archived: 16 - 22 Jan, 2005 Back Next
UPDATED: January 18th, 2005
GARY
“BATTS” PELPHREY
“Rob Stein”
Junkie: Several TPJ readers discovered the “Ron” Stein TPJ was searching for was actually Rob Stein. TPJ covers Rob Stein in THEM DEMS today.
In an exchange of email with Mr. Pelphrey prior to running his letter today, he thought readers would like to know that he:
was not a Dean supporter during the last election cycle, but I was very impressed with his presence when I saw him here in Atlanta. He senses that the Democrat Party has tried so hard not to anger anyone that they've wound up not standing for anything and, that if we want to win, we've got to frame the issues ourselves, and not accommodate the Republicans' vocabulary and perspectives; i.e. no one is pro-abortion, but we are pro-choice; we're for empowerment, not entitlement.
His letter to TPJ follows:
_____________
I'm not sure, but I think your unknown Ron Stein is actually Rob Stein; you'll find more hits than you want with Rob Stein and Democracy Alliance.
I know no more about him than what you printed today, and a couple of minutes fighting through the first Google results page, but his tone scares me.
When Howard Dean came to Atlanta last week, I went down to hear him and it seemed to me that he hit the nail on the head, in sharp contrast to what I would describe as Stein's 'shadow boxing'.
As you pointed out, Dean said that his southern state strategy would begin with, and hinge on, two words - "Show up." He went further, in the talk I heard, and, in this aspect, seems to show the futility of Stein's view. Dean says that we've got to stop letting the opponents frame the issues. Starting a preemptive war is not a moral value Americans support. Using the Constitution to practice discrimination is not a moral value Americans support. Letting government make a personal decision for each woman is not a moral value that Americans support.
Stein describes an organized opposition, with think tanks, and Rush Limbaugh, etc., and lots of money. That's true, but I don't believe that the opposition is that homogeneous. What I do believe is that Stein has adopted their vocabulary - and I think that is a fatal mistake.
Would you rather label yourself a liberal or a conservative? No matter what your feelings about social issues and the size of government, I think we would all like to conserve what we have, in terms of government structure, and the general standard of living.
Would you rather be mainstream or radical? A no-brainer, but we've allowed our fringes to try to paint mainstream as a do-nothing zone. That allows the Bushmen to present their ideas in opposition to peaceniks and tree-huggers as being mainstream.
We did lose this election on the basis of faith; not a faith in Jesus, or Jerry Fallwell, but a faith that everyone is really trying hard, and it's the 'American' way to let them continue; it can't be as bad as the 'liberal' press says it is.
The next election(s) will be won, in the same way as the last Presidential one was, by non-political-activist citizens selecting the person/party that sounds like they do. No one can tell me that the majority of citizens support corporate greed, or control of wealth by an empowered few, or discretionary war. We need to start talking with a vocabulary that brings these 'family values' home.
And I don't think Stein is doing that.
JUNKIE
“Taking The Money – NOT”
Sites like TPJ have sprung up across the United States, covering all spectrums of political philosophy. Anyone interested in politics can find a plethora of wonderful sites to suit their appetites.
Reports have recently surfaced that those operating political internet sites have taken money from candidates. Slate magazine has an excellent summary of the controversy. – Slate In particular:
[Dean’s campaign] named two prominent bloggers in particular: Jerome Armstrong of myDD.com and Markos Moulitsas Zuniga of Daily Kos. "On Dean's campaign, we paid Markos and Jerome Armstrong as consultants, largely in order to ensure that they said positive things about Dean. We paid them over twice as much as we paid two staffers of similar backgrounds, and they had several other clients," Teachout wrote. "While they ended up also providing useful advice, the initial reason for our outreach was explicitly to buy their airtime. To be very clear, they never committed to supporting Dean for the payment—but it was very clearly, internally, our goal." In the past, Teachout has also fingered Matthew Gross for writing about Erskine Bowles while Gross was on the candidate's payroll. – Slate
First, TPJ readers should understand that TPJ does not receive and will not take “consulting fees” or any other fees from candidates or any other individual in return for the expectation of publishing certain views.
Second, TPJ is a web magazine – not a blog. Within standards of reasonable judgment and taste, anyone is free to submit material for possible publication. TPJ strives to present a range of views, even if TPJ disagrees with viewpoints of a particular writer.
Third, TPJ is honored that readers make TPJ a part of their political reading. We believe that confidence requires TPJ to meet the guidelines for quality research and writing, including appropriate citation of source materials. We believe that meeting these guidelines is the only way to establish a quality publication.
_____________________________________________
LEUTISHA STILLS
“Thanks”
Please forward my thanks to Junkie Contributors Michael Carmichael and Dr. Steve Jonas for their insightful pieces on taking back the Democratic Party. As you know, I've developed a weblog totally devoted to getting rid of the Democratic Leadership Council. It's called "Get Rid of The DLC" and can be found on www.getridofthedlc.blogspot.com.
Junkie: Thank you Leutisha for making TPJ a part of your political reading. Junkie Editor Michael Carmichael and Dr. Steve Jonas are the very “heart” and “soul” of TPJ. Both have contributed enormously to the dialog on taking the Democratic Party in new, and hopefully more successful, directions.
TPJ readers can go directly to Ms. Stills’ very informative website by clicking on the hyperlink immediately below:
TAR HEEL TEACHER
“Loud and
Clear”
Tar Heel Teacher wants to talk about Bushes plans to "save" social security. What he really means is give the money to big business in the form of setting up private accounts. This information comes from the Congressional Office of Management and Budget – with a only one percent increase in the payroll tax for both the worker and employer Social Security “as is,” is safe for the next 75 years. This message must get our across the airwaves and internet loud and clear – there is no a social security “crisis.” This is something I say, perhaps tongue and cheek, Bush dreamed up because he needs the Social Security Fund to pay for the mess in Iraq.
Junkie: Tar Heel Teacher has it right. And, Bush is borrowing heavily from the Social Security Trust Fund to float his massive federal deficit spending. Recall that Ronald Reagan increased the Social Security tax by 100%, to put in a trust fund to meet the demands on the system when the baby boomers started retiring. Therefore, Social Security has collected more money than it needs for some 20 years.
What happened to the trust fund? Bush has been borrowing from the Trust Fund to help offset the federal deficit. When the baby boomers start to retire, the federal government will have to repay the loan with interest.
TPJ will keep writing on the issue.
Last Update: 03/23/2006