Arc of Identity

I’ve been a loyal Democrat and devoted liberal my entire life. Even as a teenager when Reagan was popular with my generation, intuitively I knew his vision was wrong. So I worked my butt off for the party and registered voters. I did this on faith that the Democratic Party would be a vehicle for economic and social justice.

Yet a lingering disenchantment with the party always lurked like a nagging conscious and whispered doubts in my ear. Personal friends from my youth may recall how I often quipped that Republicans were the party of evil and Democrats the party of gutlessness. Alas, our winner take all system reinforces the two party duopoly, so I saw no viable alternative. And perhaps there never will be.

The good thing about the gutless party is that at least it wasn’t out to get me. Whereas those nasty Republicans seemed to suggest that if I as a secular Jew didn’t accept Jesus Christ as my personal savior, support school prayer and engaged in casual sex, I was condemned to eternal damnation. Furthermore, if I didn’t fully embrace the principles of predatory capitalism and aggressive military nationalism, I was not a loyal American in their eyes. The Republican Party’s racist “southern strategy,” gutter tactics and homophobia, also repulsed me.

So I rationalized supporting Democrats against what I deemed the party of evil. If we didn’t stand up for Bill Clinton then Newt Gingrich and his apostles of hate and greed would run amok. With respect to policy the Clinton administration made all sorts of compromises I didn’t agree with such as welfare reform. But his heart seemed in the right place and the technology bubble provided an illusion of prosperity and hope for wage earners across the board. Meanwhile, the Republicans had the temerity to impeach our duly elected president for getting a blowjob. I didn’t approve of Clinton’s personal conduct but abusing our Constitution over it bothered me more.

Through the year 2000, I remained a staunch liberal both ideologically and temperamentally. By temperament I mean I was willing to debate and listen to ideas from conservative acquaintances and relatives, even as I contradictorily regarded the GOP itself as an evil institution of hate mongering greed. I’ve never believed that I had a monopoly on wisdom and perhaps through the power of reason and a good faith give and take, we could find “common ground” for the greater good. Yeah, once upon a time I really did believe that.

After all, most of the conservatives I knew were decent people and didn’t perceive themselves, as enablers of hate mongering greed. I didn’t equate them with Republican politicians. So ideologically, I remained a traditional New Deal sort of liberal but in personal disposition I also believed it was important to remain intellectually flexible and receptive to changing realities. I still believe in that personally but in this country it doesn’t seem to work politically.

Then George W. Bush stole the 2000 presidential election. No need to rehash the tale we all know so well. Suffice to say that I was PISSED! Pissed at how an American electorate could make an election close enough so Bush could steal it because they preferred him as someone they could have a beer with. Pissed that Ralph Nader and his supporters actually claimed there was no difference between Bush and Al Gore.

Pissed at a Democratic Party that crawled into a fetal position after Bush’s ascendancy and 9/11. Pissed at the reign of indecency under a Christian-fascist regime guided by neocons, immoral nationalists, predatory crony capitalists and religious zealots. A century from now, if the human race is still here, historians may well trace America’s decline to that 2000 election when predatory capitalism’s crusade that was launched by Reagan achieved its nirvana of destruction under Bush, Cheney and their merry band of “End Times” misogynists, corporatists, Ayn Rand fetishists and delusional believers of American exceptionalism.

During the 2002 midterm elections I looked upon my party of gutlessness in a new light. While Democrats would not overtly do me any harm they also wouldn’t stand up for me when Republicans pursued irrational wars or allowed predatory crony capitalism to destroy the American dream. It seemed the entire party was a self-gelding machine of ineptitude suffering from battered wife syndrome.

Then along came Howard Dean, a centrist governor from Vermont, who nonetheless was one of the few Democrats bold enough to fight the madness with his famous “What I want to know” March 15, 2003 speech in Sacramento. Inspired by Dean, a “netroots” movement took off to emancipate the Democratic Party from elite consultants and lobbyists to represent regular folks. Or so we believed.

For liberals like myself it was cathartic to encounter others who realized America was on a collision course with calamity and hungered for a Democratic Party with the spine to stand up and fight. In that despair and anger we felt under Bush and a corporatist media that failed to challenge the Bush administration’s distortion of reality emerged an exhilaration that we regular people would “force the spring” with a counter narrative of “truth.”

