Why most boycotts & pressure campaigns don't work & a possible solution

[Kelvin Mace]

I was reading snopes .com today to keep up on the latest ULs and ran across this bit:

http://snopes.com/politics/war/not1dime.asp

Claim: Participating in a 'Not One Damn Dime Day' is an effective way to protest the war in Iraq.

Status: Probably not.

Excerpt

As a functional protest, this one is equally off the mark. Although a boycott can be an active form of protest (even though boycott participants are in effect doing nothing, they're following a course of action that directly affects the object of their protest), boycotts succeed by causing economic harm to their targets, thereby putting them out of business or at least requiring them to change their policies in order to remain in business. But the target of this boycott isn't an entity that has the power to bring about the desired resolution (i.e., the government) — those who will be economically harmed by it are innocent business operators and their employees.

Let me add to this that other problem with boycotts and calls to write this senator or that congressman is dilution of effort. On any given day in the liberal blogsphere, there are a number of such efforts, each trying to shine a light on an issue. This is a good idea in theory, but in practice, no matter how much light we have, it seldom manages more than a dim glow because of the number of issues it must illuminate.

Put another way, each of us is like an atom of uranium. The more of us that concentrate on an issue, the more "radioactive" the issue becomes. If enough of us manage to get together on an issue, then the issue achieves critical mass and an explosion (a result) occurs. There are a number of examples of this, the most recent was getting Barbara Boxer to stand and challenge the Ohio vote (Please, no arguments about whether this was a good idea of not, take that debate elsewhere and consider only the point I am making). If we had tried to push all the Dems, or even a small group of Dems, we would have failed. Instead, the effort coalesced around Barbara Boxer and reached critical mass: She signed the letter.

This also happened with a number of issues such as Trent Lott, The 60 Minutes "Memogate" (works for the right too), etc.

Folks, this is the model that works. We can only succeed only by narrowing our focus and picking one issue at a time. We keep piling onto a single issue, devoting all our attention, email, FAXes, phone calls until "critical mass" is reached and the issue goes our way.

If a key Dem is refusing to do what is right, then we start piling on him. We make him our poster child and we make sure he knows every minute of every hour of every day how we feel about the issue. We invite web sites after web site to focus on this wayward son. We encourage his constituents to visit his offices and make their displeasure known. We coordinate demonstrations at whatever events he appears at. We apply increasing amounts of pressure and we keep it on until he cries "uncle" and does the right thing.

To do this, we create a website that becomes our rallying point, as well as our polling place for deciding what issue/person we focus on. We do not change targets until either we succeed or the issue becomes moot. We then poll the people for our next target issue.

The site would allow any member to post an issue, and other members to rate the issue. Issues that get above a certain threshold then move to an action queue to be voted on. This is how we determine the next target issue.

Once a target issue is decided upon, we post links with phone numbers, email addresses, mailing addresses, office locations, relevant events (appearances, meetings, ect). Membership goes into activism/intel mode. Calling the person/organization and making their views known. Participating sites have a banner linking to us which changes as the target issue changes.

Example: Senator Reid will not move the Dems to filibuster Alberto Gonzales and we have decided he must. The alert goes out and we begin to concentrate on keeping his phones ringing, his mailboxes full and his awareness of our desires high. Any place he appears, we have demonstrators present. If he is out at a fundraiser, he knows we are there too, talking about the issue to the people shelling out money to him. We make a point of recruiting constituents to raise hell with him and let him know we are watching and we are not happy.

We keep the pressure on, building it as we can until either we get him to do right, or Gonzales is approved. The we move to the next issue.

(And yes, I know it is too late for Gonzalez, I just use him as an example).

If we want to help a candidate, we can do that as well, setting a fund raising goal and keeping that on the front burner until the goal is met. That candidate will KNOW how his supporters feel and lets face it, money talks.

Imagine how effective this could be if we succeed in getting the blogsphere to focus on one issue at a time instead of seeing our efforts mostly ignored. Issues that could be affected would be thing such as filibustering, leadership decisions (Kucinich for DNC chair?), fundraising, etc.

