I am still not comfortable with the focus on the shrub's National Guard record since I believe it to be a charade intended to prepare the way for Kerry's war record to be attacked.
The analysis up thread that the issue is trust is correct. Shrubs supporters know that they need to destroy the electorate's trust in a candidate. Since it hasn't worked with Governor Dean, so far, they are working on the current front runner.
That some of the donors to our campaign also contributed to a group working against us should not come as a surprise. The people who put the shrub in office are well versed in the skills of subversion. It is not a coincidence that Bush the elder was once the head of the CIA.
A successful strategy on our part requires that we anticipate what they are likely to do next. I think it also requires some "pro-active" behavior on our part.
One of which I'd now like to suggest.
Remember that in addition to threatening the corporate media with the dissolution of their growing empires, Governor Dean announced that part of his campaign would target the composition of the House and Senate. So, why do we wonder there's not a whole lot of support from the established Democratic coterie in Congress?
All of the members of the House are up for re-election. This time, it should not be a question of whether the presidential nominee has coat-tails, but whether the congressional candidates are supportive of the program he has (rather presumptuously :-) laid out.
So, what I am urging, especially in those states that have completed the first round in the delegate selection process, is that the present members of the Congress be contacted by their constituents (although they accept donations from everyone, they no longer respond the queries from people not in their district) to find out the answer to one or two questions.
1) How did you vote on the Patriot Act?
2) What were the three main reasons for the position you took in your vote (votes, if there were more than one)?
That's all. If there is no reply or a stock "thank you for communicating, please send money" answer, then that should be sufficient to consider a replacement. Of course, if your representative has already announced retirement, there's no reason to bother with this question.
As a hypothetical to a prospective candidate, the question isn't much use either, since the legislation is much too complicated to be understood by a novice.
Posted by Monica Smith at February 11, 2004 08:32 AM