Revolution to evolution American Politics have made full circle, it is time to return to the Constitution and Bill of Rights and build either from within the Democratic Party a definite Progressive platform, or to become conformists and join the politics as usual, which will be the downfall of the Party and the Country, as was proven in this last election.

Rush "We're patriotic, you're traitorous!" Limbaugh, is a big advocate of conformity, the by word of the Conservative Right.

MOST of us know what conformity is. We know what individualism is. We understand at some level that civilized society is based on a continuing tension between them.

We hope for nonconformists among you, for your sake, for the sake of the nation, and for the sake of humanity. theologian Paul Tillich

We are being trained to think and act in unison, to absorb the values of the team, to suppress any truly innovative ideas in the interest of harmony. not only in our places of business but in our schools at all levels.

I am a nonconformist I guess, since my mother and wife are always telling me I should learn to get along with others, don’t stand out, go along to get along. Hog Wash, back in the sixties and seventies this was exposed for what it was. Bunk.

I have always thought that if I fight for what is right, face to face, that I achieve more than if I set back and let others tell me what to think and do.

The Vietnam War brought this home to many of us baby boomers, and we found that together we had a voice, we had strength. But in the eighties and nineties we fell back into the conformity mode, even Abby Hoffman joined the conformists. In this new age of cellphones, BlackBerries and iPods, we baby boomers feel the surge of non-conformity once again, but we have no direction, especially on the political front.

Steve Jobs of Apple Computer, is a non-conformist, and has basically held true to that belief, although he has become one of the Moneyed Elite that are a bane of progressives, he is a good example for those of us who try to think outside of the box. His I-Pod has crossed social and demographic barriers. (I don’t have one yet, not because I don’t want one, but because disability prevents me being able to afford one).

Timing and execution are everything. Being first in an emerging market is neither as important nor as lucrative as designing the right products and services to cater to second- and third-stage growth.

How you might ask does this relate to Progressive politics?

Being first to capture the imagination of the public on an issue such as Clean Government, Get out of Iraq, Increase Minimum Wage to mention a few are all part of the emerging ideas that will create organizations and services that will support the next level of growth for Progressives.

We have to become self-starters. We must always have a message to deliver, and we must do so with unstinting enthusiasm.

We still didn’t know how well we are achieving what we are trying to do – enhance self-esteem, develop community power in broader political processes, and promote a sense of community, participation in political organizations, and links across social differences.

So I ask you, what are you a conformist or a non-conformist and WHY?

Ron McBride
ronmcbride@WeDemocrats.org

William Arnone sent me this earlier today:

The following is a follow-up analysis of the 29 Democratic candidates who thus far appear to have won their campaigns as Congressional newcomers in seats that were held by Republican incumbents.

The first analysis examined whether they were “centrists” or “progressives” on five issues:

§ The war in Iraq
§ Terrorism
§ Health care
§ Social Security
§ Income taxes

Based on theses characterizations, 18 of the Democratic Congressional newcomers or just over 62% appear to be “progressives” and 11 of the newcomers or 38% appear to be “centrists.”

This follow-up analysis looks at their positions on “moral values” issues. Unlike the previous analysis, this one does not attempt to characterize candidates’ positions on these issues as either “centrist” or “progressive.” Rather, it characterizes a candidate’s “moral values” positions as “high,” “moderate,” or “low.”

In assessing a candidate’s “moral values” positions, the following issues were examined:

Women’s reproductive rights

A “high” position takes a “pro-life” stance and/or places significant restrictions on abortion. A “moderate” position addresses abortion and places some restrictions on it. A “low” position takes a “pro-choice” or supports a woman’s reproductive rights.

Same-sex marriage

A “high” position makes same-sex marriage a priority issue and/or opposes such marriages. A “moderate” position addresses same-sex marriage and supports gay rights without explicitly endorsing same-sex marriage. A “low” position either does not address same-sex marriage or supports some form of same-sex marriage (e.g., civil unions).

Stem- cell research

A “high” position opposes embryonic stem-cell research. A “moderate” approach either does not address stem-cell research or places limits on it. A “low” position supports it without significant limits.

Overall tone

A “high” tone emphasizes the candidate’s faith or religion, or casts many positions in moral terms. A “moderate” tone makes some references to the candidate’s faith and religion, or casts some positions in moral terms. A “low” tone makes little or no reference to the candidate’s faith or religion, or casts few or no positions in moral terms.

This analysis is based primarily on the positions indicated on each candidate’s Website and other Websites sponsored by organizations that focus on each issue.

