Where did the Deaniacs go?

[cal04]

Ginny Ross of Portland, who is a member of the Democracy for Oregon Steering Committee

Ever wonder where all those pioneering, fund-raising, people-powered, first-time activists for Howard Dean went after March '04? Did they "unsubscribe" and take the summer off? After Nov. 3rd did they bite back the sweet temptation to say "We told you so, dood" and hang up their mousepads and shoeleather? Nothing of the kind! We still hear Howard Dean's gruff inspiring phrase ringing in our ears --- We Want Our Country Back!

In April, we sat in awe as Howard Dean immediately picked himself up after the Primary, created Democracy for America and went about, in a matter of weeks, raising and spending $5 million to put hundreds of progressive candidates across the nation in office on election day. So following Dean's lead, we refused to give up the fight to put ordinary citizens back in charge again. We stuck together, continued to Meetup, and we are still an active community today. After working non-stop to support Kerry through an exhausting General Election, we summoned the energy to knit our group back together. To help place a veneer of officialdom around our rabble of patriots wielding cyber pitchforks and torches, we did the obvious thing. We incorporated.

With our shiny new Democracy for Oregon, we will bring Howard Dean's national initiatives right to the pub in your town every month. We suspect this will glue us together, amplify our voices, fill our inboxes to brimming, and forge us into an awesome team of coordinated progressive activists ready for any campaign. Looking back over 2004, thousands of us Oregon Dean supporters (like Blue Oregon contributors Lew Frederick and Andrew Simon) did our utmost to elect Kerry and other Dems in vital races throughout the state. Our historic Dean houseparty fundraisers became Kerry fundraisers. Our Dean Shoeleather Brigade worked tirelessly registering thousands of voters to elect Kerry.

But I wanted to let you all know that in the midst of working for Kerry and other Dems this year, we never lost sight of the long term battle Dean opened our eyes to. We have to restore our democracy for ordinary citizens again. This is the message and appeal of the ongoing Democracy for America campaign: That when corporate interests control the debate through media consolidation, and they also control the candidates through campaign financing, real democracy for ordinary American citizens (of any party) is doomed. We must face this fact and fight back. Howard Dean did, and we can too.

http://www.blueoregon.com/2004/12/where_did_the_d.html

[bahrbearian]

1. We are still here, and "I told you so"

[RubyDuby in GA]

3. I'm still here too

And I do try to restrain my I told you so's. Take over your local party, then take over your state party. That's part of my dastardly plan :evilgrin:


on edit: my bad, I meant to respond to the original message. I've been on vacation too long...

[MercutioATC]

8. Same sentiment here.

How'd your "electable" boy do? Huh?

[Bimini_Twisted]

65. I still scream for Dean!!

[48pan]

2. Told you so... Na na na na na....

We're too depressed to gloat.

[janx]

4. DFA Meetup next week in a town near you!

;-)

[Radical Activist]

5. Correction to the article

DFA did not raise money to just support progressive candidates as the article indicates. It gave money to support moderate and progressive Democrats both. Of course, it's easier to raise money and get support from Oregon progressives if you present DFA as an organization for progressives and lead by a progressive.

Dean supporters will often claim that everyone knows Dean is a moderate, not a liberal. This article presents another picture and highlights the doubletalk that permeates the Dean movement. Dean presented himself as a vehicle for progressive change to some audiences and as a safe moderate to other audiences. It appears that Oregon DFA is following that same pattern by presenting itself as a progressive organization to a group of hard core Dems.

On a thread about Kerry leading progressive groups someone asked why we should allow a moderate to lead the progressive movement. I ask the same question about Dean.

[janx]

6. "Progressive" does not mean "Left."

You might use the term that way; most Deaniacs don't, and Dean does not.

[Radical Activist]

7. Yes, it does meant that to everyone else in America

I guess I could appeal to Republicans by calling myself a conservative and when they notice that I don't hold any conservative positions on the issues claim that I have a new definition for the word and that it isn't right-wing anymore. I think that would be a little dishonest though. Don't you?

[janx]

11. No, I don't.

And those who support Dean don't either.

Give it up, RA.

[Radical Activist]

19. I guess normal words

lose all their meaning and become something new when Howard Dean uses them. The same must be true for phrases once use to indicate that a person is a liberal.