To my disgust Bush stole another election in 2004 and portrayed John Kerry, a man with four purple hearts, as soft. In opposition, both to the Republicans and status quo insider Democrats, many of us dug in our heels to save the party and the country. In February 2006, I posted an essay I was quite proud of entitled “Pro-Business Liberalism.” It was the first post I did that achieved any sort of notice and within the opening paragraph I identified a flaw that remains pervasive in the Democratic Party today:

“Meanwhile, the Democrats are enduring the worst perceptions among voters from both wings of their party: liberals reluctance to identify with pro-business policies makes the party appear in favor of handouts while the DLC reinforces the suspicion among voters that the Democrats are just as corporatist as the Republicans. It’s an odd contradiction and a rare feat of political ineptitude: the two wings of the party have managed to make Democrats appear socialist and corporatist at the same time.”

Over four years later and little has changed! President Barack Obama this past week was compelled to defend his administration for not being anti-business even as millions of Americans perceive it as beholden to predatory capitalists on Wall Street. The duality is undermining Obama’s administration and the Democratic Party’s effectiveness.Sadly, what the Democratic Party offers is predatory capitalism lite and nationalism with a veneer of multinational diplomacy.

And that leaves liberals like myself feeling adrift. My ideal of liberalism is to provide an indispensable alternative to revolution and reaction. I always envisioned liberalism as facilitating tangible positive change and reform at a pace that can be absorbed by society as a whole. I’m not a revolutionary. Revolutions are bloody. Reaction is also bloody. Hence, liberalism to me represented a means of how society could evolve and adapt to changing realities without bloodshed or overly harsh policies that hurt the most vulnerable among us. And hopefully empower and lift up those left behind in the free market’s rough and tumble.

In 2010 however, liberalism as defined by Democrats under Barack Obama is pursuit of that holy-grail independent voter who stands on the political fifty-yard line. The end result is the center of political gravity being pulled further to the radical right as liberalism continues to lose ground. And the body politic as a result can’t even do something modest like extend unemployment benefits as plutocratic millionaire corporatists complain about the deficit they largely created during the Bush years.

So as I reflect upon my political identity today it can be defined as weary of slogans, promises and personalities. I don’t believe in political parties or their platforms. I don’t believe in the dogma of ideology, be it left, right or middle. I don’t believe in silver tongued icons. I don’t believe in special interests, net roots movements, so called grass roots movements, moralizing politicians with nice haircuts, blow dried talking heads or careerist pundits with stock dividends in the system. I don’t believe in big government or the free market. I never believed organized religion could save anyone.

I do believe most people are decent, reasonable and competent. Our salvation, if it is to ever come, will happen on the community level when people pool their collective resources against predatory capitalists and their enablers in power with their own businesses, local financial credit lending institutions and reduce our own carbon footprints. Otherwise, in my lifetime, a bloody revolution, reaction or even a xenophobic civil war is inevitable.

Alas, liberalism never seemed so far away.

Follow Up Thoughts re Gov. Bobby Jindal

Delivering the response to a president's speech in front of a joint session of congress, is arguably the toughest assignment in politics. Few garner enthusiastic reviews after a president benefits from the symbolic majesty of such a moment. Yes, Virginia Senator James Webb was terrific a couple years ago. I can also recall former Democratic House Speaker Jim Wright, delivering an effective response following Ronald Reagan's 1987 State of the Union speech.

Nonetheless, Jindal's performance last night was the most pitiful response I have seen since former Senate Republican leader Bob Dole in 1996. At the time of Dole's response, I was quite critical of Bill Clinton from the left. Nonetheless, it was apparent that no one in the Republican Party held a candle to him.

Governor Bobby Jindal's performance last night and even John McCain's petulance at the "Fiscal Responsibility Summit" the day before, illustrates that the stature gap between Republicans and President Obama is widening. How will this impact substance I wonder? It still requires sixty votes to move legislation in the Senate. When will President Obama opt to stare the Republicans down and dare them to filibuster? And would enough Republican's blink when confronted with Obama's stature?

I'm convinced that President Obama has an opportunity to use his political capital and bargain aggressively for a far more activist agenda than he has to this point. Obama's speeches are wonderful. I just hope he seizes the moment and negotiates more effectively than he did with the stimulus bill. Even as the stature gap between Obama and the insipid opposition party widens, liberals must remain vigilant on behalf of peace, prosperity and social justice. As much as I respect President Obama, substance matters more than serving a cult of personality.

