Death To The Consultants

Exerpt....

Where is the inspiration in our party?  Like Karl Rove, we've been reduced to a cabal of mad scientists dreaming up some alchemy that would somehow create gold out of the fecal refuse of a focus group.  The futility of crafting the perfect "message" has left us soulless, our leaders and candidates, at every level, reading speeches like a kindergarten teacher reads a scripted code of conduct in homeroom.  

Vacant, distant, their eyes seeming to look more into themselves for error than into their audience for connection, our highest office holders are caricatures of themselves, appearing unable even to laugh, joke, watch a baseball game, drink a beer, without some crisis group meeting of their consultants.

Where is the soaring rhetoric of possibility?  When did the words "together we can" become standard, prerequisite, cliché dogma?  The silliness of "hope is on the way" being repeated for the sake of repetition, being printed on placards and distributed by advance teams at rallies, is dismissed on its face by an electorate just too damn tired of hearing it out of the mouth of every single candidate from president to state rep. to county auditor.

I yearn for a Democrat to deliver oratory again.  Not like Howard Dean ranting, or Bill Clinton feeling our pain.  The field of American candidates is bereft of anyone capable of taking powerful words rarely used, weaving them amongst the American experience universally understood, and thus taking the electorate with him to a higher plane of belief and inspiration.  

...for the rest, see extended entry...

I've never seen a reaction to an election loss this emotional.  I've heard reactions compared to their worst break-up, to the day a grandparent died, even to the day after September 11.  

The resulting soul searching may be a blessing in disguise.  The answers, I suspect, are not in some exit poll, they are within us all.  Our party, and our politics, are in need of a long overdue gut check.

America's best ideas, values, foundations, are its easiest to understand.  We were founded by a bunch of religious misfits, restless adventurers, tax-hating businessmen, and persecuted ethnic groups who took the absurdly dangerous risk of crossing an ocean on a rickety boat to get to something better.  There's a little bit of that in all of us, and our democracy reflects it.

But our politics has become such a reeking cesspool of polls, consultants, and their banal spells concocted out of boiling cauldrons of spin and code words designed to win at the margins, most Americans turn away in disgust.

Taking this science to a new low by making gay bashing the new Jim Crow in Ohio, Bush sneaked his way into the presidency on the back of coded and clandestine support for a same-sex marriage ban.  Pennsylvania had no such measure on the ballot; Kerry won PA by the same margin he lost in Ohio.  Once again, a candidate resorting to division to bump turnout in his base leaves a country cheated and deceived.

It would be easy to dismiss the voters who responded to this call as unreachable for Democrats, too far from our "values" to merit even the effort.  But that would be a mistake...most of those voters are not troglodyte trailer park bigots (though many certainly are).  

Most of them have mothers, fathers, grandparents, who came to Ohio on the back of the same "values" we Democrats hold closest to our hearts.  They may be fleeing our cities into the never ending sprawl of homogenous suburbia Ohio is becoming, but then again, so are we.  Just like us, most are descendants of immigrants, hard working families whose dreams mirror ours, who feel the same deep betrayal of politics leaving them behind, dividing them into camps of "pro-gun" vs. "gun-control", or "pro-choice" vs. "pro-life".  

Those same voters can be reached on our terms.  They voted for Bill Clinton twice, many are old enough to have voted for liberal giants like Howard Metzenbaum and John Glenn many times over.  They will probably even vote for Jerry Springer for governor in 2006.

They are Americans in search of inspiration, and given the choice between cynical division on cultural issues versus a higher calling that reaches their souls, they will deny the consultants' game plan every time.

But where is this inspiration in our party?  Like Rove, we've been reduced to a cabal of mad scientists dreaming up some alchemy that would somehow create gold out of the fecal refuse of a focus group.  The futility of crafting the perfect "message" has left us soulless, our leaders and candidates, at every level, reading speeches like a kindergarten teacher reads a scripted code of conduct in homeroom.  

Vacant, distant, their eyes seeming to look more into themselves for error than into their audience for connection, our highest office holders are caricatures of themselves, appearing unable even to laugh, joke, watch a baseball game, drink a beer, without some crisis group meeting of their consultants.

Where is the soaring rhetoric of possibility?  When did the words "together we can" become standard, prerequisite, cliché dogma?  The silliness of "hope is on the way" being repeated for the sake of repetition, being printed on placards and distributed by advance teams at rallies, is dismissed on its face by an electorate just too damn tired of hearing it out of the mouth of every single candidate from president to state rep. to county auditor.