[janx]

20. Progressive:

Definition: (n) a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties
a tense of verbs used in describing action that is on-going
(adj) favoring or promoting reform (often by government action)
(adj) advancing in severity; "progressive paralysis"
(adj) favoring or promoting progress; "progressive schools"
(adj) (of taxes) adjusted so that the rate increases as the amount increases
(adj) gradually advancing in extent

http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/progressive

When we use the term (and we usually use it in its adjective form), we are talking about reform.


It's not a new idea or a new term.

[Radical Activist]

21. If you use a generic enough definition

anyone and anything can be called progressive. The same can be done with broad definitions of liberal, moderate, or conservative.

Wikipedia shows the conventional meaning:

Progressivism or political progressivism is any of several historically related political philosophies or political ideologies. There are also a number of Progressive political parties in various countries. All of these are primarily (though not necessarily exclusively) identified with the political left.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism

The three Progressive Party candidates in US history were T. Roosevelt Bob LaFollete and Henry Wallace. All known as left-wingers.

[janx]

23. Teddy Roosevelt was not a left winger.

You've just proven my point.

[Radical Activist]

25. For his day

he was, and he spent a lot more time talking about abuse of corporate power than Dean ever will. He bolted the Republican Party and ran as a Progressive because the incumbent Republican was too conservative.

[Cheswick2.0]

45. For his day he was?

Are you under the mistaken notion that political position has become more and more left as time goes on? LOL
TR was not left, for his day or any other.

[madfloridian]

24. Again:

Definition: a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties
a tense of verbs used in describing action that is on-going
favoring or promoting reform (often by government action)
advancing in severity; "progressive paralysis"
favoring or promoting progress; "progressive schools"
(of taxes) adjusted so that the rate increases as the amount increases
gradually advancing in extent

You are a progressive, I am a progressive, we are all progressives. You are just being silly about your lefty views.

[madfloridian]

12. Haven't you heard? Dean is using the word "reform" quite often now.

So now you will have to not like that either. LOL

[Radical Activist]

15. If he actually acts like a reformer

I won't mind at all. I only mind we he implies or claims to be something he is not, and I feel the same about DFA claiming to be a progressive organization for progressives to take action. It takes resources away from real progressives who will fight for progressive values.

[madfloridian]

18. I have an idea!

Go to Amazon, or Barnes and Noble, put out a little to buy his book, and then you can blast or not blast from a stronger position. You will actually know what he thinks.

It is a powerful book, and he spares no one the criticism they deserve, not even himself. If you really are sincere, you need to read it.

[Cheswick2.0]

50. That is your real gripe isn't it?

You felt that your candidate owned the votes and money of progressives and liberals.

Dean didn't mislable himself and the people who supported him didn't either. But you continue to for some weird reason.

[Zhade]

77. I'm not a Deaniac (he was my #2 choice), but you're very correct here...

You felt that your candidate owned the votes and money of progressives and liberals.

A common, arrogant belief displayed by many Kerry partisans, indeed!

[Cheswick2.0]

48. You supported DK.... hardly a liberal... not even as liberal as Dean

but yet his supporters kept claiming all during the primaries that he was the real liberal in the race> not hardly.

[PassingFair]

55. Wow, Rad!

Glad you're able to speak for "everyone else in America"! For your info, this "else" and a lot more "elses" like me believe HD to be a progressive candidate. Not left/liberal, but progressive.

[InvisibleBallots]

67. I've always been very critical of Dean

Yeah, he's a moderate, yes, especially economically he's never been progressive.

Dean has a grassroots organization behind him. That's the difference - democracy. It's not about Dean, the second rate politician. It's about all the people that chose him as a figurehead for their movement.

Chomsky said it - why did the DLC attack Dean so much? It obviously wasn't because of Dean's record or his positions - the DLC mostly agrees with him. So why? Because Dean got the "unwashed masses" involved in his campaign, and that is what the DLC is afraid of.

It's not about the man it's about the movement.

[Eloriel]

82. This has to stop

I absolutely do NOT understand people who try to characterize Dean as "moderate" or, especially, in line with the DLC. He is NOT. Was he once? Yes, and that's been a long while. The DLC has changed and morphed (or perhaps people have come to understand what it really stands for) since that point.