Monday Night Hit & Run Thoughts

• Listening to Republicans sanctimoniously whine about “bipartisanship” is both humorous and grating. Their socio-economic philosophy is completely discredited yet they cry foul because Democrats have no enthusiasm for adopting their stale “ideas” which has the world on the brink of total catastrophe. If Democrats were to make policy changes based upon the world being round, Republicans would whine about being excluded for believing the world is flat. Bipartisanship is not possible when people who belong in a lunatic asylum lead the opposition party.

• My visceral sense is that the stimulus debate was a seminal moment for President Obama. It’s a political victory, yet at the same time insufficient for what the country needs because he failed to define the terms of debate and bargained away too much at the onset of negotiations (read this post). If I read Obama correctly, he knows this as well and won’t be such an easy mark going forward. Obama's nominee for Health and Human Services may be a bellwether of his administration's direction. If it’s Tennessee governor Phil Bredesen, I’ll feel betrayed unless that appointment is coupled with a healthcare legislation czar determined to bargain hard with the HMOs. My preference is Howard Dean but that’s probably not going to happen because Chief of Staff Rham Emanuel hates him and Republicans hate truth tellers.

• Nationalization of the banks is coming and President Obama knows it. First though will be the obligatory kabuki dance of Treasury Secretary Geithner’s “plan.” I suspect Geithner’s troubling and vague performance is partly attributed to the administration’s belief that citizens learning more truth about the insolvency of our banks would result in massive withdrawals. Speaking of truth, tomorrow night I plan to watch a PBS Frontline special about America's economic day of infamy: September 18th, 2008.

• It will be interesting to contrast the rollout of Obama’s plan to stabilize housing with last week’s Geithner plan. The word is the administration will reveal far more details. More details with a housing plan is likely to generate confidence and hope. Whereas, as I referenced in the previous bullet point, with the Geithner plan, the powers that be are convinced confidence is best served by not revealing the complete truth.
  

Reminiscing About the Future

Watching McCain/Palin rallies it seems as if Republican Party jihadists are praying for a bullet, a bimbo or a bomb. They know only a catastrophic event will prevent Senator Obama from becoming president while the Republican Party is poised for disintegration from coast to coast. In my home state of New York, Democrats finally outnumber Republicans in Nassau and Suffolk Counties! Nassau County was home to the vaunted political machine of Al D'Amato and bastion of GOP money and patronage. No more and Democrats are poised to capture the New York State Senate for the first time since 1965 as a result. I realize most regard New York as the bluest of states but that's a big deal and symptomatic of the political terrain nationwide.

Memo to Republicans: Obama's ascendancy does not mean the "end of days." However, the combination of George W. Bush's two mismanaged military occupations, crony capitalism and the resulting economic calamity mean even Jesus Christ will not save the GOP's rotting corpse. Republican salvation will only come from repentance of their failed corporate theocratic ideology and cultural contempt for intelligent secular people.

Republicans eminently deserve the pasting they're about to receive. More importantly, Republicans have thoroughly demonstrated how incapable they are of competent governance; especially during times of crisis. For the moment, America and the world can't afford to have the GOP anywhere close to the reigns of power beyond a few state and municipal governments. Republicans also need this beating as an impetus to reform themselves.

Ultimately, I hope judicious Republicans rise above the mob that their party has pandered to. Democrats do not have a monopoly on wisdom and will not be above hubris with one party domination. Progressive Netroots activists like myself will do our best to keep Democrats honest but what's really needed is the competition of strong adversarial parties (note I didn't write party singular) engaged in the intellectual marketplace of ideas.

The years ahead will be challenging and tumultuous. Americans will be tasked with creating a new economic social/paradigm on the fly that works in the 21st century while too many of us are struggling to survive and avoid destitution. Our country will be further challenged because we can no longer effectively sustain an empire and that will require a major adjustment as the world is experiencing both shortages of oil and water. Indeed, a large dose of humility will be needed after the hyperpower post Cold War presidencies of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. Culturally, we Americans have never done well with humility so that too represents a challenge.