I yearn for a Democrat to deliver oratory again.  Not like Howard Dean ranting, or Bill Clinton feeling our pain.  The field of American candidates is bereft of anyone capable of taking powerful words rarely used, weaving them amongst the American experience universally understood, and thus taking the electorate with him to a higher plane of belief and inspiration.  

Democrats have as their almost exclusive domain the ability to personify and embody the American experience in this way.  Barrack Obama, the new senator from Illinois, seems to have this ability, in the way Mario Cuomo or Jesse Jackson does, to not just speak to an audience, but to stir it.  Not just to reach minds and make them understand, but also to reach hearts and make them pound with pride, hope, and possibility.

I spent election day in African American inner city Cleveland polling places.  Voter number 100 at the Rainbow Place retirement home on Euclid Avenue walked in at 8:15 a.m.  A tall, middle-aged man carrying an umbrella, wearing a suit, walked in and got his ballot, with a stern look in his eyes, facing a twenty minute wait in line for a voting booth.  He checked his ballot for hanging chads, made sure he punched the right hole in the ballot, cast it with pride, and went to work.

Somewhere else in Ohio, in a sprawling suburb lily white, someone else went through the same experience, waiting perhaps even longer, in the same rain storm.  

Both can remember the sweet smells of grandma's kitchen, the way that snow seemed to fall heavier at Christmastime when they were kids.  Both are heartbroken when the Browns lose in overtime, or when an Ohioan dies in Iraq.  Both want their kids to stay in Ohio, so when the grandchildren come along they can create those same memories for them.

We can reach them both.  

The good news is that the ground on which they stand is more common than the consultants are capable of understanding.  We Democrats have that ground, because we've lived it.  

Reach for the stars again, Democrats.  It's time to tell the consultants to get lost, and invite our parents and grandparents into our strategy sessions...hopefully they'll bring some cookies to the meeting.  

Only then can we take American democracy to a new level of positive inspiration rather than negative division, finding the better angels of our nature among the common drama of the American experience.

Tags: General 2008 (all tags)

Comments

27 Comments

Thanks
That is all
by Carol 2004-11-08 09:30AM | 0 recs
Don't bl;ame the consultants balme yourself
Where is your backbone.

We have a stolen election and we have MyDD and Daily KOS doing their best to totally ignore the fact.

Here are some web based organizations who are not cowards;

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/

http://www.legitgov.org/

an article;

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHI411B.html

by leschwartz 2004-11-08 09:35AM | 0 recs
many thousands of such reports as this one
many thousands of such reports as this one

http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~sanjay/florida.html

I received this message from a personal friend of mine, Jill Greenlee. I tend to dismiss anything that smacks of conspiracy, left-wing or right. But Jill is smart, levelheaded and trustworthy: she is a Kerry supporter but no wingnut. This information is truly disturbing.

-Sanjay Srivastava

[Note: This is a slightly updated version of the letter that Jill sent me several hours after I posted the original.]

On The Front Lines in Florida

Spurred by the unwillingness of the broadcast media to report voting problems during the 2004 election race, we want to alert our friends, family and colleagues to the widespread voter suppression and disenfranchisement that occurred in Broward County, Florida. We staffed the emergency hotline for the Kerry Campaign Headquarters in Broward County from late October through the election. All of us were devastated by the margin of Bush's win in Florida, particularly since most polls predicted the race would be extremely close.

Many of the calls to our hotline were from voters who had pressed the "Kerry" button on their electronic voting screen, only to have "Bush" light up as the candidate they had chosen. In some cases, this would happen repeatedly until about the 5th or 6th time the voter pressed "Kerry" and eventually his name would light up. In other cases, the voters pushed "Kerry" but were later asked to confirm their "Bush" vote.

We had calls about a road block, put up by the police at 7am on Nov. 2, which blocked road access to two precinct locations in majority black districts. There was no justification for the road block - no accident or crime scene or construction.

Many of our calls dealt with voter suppression, or manipulation, of the Haitian population - occurrences which seem too numerous, and their targets too indefensible, as primarily poor, first-time-voter, Creole-speaking refugees, to be anything but systemic. In one example, a voter whose hands were bandaged could not press the touch-screen himself; he asked the nonpartisan election official to press "Kerry" for him, but the election official pressed "Bush" and sent his vote immediately into the machine. Many, many others were denied the right to vote and were not given provisional ballots, while others were refused assistance at the polls, even though provisional ballots and voter assistance are legal rights. Others were told they had already voted and were turned away, although they had never voted previously. This latter experience was a complaint not isolated to Haitians but also included other surprised voters with no recourse except their word against that of the Supervisor of Elections.