How much more progressive can you get as to not just advocate but put into effect (in his state) healthcare for all kids and a bunch of adults as well? How much more progressive can you GET than to put into effect (in his state) a program that addresses the causes, not just symptoms, of child abuse and all the problems that stem from that? How much more progressive can you be than to be the first governor in the nation to sign and strongly support civil unions? How much more progressive can you be than to tel the blunt truth, even when it's likely to get you criticized to the max? Even the vaunted "progressive" Dennis Kucnich isn't ThAT progressive. How much more progressive do you want than to advocate FDA processes (since he is an M.D.) for medical marijuana? How much more progressive do you need to be than to put aside millions of acres of land safe from development?

Could he have done more? You find me a perfect progressive politician somewhere and then we'll talk. Not even Wellstone was perfect, nor Feingold either. Where some people found him insufficiently progressive, I see that he got the job DONE, unlike others who take beautiful but impractical positions which never get put into effect. I'll take the pragmatic, doable approach, thank you.

I've been a Dean watcher and fan from very early on -- was among his first supporters here at DU, and I've watched him carefully. AFAIC, he defies categorization. As an extremely staunch liberal myself, there are very, very few of his positions that trouble me, and most of the ones that did (a very small number) I saw him moderate (uh, move left on) considerably during the primaries as he listened to the people -- the only politician I know of who does that -- and got properly educated.

[bahrbearian]

13. Isn't Kerry the" most Liberal Senator,"

Shouldn't he lead the progressives, by that logic.

[Radical Activist]

16. If that were true

it would make sense. I don't recall Kerry making an effort to appear to be more liberal than he is during the election.

[JNelson6563]

14. Dean himself is moderate

I see no conflict with moderate and progressive being used together.

Julie

[Radical Activist]

17. They are different terms

with different meanings. If the article had said "progressives and moderates" it would have been more accurate.

[janx]

30. Real progressivism involves reform, or change, as defined.

It doesn't define temporary labels in regard to that change. And yes, the term is relative over the ages. That's because it is *by definition* a broad one.

That is why both Teddy Roosevelt and George Wallace can be loosely defined as progressives. It has absolutely nothing to do with their very separate ideologies. It has nothing to do with ideology at all. In politics and history, ideology is applied to the term but is not a part of its definition. That's why Teddy Roosevelt, one of the greatest conservatives (in terms of conservation--not one specific kind of religion) is termed a progressive. That's why Howard Dean advocates progressive policies--policies of reform in government--without advocating the throwing of rocks at the World Bank.

That's why I think it is an unfortunate term for those on the far left of the political spectrum to use, frankly. Trying to tailor it to mean a specific kind of change during a specific era just doesn't work. That's not what the word means, and to pretend otherwise strikes me as a cheap shot and a desperate one. "We don't want to be called liberals--we're progressives" is just a reaction to the demonization of the word liberal (again, not a specific time/ideology) as defined by the people who hijacked the Republican party.

People in this country are going to have to realize that the temporary labels we so stupidly contrive and depend on today have no real relevance in the larger scheme of things. The old labels--like conservative, for instance--have been turned on their heads since the hijacking of the Republican party.

But we're so fond of making up terms and classifying people, and with the media's constant cheap marketing of politics, this has increased at such a rate that we are all really making fools of ourselves.

/rant

[demwing]

43. Progressive Label

Unfortunately we live in a 30 second world, sound bites rule over sound policies, and prepackaged TV images have replaced our imaginations.

Under these circumstances, the party or movement that doesn't grab an image and define itself quickly, leaves the task to less friendly and supportive influences.

So I see nothing wrong with people identifying with the Progressive image. It says "I'm for intelligent reform, populist government rule, and individual liberty"

It also allows those who would only identify themselves as "Conservatives" to find common ground with those who would only identify themselves as "Liberals."

Now what in the world is wrong with a label that does all that?

[quaker bill]

22. In an age of right wing hegemony

"moderates" can be progressive too. I know you love the ideological purity of the far left, but in all honesty, we are simply going to need more votes than that.