Senator Obama is far from perfect but he appears to have the right stuff for the challenges ahead. Initially, however, should Obama become president Democrats will largely be debating with themselves as the GOP is poised for irrelevancy after November 4th. In the short term that is necessary and good. In the long run that will be a recipe for disaster. Even Franklin Roosevelt had Republicans he could reach out to during World War Two such as Indiana Senator Arthur Vandenberg. As of now though virtually the entire Republican Party establishment is discredited.

It takes more than one party to govern a country especially during times as challenging as these. Hopefully, a landslide down the ticket on November 4th will facilitate the emergence of a new generation of Republicans who are part of the "reality based community" and ready to vigorously compete in the marketplace of ideas. Otherwise we'll all go down together.

Screw The House GOP

Yesterday the House Republicans stepped into a Newt Gingrich time machine. Remember how in 1995, Speaker Gingrich forced a government showdown because he was offended that President Bill Clinton didn't allow him to leave at the front of Air Force One when returning from Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin's funeral? Gingrich also complained that President Clinton didn't talk to him or Senate Republican leader Bob Dole and the New York Daily News responded with their famous "crybaby" headline.

Yesterday the House GOP scapegoated Speaker Nancy Pelosi's partisan speech as the reason for their not being able to deliver more votes to pass the Wall Street bail out. I'm not enamored of this bailout plan but I would have voted for it because the credit crisis is real. I'm not certain it would work but don't consider inaction an option.

However, I'm also not dissappointd it failed because the Democrats have an opportunity here to seize the manltle leadership and help the country. At this point, if the House GOP can't pull their caucus together then we should move on without them. Democrats can use their leverage to wrest more concessions from the hapless White House for bankruptcy protection for beleagured homeowners as well as expansion of FDIC. More House Democrats would support a bailout measure if funding for Wall Street bankers were scaled back and instead more funds were appropriated to address infrastructure. How about congress appropriate $500 billion for Wall Street and $200 billion as a stimulus for wage earners that includes the expansion of food stamps, unemployment insurance and job creating infrastructure development?

The House Democrats would pass such a measure overwhelmingly and enough Republican Senators would likely support any lifeline to the financial markets at this point. There is no reason for America to be held hostage by the loony far right House Republicans.

This Video Says It All

Forty-One Lame Donkeys

After watching the Republican presidential debate this morning, I am reminded yet again why I vote Democrat no matter my disenchantment. Ron Paul of Texas merits respect even though I disagree with some of his far out libertarian views. The rest are a scary group of fear mongers who shamelessly equate the struggle against militant Islam with 1938 during the Nazi Era or the conflict with Soviet communism.

They're a cabal of one note insipid careerists who have no sense of proportion, history or perspective. And the record shows conservative doctrine about combating terrorism weakens America's geopolitical position. In particular, former New York City Mayor Rudolph Guiliani is a joke. This trite figure of testosterone banality actually put his emergency communication center in the World Trade Center following the first bombing in 1993. Why the hell should we trust his judgment?

With fiscal and tax policies this group offers standard conservative boilerplate to justify rewarding wealth over work. Once again we hear the same supply side nonsense that an economy can be "grown" and not nurtured. How do we deal with crumbling infrastructure problems such as the collapsing bridge in Minnesota? Why cut taxes of course. Cutting taxes is the magical elixir that will enhance revenue without pain as as our blood and treasure continues to be spilled in Iraq and Afghanistan. What planet are these people living on?

The Republican presidential candidates also boasted this morning that they support replacing the income tax with the so called "fair tax." What's fair about a sales tax that sanctions working people with a 23% fee? What this is really about of course is the Republicans coddling wealth at the expense of the middle class. They don't want to tax capital gains or people earning high incomes. But they're more than happy to levy a 23% tax on single moms for purchasing groceries. And they're opposed to expanding health coverage for that single mom's kids. If anyone raises an objection to those policies they're attacked for waging class warfare.

So I remain with the donkey party. Putting all that aside however, much work remains to be done in transforming my party. It's wonderful that Democratic presidential candidates are attending Yearly Kos and ignoring the Democratic Leadership Council. But we still have a long way to go.

Forty-one pathetic Democrats in the House of Representatives supported the Bush Administration's grab at more power for the executive branch and voted in favor of the recent domestic surveillance bill. How can Democrats support giving a proven congenital liar such as Attorney General Alberto Gonzales even more power with this bill?

