi Kennedy

Rep. Conyers also spoke eloquently and tonight he focused on the problems of organized labor and the corporate takeover of America. The Rev. Lennox Yearwood stepped up to the mike and rocked the place, as usual. He said that PDA does not only stand for Progressive Dems of America; it stands for People Demand Accountability. And accountability has to be there on both sides of the aisles.

We agreed with him. He also told us that he had led a group of activists across the Gretna bridge in New Orleans last week--something he said he was going to do on November 2 when he spoke at the World Can't Wait event. He said they chose November 7 to walk across the Gretna bridge because on November 7, 2006 we will be crossing more bridges, and coming together to build a better America.

Rev. Yearwood of the HipHop Caucus and Mimi Kennedy

Last year, I worked on Joe Hoeffel's campaign. I live out of state, so I sent money and wrote him a note with a couple of ideas. You can imagine my surprise and delight when I got a lovely handwritten, personal note from him, thanking me for my help and commenting on my suggestions.

I got nice handwritten notes from other folks as well, and as a result, I will be happy to work for them the next time around.

It's always a good idea to say thank you.

Yesterday, there was this tense and interesting exchange between reporters and Scott McClellan on the subject of his credibility, and his credibility at the podium:

Q Whether there's a question of legality, we know for a fact that there was involvement. We know that Karl Rove, based on what he and his lawyer have said, did have a conversation about somebody who Patrick Fitzgerald said was a covert officer of the Central Intelligence Agency. We know that Scooter Libby also had conversations.

MR. McCLELLAN: I don't think that's accurate.

Q So aside from the question of legality here, you were wrong, weren't you?

MR. McCLELLAN: Again, David, if I were to get into commenting from this podium while this legal proceeding continues, I might be prejudicing the opportunity for there to be a fair and impartial trial. And I'm just not going to do that. I know very --

I got the call from dwahzon--"Grab the camera and get to the Senate!" As I walked over there, I stopped off at one of the Senate office buildings to speak to someone I'll call "Deep Stomach."

He did a wonderful showing of the Frist staff response to the closed door session; consisting of a cross between funereal wailing and a reaction to having sat on top of a hot stove.

But he pointed out that Reid was really showing the American people that Senators can be, and should be accountable.

I headed over to another Senate office building where I ran into the famous Marvin, and we chatted a bit--he verified that no one knew what Reid was up to. He said to say "hi" to all the K-E bloggers.

I swing over to the Capitol, but no one was getting in:

In reading Karen's piece, something occurred to me -- I know a lot of Americans who despair for their democracy. They don't know what to do, or where to begin. What do we tell them?

I have also been thinking alot about Rosa Parks this week. Rosa Parks sat down, and by doing so, gave others the courage to stand up. Surely, each of us can not only do that much, but find at least one other person and help them find their voice, and their courage to stand up, too.

It doesn't matter where you begin, or what you do. Do something, and do it now.

This week, the Bush administration threw some more sand in our eyes with the nomination of Samuel Alito for the highest court in the land. It is hard to imagine a pick for the Supreme Court who has more open disdain for the process of lawmaking, our system of laws or our even-handed and even-minded democracy of checks and balances, but they did it anyway.

And why? To once again, roil the loyal opposition. To keep us busy, while they continue to cover up their involvement in the Plame Affair. To keep us busy while they loot the national treasury. To keep us busy so we done't notice that October was one of the bloodiest months in Iraq we have ever seen.

So here's the question--can we walk and chew gum at the same time? Are they right, that we can't oppose more than one thing effectively? Will their "divide the attention of the opposition" strategy work?

No, it won't, is the answer. And here is how to stop it from working.

[Editor's note: We are leaving Karen's piece up for a bit longer than we normally would have a post on top. We feel it's critical to explore and deserves more exposure. Thank you. ]

Amy posts on the previous thread:

I show up for almost everything, but I've been very disappointed in a lot of the progressives that I know in my area. They blog, they know about things, but they don't show up.

Posted by: Amy at October 31, 2005 07:59 PM

I had been thinking about the same issue tonight, as I stood in front of the White House, listening to the World Can't Wait people talking about torture, Alito, and the Bush administration. This is the beginning of the third week; I have not been there every day, but most days. Travis, Lee, Tracie, Marylou, Don and others have withstood icy rain, hecklers, Park police and tourists's questions day after day.

Tonight a woman came along and watched for a while. She asked, "But aren't you afraid to protest in front of the White House?"

"A little fear is fine," said one of tonight's speakers. "But overall, there is a lot more dissent these days, and it is important to organize so that you are not alone."

Lee shared a story from earlier today that showed how frightening this whole process can be. They took the sign that said "2 Days Until the Beginning of the End of the Bush Regime" and went over to the Supreme Court because they figured the media would be there.

Not many in the media were left, but there was a group of radical right-wingers there. They had a group of children with them. The young children were on their knees, praying. Across their mouths was red tape. On the tape was written the word "life".

(space for you to think about THAT image for a while.)

What Lee came away with from that: If they can get Alito through, nothing will stop them. They are off to the races...

From Murray Waas of the National Journal (subscription):

Vice President Cheney and his chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, overruling advice from some White House political staffers and lawyers, decided to withhold crucial documents from the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2004 when the panel was investigating the use of pre-war intelligence that erroneously concluded Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, according to Bush administration and congressional sources.

