The fact that the greatest deterioration
of American civil liberties has occurred
in privacy and not "choice" should
be matched to the nearly non stop
calls for reform that are ignored
by both parties - at least somewhere.

To have someone decide, for example,
the file sharing case (which, believe it
or not, was not actually decided but
reversed and remanded to a lower court..)
or implementations of the limits of
corporations to buy and sell our identity
information, or the implications of
stem cell research far outweigh RVW.

I think however, they underestimate
how difficult it will be to handle
a majority. Moveon doesn't take positions
on abortion, neither do I.

1)Show what we are for in terms of values not issues. We must find an effective narrative to tie the most popular traditional Democratic priorities together.

2)Effectively frame what we are against. We need to put the Republican abuses most feared by the voting public under the umbrella of betrayal.

3)Show, using these arguements, that a conservative-packed Supreme Court will complete the betrayal of American citizens that gets worse with each of the Administration's broken promises and each Republican scandal in Congress.  

These themes should be carried out in the nomination fight and in the 2006 midterm elections.  Remember, the Republicans came from much farther behind in 1994 to capture a majority.

To start,  here are two good ten word summaries* of conservative and progresive philosophies:

Cons: Strong Defence
Prop: Stronger America

Cons: Free markets
Prog: Broad Prosperity

Cons: Lower Taxes
Prog: Better Future

Cons: Smaller Government
Prog: Effective Government

Cons: Family Values
Prog: Mutual Responsibility

Once we outline these core beliefs, we can
work our values into a narrarative.  

Cons: Strong Defence
Prop: Stronger America

A Stronger America protects its citizens from threats abroad by seeking real victory instead wasting lives and money on incompetently fought endless war against the wrong target. It uses every tool, including economic and diplomatic, to defang our real enemies rather than providing them with gigantic training ground.  At home,  it protects us from violence in the streets, poison in our food,  water and air and, and the  corrupt deals between govenment offical and drug, energy and financial companies which threaten our lives, savings and economic stability.

Cons: Free markets
Prog: Broad Prosperity

A focus on Broad Prosperity fits right in from Chris' post "Republicans Love It: The Money Line For Democrats in 2006" on the latest Democracy Corps poll:  

    "One statement stood out as the money quote,  
     polling significantly higher than the
     others:

     59 (SPLIT B) The Republicans think this is  
     the best economy in our lifetime. The  
     Democrats say we need to make our economy
     work for everyone, not just the few.

     Forty-four percent of those polled said that  
     this statement made them much more likely to
     vote for a Democratic candidate, and eighteen
     percent said it made them somewhat more  
     likely to vote for a Democratic candidate.
     None of the other statements even reached 40  
     in the "much more likely" column. None of the
     other statements reached sixty in the
     combined "much more likely" and "somewhat    
     more likely" columns."

Broad proseperity has alway been a key American value, and is reflected in the Democratic commitment to the idea  millions working honest, low-paying jobs that are essential to our economy deserve to receive their part of the American social contract. The American Dream has always promised rewards for hard work.

The Republicans have turned this upside down, providing the greatest rewards for those who make the least effort, even encouraging them to refuse to pay their share for supporting and protecting the society with the best business climate in the world.  Further, they are encouraging this during a war, allowing those who benefit most from the protection of our armed forces to get a free ride.

Cons: Lower Taxes
Prog: Better Future

Again, referring to Chris' post (emphasis mine):

    "I think there are three reasons why this  
     statement resonates so well: First, because
     they control the trifecta in Washington,
     Republicans are consistently forced to claim
     that things are moving in the right
     direction. Second, polling data consistently  
     shows that Republicans actually believe that
     the country is moving in the right direction.
     Combine the first and second reasons, and    
     people really believe that Republicans think          
     things are moving in the right direction.  
     This statement resonates as true to people's
     personal take on the country.

     The third reason why this statement works  
     well is because it articulates a positive  
     Democratic frame instead of a tired        
     political cliché. Rather than simply stating  
     "Republicans are for more of the same in
     Washington. Democrats are for change," or
     "Republicans have polarized and divided the
     country. Democrats will unite it," which were
     the two lowest resonating questions of the
     bunch, question 59 actually articulates the  
     cornerstones of progressivism: we can do
     better. We can make this work for everyone.

A Better Future is the center of the American dream, and 200 years of progess have been an American reality. We have an amazing society because 200 years of Americans paid their dues to build our institutions, roads, electrical grid, telecommunications network,  safegurds for food, air and water, and our armed forces.  

The Republicans want those who benefit the most from 200 years of work to use all these things for free while the rest of us pay their dues for them and the country still goes into debt.

Cons: Smaller Government
Prog: Effective Government

A push for Effective Government puts the emphasis on goals, not knee jerk budget increases or decreases.  We want a victory over and end to terrosism, not an endless incompetently fought war.  We want to reduce the number of abortions, as we did under Clinton by improving economic conditions, instead of restricting the freedom of women by simply outlawing a practice without having any real effect or supporting any alternatives. We want a reduction in poverty and an_impovement in education_ not boken promises to the churches and schools, where efforts on faith-based initiatives** and No Child Left Behind have recieved nothing but lip service.

Cons: Family Values
Prog: Mutual Responsibility

From the first settlements in the Colonies, Americans watched out for each other.  They worked together to build communities that served the greater good and participated in making the rules.  Children were brought up to value their communities  and to be responsible citizens; Americans took care of each other, a moral responsibility that started at the family but extended to the neighbor and the community, and was carried out though the participation in government at the town, state and federal level.

The conservatives stop at the family and conduct goverment in secret, discouraging and even preventing American from participating in the most important moral tradition we have ever had.
Again, in a time of war , this is even more reprehesable, because secret Republican government prevents us from exercising our reponsibility toward our armed forced and allows the wealthiest to ignore them.

**from Geroge Lakoff, author of "Don't think of and Elephant (www.rockrigdeinstitute.com)"

**see "God's Politics, Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It" by Jim Wallis www.sojo.net

He will nominate a pro-choice Republican to replace O'Connor, but who opposes nearly everything else we stand for. Gonzales would be a good example, but I'm sure he can find plenty more. Nominating a pro-choice justice will mask the extremist he picks in the MSM.