The one thing I noticed you didn't talk about was Iraq and the "war on terror."  Since this is the whole reason that Bush is even in office, and (arguably) that the Dems didn't take over Congress in 2002, it seems like a bit of an oversight, to say the least.  We can hardly afford to ignore it, hard though it may be to handle.

My own view is that we need a total transformation in consciousness to get our arms around this problem.  And you don't get that overnight.  So we need to start with a 60% chunk of what we can do.  And for that I'd suggest something like the following:

(1) Reinstate the "Powell Doctrine."  It's utterly amazing that Colin Powell himself did absolutely nothing as every single principle in the "Powell Doctrine" was violated.  Of course, he had nothing to do with it, really, other than popularizing it.  But it did bear his name.  And it came from the military itself.  So we need to reinstate it, and give it the force of law this time. (This should be more than a 60% position.  It should be more like 80-90%.)

This means no going off half-cocked into a war on false pretenses.  War is serious business.  It should only be a last resort.  It should have a clear objective.  It should have a specific, doable exit plan.  It should have the overwhelming support of the American people--not just ginned up support, but the kind that will really last for as long as it is needed.

(2) Protect, honor and respect the troops and our veterans.  This could be a whole diary in itself.  Suffice it to say that the military working class is not treated much different than the rest of the working class, and class-based approach to the problems they face would be strongly advised.  For example, try this one on for size: if police departments can have unions, then why can't the military?

You can't honor and protect the troops by sending them off to war under false pretenses.  You can't treat the troops with honor and respect by sending them off to any war when war is not the smart way to deal with a problem.

Honor and respect for the troops is a bridge concept that helps us get to the value of non-military approaches as a true complement to the military approach, in sharp contrast to the way that GOP chickenhawks dismiss them out of hand.

(3) The threat of terrorism is above all a symptom of more fundamental problems.  The best way to fight terrorism at its roots is to solve the problems that terrorists seek to exploit.

This is not an excuse to let terrorists off the hook.  It's a smart approach to cutting off their most important resource--the support of a larger community.  It's a smart approach based on recoginizing that terrorists exploit failures of governance.  When governance works to solve problems, would-be-terrorists find no support.  If they try to do something, they get turned in.  This perspective is not yet a 60% position.  But we're smart people.  We should be able to brainstorm a good starting point for leading people to this awareness.

= = =

As indicated above, I don't think this issue is optional.  We can get 60% solutions to all the other issues we want.  But if we don't tackle this one, the GOP will use it shamelessly in the future, just as they have in the past.

So I'm not faulting you for that.

And I agree with your basic concept 100%.  It's right along the same lines of my historical analysis that a political (presidential) relignment needs two consecutive wave elections.  That's what it takes to get a commanding majority.  Just trying to squeak by (as the GOP has done since 1994) or moving to the center (as the Dems have done since 1992) will not cut it.

With the media infrastructure arrayed against us, constantly repeateing GOP narratives, the one sure way to overcome them is simply to pass stuff that's incredibly popular.  This will work, despite everything they may do, just as the media narratives couldn't prevent Bush from becoming incredible unpopular.

But I'm also keenly aware that the only thing the GOP is really good at is fearmongering.  (They're also good at stealing elections, but that, too, requires fearmongering to succeed.)  And so long as we've got the GWOT out there, they've got a potent fear factor always close at hand.  Take that away from them, and they are truly powerless.

I think that it just might be possible that a lot of stuff is happening behind the scenes, and it's happening super-fast. Why have Pelosi and Dean begin denying that Bush would be impeached the moment it became clear that the Republicans had been routed? (Much to the consternation of everyone across the political spectrum.) Or put it another way, why did Bush give Rumsfeld the boot? (Just at a time when it would cause the entire Republican Party to go apoplectic?)

I bet a deal was made: Rumsfeld, Cheney's Chief Master of Disaster, had to go NOW, before he could, perhaps out of some sort of desperation or panic, precipitate some really huge disaster?