Cheney had been the foremost administration advocate for war with Iraq, and Libby played a central staff role in coordinating the sale of the war to both the public and Congress.

Among the White House materials withheld from the committee were Libby-authored passages in drafts of a speech that then-Secretary of State Colin L. Powell delivered to the United Nations in February 2003 to argue the Bush administration's case for war with Iraq, according to congressional and administration sources. The withheld documents also included intelligence data that Cheney's office -- and Libby in particular -- pushed to be included in Powell's speech, the sources said.

The new information that Cheney and Libby blocked information to the Senate Intelligence Committee further underscores the central role played by the vice president's office in trying to blunt criticism that the Bush administration exaggerated intelligence data to make the case to go to war.

You think now we can maybe have a real Congressional investigation?

Maybe a few Contempt of Congress citations?

Maybe a Congress that can do its damn job of asking questions and serving the function of being a check on the power of the Executive branch?

[Editor's note: Just a reminder that The Democracy Cell Project is non-partisan. The opinion of the blogworld expressed below is the opinion of the writer. Thank you.]

I try to read alot of blogs. I am always on the hunt for who's writing something interesting, and who's offering a different take on the day's news. For fans of the former, there's the blog firedoglake, and for fans of the latter, there's Paul Begala's entry at Josh Marshall's TPM Cafe. Here's a bit about each:

Over at TPM Cafe, former Clinton advisor Paul Begala has written a very interesting piece on what it's like to be working in a White House that is 'under siege'. Here's a snippet, but it's worth going over for the whole read.

...This I know first hand: when The Boss explodes like that, there are two kinds of aides -- those who fight and those who flee. When he came to Washington, Mr. Bush surrounded himself with tough-minded people who seemed not to be afraid to stand up to him. But now his team is loaded with weak-kneed toadies, and Mr. Bush is home alone. Karl Rove, of course, is fending off a potential indictment. His prodigious brain has not entertained another thought in months. (That's why, I suspect, some months back Rove popped off and said liberals wanted to give terrorists psychotherapy after 9/11. It was a loopy, stupid, and distinctly un-Rovian, meltdown - the first public sign that the pressure was causing Karl to crack.)

Go here to read the rest.

The other blog I have been reading is called Firedoglake. Primarily written by an attorney and a former federal prosecutor (Reddhedd and Jane Hamsher, respectively), Firedoglake provides insight and context to the legal proceedings surrounding the leak investigation. They research the news exhaustively and put the pieces together in a way that is extremely helpful and understandable while steadfastly refusing to condescend to their audience.

Also, they are witty and clever without being either cutesy or mean. A perfect example is this morning's post. Everyone knows that Fitzgerald's office is leakproof. The only comment they ever have is no comment. And yet, Jane manages to get a story anyway:

"The spokesman for Mr. Fitzgerald, Randall Sanborn, refused to comment." I can't tell you how many times I've read that line. Every time I open a paper, it seems. And I'm always thinking, I want this guy's job -- he could be phoning it in from the high Himalayas for all we know.

So when I called him up the other day I expected the same thing. Since I'm working on a post on Fitzgerald, I had to do the obligatory request for an interview, which I knew he'd turn down, which he did.

"One more thing," I said. "I'd like to know if you could confirm the Viagra pen story."

Christine and I had our usual vigil last night, beginning just after Cindy and the Code Pink and World Can't Wait people had their first *die-in*.

And then, about 80 eight-graders ran up to us as we were lighting the candles for the vigil. They asked what we were doing.

Christine writes:

Last night we found ourselves at a remarkable event: a planning session with Code Pink, Military Families Speak Out, United for Peace and Justice, DC Antiwar Network, the World Can't Wait's Travis Morales, Cindy Sheehan, Ann Wright, and others, all sitting around a big table at Busboys and Poets (currently THE social destination for the antiwar/peace movement in DC!).

Andy Shallal puts his head together with Cindy Sheehan

I'm not reporting on the meeting so much as sharing what we are all learning as we go along (for specifics on the outcome of the meeting, see the press advisory on the front page of this website).

It is never easy for organizations to work together, and each representative has to go back to the home organization for final approval of joint efforts. But the process was instructive and worth sharing.

Ann Wright and Travis Morales

We began (after introductions, and cheers for Ann Wright's shout-out from the Congressional gallery last week to Condileeza Rice) by setting the goals for the week: Cindy spoke eloquently about the meaning of the 2000th American death. Others brought up the Iraqi dead, the wounded, and the fact that George Bush would be having a session today with spouses and wives of dead soldiers; and that became the focus for today's actions.

We discussed the need for a beginning, middle, and end to each day and for the overall four day event.

The people present had tons of ideas about ways to drive home the messages; the challenge became to sequence those ideas in a way that amplified the messages and did not undercut them with clever but divergent concerns. It is so easy for progressives to be all-inclusive, but we need to adhere to the discipline of assuring that just the right messages get out and that messages are not stumbling over each other.

It felt rather like being in the room with a lot of artists--beginning with brainstorming all the images and ideas for a work, then the more difficult process of sequencing those ideas, losing some along the way that really belong in another work, adding new ones as the particular moments become clearer.

Over the years I have found collaborative work requires patience, perspective, clear guiding principles, and good souls. Last night we had all that, and it was good.