The Political Dogfight

'Heath Savings Accounts', a Slipperly Slope and the Fatally Flawed Assumptions: Feldman

Frameshop is open.

by Jeffrey Feldman

Problem with the phrase "Health Savings Accounts"

The "Health Savings Account" proposal is a slippery slope initiative designed to advance a broad GOP vision about medical care for US citizens.  The basic premise of a "Health Savings Account" is that the current crisis in medical coverage in this country is caused by irresponsible consumer behavior.

According to this logic, healthcare costs are out of control because the healthcare market is unhealthy.  Markets are unhealthy, according to the GOP, when they are infected with controls separating demand from supply.  In order to bring costs down, all factors separating US citizens from direct interaction with the costs of healthcare should be removed, consumers should be forced into direct contact with the costs of healthcare, and the "natural" forces should be allowed to "repair" the unhealthy market.  When the US healthcare market is healthy, US citizens will be healthier, too.  [This is the crucial underlying conceptof the GOP and the conservatives that have been planning this effort for years. TBD]

This is fatally flawed logic.

Trippi: The Grassroots Can Save Democrats

Whether you agree with every word or not, this is a fine article with ideas and concepts, particularly about the localized DNC policy and campaign planning meetings. This to The Big Dog is a particularly valuable concept. The Frameshop is one effort at bringing grassroots ideas to a crucial concept. Look for another Frameshop post tomorrow. But now read and enjoy Joe Trippi at his best...TBD

The Party Base

The Grassroots Can Save Democrats
Howard Dean paved the way to future victories.

BY JOE TRIPPI
Tuesday, November 30, 2004 12:01 a.m.

Mr. Kerry raised nearly half of his war chest over the Internet. He was so successful at this that he actually outspent the Bush campaign. But it was the outsider campaign of Howard Dean, reviled by most of the Democratic establishment, that pioneered the use of the Internet to raise millions in small contributions; Mr. Kerry was just the beneficiary as the party nominee. And it was the risk-taking Dean campaign that forced the risk-averse Kerry campaign to opt out of the public financing system. Had that decision not been forced on Mr. Kerry, he would have been badly outspent by George Bush; he would not have been competitive at all throughout the long summer of 2004.

Mr. Kerry's lead among young voters hid just how bad Election Day really was for Democrats. In 2000, voters between 18 and 29 split their votes evenly: nine million each for Mr. Bush and Al Gore. But in 2004, two million more voters in this age group turned out to vote. And while Mr. Bush won the same nine million, 11 million voted for Mr. Kerry. But when we set aside his two million new younger voters, the true disaster is revealed. In 2000, Mr. Gore and Ralph Nader won a combined total of 54 million votes. This year Mr. Kerry and Mr. Nader got 53 million (ignoring the two million new young voters).

TBD On the Road...and a Red State Letter to the Editor

The Big Dog's in Alabama this week doing a little business. If the volume of posts slows it's because I have to actually focus on business this week!

While in Huntsville, I saw the following Letter to the Editor this morning and I think there is value in the attitude. I might quibble about a few specifics...but the attitude is invaluable. Enjoy.

GOP's Phony Agenda

The Republicans did a good job of selling the masses on their 'moral' agenda. If the Democrats have a chance of taking back the Presidency, the Senate and the House they need to succinctly 'sell' their agenda as well. Democrats need to make it clear that they are for the very things that every compassionate, hard-working American supports:

• Equal health care for everyone
• Equal tax breaks for the lower and middle classes that the large corporations enjoy.
• Scientific research to try to put an end to many deadly and debilitating diseases.
• Support for those in need.

60 years ago and a battle speaks to the Past, Present and, perhaps, Future

In an old article about a war faraway and many years ago, we may find the past, present and future mixed into a memory and a historical reality. Bernard Fall was considered the foremost authority on the wars in Indochina and the only historian to understand what, today, we would call 'an insurrgent war'. This article was published in 1964 on the 10th anniversary of the battle at Dien Bien Phu in Vietnam. If you think this just a historical artifact read the following paragraphs and substitute the names, countries and adversaries:

"But as other revolutionary wars -- from Algeria to the British defeats in Cyprus and Palestine -- have conclusively shown, it does not take pitched, set-piece battles to lose such wars. They can be lost just as conclusively through a series of very small engagements, such as those now fought in South Vietnam, if the local government and its population lose confidence in the eventual outcome of the contest -- and that was the case both for the French and for their Vietnamese allies after Dien Bien Phu."

