Thoughts to move forward by...

A few more views from an outsider, now that the dust has settled in my head a little. I don't expect everyone to agree with all these points, but I hope they'll serve as a stimulus for debate and moving forward. I personally find this exciting, in many ways. This is a chance to be "Present at the Creation" - much as Lincoln and Seward must have felt when the old Whig Party collapsed, and there was a chance to build something new from the ashes.

A) The Image of Americans Abroad

Not something that concerns me personally, but I don't want to see my American friends vilified and despised for something that isn't their fault. I think there needs to be some kind of symbol for Democrats Abroad (and all anti-Bush Americans abroad) that instantly and wordlessly brands the wearer as American and anti-Bush. A lapel pin/button with the American flag, together with a defaced Bush-Cheney head-shoulders shot? This has two purposes: it protects the wearer from verbal (or even physical) abuse, and it also demonstrates publicly that there are many Americans who are proud to be American but who do not see Bush as the representative of their country. This needs to be done soon - in the next few weeks, to show the world that there are "decent Americans".

If anyone has good ideas or designs, I am very willing to act as the collection point for them, pending the return of the Gator party from Florida, and I can stick them up on the DAJ blog - there can be a vote and we can get CafePress or someone to make them up?

B) Remaking the Democratic Party

Is this something Democrats Abroad can do alone? No. Is it something they can assist with? Yes, of course. The experience of people outside the USA is invaluable. If the Democratic Party is to remodel itself along the lines of a European social democratic party, such as Britain's New Labour (let's not quibble too much about this example, please), etc., the experiences of DA members living in a country with such a party are invaluable. DAJ members have the experience of living in a (mostly) benevolent corporatist state (again, we can quibble over definitions, but the point is that it is a system of government and a social system that is unlike the US, and there are points to be learned from it). Most DCers don't have this in-depth experience or knowledge. DA is a vital part of revitalizing the opposition to Bush/Cheney.

Ideas such as the shadow cabinet are an excellent example of what can be creatively borrowed from other countries. Without transforming the existing system, it instantly provides a focus for issues and for constructive opposition. How much better to hear "Howard Dean, the Democratic Shadow Secretary for Health and Welfare, stated..." than "a Democratic spokesperson on health issues said...".

DA has an important role to play in the remaking of the opposition. Maybe even non-American DA supporters :-).

C) A Politically Responsible Managed Fund

This requires maybe more than any of us can achieve by ourselves, but I am sure we have enough contacts to at least get this idea floated seriously. Socially and ethically responsible funds have been around for some time now. These are good things, and they do actually provide some kind of lever to force some companies into aiming for the goals set by these funds (fair policies in employment, towards the third world, in the environment, etc.

Why not a fund which invests only in those companies which are on record as being against the Republicans? And label it clearly as such. Wave labels in the face of the opposition. Call it "The Liberal Fund". Call it the "Anti-Bush Fund". As JJ said in the DAJ list: "Got a ^&&*^&* problem with that?"

And then invest in it. Put your money where your mouth is.

D) Crazy conspiracy time

Bush is not a well man. I think this is obvious to anyone who saw him speak in the debates (and elsewhere). Is it premature dementia brought on as the result of earlier alcoholism (Korsakov's)? Or cocaine flashbacks? Or autism? Or all of the above? In any case, I would not be surprised (it may not be likely, but I would not be surprised anyway) if Bush announced he could no longer serve "for reasons of health", having done his duty as the puppet to give Cheney another term.

E) Trashing the Republicans

A lot of people aren't going to like this, but hear me out. Bush won, not because of what he did, but because of what he appears to be. Issues and a firm agenda don't matter. Kerry could have promised free health care on the UK model, a living minimum wage and jobs for all, but lost the election at least partly because of some chickenrice issue regarding gay marriage. "Values", as the Bush camp framed it - in other words, emotional triggers, are the key to mobilizing voters.

We are told that Bush lost a lot of the vote in 2000 because of the disclosure of his DUI charges. How much of the "godly" support would he lose if the abortion rumor was floated round and researched a little more? No, this isn't going to get him out of office, but it's going to cost him popular support. Dirty tricks? You bet. Should the Democrats rise above this kind of cheap and mean trick? Yes. Will that do any good? No. Al Gore failed to win 2000 decisively enough because of Kenneth Starr. By effectively hogtying Clinton as a Gore campaigner, Whitewater gave Bush a chance at the presidency. Our mission, should we decide to accept it, is a swift knee to the groin, followed by a rabbit punch to the back of the neck, and finishing with a boot to the kidneys.

We don't have to make up the kind of crap the the Republicans used against Clinton - there's enough stuff out there which can be used to attack his "moral" superiority -- but just suppose speculation was floated more loudly, and that then someone came out with confirmation of either a Rice-Bush relationship or renewed drinking habits (or both!). Let's drag Harken out into the open. Let's get some more of his "patriotism" out there. Let's put the little slimeball on the defensive. What was that bulge under the President's coat, Mr. Spokesman? We think you've been lying about it. Let's see the word "liar" in print a little more. Don't forget that Commandment about "bearing false witness".

And let's attack the man's patriotism at every turn. Support for veterans. Support of families at soldiers' funerals. Providing proper equipment for troops. Back-door deals with Saudi Arabia. The fact that his closest ally appears to be an ex-KGB officer. Take back the flag (it seems to matter to Americans) and leave George W Bush shivering naked in the cold wind of reality. No need to be rational about these things - the people we're trying to reach are not rational and won't respond to these things. What they will respond to is gut punches like the fact that Bush cares more for "heathen" Muslims than for decent American Christians. False flag operations? That's another subject, and *very* dirty pool.

Yes, I've just read the recent posting on the DAJ list about how the "heartland" has rejected all sense of decency in choosing the people to represent them. The first assumption is that they are choosing representatives who share their "values". But I think that this is more a case of giving support to the "godly" Bush who still enjoys a clean reputation, thanks to the media support up to now.

Republicans who go along with the Bush agendas are going to find their seats very vulnerable as the fundies desert the sinking shit [sic]. And Bush could find himself in Clinton's position -- unable to show his face in public to stump for his successor (or even for midterm elections).

Remember the scene in "Indiana Jones" when the flashy sword-wielding opponent is dispatched by Harrison Ford with a single pistol shot? For too long the Democrats have been displaying flashy ineffectual sword-play, when what's been needed has been a sub-machinegun.

Enough ranting.