Folks on the left are not the only people to warrant our attention, moderates on the Right are also fair game.

I would like to hear your views on this idea. Please keep this kicked and ask others to join the discussion.

This site would run based on the will of the progressive membership. No leaders to disappoint us or "sell out". My only offer is the idea, site hosting, and organizing the initial effort. All other infrastructure would come from volunteers (programming, banner art, site maintenance etc.)

Ladies and gentleman, I propose bluenuke.com

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

The taste of Republican butt does not improve with age.

"The NeoCons can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They do not feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

[bobweaver]

1. Boycotts in combinations with strikes are very effective (remember Gallo)

When a company has a strike, that is the time to also do a boycott, because that puts intense pressure on the company from two directions. Otherwise boycotts are only half as effective.

[bluedonkey]

2. I strongly disagree

Boycotts can work!
Last I heard Sinclair is pretty pissed off and filing charges.:-)

[Kelvin Mace]

3. Please read what I said

"most" boycotts don't. I didn't say "all" I said, "most".

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

The taste of Republican butt does not improve with age.

"The NeoCons can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They do not feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

[yurbud]

4. great quote at the end

[loudsue]

5. I like what you say here, David....and I agree.

It's a good way to "heard the cats" that are Democrats! Focus really does help! And, yes, we'll have to pick our issues, and pick our battles carefully.

Right now, the ELECTION & VOTING MACHINE REFORM issue is #1, but we're going to have to do this on a State by State basis, I feel sure.

Because....if we don't get this issue taken care of before 2006, the repukes WILL HAVE a filibuster proof congress..... and we really can't afford to have even ONE more election stolen.

So...my first vote on "bluenuke" (I love the name), HAS TO BE the Election & Voting Machine Reform issue....

Do I hear an "amen"????

:kick::kick::kick:

[Ian David]

6. I agree

Concentration of efforts on one or two targets at a time.

Include in the mix:

1) Calls, faxes, emails, etc
2) Boycotts
3) Media outreach
4) Protests
5) Commerce jamming
6) Street theater
7) Civil Disobedience
8) Freeway Blogging
9) Consolidating and coordinating efforts between groups
10) "Concentration of Firepower" (For example, instead of contacting a whole bunch of Sinclair advertisers, get everyone to contact the same one or two advertiser all day long).

[Kelvin Mace]

7. Yes,

by concentrating on one target at a time, we use a little of that BushCo "shock & awe" for something useful.

If everywhere they turn, our leaders are being told to support/oppose an issue, they will get the message. Also, the "carrot" side of the "carrot and stick" tactic would be equally effective. The ability to concentrate funds to a particular candidate increases their chance of winning. We could outraise the usual jackass lobbyists our leader are beholden to. Instead, they would actuall have to pay attention to US.

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

The taste of Republican butt does not improve with age.

"The NeoCons can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They do not feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

[Kelvin Mace]

8. Certainly an issue

But we would have to narrow the issue further. For example, targeting House reps to sign on to the bill.

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

[SaveAmerica]

9. This is EXACTLY what is needed, Kerry/Edwards official web page

contained the atoms, the power behind the official blog was impressive. Each issue, as it was discovered, was reacted to by millions. That's why the Sinclair Boycott was effective (in my opinion). November 3 came around, the web page was down, atoms simmered alone, across America. I believe what you're describing is also why it was hard to get our point across before the election. There are SO MANY things wrong and we tried to let everyone know about all of them. Information overload and very ineffective. This is what Arnheim and I talked about the other night at our meeting; so much passion, energy, anger, and desire for change needs to be corralled and your idea is the perfect way to do it. It's about that main meeting place (web page/blog) and giving/getting direction.


(I'd like to add that something like this should be done as quickly as possible while the info and energy of the 6th is fresh. I'd also like to see that one of the first issues covered is giving political protection to Boxer and Tubbs-Jones)

[Kelvin Mace]

21. I have the domain name

and can get the basic software installed, but will need some serious programming help to build the software needed to track, rate, and bvote on the issues.

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

The taste of Republican butt does not improve with age.