Well, of course, we are going to try to influence the Democrat's agenda, just like the Evangelicals tried to influence the Republican's agenda. Iraq is a giant mess, and I don't claim to have any answers, except we have to get out of there as fast as possible. I am only sure that it will very seriously be not pretty.

To the best of my knowledge, we have not elected a new media regime. So our very first order of business is going to have to be strict Net Neutrality.

I, too, have been trying to figure out how the netroots will help this governing majority.  Here's my current theory:

For the netroots to help, both the House and Senate must post online the text of every pending bill 72 hours before voting, allowing the netroots to dissect and discuss it to death.  I think the netroots will do very well under this kind of time pressure, with spontaneous groups forming on dkos and other sites to study each and every pending bill, and come up with amendments.

At the very least, we'll be able identify problems and loopholes in the bills, rather like the open-source software idea that "all bugs are shallow to many eyes".

My dream scenario would be to see preliminary versions of bills posted for review prior to even entering the house or senate docks. Coalescing from the dkos discussions will be working groups that handle bills under consideration in committees (which is when we can have the most effect anyway).

Whaddyathink... too dreamy?  Or should we start writing software to help with this now?  A simple wiki interface might work to begin with, but software to handle multiple proposed, overlapping amendments that the netroots can vote on and forward to legislators would be very interesting indeed.

No matter what the intersection of the netroots and a governing majority is, it is going to be historic.

I understand the importance of good governance, but we can't completely disregard how we were completely crushed by the repugs political savvy.

We have to stay sharp on the political front and continue to draw the line between us and the repubs AS we draft practical legislation.

The repugs love boogeymen and they use them to their advantage (communism, war on drugs, terror). Just because we slayed one now doesn't mean another one won't appear later.

They've shown that they want power for the sake of power and we need to make it clear we use power for the sake of the good of Americans.

We need to constantly drill that dems have done more good in their first year than the repubs had done in 12 years and the like.

After the battle is won, you must sharpen your knife.

This is something that most Americans can agree on without polarizing wedge points.  By going to the '60%' approach, we can solve our problems and mend our differences to solve the common good for all Americans.

How about both?

Democrats govern on the 60% positions now, while working to make 50% positions the next 60% positions.

Healthcare for every American should be a slam-dunk, no matter how much the healthcare industry fights it. The framing is simple - Why can't America have what every other civilized country in the world has? Affordable, universal healthcare.

Education is another issue the Democrats can easily win on. Access to affordable higher education will pay for itself in economic growth, better paying jobs, and increased tax revenue.

Word!

Consensus is important. There's a lot to do now, but I currently think a pragmatic but conservative (in terms of picking low-hanging fruit first) approach is best to start with.

The thing to realize is that it's going to take at least three or four election cycles to get all the things we think we need. We need a president who's on board to get Health Care, for instance.

I think the point on "teaching" is right on too. Dems in congress can start working on good government in terms of improving administrative rules and passing the laws that make the most sense, and we out in the field can launch a campaign to rally and solidify public opinion behind the policies we believe in.

Last time we tried Health Care, the plan itself was flawed (too much giveaway to the HMOs and Health Insurance Rackets) and there was no public campaign to pass it. Result? We got beat back by some smart-ass tv commercials, and the whole thing went down in flames.

To do it right, we have to have the mechanism for passing good laws, and we have to have the public support to provide the political will. Lots of work to do.

I guess that means the most important issues, the 40% get swept under the rug.  Yes, I'm going to say it and I'm going to keep saying it until I'm satisfied that never again an official of the United States government has a My Pet Goat moment.
The rest of the world has had enough of this "terra" nonsense so why not us.
Pelosi's endorsement of the 911 whitewash commission is enough of an indicator of where things will go.
I hate to rain on the parade as it only adds to a negative karma and all but, I call them as I see them.

I "almost" call them as I see them too!

('Course, they can't handle the truth.) (But few can.) (But it's still out there.)