If folks on the left want to win, they are simply going to have to learn to get along with some people they don't always agree with. It is called community building, something I was once lead to understand as a "liberal" value. Community building only occurrs where there is respect for a diversity of opinion.

Dismissal of "moderates" as something less than ideal, is simply not the way to get the job done. Tolerance is a bilateral transaction. I recommend you get used to the concept or grow comfortable in preaching to an ever smaller choir. You pick.

[Radical Activist]

26. I'm fine with building coalitions

and a big tent. That's not what this is about. To me, this is about a moderate taking limited energy and resources from the progressive movement and diverting them to a moderate agenda and to a leader that does not represent the values of real progressives.

I'm find with a liberal that I disagree with sometimes or one who makes appeals to moderate voters. This is something different. Dean stopped pretending to be a liberal sometime in December of '03 and the rest of us should stop pretending that Dean and DFA are effective vehicles for a liberal movement.

[madfloridian]

27. List the movements Dean is stealing momentum from.

Let's get this out in the open. We are very moderate folks, if you don't like it get over it. Moderates are often liberal on some issues, and often more moderate on others.

You are so locked into labels, that you do not believe anything at all. You spout the word liberal as though it were sacred.

Liberal means open-minded. I am that way, Dean is that way. If you are not you are not a liberal.

[Radical Activist]

28. Peace movement

People who opposed the war in Iraq had their efforts spent on a man who supported the continued occupation for several more years, just like Kerry and Bush.

Any organization that actually does work to elect liberal Democrats. I think there is a bait and switch going on where liberals are encouraged to donate to DFA thinking that it will make the party more progressive. But, that isn't always the case. There is no condition of a candidate being liberal or progressive to get DFA support. If DFA is an organization to build up favors for and promote Dean that's fine, but that should be the stated purpose.

And really any other organization that could use the money and volunteer effort of liberals who are supporting Dean so that Dean can go on to promote an agenda very slightly to the left of the Democratic establishment people are so sick of.

Maybe the DFA should present itself as a grass-roots reform organization for moderate Democrats instead of a vehicle for progressive activism.

[madfloridian]

31. How is Dean stealing from the peace movement?

I fought very hard against this war. I got very angry at some of the groups that held TV rallies, pretending to be anti-Iraq-war. Then when the cameras came on they supported every cause but that. But put people on whom they knew would offend a viewing public not that extreme, but definitely anti-war.

That was wrong.

Your premise is very flawed.

[janx]

34. We're starting to sound like teachers, MF...

:hug:

[madfloridian]

35. Well, hell, we are! Guess it is ok. It stays in the blood.

:hug:

[janx]

38. Trying not to sound too didactic, but I think that RA

(RA, I apologize for this format and for the fact that it sounds as if we are talking elsewhere) is a smart and idealistic person.

People don't come any better than that!

[Radical Activist]

41. Thank you

I really don't mean to be insulting to anyone who supports Dean and I try not to bring my posts down to personal attacks. I do have issues with him as a candidate and leading figure of the left for exactly the reasons I stated in this thread. This is my issue with the guy and the reason I can't stop myself from posting my opinions about him.

[janx]

47. I like that about your posts.

He might not be the leader of your specific ideology.

But without him, the people--of any ideological persuasion--may be...well, you know. Disenfranchised. (I'm trying to be polite on a public message board.) ;-)

[Eloriel]

83. Well, you are being insulting

Very.

And patronizing as well.

Do you really think I and other Dean supporters don't have the intelligence to sort out what he stands for, who he is, what he's doing? VERY insulting.

Further, of any politician I can think of, pretty much thru time, there's no one who comes close to Dean in being very clear about who he is and what he stands for.

[madfloridian]

85. He is NOT a leading figure of the left.

He is just a leader of a group of people who are fed up with the status quo.

I posted in another forum that he was very skeptical of the "radical left", just as he is of the "radical right."

The radicals on either side do not have a clue what we are about, and the radicals on the left are equally harmful to our country. Why? Because they demand
it be their way. Or as Dean said in his book, they call anyone who does not meet their revolutionary standards part of the "bourgeouis capitalist establishment."

[madfloridian]

53. I agree in some ways.....but why go after a man so much?

When he is a good man who cares about the party? There are several here who are so idealistic that there is no one to meet the criteria.

[Radical Activist]

40. At those rallies

You may have seen Kucinich or Sharpton speaking like I did, but you would never have seen Dean who was afraid of being seen with those kind of people.

I helped oganized protests against the war and I wanted a candidate who actually advocated ending the war, which is something Dean never did in a way that was any different from the plans presented by those who supported the war. I don't believe Dean ever represented the agenda of the peace movement other than the fact that he opposed it early on. After that point he wasn't much different than anybody else.

[madfloridian]

60. He never claimed to do so.

He goes into the myth that he is or ever was a radical leftist in his book.

I wish all you folks who seem to find so much to attack would buy and read his book. It is clear, coherent, passionate.

Buy it and read it, then question.

[Eloriel]

84. That would be too intellectually honest, mf

And it would take away most if not all their arguments against him. THEN what would they do, who would they demonize?

[janx]

37. I opposed the Iraq War--

along with many others. That doesn't mean I oppose all war all the time (although I would like to), because I realize that sometimes it's inevitable.

At one of the rallies/demonstrations I attended, my daughter (then 14) and I came only minutes away from the pepper gas bombs the cops directed at some of the younger set, whom we felt were a bit over exhuberant and who went against the rules (as set by our regional Peace and Justice Center). But I can't ultimately blame them; in fact I admired them for their stand--at least they had one. Some may have been more interested in the theater more than the cause, but at least they stood for something.

As Quaker Bill pointed out very well, RA, change will only come about when people are willing to compromise at least a little for the common good, especially when times become very perilous.

That's why you will find people at DU discussing things with a couple of concerned libertarians, for instance; that's why the people at the anti-Iraq demonstrations comprised people from many geographies of politics.

Try it on! It's--liberating!

[Radical Activist]

39. Then why spend your time

supporting a candidate who wanted to continue the occupation/war for several more years. Besides Dean's early opposition his position was no different from Kerry's plan about what to do in Iraq, and while I'm sure Bush is being dishonest it is no different than what Bush says he wants to do in Iraq.

There are many on the left who argue that the peace movement getting involved in electoral politics at all is a distraction and diversion of their efforts and resources. I mean those who argue for direct action and the fact that candidates rarely do everything they promise anyway no matter who you get into office.

But, if the movement did get involved in the Presidential election don't you think it should at least have gotten behind a candidate who wants to end the Iraq war instead of a man like Dean who says "The war was wrong but I'm going to keep it going for five years anyway." Someone who won't even consider cutting the pentagon budget and has the same plan for Iraq as those who supported the war does not share my views or most of those who protested the war, I believe.

[janx]

42. Dean spoke out early against this war. I became acquainted

with his opinion earlier than most because I had some cyber acquaintances on another, smaller board who were some of his earliest supporters during his governor days in Vermont--people who were defending him after he signed the civil unions bill there.

It is not an either/or situation; in fact it is fallacious logic to assert that since because I was against the Iraq War I think we should pull out all Americans.

Some maniac did this in the name of my country--wrecked another country for geopolitical idealism--and now we should let that country's people fester and rot and take care of their dead society? Are you kidding me?! Maybe--in a way--I'm more idealistic than you are; at least I feel a sense of responsibility.

[Radical Activist]

44. I think the Iraqis can do a better job

of taking care of themselves since the American way of helping Iraq involves a lot of killing.

I don't think pulling out means abandoning the country. I believe a government assembled by the UN, like they did in Afghanistan, would be more likely to succeed. I also think we should pay Iraq reparations to help rebuild their nation, which Kucinich called for as well. Pulling out doesn't mean abandoning responsibility. It would mean giving up control.

[janx]

49. I do too, RA, but the place is such a hell hole now

that few of our traditional allies (including many from the UN) will have anything to do with it. Afghanistan is not Iraq, as you well know.

Even Bush* (especially Bush*) will gladly give up control now. The whole thing makes me sick.