Obviously, the Democratic Party continues to suffer from battered wife syndrome. Below is a list of the forty-one House Democrats who supported this bill. If any of them represent your district, please click here to express your objections.

Jason Altmire (4th Pennsylvania)
John Barrow (12th Georgia)
Melissa Bean (8th Illinois)
Dan Boren (2nd Oklahoma)
Leonard Boswell (3rd Iowa)
Allen Boyd (2nd Florida)
Christopher Carney (10th Pennsylvania)
Ben Chandler (6th Kentucky)
Rep. Jim Cooper (5th Tennessee)
Jim Costa (20th California)
Bud Cramer (5th Alabama)
Henry Cuellar (28th Texas)
Artur Davis (7th Alabama)
Lincoln Davis (4th Tennessee)
Joe Donnelly (2nd Indiana)
Chet Edwards (17th Texas)
Brad Ellsworth (8th Indiana)
Bob Etheridge (North Carolina)
Bart Gordon (6th Tennessee)
Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (South Dakota)
Brian Higgins (27th New York)
Baron Hill (9th Indiana)
Nick Lampson (23rd Texas)
Daniel Lipinski (3rd Illinois)
Jim Marshall (8th Georgia)
Jim Matheson (2nd Utah)
Mike McIntyre (7th North Carolina)
Charlie Melancon (3rd Louisiana)
Harry Mitchell (5th Arizona)
Colin Peterson (7th Minnesota)
Earl Pomeroy (North Dakota)
Ciro Rodriguez (23rd Texas)
Mike Ross (4th Arkansas)
John Salazar (3rd Colorado)
Heath Shuler (11th North Carolina)
Vic Snyder (2nd Arkansas)
Zachary Space (18th Ohio)
John Tanner (8th Tennessee)
Gene Taylor (4th Mississippi)
Timothy Walz (1st Minnesota)
Charles A. Wilson (6th Ohio)

Democracy's Mr. Fix It: A Podcast Interview With Author Joel S. Hirschhorn

Across the political divide Americans understand our democracy has stopped working for them – unless they happen to be comfortably wealthy. Prostitutes are held in higher esteem then today’s politicians because at least they’re providing a service. Our elected leaders appear to only service themselves and their cronies as Hurricane Katrina exposed to our national shame in 2005.

Many progressive political activists such as myself believe the best approach is to take over the Democratic Party the same way conservatives captured the GOP. Hence the enthusiastic pride of volunteers like me who helped Democrats recapture congress in November.

Joel S. Hirschhorn, author of Delusional Democracy: Fixing The Republic Without Overthrowing The Government (Common Courage Press) disagrees. He advocates for the systematic dismantling of the two parties “duopoly” instead.

Hirschhorn’s views were shaped by his experiences as a professor at the University of Wisconsin, a congressional staffer at the Office of Technology Assessment, a business consultant and the Director of Environment, Energy and Natural Resources at the National Governors Association. Chapters 1-6 of Hirschhorn’s book are essentially a rant against the corporatist state plaguing America.

On that score he’s admittedly preaching to the choir with people like me. Bloggers such as myself eat the “our country is a corporate plutocracy” rant for breakfast, lunch and dinner. Venting about it has become our fuel and while I’ve read similar rants in many different places, I nevertheless appreciate what Hirschhorn has to say about it. His prose effectively combines earnestness with a common touch.

Chapters 7-10 are more focused on his proposed solutions to break the two party stranglehold such as compulsory voting, cleansing politics from “dirty” money, expanding ballot initiatives and giving voters the option to choose “none of the above.” Some might consider his solutions impractical and I’m not a fan of ballot initiatives or his “none of the above” approaches. However, incremental change is not likely to reverse the trend of crony capitalism undermining our democracy and Hirschhorn deserves credit for thinking boldly.

From a scholarly point of view it annoys me that Hirschhorn doesn’t footnote anything (which I ask him about). For example, in Chapter 7 Hirschhorn cites a national poll conducted in 2000 about Americans support for “public financing.” As a reader I’d like to know what “national poll” he’s referring to and where he’s getting those figures. Typically, I review endnotes upon completing a chapter to see where information like this is coming from and it bothers me when I don’t have that option. Was it a newspaper article? Thankfully, Hirschhorn does provide a bibliography of secondary sources at the end of his book.