We spoke with hundreds of voters who were certain they had registered to vote in the past 6 months, well before the October 4th deadline, but were not on the rolls. And those were just the people who had the information to contact us.

The local paper, citing the Supervisor of Elections office as its source, reported that all persons voting by absentee ballot that they could turn in ballots by hand to any of its six offices on Tuesday, Nov. 2. Every single one of those offices except one was closed on Tuesday.

We had numerous calls from voters on Nov. 2 whose precincts had closed, yet the Supervisor of Elections office had given voters no notification of the closure, and no notification of where to go to vote. Thousands of people were likely disenfranchised because of inexcusable mishaps such as this.

We had many calls from people who had been harassed by poll workers, who were turned away without being allowed the right to vote provisionally (another breech of voter rights). Other people were turned away because the address on their driver's license did not match the address on their voter registration card; again, this is in direct violation of election law.

All of these problems do not even take into account the 58,000 absentee ballots that had been "lost" by the Supervisor of Elections, in perhaps the most Democratic county in the state, disenfranchising thousands of people who were disabled, out of the country, or elderly and unable get to the polls. These events, and many others, have been documented and also reported to lawyers, but we fear they will not get the attention they deserve. This is what we witnessed in just one county. We believe that these "voting irregularities" raise serious concerns about the legitimacy of the results in Florida, and more broadly, about the health of democracy in this country. Please circulate this widely.

Libby Anker Libanker@berkeley.edu

Ryan Centner rcentner@berkeley.edu

Jill Greenlee jillgs@socrates.berkeley.edu

Rachel VanmoSickle-Ward rvansick@berkeley.edu

by leschwartz 2004-11-08 09:56AM | 0 recs
Re: many thousands of such reports as this one
Get a diary.
by Chris Bowers 2004-11-08 10:00AM | 0 recs
Yep, I'm a Republican stoolie
Do any of these various "analysis" even come close to pickup the the four million vote margin Kerry would need to win the popular vote? No.

Do any of these various "analysis" even come clsoe to reversing the gains the Republicans made in the Senate? No.

Do any of these various "analysis" even come close to seeing clear to a Dmecoratic majority in the House? No.

I am sorry if you are upset that I do not share your view that this election was stolen. There clearly were significant acts that reduced the numebr of Kerry votes. However, it is not enough to make a Demcoratic majority in this country.

I spent the last twenty months of my life working full-time to defeat Republicans and conservatism. I remain devasted, but more willing to engage in a streetfight than ever. As far as the incessant calls for blogger heads who do not feel that this election was stolen, I agree completely with kid oakland's excellent diary at dialy kos from a few days ago.

To continue to deny that we have any faults, and that all of our electoral problems are the result of fraud is the most certain path to continuing defeat that I can imagine. We need to begin to develop a language of interiority that allows us to examine our own faults, so we can improve in the futre. The diary here on the front page is an excellent example of that.

Keep working to dig up whatever you can about voter fraud, but a lot of what people have found, especially the profound misunderstanding of Dixiecrats in Florida, is hopelessly flawed. Helping Demcorats win has become my life work. If we have no ability to look inward and find out more about ourselves, then work will be all for naught.

Finally, we have diaries and a permanent open thread for this sort of discussion. Take it there.

by Chris Bowers 2004-11-08 09:58AM | 0 recs
Kid Oakland - Blowing Smoke
Kid Oakland was just preening and he was talking out of both sides of his mouth.

You can actually speak "fraud" and "reform" at the same time.

I am not convinced that there was not fraud in the election, possibly on a massive scale, but that does not mean there are not broader issues to discuss.

I think Chris is right on here.  I think the bottom line of the election is this:

John Kerry failed to clearly define his positions and failed, by dint of his personality, to inspire those looking for new leadership.

Just this AM on Air America someone was talking about the great number of voters who "hate Bush" but voted for him anyway.  That is UNACCEPTABLE!!

How could that happen?  Chris nails it, for the most part.  Uninspiring leadership.

Bush, for all his endless and dangerous faults, inspires.  Like Hitler.  Hitler certainly inspired.

Since Obama is probabaly edged out of serious Presidential consideration due to his name and ethnicity, the Dems should go to his school of rhetoric and bone up.

by Long Haul 2004-11-08 10:34AM | 0 recs
Re: Kid Oakland - Blowing Smoke
I wouldn't rule Barak Obama out.