"The NeoCons can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They do not feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

[snot]

10. Pls excuse multiple kicks to come

[snot]

11. Kick--and p.s., ideally, this shd NOT just be a Kerry-Edwards site

This should be a site for power to the people.

[Kelvin Mace]

22. I wouldf NOT be a site tied to any specific group

It would be a stand alone site. Members would pick the issues, rank them and vote on them.

We would then set up a newtork of banners on lefty sites which would act like a "bat signal", calling out the troops.

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

The taste of Republican butt does not improve with age.

"The NeoCons can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They do not feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

[snot]

12. P.P.S.--A challenge will be

similar to any election: making sure voting as to which issues are most impt is based on "one person, one vote" (no multiple voting)?

E.g., what's to stop a Repub from piling votes up on peripheral issues?

Can any computer geek DU'ers help?

[Kelvin Mace]

23. Infiltration should be moderately easy to spot

but even so, I don't think they would be able to interest enough freepers to spend time screwing with us. And if they do, screwing with us means they aren't up to other mischief.

As I mentioned, I will need geek assistance. I am looking at using Xoop as the base software for content management.

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

The taste of Republican butt does not improve with age.

"The NeoCons can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They do not feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

13. The boycott worked against the Dixie Chicks and I will use it....

against Right Wingers! Yes, I will deny them the ability to make a living! I will NOT buy their products!

[SaveAmerica]

14. They were organized and that made the news, we have to work

with the fact that only 'certain things' make the news. The main idea is that some boycotts work, but are only effective if the masses find out about it and it's organized.

[Kelvin Mace]

26. We are not neccesaily intestested

in making the news. Which are interested in making our views know and encouraging our leaders to ACT. That in itself will make news.

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

The taste of Republican butt does not improve with age.

"The NeoCons can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They do not feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

[Kelvin Mace]

33. Organizaztion is the key

Which is what the site should help accomplish

As to the press, this isn't about pressuring the press, but an individual person or group. The narrower the focus, the greater the pressure.

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

[Kelvin Mace]

24. Right now our problems seems to be

our own "leaders" won't fight. So, we need to use this site to kick them in the ass until they do.

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

The taste of Republican butt does not improve with age.

"The NeoCons can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They do not feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

[steelyboo]

15. I like this idea a lot. I would ask that you look at this idea as well, as

I think it could help supplement yours in a broader strategy that we will need to take down the Right.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=256678

If you wish to discuss this further, please PM me.

[Kelvin Mace]

25. I think your first instinct is right

We can't beat the enemy by becoming the enemy. We must always take the high ground. That said, that does not rule out efforts to use things like letters to the editor, flyers, web sites, etc to make sure people know the opposition's record of sleaze. But anything which is done must be 100% factual. No innuedeno or half-tuths.

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

The taste of Republican butt does not improve with age.

"The NeoCons can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They do not feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

[pearl]

16. Focus is the key

Having worked on the stopdrlaura.com campaign.

This is exactly what needs to happen. The people whom the action
is directed to wards have to know their being "targeted"
The decision makers have to feel the pain directly.

One or two at a time:
I suggest targeting the corporate media,

one slimeball paid political pundit at a time;
Russert, Matthews, Scarborough.
Hey, that's GE

Hey GE, if you're going to be in the WAR business,
get the holy fuck out of the news business.

[bpilgrim]

17. sounds similar to MoveOn's formula, which has a PROVEN track record

so of course i LOVE the idea :bounce:

one suggestion i would make is to allow all issues to be discussed and encourage folks to fight for their issues while at the same time ELEVATING, through the above mentioned process, a few KEY ISSUES that need to be dealt with IMMEDIATELY and COLLECTIVELY.

it adds to the 'CHATTER' and helps to keep them off their toes :evilgrin:

we are POWERFUL because we are so many, that is certainly our strength and if we can FOCUS our energies NOTHING will be able to stand up to us.

thanks for sharing :toast:

peace

[Kelvin Mace]

30. This is how I envision it

A forum to discsuss various issues and make your case

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

[Luminous Animal]

18. An excellent idea

Though I think it could be broadened to 3-4 issues at once with 3-4 separate group of targets. I was once in an organization in San Francisco called the Women's Action Coalition which had a membership of 300-500 women. Committees were formed to work on individual issues, the campaign (lobbying, protest, etc.) was mapped out in committee and then broght to the general membership for suggestions and fine-tuning. Doing this allowed us to work on more than one issue at a time without getting bogged down with too many voices involved in the planning process.