Based on theses characterizations, 18 of the Democratic Congressional newcomers or 62% are rated “low” on moral values issues. Of the newcomers, 8 or 28% are rated “moderate,” and 3 or 10% are rated “high.”

Harry Mitchell (Arizona, 5th CD): Low

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Low
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Low

Gabrielle Giffords (Arizona, 8th CD): Low

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Low
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Moderate

Jerry McNerney (California, 11th CD): Low

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Low
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Moderate

Ed Perlmutter (Colorado, 7th CD): Low

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Low
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Low

Joe Courtney (Connecticut, 2nd CD): Moderate

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Moderate
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Moderate
§ Overall tone: Low

Chris Murphy (Connecticut, 5th CD): Low

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Low
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Low

Tim Mahoney (Florida, 16th CD): Moderate

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Moderate
§ Same-sex marriage: Moderate
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: High

Ron Klein (Florida, 22nd CD): Low

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Low
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Low

Joe Donnelly (Indiana, 2nd CD): High

§ Women’s reproductive rights: High
§ Same-sex marriage: High
§ Stem-cell research: Moderate
§ Overall tone: High

Brad Ellsworth (Indiana, 8th CD): High

§ Women’s reproductive rights: High
§ Same-sex marriage: High
§ Stem-cell research: Moderate
§ Overall tone: High

Baron Hill (Indiana, 9th CD): Moderate

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Moderate
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: High

Bruce Braley (Iowa, 1st CD): Low

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Low
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Low

David Loebsack (Iowa, 2nd CD): Low

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Low
§ Same-sex marriage: Moderate
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Low

Nancy Boyda (Kansas, 2nd CD): Moderate

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Moderate
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Moderate

John Yarmuth (Kentucky, 3rd CD): Low

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Low
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Moderate

Tim Walz (Minnesota, 1st CD): Low

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Low
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Moderate

Carol Shea-Porter (New Hampshire, 1st CD): Low

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Low
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Low

Paul Hodes (New Hampshire, 2nd CD): Low

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Low
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Low

John Hall (New York, 19th CD): Low

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Low
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Low

Kirsten Gillibrand (New York, 20th CD): Low

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Low
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Low

Michael Arcuri (New York, 24th CD): Low

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Low
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Low

Heath Shuler (North Carolina, 11th CD): High

§ Women’s reproductive rights: High
§ Same-sex marriage: High
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: High

Zachary Space (Ohio, 18th CD): Moderate

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Moderate
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: High

Jason Altmire (Pennsylvania, 4th CD): Low

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Moderate
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Low

Joseph Sestak, Jr. (Pennsylvania, 7th CD): Low

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Low
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Low

Patrick Murphy (Pennsylvania, 8th CD): Low

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Low
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Low

Chris Carney (Pennsylvania, 10th CD): Moderate

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Moderate
§ Same-sex marriage: Moderate
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Moderate

Nick Lampson (Texas, 22nd CD): Moderate

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Moderate
§ Same-sex marriage: High
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Low

Steve Kagen (Wisconsin, 8th CD): Moderate

§ Women’s reproductive rights: Moderate
§ Same-sex marriage: Low
§ Stem-cell research: Low
§ Overall tone: Moderate

Conclusion

Combining both analyses of the Democratic candidates who thus far appear to have won their campaigns as Congressional newcomers in seats that were held by Republican incumbents reveals the following:

* 14 or 48% are “progressives” with “low” moral values positions (Giffords, McNerney, Perlmutter, Murphy, Braley, Loebsack, Yarmuth, Shea-Porter, Hodes, Hall, Gillibrand, Arcuri, Sestak, Murphy)
> Of these, 5 (Perlmutter, Hodes, Hall, Arcuri, and Sestak) appear to be “progressive” with “low” moral values positions on every issue examined.
* 4 or 14% are “progressives” with “moderate” moral values positions (Courtney, Boyda, Space, Kagen)
* 4 or 14% are “centrists” with “low” moral values positions (Mitchell, Klein, Walz, Altmire)
* 4 or 14% are “centrists” with “moderate” moral values positions (Mahoney, Hill, Carney, Lampson)
* 3 or 10% are “centrists” with “high” moral values positions (Donnelly, Ellsworth, Shuler)

Don’t get me wrong, we made some tremendous strides in this past election, but can we even hold on to those gains? I doubt it, already the New People’s Party Representatives are being wooed by the Money Party members. Introduction to lobbyists who can raise vast amounts of money for their re-election campaigns. Telling them that this is business in Washington, and that if they expect to get anything done they have to go along to get along.