I definitely share Hirschhorn’s passion about the state of our democracy but remain inclined to try and change the Democratic Party instead of getting behind a third party at this time. From my vantage point we’re more likely to achieve real change that way. Nevertheless, Hirschhorn wrote a thoughtful book and he agreed to a healthy give and take in a podcast interview. Please refer to the media player below.



This interview can also be accessed for free via the Itunes Store by searching for "Intrepid Liberal Journal."

Senator Tim Johnson Hospitalized With A Possible Stroke

Democratic Senator Tim Johnson of South Dakota was admitted to a hospital after possibly suffering a stroke. The Washington Post reports that Johnson was taken to George Washington Hospital because he felt ill in the morning.

According to Senator Johnson’s spokeswoman Julianne Fisher the symptoms were detected early. Hopefully early detection means Senator Johnson can lead a fulfilling life whether he remains in office or not.

Crass as it is to write about however there are repercussions beyond Senator Johnson’s well being. South Dakota Governor Mike Rounds is a Republican and one can expect he would select a member of his own party to replace Johnson. Consequently the Senate would be split 50-50 with Vice President Dick Cheney casting the tie-breaking vote.

That happened to be the precise composition of the Senate in 2001 when Vermont’s Jim Jeffords left the GOP to be come an independent – giving Democrats a majority until the 2002 mid-term elections. Any replacement for Senator Johnson would be allowed to fill his term until the 2008 election.

If Johnson can’t complete his term the outlook is not favorable for Democrats or the country. There is no Republican likely to be converted to give the Democratic Party a majority. However, Senator Joe Lieberman is certainly a threat to discontinue caucusing with Democrats. Republicans will no doubt hit Lieberman with a hard sell.

I suspect Lieberman would be loath to give liberals the satisfaction of saying, “we told you so” about him going back on his word. However, his leverage is enhanced and Lieberman will extract heavy concessions from Democrats. Given Lieberman’s warped views on national security and corporatist leanings this is a troublesome development indeed.

The Seduction of Political Inertia

Democratic Party strategists must be salivating. An ABC News-Washington Post survey reports 8 out of 10 Americans favor changing the U.S. mission in Iraq from direct combat to training Iraqi troops and significant majorities prefer withdrawing nearly all troops by 2008. The ABC/WAPO Survey also indicates increased support for diplomatic initiatives with Iran and Syria.

Since the Bush Administration has opted to essentially reject the Iraq Study Group’s bipartisan recommendations, Democrats have received an early Christmas present: they can embrace the report to appear responsible and allow Iraq to continue dragging down the Republican Party heading into 2008.

All very nice except for one minor detail: blood is being shed every day. Too many of our soldiers are wounded or dying in this lost and immoral cause. Consequently, it is immoral for the Democratic Party to sit on its hands while Iraq burns.

I consider myself a progressive pragmatist. There are times when it makes sense to let the other party simply stew in its failures. On issues ranging from healthcare to entitlements it probably makes sense for Democrats to use their new majority as a platform to educate voters, push for complete victory in 2008 and implement a genuine progressive program with a Democratic White House and congress.

However, war requires a different standard of leadership. It would be irresponsible for Democrats to simply say,

“Hey we support the Baker-Hamilton report. It’s Bush that doesn’t. And he’s the commander and chief so what can we do? Instead we’ll just sit back while Iraq deteriorates more, public support goes even lower and beat up on John McCain.”

Not good enough. Democrats are obliged to use their power to reverse Bush’s criminal policies. As I have previously written, that means contemplating one of three options: 1) impeach and remove President Bush and Dick Cheney; 2) invoke the War Powers Act; 3) cut off funding for the Iraq war. Regular readers of my blog may find me to be a broken record but this message must be reiterated. Now is not the time for Democrats to be guided by their strategists. Instead we need principled leadership that is ready, willing and able to fulfill their moral and Constitutional responsibilities.

I am not a wealthy contributor or a person of influence. I am merely a concerned citizen who contributed some money to candidates and phone banked on behalf of the Democratic Party this election cycle. So perhaps the Democratic Party believes my convictions can be overlooked. Nevertheless, I will be monitoring what my party does and doesn’t do very closely.
********************************************************************************
ADDENDUM: Thanks to Maryscott O'Connor for frontpaging my cross posting of the above topic on My Left Wing.