I have some rather openly racist "America First" relatives in rural Illinois who voted for him for Senate (and Bush for President).

He managed to inspire them dispite his name and ethnicity.

Never underestimate how broad the appeal of a good canidate with a compelling story can be. Obama's biography is the American dream and American ideals personified.

Assuming he wants to run he will be a canidate for President some day. He is perhaps a tad too inexperienced for 2008, but then again JFK hadn't been in politics long when he ran for President and Obama has more political experience overall than Edwards did before he ran.

Worrying about what part of the country a canidate is from, or what color they are, or what religion they are is the same formulaic nonsense that has gotten the Democrats into trouble in the first place. Frankly it smacks of yet more gimickry.

To reject one of the most inspiring and charismatic Democratic elected officials to come onto the American stage in a long time out of hand because he doesn't meet some pre-conceived checklist of what a successful Democratic Presidential canidate needs to be would be stupid.

Enough with the boring milquetoast middle-aged white guys with good hair, I want something new. Barak Obama is one possiblity.

by ces 2004-11-08 11:39AM | 0 recs
Speaking Of Interiority
I think a lot of the anger around this issue is a function of displacement--anger built up about Kerry repeatedly holding his fire throughout the campaign. And when I finished writing the comment that would have gone here, I decided it should be a diary instead:  Getting Behind the "Stolen Election" Anger.
by Paul Rosenberg 2004-11-08 11:01AM | 0 recs
Gawd...
...you can't post this...you might have just offended some swing voters...let's please conference everyone to discuss how to overcome this faux-pas...

Bwaaaaahhaaahhaaa!

Political Physics
by cgilbert01 2004-11-08 09:49AM | 0 recs
Authenticity as much as rhetoric
My theory is that the days in which a Cuomo can dazzle a room with rhetoric is gone.

What we need -- and what McCain and Dean supplied -- is the ability to provide a message in a very simple way that was non-nuanced and got to the point to a non-political audience.  Most interaction we have with candidates nowadays isn't through speeches at big halls, or campaign rallies.  It is one on ones with Tim Russert or Wolf Blitzer or whatever.  

There's an advantage in this:  the appearance of authenticity is going to be a key for the Dem. nominee (btw, I do think that is why Govs. not Sens. get elected -- they aren't trained to speak in Beltway nuance, so are actually understandable).  The disadvantage:  saying what you think means that it isn't filtered and a nitpicking press will go after any non-nuanced, original way of framing something (the Confederate flag "controversy").  We can reach these people not through rhetoric, but through a conversational tone that gets the message across clearly.

by ChrisR 2004-11-08 09:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Authenticity as much as rhetoric
That word "authentic" is the other one that people used to describe why they voted for Bush (even those who stated that they "hate" him) over Kerry.  Kerry's nuances just left them cold and uncertain.

Dean got me fired up and activated for the first time in 35 years in 2003.  He spoke plain, simple and from the heart.

That is what people respond to, at least outside the realm of Democratic primaries.

No more "I am the most electable" please.

by Long Haul 2004-11-08 10:37AM | 0 recs
All of this is self falelating BS

People know when they have a job or not and they know when they are being lied to about the need for a war, and how well the war is going.

We have a margin of more than 3 million votes that were stolen by the Bush - Rove machine.

Stop looking for every reason but the truth.

The election was stolen.

by leschwartz 2004-11-08 09:58AM | 0 recs
Almost with you...
I liked "Death to Consultants" piece right up to the point where it yearned for better oratory.   There is a problem with too much focus on polls and focus groups.   The problem is that this focus leads to quick fix proposals that don't measure up to the depth and cohesiveness of the conservative ideas produced by the conservative think tanks.   Dems don't need more effective emoting, they need more effective liberal ideas and repudiations of conservative ideas.   This doesn't have to come from multi-million dollar think tanks, but it does have to come from people that are deeper thinkers than Gore, Kerry, McAuliffe, and the folks that ran the last two campaigns and DNC over that timespan.  
by LastToKnow 2004-11-08 10:07AM | 0 recs
Language
So maybe "oratory" does not really hit in on the head, but clear, strong, ideas well articulated can also be referred to as oratory.

No couching, no apologies, no nuance.  Go on the offensive, be clear, be straight.  Win.

by Long Haul 2004-11-08 10:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Language
Democrats need better ideas and better tactics.   Part of good tactics is understanding that the channel of communication to the voters has limited bandwidth, so it is better to put forward a few good ideas clearly and a few strong attacks on the opponent that are hard to rebut.   Voters are not going to be inspired without good ideas, and they also won't be inspired unless they hear and can understand and remember the ideas that are good.   It's best if the idea and presentation is simple enough that they can convey it effectively to their friends, and it doesn't have a simple refutation by the other side (e.g. 'John Kerry won medals risking his life in combat for vets, so he really cares' vs. 'John Kerry called all our Vietnam vets "war criminals"'.
by LastToKnow 2004-11-08 11:17AM | 0 recs
Re: Almost with you...
(Although I'm pleasantly surprised at the way that Gore's evolved since 2000) I agree with this, and offer what I hope is a friendly amendment:

We need better rhetoric, properly understood as the presentation of sound ideas in a properly engaging manner. It has to start with the sound ideas, and from the struggle to develop, communicate and express them, an appropriate rhetoric can grow. Then the oratory can kick in.  

I don't think this can come from think tanks--though I do think that Lakoff's Rockridge Institute will definitely contribute mightily to the process. I think it has to come from a much broader debate, which will happen in large part (not exclusively, by a long shot) right here in cyberspace, the place where footsoldiers can attend national conferences every day of the week.

by Paul Rosenberg 2004-11-08 11:11AM | 0 recs
Great!
Wonderful post.
by Christopher 2004-11-08 10:18AM | 0 recs
One Voice
Don't forget Barack Obama -- If anyone can come up with the eloquence to inspire tens of millions of Americans, it is he.

And let's not forget our own voices. If we go off blaming each other, our candidates, party leaders, whomever, we definitely sign over the future to the Republicans.

But if we can find a common voice, and learn how to speak to others (hint, hint, all you who bury yourselves in liberal blogs and web sites and ignore the rest of the world) ... if we can speak with one voice of decency, humanity, and all the old American ideas of democracy (little "d" democracy, but big "D" Democracy also), we will have the voice to move mountains.

And we CAN take back this country. We MUST take back this country ... before it's too late.

by S1 2004-11-08 10:45AM | 0 recs
Re: One Voice
I agree that Barack Obama can do this.  And because it is so authentically who he is, it goes beyond oratory.

The other candidate who I saw do this during the primaries was Dennis Kucinich.  He is one of the only Democratic politicians at the national scale that I really trust.

Howard Dean?  No, not for me.  He was as fake as Kerry to me.  In addition, his record as Governor was so  different from his rhetoric.

by chorti 2004-11-08 11:21AM | 0 recs
Re: One Voice
I am so happy that Obama is my new Senator!  I truly believe that he's going to be President one day.

I think we need a little more conviction and a little less consulting.  Dems are so afraid that we might offend someone, we're afraid to stand up for what we really believe.  People aren't stupid (even those poor 59 million....) and they notice when politicians start spewing talking points.  Conversely, they notice when someone speaks from the heart.  Most people don't have the time or stamina to wade through policy positions, so they're going to rely on their guts to judge canidates.  As long as our candidates don't appear to really stand up for their beliefs (or even HAVE any), we're going to lose.  

Obama and Kucinich stand up for what they believe, and they've able to convince people of their sincerity (Bush does this too, unfortunately).  Even when Kucinich was espousing things I thought were crazy, I never doubted his sincerity. I really admired the fact that he said what he believed, no matter how strange it may have sounded.  We need more of this.

I think Dean fell prey to his own consultants. He always struck me as being fairly true to himself until his campaign really started to take off.  Some of the stuff in Iowa was just so over the top (that huge, stupid, expensive bus??) that it was clear he'd lost his way. I don't blame him for it -- I think he found himself in way in over his head and gave the people (supporters and within the campaign) what they wanted.  Personally, I liked him because of his record, and not because of his rhetoric (though it was always good to hear him rip Bush a new one...).  If he runs again, I'm hoping he won't buy any of that Joe Trippi snake oil.