WeDemocrats and Democracy for America must be ever diligent, we must hold these new members accountable to those of us who voted for them. We must make sure they aren’t seduced by the Money Party. We elected them largely on an anti-Money Party theme such as opposition to pay-to-play corruption and to lobbyists in general.

I read years ago where some one said “What’s good for GM is good for America”, this is why most Big Business entities contribute to both parties, by doing so they ensure that the coalitions of Republicans and Democrats who are recipients of their largess are kept in their debt, and can be counted on to thwart the actions of a few People’s Party members.

Forget the calls for bi-partisanship, it won’t happen any different than it has in the past, it will be business as usual if this line is followed.

I call on those elected by the People’s Party to stand up in the defense of We The People, vote as a bloc, force change on Washington. You do your part, and we will guarantee to return you to Congress with even more support in the next election.

Ron McBride
netquest@shawneelink.net
www.WeDemocrats.org

Cut and Run, the Only Brave Thing to Do

Sunday, November 26th, 2006

Friends,

Tomorrow marks the day that we will have been in Iraq longer than we were in all of World War II.

That's right. We were able to defeat all of Nazi Germany, Mussolini, and the entire Japanese empire in LESS time than it's taken the world's only superpower to secure the road from the airport to downtown Baghdad.

And we haven't even done THAT. After 1,347 days, in the same time it took us to took us to sweep across North Africa, storm the beaches of Italy, conquer the South Pacific, and liberate all of Western Europe, we cannot, after over 3 and 1/2 years, even take over a single highway and protect ourselves from a homemade device of two tin cans placed in a pothole. No wonder the cab fare from the airport into Baghdad is now running around $35,000 for the 25-minute ride. And that doesn't even include a friggin' helmet.

Is this utter failure the fault of our troops? Hardly. That's because no amount of troops or choppers or democracy shot out of the barrel of a gun is ever going to "win" the war in Iraq. It is a lost war, lost because it never had a right to be won, lost because it was started by men who have never been to war, men who hide behind others sent to fight and die.

Let's listen to what the Iraqi people are saying, according to a recent poll conducted by the University of Maryland:

** 71% of all Iraqis now want the U.S. out of Iraq.

** 61% of all Iraqis SUPPORT insurgent attacks on U.S. troops.

Yes, the vast majority of Iraqi citizens believe that our soldiers should be killed and maimed! So what the hell are we still doing there? Talk about not getting the hint.

There are many ways to liberate a country. Usually the residents of that country rise up and liberate themselves. That's how we did it. You can also do it through nonviolent, mass civil disobedience. That's how India did it. You can get the world to boycott a regime until they are so ostracized they capitulate. That's how South Africa did it. Or you can just wait them out and, sooner or later, the king's legions simply leave (sometimes just because they're too cold). That's how Canada did it.

The one way that DOESN'T work is to invade a country and tell the people, "We are here to liberate you!" -- when they have done NOTHING to liberate themselves. Where were all the suicide bombers when Saddam was oppressing them? Where were the insurgents planting bombs along the roadside as the evildoer Saddam's convoy passed them by? I guess ol' Saddam was a cruel despot -- but not cruel enough for thousands to risk their necks. "Oh no, Mike, they couldn't do that! Saddam would have had them killed!" Really? You don't think King George had any of the colonial insurgents killed? You don't think Patrick Henry or Tom Paine were afraid? That didn't stop them. When tens of thousands aren't willing to shed their own blood to remove a dictator, that should be the first clue that they aren't going to be willing participants when you decide you're going to do the liberating for them.

A country can HELP another people overthrow a tyrant (that's what the French did for us in our revolution), but after you help them, you leave. Immediately. The French didn't stay and tell us how to set up our government. They didn't say, "we're not leaving because we want your natural resources." They left us to our own devices and it took us six years before we had an election. And then we had a bloody civil war. That's what happens, and history is full of these examples. The French didn't say, "Oh, we better stay in America, otherwise they're going to kill each other over that slavery issue!"

The only way a war of liberation has a chance of succeeding is if the oppressed people being liberated have their own citizens behind them -- and a group of Washingtons, Jeffersons, Franklins, Ghandis and Mandellas leading them. Where are these beacons of liberty in Iraq? This is a joke and it's been a joke since the beginning. Yes, the joke's been on us, but with 655,000 Iraqis now dead as a result of our invasion (source: Johns Hopkins University), I guess the cruel joke is on them. At least they've been liberated, permanently.