[Zensea]

80. I was a conscientious objector in the Vietnam War

& i still hold those beliefs & I had no problem with Dean and supported his candidacy.
You have to deal with realpolitik in this world.
I'd like all war to end & I personally would refuse again to be in the military if they decided to draft 48 year olds.
But nations, can not cut and run once they've created situations like Iraq.
That's what Dean's position is about, not about an approval of unmitigated imperialism, but a moderate and a progressive realization of if the country makes certain decisions, it has to face up to the responsibilities it has brought upon itself.
If you unjustifiably destroy something, you have a duty to fix it.
Cutting and running from Iraq after we destroyed their institutions would be a great evil, perhaps as evil as the intitial destruction.

[CTLawGuy]

87. you must understand

no matter what you thought about the wisdom of going into Iraq, you must realize that we are the dominant political force there now. We keep order (as best we can).

If we were to just up and leave one day without notice, we would be breaking Geneva convention rules (which state that an occupier must look over the welfare of the occupied country), and we would subject Iraq to a political vacuum which would be filled by a bloody civil war which would result in thousands of deaths of innocent people.

Surely, good liberals like yourself do not want to expose Iraq to more death and destruction.

We need to stay in until a stable government is in place, then we need to leave immediately.

The thing with Dean was, if he had been nominated, he would have talked about the morality of going to war in Iraq, the costs, the shady way in which Bush handled the situation, and the irresponsible way he dealt with the intelligence.

Kerry could not do this. he voted for the war, he looked at the same intelligence and came to the same conclusion (at least ostensibly) that Bush did. Someone who opposed the war from the beginning could make its morality an issue, but not someone who gave his consent to make said war.

[Geek_Girl]

54. I Like Dean allot Mainly because

I like what he has to say. But you have a point. DFA gave money to Salazar's campaign and after he was elected he is now involved in the third way DLC organization. I thought that was kind of odd. But maybe that is something Dean and the DFA have no control over.

[janx]

71. He is my senator. I intend to keep in touch with him and hold

him accountable and urge my friends and neighbors to do the same.

[Cheswick2.0]

46. nonsense..........these are the candidates DFA raised money for

SOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATE SOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATESOCIALLY LIBERAL, FISCALLY MODERATE

I am wondering if that information will sink in after the 2 thousandth time you hear it.

[Zensea]

79. progressives are moderate

Any more questions?
That's not double talk.
Wrap your mind around that.

[CTLawGuy]

88. Teddy Roosevelt

was a progessive, and he's no FDR.


See the discussion upthread.

[Zensea]

90. agreed

I saw other posts that made the same point I did, with examples aplenty.
I just thought I'd distill it down to a nice pithy comment!
(and I was just thinking of my own experience of being progressive in outlook and relatively moderate in behavior, especially the older I get, & that this moderation hasn't changed my political viewpoint one bit -- what it has changed probably is my views about how to cause change).

[slor]

9. We were...

forced to marry Kerry, and it appears we were left at the alter.

[hippiechick]

29. Slor ~

:toast:


:hippie:

[DemOperative]

36. Seen that sticker" In Love with Dean, Married Kerry, left him

got drunk,
woke up with Bush?"

[madfloridian]

10. We are here, sign-ups still growing.

Once a Deaniac...hard to be anything else.

[RetroLounge]

32. Oh, we're still here, and still working it.

if for no other reason than to see the Dean Bashers jump on another DU thread and whine "He's no Progrssive, whaaa whaaa whaaa."

So how's that electability meme working for ya?

RL

[JNelson6563]

33. This part says it all

But I wanted to let you all know that in the midst of working for Kerry and other Dems this year, we never lost sight of the long term battle Dean opened our eyes to. We have to restore our democracy for ordinary citizens again. This is the message and appeal of the ongoing Democracy for America campaign: That when corporate interests control the debate through media consolidation, and they also control the candidates through campaign financing, real democracy for ordinary American citizens (of any party) is doomed. We must face this fact and fight back. Howard Dean did, and we can too.

Amen Sister Ginny! :toast:

Julie

[janx]

73. Very sweet! n/t

[hansolsen]

51. Still here, still mad, and still motivated. There is a battle on for the

soul of the Democratic Party. Dean supporters are soldiers in that battle.

[madfloridian]

52. And as our Capn Sunshine put it.......

Reactive and with deep pockets. Oh, yeah.

