Somebody TIVO C-span right now. This forum that is on has an awesome

[Pirate Smile]

rant near the end of it by Steve Jarding, Democratic Strategist from the south.

I saw it a few weeks ago. It was great.

[Kahuna]

1. I'm liking what I'm hearing. Which of course means...

a lot of DUer won't like what they're saying. They do seem to be saying that the Dem bases demands that Dems be very vocal in passing a litmus test is not really serving us too well. They said that people believe that they know what republicans stand for. But Democratic constituents seem to want our candidates to sign a contract stating how they feel about the hot button issues. And by doing so, our guys are on the record where their stances are subject to distortion by the opposition.

[Pirate Smile]

2. Keep listening - the rant is coming up.

[Kahuna]

9. I heard him. He sounds like a very good man. Managed Warner..

to victory--in a red state---on the heels of 9/11. Must be smart too. :D

BTW, thanks for the heads up. I wouldn't have watched it if I hadn't seen your post.

[Pirate Smile]

12. Today, somebody posted the clip on Daily Kos and part of the transcript

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/1/3/102038/8280

On 12/3/04, Larry Sabato hosted a centrist panel discussion at U of VA featuring Donna Brazile, Jim Jordan (Kerry 2003 campaign manager and ACT), Steve Jarding (Mark Warner's campaign manager and John Edwards' New American Optimists PAC), Harrison Hickman (Democratic pollster, Edwards 2004 primary campaign) and Rep. Brad Carson of OK.
The most informative answers came from Steve Jarding, this was the first time I've heard him speak. In particular, his closing response brought the house, er hotel room, down. It was a comment on the suggestion that maybe Democrats should rhetorically withdraw and let the Republicans pursue their agenda into excess. Text and video of Jarding's 2 minute answer follow the break.

Steve Jarding < Harvard Bio >
I don't think it ever is good to give your voice - give up your voice - or give it away or to silence it.

I would actually use these as opportunities, I'd do almost the opposite. I'd say - you know, I don't like these guys much, I think they're phonies, I think they're hypocrites, I think they're charlatans in many ways, and we as a party need to find a voice.

That voice needs to say - and I believe this in politics - that you hit somebody at their strength - and if their strength is, "We're going to nominate judges that are family values", then by God, we're going to define family values, cause those guys don't have a corner on that market.

Family values is a Democratic issue. When people sit around the table at night and they lost their job, they don't have health insurance, they got a sick kid, they're sitting there fighting, maybe they're hitting the bottle, maybe they're hitting each other, but it ain't a happy family.

And at the end of that dinner, they're not sitting there going, you know, "Our life sucks, but at least, what really pisses us off is two guys getting married in Massachussetts". That does not happen, it does not happen, you know it and the American public knows it. That's not what splits families. We ought to hammer 'em on that.

We ought to hammer 'em on judges that - on any of their appointments - if they're not fiscal conservatives, we need to talk about it.

We need to talk about defence as a party. George Bush didn't support raising the death benefit from 6 to 12 thousand dollars in the 2004 defence budget. He cut some pay grades. He cut military construction 20 percent. Look at the VA budget for 2005.

This is not a friend of defence. This is not a fiscal conservative. And these guys are not family values.

And we need to get our voice back and when they present an opportunity, when they throw a judge - claims it's going to be a family value judge - then let's have that debate, because that's on our turf, baby, not theirs.

We need to get the voice and just hammer the hell out of them, that would be my recommendation.



Play Video (RealVideo, 1:57, 3Mb download)

The text does not do justice to Jarding's delivery. The video is worth the download, if only to see the moderator, audience and Jim Jordan reactions to Jarding's impassioned statement.

[Eloriel]

4. Then it's our job to UNDISTORT it

Rather than let the other side win. They will always find another hot button issue to defeat us on until we start standing up to them and denouncing them and their tactics, not continuing to cave in the face of them.

[Kahuna]

8. Except that he is right because as you WELL KNOW... we have..

a problem with the media. So how do you suggest we fight the right wing noise machine? You have had four years to come up with "the" solution. I'll be very happy when you finally share it with the rest of us.

[slor]

3. It was good...

but all he did was speak the truth, and show the rethug talking points to be deceptive. Quite simple really, though one could say, it was not done by Kerry/Edwards, or more accurately, it was not shown by the media. How some people here, and elsewhere in the party can claim this means move center and away from the left, is baffling to me.

[Pirate Smile]

7. True. No movement is necessary - just better explanations and selling

of our ideas and candidates.

I think they were right about the Democratic Party having an image problem though. That is no surprise considering the constant bashing from the Republicans, hate radio, media pundits, etc. We definitely need a lot of improvement in that area, along with pounding the sh@# out of the Republicans - which shouldn't be too hard because we have the truth on our side.

[nascarblue]

5. YOu thought that was great?

Isn't that the same one where he blames Moveon.org and Michael Moore? The one with Donna Brazile? I thought they were clueless myself.

[Pirate Smile]

6. The one I was talking about didn't include him blaming anyone on our

side. It was about how disingenuous the Rethugs family values crap is and the need to fight them all the way.

However, it didn't seem nearly as good to me this time as it did the first time I heard it.

Although, it was the one time people in the audience applauded.

[Still_Loves_John]

10. I thought it was really interesting

I especially liked the guy who managed Warner's campaign--he was the guy with the rant at the end.

And even though the rest were too conservative for my taste, they still made some good point. Jim Jordan said one or two good things; one was that Democrats need to stop voting for marginally improved versions of bad Republican bills, because it bites them in the ass. The second was a little more profound, and had something to do with us here on DU:

He basically said that the Democratic party is, to the average person, far more associated with the extreme elements of it's base than the Republican party is, which is totally true. And it basically stems from the fact that we're way too whiny. The Republican base faithfully votes Republican based on a few code words, while we want our politicians to tell us exactly all the liberal measures that they will enact while in office. Now, this doesn't mean that our candidates need to be more conservative in their governing, they just shouldn't have to speak to the more liberal elements of their own party during campaigns.

Look at the Republicans--they put on moderate faces during the campaigns, then govern from the far right. We can do the same thing; we just have to trust our politicians to fight for Democratic values enough that we don't need to hear them promise it during the campaign.

[Pirate Smile]

11. Steve Jarding is his name. I saw him one other time on Hardball

during the election and I was hoping the Kerry campaign would hire him.

I hope the DNC (with whoever the next chair is) hires him to help in the red states and rural areas.

We don't have to change what we are for, we just need to sell our ideas better and CHANGE OUR IMAGE.