So I don't want to hear another word about sending more troops (wake up, America, John McCain is bonkers), or "redeploying" them, or waiting four months to begin the "phase-out." There is only one solution and it is this: Leave. Now. Start tonight. Get out of there as fast as we can. As much as people of good heart and conscience don't want to believe this, as much as it kills us to accept defeat, there is nothing we can do to undo the damage we have done. What's happened has happened. If you were to drive drunk down the road and you killed a child, there would be nothing you could do to bring that child back to life. If you invade and destroy a country, plunging it into a civil war, there isn't much you can do 'til the smoke settles and blood is mopped up. Then maybe you can atone for the atrocity you have committed and help the living come back to a better life.

The Soviet Union got out of Afghanistan in 36 weeks. They did so and suffered hardly any losses as they left. They realized the mistake they had made and removed their troops. A civil war ensued. The bad guys won. Later, we overthrew the bad guys and everybody lived happily ever after. See! It all works out in the end!

The responsibility to end this war now falls upon the Democrats. Congress controls the purse strings and the Constitution says only Congress can declare war. Mr. Reid and Ms. Pelosi now hold the power to put an end to this madness. Failure to do so will bring the wrath of the voters. We aren't kidding around, Democrats, and if you don't believe us, just go ahead and continue this war another month. We will fight you harder than we did the Republicans. The opening page of my website has a photo of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, each made up by a collage of photos of the American soldiers who have died in Bush's War. But it is now about to become the Bush/Democratic Party War unless swift action is taken.

This is what we demand:

1. Bring the troops home now. Not six months from now. NOW. Quit looking for a way to win. We can't win. We've lost. Sometimes you lose. This is one of those times. Be brave and admit it.

2. Apologize to our soldiers and make amends. Tell them we are sorry they were used to fight a war that had NOTHING to do with our national security. We must commit to taking care of them so that they suffer as little as possible. The mentally and physically maimed must get the best care and significant financial compensation. The families of the deceased deserve the biggest apology and they must be taken care of for the rest of their lives.

3. We must atone for the atrocity we have perpetuated on the people of Iraq. There are few evils worse than waging a war based on a lie, invading another country because you want what they have buried under the ground. Now many more will die. Their blood is on our hands, regardless for whom we voted. If you pay taxes, you have contributed to the three billion dollars a week now being spent to drive Iraq into the hellhole it's become. When the civil war is over, we will have to help rebuild Iraq. We can receive no redemption until we have atoned.

In closing, there is one final thing I know. We Americans are better than what has been done in our name. A majority of us were upset and angry after 9/11 and we lost our minds. We didn't think straight and we never looked at a map. Because we are kept stupid through our pathetic education system and our lazy media, we knew nothing of history. We didn't know that WE were the ones funding and arming Saddam for many years, including those when he massacred the Kurds. He was our guy. We didn't know what a Sunni or a Shiite was, never even heard the words. Eighty percent of our young adults (according to National Geographic) were not able to find Iraq on the map. Our leaders played off our stupidity, manipulated us with lies, and scared us to death.

But at our core we are a good people. We may be slow learners, but that "Mission Accomplished" banner struck us as odd, and soon we began to ask some questions. Then we began to get smart. By this past November 7th, we got mad and tried to right our wrongs. The majority now know the truth. The majority now feel a deep sadness and guilt and a hope that somehow we can make make it all right again.

Unfortunately, we can't. So we will accept the consequences of our actions and do our best to be there should the Iraqi people ever dare to seek our help in the future. We ask for their forgiveness.

We demand the Democrats listen to us and get out of Iraq now.

Yours,

Michael Moore
www.michaelmoore.com
mmflint@aol.com

Ron McBride
WeDemocrats.org

I founded WeDemocrats.org because I saw the deep support that Governor Dean has nationwide. I feel lucky to have the opportunity to work with him, the DNC and his brother Jim Dean and DFA, as well as the hundreds of thousands of Americans who stood with him and demanded a voice in the way this nation will be governed for decades to come.

Democracy for America is a political action committee dedicated to building a grassroots network to support socially progressive and fiscally responsible candidates at all levels of government. DFA’s mission is to develop strategic partnerships with other progressive organizations to maximize resources for candidate recruitment, training, and organization.

WeDems is an online social networking portal that facilitates offline group meetings in various localities around the country. It allows for individuals and various groups unified by a common interest, such as politics to come together not only on line, but together in face to face meetings, facilitated by Coordinators in every State and County in the Country. It will be used by a number of candidates for the various nominations, and by various coalition groups to build and energize their grassroots support.

WeDemocrats.org is a base for the grassroots/netroots community to move into the mainstream of National Politics, it represents exactly the vehicle of hope that this country needs to enact real change in America and to ensure progressive voices up and down the ticket. By uniting and activating a national grassroots network of small donors to provide financial support in targeted races, and providing campaign, message and technical support to progressive campaigns.