[dave29]

56. present

:)

[pdxmike]

57. another Oregon Deaniac

Nobody in the Democratic party did more for Kerry and Edwards than Dean (with the possible exception of Clark). He didn't close up shop and go home after he lost. He sucked it up and did everything he could to help the ticket. More than Gore, Hillary, the Big Dog, anyone.
I now see that Dean was a flawed candidate. But there was/is noone who better understands how important it is that the Dems frame the debate. The man must be DNC head.

[zulchzulu]

58. Is it a clique?

I support DFA and even wouldn't mind Dean as DNC chair, although it would hamper his efforts with the DFA.

However, I'm not a "Deaniac"? Is that someone who was for Dean since 2002?

[madfloridian]

61. You don't have to claim the name. We were labeled with it.

So we decided to own it, and it does not bother us anymore.

You can feel he is right for the job, and not wear the label.

[janx]

70. No, Zulch, it's not a clique.

Everybody's welcome at DFA!

[pstans]

59. Count me in...

I am a Deaniac here in Iowa.

[jswordy]

62. I'm in, and also amazed...

...at how strongly Dean's folks have stuck with him. Look at the other primary candidates...all have faded, their supporters have scattered. But not Dean.

Why?

I believe it is because his message is larger than the man himself. Dr. Dean has done nothing short of challenging the Democratic Party to take up the tools to craft its future, since he first decided to run for president.

His challenge is seen as a direct threat to the cushed-out powers that be, who are scrambling now to save their positions.

I said while Howard was running for president that we, his supporters, are like the rabble standing outside the castle, waiting to storm it. That's exactly why the king and his staff are worried.

But should we succeed, a new wave of populism could sweep the party, and we would see strength again like we have not seen in years. I guarantee you, Dean as chairman would take no prisoners in election races. It has been a long time since I have seen such a competitive personality in our party.

It's up the the state chairs to lower the drawbridge, though, and in my opinion they are a gunshy lot. Time will tell.

[Tom Rinaldo]

63. I agree with most of what you said, except Clark supporters haven't faded

We also are united active and resolute, so I beg to differ on that one point. I think what Dean supporters continue to do is great. More power to you, literally.

[JNelson6563]

75. A good strategy is to

take as many county chairs as possible and even CD chairs. Also good is to get as many Deanies onto county boards as possible.

Julie

[Zensea]

81. Dean supporter here who says Clark's supporters haven't scattered

I see Tom has posted this too, but I thought a Dean supporter should say it as well.

[Gyre]

64. I'm here

and a member of the Greens (who will get all my donations), until the dems give the podium to Dean.

Gyre

[Skidmore]

66. I'm here and so is my husband

and many of our very good friends.

[frustrated_lefty]

68. We're here.

It's you folks who picked Lurch.

Don't expect avid interest in discourse. You had it your way. You deserve what you get.

FL

[janx]

69. I think you missed the point of the original post...

:shrug:

[shanti]

72. still here!

laying low...

[hellhathnofury]

74. Ditto...

[DFLforever]

76. Still here and still energized by words Howard Dean speaks,

[radio4progressives]

78. And here in the North Bay as well... meeting up Jan 5th

Oregon and Northern California - we are kindred spirit communmities... and we aim to take back our democracy.

sometimes i find it useful to say, i'm working with the anti-fascists movement since too many people have not yet awaken to what's happened in this country - they don't get what is meant by "taking back our democracy".

Most people don't understand that it was hijacked or how we let it happen. Hell, i don't believe most people understand what democracy really is.

[hedda_foil]

86. I'm still here!!

I've found myself doing things I never would have dreamed of before .... because Howard insisted that we have the power. Rather than hanging back, I've somehow become a leader of the recount efforts (http://www.helpamericarecount.org) ... because it had to be done and nobody else seemed to be stepping up to the plate. And we are making a difference. Will we get Kerry into the White House? That was always a most unlikely outcome with the Repubs in control of everything. What IS happening is a far greater awareness that our election system is rotten to the core ... and the probability that the electoral vote will be challenged in the Congress.

But just as important as that is that I'm a Deaniac forever and I CAN'T WAIT for this week's meetup!

[CTLawGuy]

89. Still around!

Dean 2008 (or strong consideration of whomever he endorses)