Democrats, let's tell our story to America

ILLUSTRATED: Ideas for Democratic Storylines...Dems are Governing in the Public Interest...Dems protect We The People...All get Access to Justice
In an excellent piece, Peter Daou defines "storylines" as putting a narrative to a framed worldview. For example "Bush is resolutely protecting America from terrorists" is a storyline. But NSA snooping or even the Iraq War, to an extent, are just stories, or episodes. These controversial episodes are debated in the greater storyline "Bush is resolutely protecting America from terrorists." We're on defense, here's how we can go on offense (and win elections).

Keep repeating the following phrases and discuss everything through these phrases:
"Democrats are Governing in the Public Interest". Our system to educate, heal, protect, adjudicate, and conserve the environment are in the Public Interest. Democrats are always on that side.
"Democrats protect We the People". We can protect our people and our Constitution. It starts with returning to using all three branches of government. We will get better policy and more accountability.
"Democrats want all to get Access to Justice". That's is why you can hold "The Big Guy" accountable in court. All tort reform is to trying to get out of accountability.

It's war, taxes, and judges stupid

ILLUSTRATED: Protect the people and the Constitution, Invest in America, Interpret Justice in our Constitution
As he did four years ago, Karl Rove has telegraphed (summary) that National Security will be the GOP theme this year. In addition to their old standbys: taxes and judges.
This blog is full of posts describing how Democrats can articulate our positions on all three topics. A refresher:
Defense
-Democrats will agressively root out terrorists at home and abroad, and will do it in the most courageous way...the way that keeps our Constitution.
-Democrats will arrest and listen in on terrorists diligently, but there is no reason why a secret warrant cannot be gotten in 72 hours.
-Democrats support a drawdown of troops in Iraq to build up our political chips, the only winning solution.
-More troops means more resources to deal with the new al-Queda franchises spawned during the Iraq incursion. Also it frees up military resources to deal with Iran.
Taxes
-Bush is running the federal government into the ground, deliberately. Democrats will use your money to adequately & competently administer emergency response, public education, and fund a national healthcare risk pool.
-We will also start lowering the deficit, as Clinton had done.
Judges
-Judges should interpret the Constitution as if it is 2006, not 1789.
-All are equal in the eyes of the law and all must have access to justice.

The Right does not believe in States Rights or in Judical Restraint

ILLUSTRATED: Conservative Jurists vote for substantive results, and whichever level or branch of government that gets those results.
I don't know which is worse, the agenda of the conservatives in power, or the inability of Democrats to articulate it. Here's this Democrat's shot:
Today the Supreme Court ruled denying the federal government the ability to stop states from allowed physician assisted suicide.
Full Ruling , Summary
I am not discussing the SUBSTANCE of that policy, only the hypocritical PROCESS of the conservatives vis-à-vis their campaign rhetoric.
Scalia, Thomas, and Roberts are Bush’s three favorite justices. He said so as to the first two, and appointed the last. Yet these three not only said a law could be stopped (ahem Judicial Restraint anyone?), but indeed that the Feds could stop a state law (pssst States’ Rights?).
As I’ve said on previous posts, the Scalia, Thomas, and Rehnquist voted to strike down the most laws in recent years. Clinton’s appointees voted to strike down the least.
Conservatives do not really believe in Judicial Restraint, they have a results based agenda. They do not believe in States Rights, only which ever level of government is likely to get the results they want. Scalia seems to love the Commerce Clause here.
Working backwards from the result, they throw in theory. Then their spin doctors effectively translate that into bogus rhetoric.

Al Gore's Eloquence

ILLUSTRATED: Keeping The Rule of the Constitution is Courage

Al Gore's speech was great. Here is the best link. It inspired me to the following:

-Courage is the antidote to Terror...by definition. Nothing will inspire more courage in the American people that maintaining our constitutional system and processes. (On June 30 I commented about the necessity of these processes in national security making.)

-The "Unitary Executive" theory is a constitutional basis for unfettered rule of presidents. It not only shows the hypocrisy of the "Strict Constructionists" who claim nothing in the Constitution should change. It is a stupid approach to governance. Checks and balances prevent mistakes, corruption, and tyrrany.

-Calling for a Special Counsel is a good political tool to keep the NSA story alive. It is more palatable than calls for Impeachment.

Iran

ILLUSTRATED: Iran, what Democrats can say for now.
Iran is probably the biggest national threat to this country. It is in the Middle East, the crossroads of the world, it has influence with the majority of Iraqis (the Shia), and they could inspire even more Islamist terrorism against the United States.
Kim Jong Il is a bit more insane, and may already have a crude nuke, but he is physically isolated. China has too much to lose in fighting us (unless it is for oil).
The spin by the conservative noise machine is that Bush was prescient in moving troops to the Persian Gulf region (Iraq) to attack Iran. Nonsense.
Bush has tied down over 100,000 troops in Iraq preventing a civil war there. Iran must be dealt with, the most courageous method would be face to face talks. But as this excellent analysis in the Atlantic Monthly suggests, we need a military option and none looks good. Bombing or an in-and-out invasion are possible, but are only short term solutions. We could not hold the territory, and we would invite a generation of more retaliatory terrorism.
Bush has fouled up our defense posture and already made Iran the strategic winner of the Iraq misadventure.

Stop whining about Alito and go walk your precinct

ILLUSTRATED: We’ll get back the judiciary (and thus the Constitution) by winning elections.
Repetition is the key to political communication and I’ll rehash the message from the September 4th and 13th entries on this blog. As it looks as if Alito will be confirmed, remember, the best way to stop conservative jurists is on Election Day.
-Tedious research of voter rolls done in campaign headquarters is more powerful than the legal research of the Democratic staff on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
-Questioning fellow Democratic voters in your precinct is more powerful than the questioning of Democratic senators.
John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsberg are up there in age, so let’s take back the Senate in November.
P.S.- The right hand side of this blog has plenty of sound bites in plain English about the Judiciary.

Of Warrants and Oversight

ILLUSTRATED: Simply say Bush spied on us without judges’ approval. In America we have presidents, not dictators.
Checks and Balances are one of the few things most people remember about high school civics. Warrants and evidentiary rulings are the main ways the judicial branch checks the power of the executive branch criminal investigations and prosecutions. Oversight hearings are a key ingredient of the legislative branch checking the executive. Bush has been dodging the judges and GOP Congressional leaders are looking the other way with Bush.
Terrorists are well organized, well funded, and want to harm us. Right now we don’t know what communications are coming in from overseas. The unlawfulness of Bush is not wiretapping, it’s that he did not get a warrant. Unless more revelations come out about capricious or even pernicious domestic spying come up, keep the focus on the fact that these were warrantless searches. Bush is acting like a dictator.