This broad network of independent grassroots organizations across the country are engaging in people-powered politics. These Coalition groups work closely with WeDemocrats.org to achieve our shared goal of electing socially progressive, fiscally responsible candidates to all levels of office. Governor Dean has changed politics forever, showing that a campaign that is truly powered by ordinary Americans can emerge from nowhere and build support."

The term "activism" is often used synonymously with protest or dissent, but activism can stem from any number of political orientations and take a wide range of forms, from writing letters to newspapers or politicians, political campaigning, economic activism (such as boycotts or preferentially patronizing preferred businesses), rallies and street marches, or even strikes.

Activist organizations are those that use a method or methods of operation that have the purpose of affecting public and/or private sector policies or decisions that impact human health, the environment or community sustainability or are building the capacity of groups and communities to engage in activism on those issues. These methods can include public education, organizing, direct action, lobbying, litigation, etc.

Internet activism (also known as electronic advocacy, cyberactivism, and online organizing) is the use of communication technologies such as e-mail, web sites, and podcasts to enable faster communications by citizen movements and deliver a message to a large audience. These Internet technologies are used for cause-related fundraising, lobbying, volunteering, community building, and organizing. We are determined to fight everywhere, and to get in-your-face if necessary to achieve our goals, we like to call ourselves the netroots movement.

Internet works best as an organizing tool for "charismatic, outspoken mavericks" with "outsider" appeal in elections. It also invites a decentralized approach to campaigning that runs contrary to the traditional controlled, top-down, message-focused approach. "The mantra has always been, 'Keep your message consistent. WeDems don’t accept that, we believe a better approach is a bottoms up, giving the members freedom to state their views, to take different roads, as long as we are all pulling in the same direction. A solid base of members working in the field, can achieve more lasting results than a super star who becomes a flash in the pan.

"Online Political Citizens" (OPCs) are "seven times more likely than average citizens to serve as opinion leaders among their friends, relatives and colleagues...Normally, 10% of Americans qualify as Influentials. A study by the Institute for Politics, Democracy & the Internet, found that 69% of Online Political Citizens are Influentials."

The Internet has also made it easier for small donors to play a meaningful role in financing political campaigns. Previously, small-donor fundraising was prohibitively expensive, as costs of printing and postage ate up most of the money raised. Groups like WeDemocrats.org, however, know that they can raise large amounts of money from small donors at minimal cost, with credit card transaction fees constituting their biggest expense. "For the first time, you have a door into the political process that isn't marked 'big money.' "That changes everything," Said Carol Darr, director of the George Washington University Institute for Politics, Democracy & the Internet in Washington, D.C.

A recent study by the Pew Internet & American Life Project suggested that more than 90% of Americans have access to the World Wide Web either directly or through work and family. Studies by both Pew and Nielsen indicate that the elderly are one of the fastest growing demographics on the Web, and one of the most literate in computer use.

WeDemocrats.org uses e-Democracy to make political processes more accessible; making citizen participation in public policy decision-making more expansive and direct so as to enable broader influence in policy outcomes as more individuals involved could yield smarter policies; increasing transparency and accountability; and keeping the government closer to the consent of the governed, increasing its political legitimacy.

In my opinion the internet is a God send to politics in general, but makes people feel like they've done something when they haven't. It allows people who agree with each other to talk to each other and gives them the impression of being part of a much larger network than is necessarily the case.

The only way to make the Internet the tool of politics is to combine netroots and grassroots activism to create the next generation of leaders. To explore the boundaries of an involved citizens movement. Instead of war-chest stockpiling like the traditional parties do, with which to conduct last minute blitz advertising campaign for just a few ‘targeted” candidates, WeDemocrats.org invests on the ground, online, in the people.

WeDems are working toward freedom and democracy, civil liberties and an open society. An open society is a society which allows its members the greatest possible degree of freedom in pursuing their interests compatible with the interests of others. It recognize that people have different views and that nobody is in possession of the ultimate truth.

If the United States fails to provide the right kind of leadership our civilization may destroy itself.

We are building partnerships with other progressive organizations, we have launched a brand new website -- and we're not stopping there.

Grassroots/Netroots democracy is alive and well in America because of you. There is a lot to do, but together we can build a movement that will win in 2008 and continue to impact long-term change in politics. Now let's get to work.

Thank you,

Ron McBride
netquest@shawneelink.net
Founder & Chair
www.WeDemocrats.org