The main stream is important. Send out press releases to the media but also pinpoint journalists who have reported on a specific issue and feed them information.

[Kelvin Mace]

31. The trouble is

if we broaden the scope to multiple issues, we risk diluting our efforts. We might have several approved issues in the queue so that people can be ready to hit the ground running as soon the current issue is resolved.

Also, press releases and hitting the press is good, but I think we should just let the press know when we will be demonstrating so they cover the issue.

Once an issue is adopted for action, but before it is acted on, we should then start hammering out the strategy to use, tailoring each action to suit the situation.

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

[Luminous Animal]

34. RE: The trouble is...

Actually, I see it opposite. By focusing on one issue at a time only, you lose out on soliciting aid from those who may feel passionate about one issue and not another.

Let's consider this scenario... you have one group of people who are committed to preserving social security, they compile the research and map out the plan of attack for the campaign, they then solicit help from ALL the membership and all the blogosphere to make it happen. Meanwhile, another group is passionate about voting reform, they, in turn, compile the research and map out the campaign, again soliciting help from the ENTIRE membership.

In this model, only those who are most interested in an issue will do the initial legwork, while having the entire membership on hand to make the action work. Also, in this way, you can engage the interest and energy of most of the membership at all times and avoid having people become bored and drop out.

[Kelvin Mace]

35. The idea is that if the issue has enough support

it gets to become an "action" issue. Groups who think something is important lobby other progressives to vote for their cause to be next. What you are describing is pretty much what we have now.

SS would certainly be an issue, so we must get a promise from the Dem leadership that they will fillibuster ANY attempt to "reform" SS.

The SS partisans present this as there proposed action and show off what they have dug up as a plan of action. When they persuade enough members to vote for their issue, it becomes the issue that is acted upon and is acted upon by EVERYONE. We bring the full weight of the group to bear on extracting a promise IN WRITING that ANY plan by the GOP will be scuttled.

The bat signal goes out and the campaign begins. Even while all this is going on, other groups with other issues are lobbying for votes for their issues. The point is to be able to deliver overwhelming force to bring a lawmaker to heal in the shortest time possible.

We must use the doctrine of "overwhelming force" on these people. No surrender, no retreat, no quarter asked nor given.

*If* we recruit enough people, it might be possible to take on multiple issues, with the undersdtanding that if one issue runs into stiff resistance, we start bringing in re-inforcements from the others to increase pressure.

No compromise, no deals, no second chances, comply or we will keep applying noogies to your head until we bore through your skull

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

[ooglymoogly]

19. i'm going to haul this out one more time

REMEMBER ANITA BRIANT one of the most successful boycotts of all time.
boycotts only work if they are persistent over a period if time.

[Luminous Animal]

20. Kick!

Because this really is a great idea. With the MSM doing their best to marginalize and demonize the blogosphere something like this that actually focuses on action and results could do much to make the internet politically relevent to the average person.

[Kelvin Mace]

36. It also allows

us to bypass the MSM

[Bouncy Ball]

27. While I disagree about the boycott thing

I do fully agree with the Applied Focus Theory (as I now call it). I've seen it work beautifully.

[spatlese]

28. I love the idea...

especially about picking a target issue and focusing our efforts on that issue and having a 'priority list' per se.

That way, we can keep the pressure on one particular issue and make an impact.

[justiceischeap]

29. I know many don't like PETA but

This is exactly what they do and have been very successful in doing so.

[Kelvin Mace]

32. Now polling for the name of the group

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2927641

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

[Cocoa]

37. this is SO not what Snopes is supposed to be about

what does a site that's supposed to be about urban legends have to do with protest strategy?