This is worth your time and will add to your knowledge of the historical reality of the war we fight today. Bernard Fall, by the way, died in Vietnam, a battle casuality with US Forces. He lived large.

Dien Bien Phu: A Battle to Remember

Fifty years ago, the French garrison at Dien Bien Phu fell to the Viet Minh, in one of the 20th century's most decisive battles.

By Bernard B. Fall

The Big Dog's View

A Personal View from The Big Dog

This last week we saw the spectacle of the opening of the Clinton Library and an hour interview with President Clinton by Peter Jennings. I was moved by the library and by the interview with this man who, for many, is the only successful Democratic President they have ever seen.

Sidney Blumenthal has a scathing piece about President Bush's personal conduct at the opening on Salon. I'm including a photo of our President trying to push himself through a door even after it had been agreed that President Clinton would lead the Presidential procession. It is the best non-verbal display of everything that is wrong with this man as Commander-in-Chief.The article is great and is well worth watching the short ad if you don't have a membership. Link to Salon.com here.

Yet after all that, I thought there were two paragraphs even more important for us as Democrats, Independents and disaffected Republicans. These two paragraphs, I believe, speak to the future we must create by the force of our efforts, our planning and ideas: [emphasis mine. TBD]

"In his speech, Clinton sought to clarify the present by his broad analysis of globalization -- "an age of interdependence with new possibilities and new dangers" -- and the offer of conciliation: "America has two great dominant strands of political thought; we're represented up here on this stage: conservatism, which at its very best draws lines that should not be crossed; and progressivism, which at its very best breaks down barriers that are no longer needed or should never have been erected in the first place."

"In his effort to transcend the division of America into two nations, red and blue states, Clinton was applying his tradition -- the absence of dogma, the belief that good ideas can come from anywhere, and that solutions cannot be imposed but must be worked out in democratic politics by building coalitions, compromises and experimentation, of which he was leading practitioner and survivor, ever the Comeback Kid."

Think on these words tonight from Bill Clinton: "the absence of dogma, the belief that good ideas can come from anywhere, and that solutions cannot be imposed but must be worked out in democratic politics by building coalitions, compromises and experimentation....."

Aren't these words of both idealism and practicality? And don't we need both to win back seats in 2006 and the White House in 2008? Is there is a better slogan for Dogfight04 and those of us dedicated to winning the next election cycle?

Frameshop: 'Personal Retirement Accounts' (CAUTION!)

Frameshop: 'Personal Retirement Accounts' (CAUTION!)

by Jeffrey Feldman   

POLITICAL LANGUAGE RECALL

The following phrase has been identified as faulty political language:

"Personal Retirement Accounts" (PRAs)

DO NOT USE THIS PHRASE. This phrase is subject to immediate recall.

If you or someone you know is currently using this phrase, please go immediately to Frameshop for repairs. WIDELY USED IN SOCIAL SECURITY DEBATE.

This phrase is widely used in Bush proposals to "fix" Social Security. Also used in Conservative think tank "solutions" to Social Security. Anyone currently engaged in debate about Social Security should exercise extreme caution.  All others should immediately make themselves aware of the problem.

WARNINGS:
Use of this phrase will result in serious damange to political debate and harm to this country. Repeated use of this phrase will result in the proliferation of a deceptive conservative frame, the dismantling of Social Security, and the destruction of the social welfare state.

EXTREME CAUTION ADVISED.
---

Frameshop is open.

'With Deepest Sympathy'

By David H. Hackworth

Donald Rumsfeld – who’s known as a people-eating systems man – has a long history that shows he prefers technology to humans. Certainly as SecDef he’s always gone for high-tech military gear rather than giving the boots on the ground max priority when it comes to the basics: armored vehicles and vests, sufficient ammo and all the other vital stuff that helps soldiers make it through the Valley of Death.

His beloved shock-and-awe whiz-bang wonder weapons worked well enough initially in Afghanistan and Iraq, but as we saw on the tube last week, we’re once again back to the age-old struggle of man against man – with grunts, not machines, taking and holding ground.