by mlr701 2004-11-08 01:08PM | 0 recs
what about you?
Great post - you give great oratory.  When are you announcing for office? :-)
by mfidelman 2004-11-08 10:51AM | 0 recs
Re: what about you?
Well, it's partly oratory. But I tend toward the Mencken term "booboisie" to describe the great mass of Americans. Soaring oratory sounds a bit weird to them. As in: "who among us does not enjoy NASCAR?"  We had some bad luck with our candidate who is a nice guy but happens to be a Senator from MA, and a multi-millionaire. To me the underlying problem is that people feel insecure, lost, powerless, and frightened. Flag-waving nationalism and a turn to the right is a pretty common reaction to a decline in living standards. That's why they are called reactionaries. But the ideolgical response to all this is to attack the massive expansion in centralized power in this country. That means you oppose expansion of Federal programs in favor of local or State programs. That means you oppose weakening of civil liberties. That means you try wherever possible to tie the GOP into a paranoid populist vision of over-weening federal power. Most people are afraid of the federal government. That's our playground. So stop sweating the small stuff like oratory. I find that oratory takes off when their are ideological wings to flap.
by Jacko 2004-11-08 11:08AM | 0 recs
Of course, there is a reason....
That focus groups and polls are so heavily used.  They work.  The GOP sure uses them out the ying-yang.  But I understand what you're saying.  Candidates often are overly cautious, afraid to give a straight answer to a question for fear of offending someone.  Maybe a candidate's natural political instincts come into play here in striking a balance between speaking from the heart and not saying something that will get them killed.
by Randi 2004-11-08 10:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Of course, there is a reason....
Focus groups and polls work within a limited context. Our task, however, is to expand the context. That doesn't mean that focus groups and polls are irrelevant. Just that they're insufficient as they are normally used.  

PIPA, for example, does excellent polls which show all sorts of unexpected things. Bush voters are ignorant as shit, they imagine he supports them on the issues when they are much more liberal than him, etc.  This is important stuff. But it's by no means obvious what we should do with it. For that, we need a much bigger discussion, including much more soul-searching, self-criticism, and interiority, as Chris put.

by Paul Rosenberg 2004-11-08 11:17AM | 0 recs
Inspiration
Some of us already stand on the same ground, right?

 "Together We Are"  "Hope Is Here"

Let's not "start something," but let people know that we already have...

 "can" and "on the way" create a sense of potential disappointment, more looking out for something that may not come than working with what is already here.  

Or does that sound too "consultry?"

I enjoyed very much reading your post.

by lil miss liberty 2004-11-08 11:25AM | 0 recs
While maybe true - they still did not win
Why aren't we making more noice about the stolen election.  If you agree with the linked article - write the DNC and John Kerry to hold up their promise to make sure every vote counts:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/110804A.shtml
by CaseyK24 2004-11-08 11:53AM | 0 recs
Ever actually listen to Clark?
The candidate you were looking for was always there.  We just ignored him.

"You will determine whether rage or reason guides the United States in the struggle to come. You will choose whether we are known for revenge or compassion. You will choose whether we, too, will kill in the name of God, or whether in His name, we can find a higher civilization and a better means of settling our differences"  -- Wes Clark

"Freedom and dignity spring from within the human heart. They are not imposed. And inside the human heart is where the impetus for political change must be generated."  -- Wes Clark

"I believe in an America that leads by caring and listening -- in the America of the New Frontier, the New Deal, the Marshall Plan, and the moon shot. The kind of America that inspires all of us to embrace the future, to feel excited at the dawn of a new day, and to view the past as prologue, not a prison. In short, I believe in an America that is determined to do good and dares to be great. One that pushes the frontiers of human potential in the sciences and education ... in health and the arts.  Education is the key to a healthy democracy - to the creation of citizens who are informed and engaged, who will hold their leaders and one another accountable"  -- Wes Clark

"Today there is no substantial challenge to American ideals. The question is this: Where can we, with all our wealth and capabilities, lead mankind?"  -- Wes Clark

"Imagine a world in which we saw beyond the lines that divide us, and celebrated our differences, instead of hiding from them. Imagine a world in which we finally recognized that, fundamentally, we are all the same. And imagine if we allowed that new understanding to build relations between people and between nations. " -- Wes Clark

"I am a liberal. We live in a liberal democracy.  That's what we created in this country. That's in our Constitution. ... I think we should be very clear on this.  You know, this country was founded on the principals of the Enlightenment. It was the idea that people could talk, reason, have dialogue, discuss the issues. It wasn't founded on the idea that someone would get stuck by a divine inspiration and know everything right from wrong. I mean, people who founded this country had religion, they had strong beliefs, but they believed in reason, in dialogue, in civil discourse. We can't lose that in this country. We've got to get it back."  -- Wes Clark

"When you can do good, you should."  -- Wes Clark

by Mark Matson 2004-11-08 02:49PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------