And remember, Snopes was horribly wrong about Michael Moore and the Saudi flight.

[Kelvin Mace]

38. They also handle email scams

chain letters, etc. Snopes kind of branched out because some things didn't actually fit the UL definition.

Also, in fairness to Snopes, he did correct the bin-Laden/Moore piece and admit error.

Edit: add comments from Snopes:

That set me off on a tirade, and it shouldn't have. Part of Mr. Moore's statement has since been proved to be correct — during the ban on air travel, some Saudis (including members of the bin Laden family) were transported by air to assembly points in the U.S. in preparation for their leaving the country. In an earlier version of this article, I ranted and raved about his avowing bin Laden flights had taken place while no one was allowed to fly. Yet some did, at least within the U.S.

I shouldn't have yelled at him. He was right about that.

Actually, I shouldn't have yelled at him even if he'd been dead wrong about everything. There's no good excuse for my having gotten vitriolic about Michael Moore as I attempted to address the substance of what he said. I regret having done that because it's just flat-out the wrong thing to do under any circumstance. Michael, if you're out there, please know that I am sorry for having said hurtful things. The world is full enough already with pain and miserableness for me to want to add to it or to want to direct any of it your way.

That is a pretty absolute admission of error and apology.


David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

The taste of Republican butt does not improve with age.

"The NeoCons can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They do not feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

[Tactical Progressive]

39. Rigid single-issue is bad

It just isn't the way the world works. There might be two hearings in a day or within a few days, on say Social Security and a bad nomination. It doesn't make sense to jump in fits and starts all the time. That would diminish groundwork and preparation and leave the people we are trying to motivate unaddressed until the wave hits.

Further, from a personal perspective, different sub-constituencies are more motivated by different issues. People need to be able to choose and keep continuities of focus on their concerns even when they aren't the immediate top priority. It's an over-reaction to go from one extreme - unfocused, to the other - single focus.

I love your idea, but keep a little balance in it.

I'd suggest a current 'Priority-1', or maybe a couple depending on circumstance, then a few 'High Priorities' on deck, maybe on page 2. Give guidance for everyone to put a majority, or all at crunch time, of their effort into Priority-1, to service your main goal, with surplus time or effort into one of their own high concerns.

That keeps main energies on the top priority while still allowing for excess energy to be funneled to individual-priority issues. That means Congresswomen are still being pushed on Social Security in the weeks leading up to some SS hearings, even during Abu Gonzales week of hearings. People can swing the majority of their efforts to help out each other on the cause of the day, while still attending to their own.

The issues in Washington are dynamic, as are people's concerns and energies. Provide for a measure of it.

[Kelvin Mace]

40. It is single issue until we accomplish

that particular action, then we move on to the next. As I commented earlier, until we have a large enough membership, we would have to focus on one issue at a time. Once you have a large enough memebership you can look at secondary issues.

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

The taste of Republican butt does not improve with age.

"The NeoCons can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They do not feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

[noamnety]

48. It wouldn't prevent people from taking action elsewhere

If there was a specific issue being worked through this site, and something else urgent came up, there's no law saying DU and bloggers can't organize a separate campaign, but this group would focus their efforts on one at a time, if I understand it right.

[Kelvin Mace]

49. Correct

If you look at the other thread where I am discussing some of the mechanics of the site, you can get a better idea of what I am trying to do.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2939113

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

The taste of Republican butt does not improve with age.

"The NeoCons can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They do not feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

[Tactical Progressive]

50. I understand

I just don't think that's the way our politics works, and see it as an extreme reaction to a too unfocused current state of affairs. From one extreme to the other.

There are typically two or three issues on the front burners. Right now it's the AG nomination in play, with Social Security, a judicial nomination, and Iraq elections all coming up, and the tsunami and electoral certification on the wane. If you want to pick just one, go ahead, but I don't see that as particularly wise, either from an effectiveness perspective on the results side, or from a motivational perspective on the personal input side. Some people care alot about Social Security while maybe not being that concerned about Abu Gonzales.