And now, apparently, Rumsfeld’s obsession with machines and their efficiency has translated into his using one to replace his own John Hancock on KIA (killed in action) letters to parents and spouses. Two Pentagon-based colonels, who’ve both insisted on anonymity to protect their careers, have indignantly reported that the SecDef has relinquished this sacred duty to a signature device rather than signing the sad documents himself.

The Frameshop, an Introduction

Frameshop, an Introduction

by Jeffrey Feldman

I learned a great deal from the "Looking for Lakoff" diaries.  In particular: the Reader is not just interested in reading books or having abstract discussions. Nobody is going to get elected by talking about Lakoff.  Theory was the beginning.

Now, we, all of us, want to put the idea of "framing" to good use, on the ground, right now! We want to use Lakoff's ideas to make things better, to take back control of the political debate, and to repair the system.

Frameshop is open.

[ I'm never quite sure how deeply I should climb inside metaphors, but I'm writing this on a Friday, so here goes... ]

A Repair Shop for Political Language

Fallujah: From the Swordpoint of Combat

From Stuart 'O'Neill, The Big Dog:

This article was in today's papers across the nation. It strikes at the home of our greatest contradiction as a divided nation; Supporting the Troops while perhaps despising the war.

Here The Marine Corps, thought by many military analysts to be the last Service to understand being warfighters at the swordpoint of combat, pay the price for the decisions made in Washington D.C. and London. And they pay that price with pride, honor and dedication. At the very end of this article I believe you will meet the most courageous man of all...the man who has learned how to lead his men in the midst of chaos and uncertainty and embodies the best of leadership skills.

I am no military man. Yet reading of these young and not-so-young warfighters brings both sorrow and pride to my heart and tears to my eyes. This is a departure for DF04, yet it is an essential part of understanding the reality of modern combat and the men and women who will act out the deadly roles assigned to them by our national leadership. These are good people, with courage and tenacity I can only imagine. I hope I measure up to their sacrifice.

[We must also honor the courage of an unarmed reporter who was also at the swordpoint of combat and his only sword was his pen.]

November 21, 2004

In Fallujah, Young Marines Saw the Savagery of an Urban War

By DEXTER FILKINS

[Cpl. Nathan R. Anderson, pictured here, was killed, in an ambush]

FALLUJA, Iraq, Nov. 18 - Eight days after the Americans entered the city on foot, a pair of marines wound their way up the darkened innards of a minaret, shot through with holes by an American tank.

As the marines inched upward, a burst of gunfire rang down, fired by an insurgent hiding in the top of the tower. The bullets hit the first marine in the face, his blood spattering the marine behind him. The marine in the rear tumbled backward down the stairwell, while Lance Cpl. William Miller, age 22, lay in silence halfway up, mortally wounded.

"Miller!" the marines called from below. "Miller!"

With that, the marines' near mystical commandment against leaving a comrade behind seized the group. One after another, the young marines dashed into the minaret, into darkness and into gunfire, and wound their way up the stairs.

Think Big, Hit First: Looking to How to Frame Issues (Conclusion)

Think Big, Hit First: Looking to How to Frame Issues(Conclusion)

by Jeffrey Feldman
[note: The Lakoff series by Jeffrey Feldman was originally published at DailyKos and was discussed the in the diary system referenced below. It was republished here at Dogfight04.com with permission of the author. His future work called The Frameshop will be published here as well.]

In the past few weeks, many of us in the diaries have been writing ourselves through anger, fear and sadness with an eye towards creating a discussion that might be helpful to those around us.   

With that in mind, I began "Looking to Lakoff" as an impromptu dKos workshop--a conversation for anyone who wished to sit down on the floor with me, roll up their sleeves, and talk through ideas. I am, now, in a very different state of mind.  My feet are back on the ground and the emotions that drove me to read and discuss Lakoff have begun to dissipate.  More importantly:

Lakoff is now on our minds, where once he was just on our bookshelves.

As a result, the time has come to wrap up the introduction and turn towards the task of putting Lakoff into practice. In this last "Looking to Lakoff" entry, I sum up my own thoughts and invite you to sum up yours.   

This is the big picture discussion at the end of a series of smaller conversations.

Words and Deeds: