I don't mind being criticized by the Right (what self-respecting Democrat would?), but I've been somewhat troubled by the relative lack of response from the Left.  I realize that blogging on both ends of the political spectrum consists primarily of complaining about the opposition, and I certainly applaud efforts to shed light on Republicans' numerous failures and flaws, but it's also important that Democratic bloggers promote the good things Democrats do.

I don't mean to attack you for your efforts, but I find this somewhat petty. It sounds like you feel that progressives are somehow obligated to promote your book.

As far as the book itself, such blatant propagandizing towards children makes me uncomfortable, even if it's propaganda I agree with. I think children should be taught compassion, and you mention that your book talks about "principles of fairness, tolerance, peace, and concern for the well-being of others". I think these are important principles to be taught, but I want children to have the critical thinking skills to make their own decisions on who stands closest to their principles.

In my opinion it's the football team approach to politics (I'm a Democrat and so Democrats are always right, or vice-versa) that is partially causing the lack of meaningful dialogue about politics in our nation.

I've always liked Thich Nhat Hahn's 14 Precepts, of which number three reads:

Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education. However, through compassionate dialogue, help others renounce fanaticism and narrowness.

Of course, others may disagree. But my point is, there may be reasons that your book hasn't taken off as much as you hoped. Blaming the left blogosphere for not promoting it enough isn't fair. Nobody's entitled to having their product promoted for free. There's probably hundreds of self-published liberal-oriented books out there. Whether even the best of them catch waves of blogosphere support is subject to a lot of forces, sometimes including random good luck. But there's no obligation of Democratic bloggers to promote every "Democrat doing good things" in the world. It's up to you to get the good things you're doing noticed.

As I said, the book isn't for everyone. However, I should point out that it's actually doing much better than I'd expected -- just not in the Blogosphere. Many Democratic activists, organizers, and office-holders (as well as other Democrats) have told me how much they appreciate it, that it fills a niche, it's a great fundraising tool, etc. This is precisely why I'm surprised that Democratic bloggers haven't shown a bit more interest. They're not obligated to promote it, obviously, but it strikes me as odd that conservative bloggers would be so much more interested.

I mean, yeah, I'm sure mommy is a democrat for the same reasons I am.  But choosing to make party-affiliation the central label--if not theme--of the book seems like a mistake to me.

I would be much more interested in this book if it were something like "why mommy is a liberal" or "why mommy believes in progressive ideas" or something like that.  But, just outright labeling the book with a political party's name seems, well, like a mistake.

Mommy's a democrat because the evil GOP want to put RFID in US citizen's passports and ID cards so they can track them.  It looks like George Orwell's vision just took another 20 years.  

REAL ID is scary... We need to filibuster the hell out of that in the senate.  Any Dem who crosses over should be taken to task.

"blatant propagandizing towards children" is utter nonsense; children learn from examples and in that way, someone can can "propagandize" w/o ever overtly discussing anything.

What is interesting is that people can be partisan, but never explain. My dad actually refused to do so, although he once told me that the GOP was the most fascist organization in the country. He was a bigoted, passionately pro-union, pro-civil liberties, anti-Communist who never really got feminism and was rather sympathetic toward Nixon in Tricky's last days. In other words, there were times when he had some explaining to do, if only to deal with his own contradictions.

You know, I thought about getting this book and then I looked at the sample page where it says "Democrats make people share their toys just like Mommy does" and I thought: nothing to make my two year old into a Republican like running that past him.

I think I'll let my kids become Democrats by seeing the good example provided by me and my wife, just like my parents did with me.

Perhaps we could also have the Spanish language version, with Abuelita's political outlook.

I dunno.  I'm not keen on indoctrination.

I'm not a believer in taking options off the table.  Bring me a GOPer who votes for the minimum wage and nationalized healthcare, and I could give a shit less that my mother is (in reality) a Democrat.

I feel that feeding my child ideas about politics at an early age is irresponsible. I expect them to emulate others' good behavior, and I will make sure they develop the critical thinking skills that I believe are necessary in today's world. Such skills, it seems to me, often end up creating a person with a liberal, or at least realistic, viewpoint anyway. But it is not my job to decide my child's lifestyle and ideology, it is theirs.

There are other influences in a child's life besides thier parents. These should be allowed to take place naturally as well; children are as much affected by their friends and environment as they are by family. Filling them with prejudiced ideas about political parties inhibits their ability to think critically about their world later on in life. After all, why would one consider the positions of their chosen party if one had grown up with the innate "knowledge" that they were always right?

Children shouldn't be indoctrinated. They should be educated.

I don't have a problem with teaching children ideas about politics. Why is politics such a sacred, touchy subject that you can't ever bring up your own ideas with your children? You're teaching them about everything else, why not one more thing. I agree that it's a bit strange to feature the party as the subject of the book, as party ideologies can and do shift over time, but whatever. It's a weak criticism.

Anyway, what I really wanted to comment on is the choice of the squirrel. This is brilliant. I have always disliked the donkey as the totem animal of the Democratic party, and I would love to see a genuine effort to replace the donkey with a squirrel.

Right now we are indeed the donkey party: beaten down, and working too hard for no respect in return.

But contrast this with the squirrel: charismatic! nimble! practical! independent! loves the outdoors! Would a squirrel run up a multi trillion dollar deficit? Of course not. We'd be too busy saving up acorns for winter. And would a squirrel allow itself to be enslaved so it could tear up the land for agribusiness? Again, no.

The squirrel is a brilliant choice of character, and I hope it catches on.

Down with the donkey! Up with the squirrel!

When I first saw this book on the web, I was sure this was a spoof done by a conservative, for obvious reasons.  Reading even 3 pages made me want to reach for the knitting needles.  Even after reading that, apparently, a lot of people do not think this is a spoof, I remain unconvinced.  

i do not like to subscribe to any party affiliation. i don't think it is that the left does not have a voice because it does not speak, and therefore people are unsure of what democratic values are all about- i doubt whether there is a cohesive democratic identity in this country. things are complex. being a democrat and believing in sharing toys does not actually mean that you are a generous person, no more so than a republican. it's like calling yourself an evangelical christian, which doesn't necessarily mean that you are against abortion, believe in war, support president bush, etc. i find that many  of my friends today see themselves as moderates, more or less taking one issue at a time because they know that things are way much more nuanced, dependent, and complex than seeing things as mere dichotomies, liberal/democrat, conservative/republican, good/bad.

what happens on the first day of school when a kid goes, hey you're a republican, i hear you're selfish and don't want people to go to school. and the book implies that republicans do not care about the safety of their children, which is probably why this book has been getting so much flack from the conservatives. i'm not a republican and i find that insulting. that succeeds in alienating your audience, even though this book isn't intended for a conservative audience. safety and security are complex issues and to make a nursery tale that fails to convey any of the complexity of such ideas is a mistake, especially conveyed through a mother figure, a parental figure, a figure that a young child places upon a godlike pedestal, until his or her teenage years.

also, values aren't just a mere "mommy says that you should be like this because she is." you want to teach your kids real values? show them by example. not dictation.