1.  The Democrats now have an overwhelming "reality" advantage in terms of a wide range of issues, with Iraq sitting potently at the center.  At the same time, however, the legacy media (especially in the TV arena) and Republican noise machine continue to shroud reality in a corrosive, blinding fog.

2.  As I discussed yesterday, the Democrats have a growing number of "strong, clear and smart" (SCS) leaders/spokespersons, each with unique strengths, styles and potency on particular sets of issues.

3.  The Internet offers a range of powerful tools and platforms for distributing video clips, especially fairly short one.  It also supports "viral" distribution, where perceived quality can lead to mass distribution at virtually no incremental cost.

4.  Roughly half of U.S. homes will have broadband service by November and probably about 2/3 will be connected via broadband by the 2008 election.  And I'd guess that the corresponding percentages among likely voters are probably significantly higher than those two numbers.

5. Producing and editing short but good-quality "headshot" videos is pretty inexpensive and easy these days.  Even adding some stock footage (e.g., from Iraq, Katrina, clips of Republican lies, etc.) would not add substantial cost or required skill-sets.  Today's technology also supports relatively easy remixes/mashups, where individuals can recombine clips to better suit their purposes, their preferred mix of issues, and their target audience.

So the idea is:

One or more groups from within the netroots self-organize to get the ball rolling.  This would probably include contacting SCS leaders/speakers (these need not be all high-profile individuals);  discussing topics/content to be covered;  organizing taping sessions and follow-up editing; developing and implementing distribution strategies, etc.

My suggestion is that the process not be too tightly controlled once the content was created.  The key is to have a human-to-human video messages that can be rapidly disseminated and, as needed, customized and combined with other compatible clips.  

I'd suggest that the initial crop of videos focus on Democratic "vision" and "values" rather than specific policies, though the latter should be included to some extent.  The point is to achieve the "human-to-human" communication that the video medium is uniquely able to support.  

A key goal would be to promote trust in the speakers and in the Democratic party--to convey the reality that they are strong, honest, smart (yes, even wise), have strong and relatable values and a clear, positive vision for this country, and can be trusted to manage our government and help make our lives better, safer, more abundant and happier.  

The message would also be that the Republicans are none of the above, though I think we should focus much more on the positive message of the Democrats, with just enough targeted negative comments to help viewers mentally and emotionally disengage from the Republican party, its messages and its representatives.

I'd suggest using virtually all the available online video platforms, from Politics TV, to YouTube, MySpace, Veoh, etc.  There are more and more of these popping up every day--each with their advantages and disadvantages--and the goal would be to reach out effectively to the "audiences" of all of them.  The more the merrier.

Think of it as a marriage of the growing "viral" distribution power of the video-enabled broadband Internet with the growing power of netroots-backed Democratic vision and values.

I've got some more specific ideas about the details, but this should give you the basic idea.  I hope some of you run with it and, if you do, I'd be happy to be part of a working group to get the ball rolling.

I've been waiting for us to get to this point since 1980 when, after leaving a life of monastic meditation and service, I worked for the Citizens Party, an environmental third-party whose candidate, Barry Commoner, got his only mass media coverage when he said the word "shit."  I can still remember watching the campaign and election coverage and feeling that our country had just entered a new (and to me, very, very strange) age of political media. That, of course, was when actor and spokesman Ronald Reagan became president of these United States.

Shortly after that I enrolled in grad school to study telecom and media, because I sensed that this was an arena where new strategies and tools for "progressive change leverage" had to be developed.  It's been a long time coming, but I think we've finally reached a point where the evolution of political media is clearly shifting in a pro-democracy direction and that we may have reached an inflection point where this shift can dramatically accelerate.  I also believe that the progressive netroots is very well positioned to take maximum advantage of this shift into high-gear and ride and guide the wave of change in a very positive direction.

So, to all you netroots citizens out there--especially the younger generations: Congratulations!...and Thanks!