I love the idea, really. I just think there should be SOME flexibility in it. Not alot, but some. Not forty issues on the menu, but a top issue with one or two or maybe three in warmup. There is room, for instance, for letters to Congressmen about the impending Social Security debate even while AG nomination hearings are going on. And I would think that people working on SS efforts might be more likely to swing some effort to try to block a nomination if they were already involved on-site than if they weren't already there invested in the nomination question on its own.

I see nothing wrong at crunch time, say in the days immediately leading up to a Senate hearing, or to address a media outburst on an issue, with swinging almost all effort to a single cause, depending on the heat. But I really think there are always a few high-priority issues that 1) deserve some measure of continuity of attention and 2) would round out the energies and interests of the diverse set of people who will no doubt will be involved. Plus 3) the amount of 'swing' available will be a function of how many people are already involved in other issues. If it's just the one previous issue drawing people for the next effort, that's simply less people already involved. Meaning more people who need to be marketed to to draw them in.

Good idea, just not so extremely implemented would be my suggestion.

[Kelvin Mace]

51. Again, nothing is set in stone

There is the possibility that we may have a primary and several secondary issues. As long as the primary is meeting its objective of going after the the person in need of persuasion, I'm a happy camper.

The idea to is to have a feedback mechanism so activists can know the effects of their actions. If you look at the alert banner and see that 62% of our members assigned to this action have contacted the party, you have a feel for what needs to be done. If you haven't bugged the guy today, then you log in and bug him. If the primary alert is at 100% for that day, you can go and concentrate on a secondary issue.

The idea for the site is to focus on a narrow range of issues and keep up the pressure until the mission is accomplished or the issue becomes moot. Also. we want to create a feedback mechanism to measure effort.

The other plan for the site is to have an escalating response. We start an issue by making sure that the guy we target gets 500 emails a day for a week. If there is no change, we escalate to 1,000 emails and 100 phone calls a day; then 2,000 emails and 200 phone call plus 50 FAXes, etc.

Say the issue is SS destruction and we pick a moderate GOP (like Spectre, Snow, Chaffee, etc) for action. We demand that they start telling the truth about the BushCo lie of a crisis. Aside from emails, phone calls, letters, etc, we coordinate with interested groups in their state (say seniors). We find out the senator will be at a retirement home and we make sure that EVERY resident of that home has a list of questions to ask the senator. Later we make sure that protesters show up at events with signs demanding they protect SS and tell the truth.

How each issue is acted upon will be planned out in advance.

We don't disagree. I just want to keep the number of issues dealt low and have a central issue that gets ever increasing attention as time goes on.

Local and state politicos are VERY sensitive to this kind of effort.

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

The taste of Republican butt does not improve with age.

"The NeoCons can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They do not feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

[Kelvin Mace]

41. Kick

[Freddie Stubbs]

42. Wouldn't this wind up hurting progressive businesses?

The people who are most likely to participate in this boycott probably don't shop much at Wal-Mart, or spend much money at Starbuck's. They probably spend a disproportionate amount of money at locally-based businesses. Those are the ones that are going to get hurt.

[Kelvin Mace]

43. Huh?

The point of the site is about consolidating action on specific issues. For example, bringing pressure on a key senator to vote a particular way. The example just shown was getting Barbara Boxer to contest Ohio. When the effort centered on ONE senator instead of the a dozen seantors, it succeeded.

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

The taste of Republican butt does not improve with age.

"The NeoCons can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They do not feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

[Freddie Stubbs]

45. I was talking about the "Not one damn dime" campaign

[Kelvin Mace]

46. OK, I was confused.

[Joanne98]

44. The only boycott I ever saw work was the grape boycott

in the 70's. It had a lot of cooperation and it was still hard. Murkins don't care. They won't even boycott Walmart to save their jobs. The only boycott I have hope in is the DOLLAR boycott. Sell the dollar, buy EUROS. Screw the Wall Street banks. This might really work.

[Kelvin Mace]

47. Again, something that could be proposed for

the type of site I am talking about.

I will be setting up the site and will need volunteers to help set it up.

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

The taste of Republican butt does not improve with age.

"The NeoCons can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They do not feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.