This post is a bit premature, however,

[Cyrano]

unless the thug-in-chief blows up the planet, we will someday win back the congress and the presidency. It goes without saying that the initial reaction of most Dems will be "Let's crush those fascist Republican bastards forever."

On most day, I feel exactly that way, but I'm currently having an attack of rationality. If revenge becomes our reason for being, and we act upon it, we would destroy democracy as surely as they are currently trying to destroy it.

If/when, we ever regain power, our first step must be to reach out to moderate Republicans and try to revive the notions of civility and tolerance. There is much damage that needs to be undone, both at home and world-wide, and a broad consensus will be required to make it happen.

I am a devout agnostic, so I'm not basing this posting on any religious dogma. Perhaps I'm a fool to believe that we Dems can ever forgive these Huns. But at least give these remarks some thought. Otherwise, we're going to forever be living in a world of payback and hatred.

And as I final thought, I find these wingnuts and freepers as despicable a bunch as has ever existed in this country. But at some point, (if/when we regain power) we're going to have to let it go.

[patrice]

1. I have a more-or-less "Classic" education. I like balance.

Harebo!

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

2. We're reaching out to the Democrats....

Moderate/liberal Republicans, anyway. Believe me, we detest the wingnuts MORE THAN the Democrats...if that's possible.

Here's to the (not to distant) future of 06/08:toast:

[annabanana]

17. We KNOW you are, ModRepub...

And believe me, we feel your pain (sorry). We both recognize that in order to preserve the American Dream (and I DON"T mean the house and a couple of cars one), we have to restore some balance to the place.

I believe absolutely that this will happen as long as we can fix the busted voting apparatus. I really trust the American people to do the right thing.

[ovidsen]

3. I agree

Lead by example, take the high road, don't sink to their level and all of that....

[TheFarseer]

4. I think it would be bad if either party got their entire agenda

passed into law. There are good points about the republican party(I mean the REAL republican party, there's nothing good about neocons) and bad points about the democratic party. A balance of the two is needed.

[endarkenment]

5. we do need to reach out

but we also need to re-establish that this is a secular republic based on the principals of the rational traditions of the enlightenment, and not some sort of christian theocracy. I'm not quite sure how we get there without a whole lot of hurt feelings :-)

I'm open to suggestions as I really do not want this mess to descend into outright bloodletting. I just don't see how there is a peaceful resolution.

[Cyrano]

10. A Christian theocracy could only happen with Republicans in power.

The majority of people in this country are Christians, but they are not the shrill, lunatic fringe represented by the likes of Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Jerry Falwell, Randall Terry, et al.

Why the vast majority of Christians in this country have kept silent while a minority of Christian/Taliban lunatics have been giving hypocrisy a bad name, is beyond me. Maybe there's some moderate Christian out there who can explain it to the rest of us.

[quiet.american]

6. I don't think Democrats are instinctively "the culture of revenge"

Not to imply that is what you're saying -- only it seems to me Democratic leadership more or less (at least in the last thirty years or so) always attempts to extend the olive branch.

Look how long it's taken the Democratic leadership to actually accept what the Republican fringe have been publicly declaring for years -- that they have literally declared war on the Democratic Party.

How long did it take to get our leadership to stop "standing shoulder to shoulder" with the moron in the White House.

How long did it take to get the leadership to stop "pooh-poohing" massive numbers of Democratic protests against Shrub's policies, dismissing said protestors as the far-left fringe of the party -- instead of acknowledging them as a sizeable portion of its very active base.

I have a feeling the first urge of the Democratic leadership will not be to steamroll the Republicans, but to "reach across the aisle" -- probably even to the point where it becomes exasperating.

[bunkerbuster1]

9. We're not... yet.

If that kind of behavior wins elections for us, we could easily become the kind of party that seeks victory for victory's sake, and not for any ideological reason.

That's what I find bothersome about the current RW approach, because it is so easy to slip into. When that happens, uou frame every argument dishonestly, in order to make the opposition seem evil/traitorous/whatever every time out. You become disinterested in what's mutually beneficial, and only interested in winning this round.

It's probably addictive.

[quiet.american]

12. True -- war is hell. n/t

[Sick_of_Rethuggery]

18. Two things about the Democratic party

that makes such a possibility much less likely: they never can get into the kind of lockstep that is needed to pull off the "winning is everything" mindset (just witness the clockwork regularity of the DU circular firing squads :-)

Second, the Democratic party has too many different disparate interests for any one goal to receive too much enthusiasm from all (activist) segments anyway, fortunately!

I think the party's culture is such that it glories too much in its rationality and its diversity to ever get locked into one position.

It is the attitude of the people/leaders of the Dem party that even prompts me to call myself a Democrat -- I actually disagree with many positions of the party, but I sense a willingness to listen that makes it attractive to me.

[demnan]

7. I don't think the Democrats ever act out of vengence

like the Republicans do. I think when we regain the Senate (and I believe we will) that things will work very well. The only thing that will change that is this "nuclear option" - because absolute power corrupts absolutely.

[RaleighNCDUer]

8. Your rank and file, certainly.

But those who are guilty of criminal violations of the constitution and civil law must never be forgiven.

The major players of previous scandals, from Watergate to Iran/Contra, are again at the seat of power despite censure, forced resignations and criminal convictions overturned or pardoned by subsequent republican administrations. After his term in Central America, Negroponte should be in prison, not in government. Oliver North should be a disgraced outcast, not a Bushco spokesman. Do we want to see Rove and Delay returning with another republican administration in 16 years?

These people who fix elections and loot the treasury should be tarred so completely with their crimes that no one would ever think of bringing them back.

Then we can deal with the real republicans in an atmosphere of genuine respect and mutual consideration.

[Cyrano]

14. Rove/DeLay/North/Poindexter and their ilk will always escape justice.

As will Henry Kissenger, as big a war criminal as this country has ever seen.

At some point we've got to drop it. Nonetheless, we have to find a way to ensure that these horrible specimens of humanity will never again be put into a position of power or influence.

One step this country can take is to recognize the authority of the International Court at the Hague. It's fairly obvious why BushCo hates this venue. They'd all be on trial as war criminals.

Nonetheless, we need a president and congress that will, not only sign onto it, but help to insure that their rules are just and not used as excuses for seizing some national leader who is merely unpopular.

[Mizmoon]

11. I would never want to crush the other party

we need at least two parties or we're all toast. We barely have two as it is.

John Adams didn't want ANY parties - he said it would be too devisive. What would America look like if his view had won out?

[rniel]

13. That's why when democrats win

They need to tell people. We're all in this together. They need to say we're all americans now. We're all patriots. It's ok to disagree with me. Bring people together not push them further apart which the republicans have done on purpose.

[calimary]

15. It sounds good, but we can't allow that philosophy to lead us to dropping

our guard.

I'd rather hold out the olive branch after most of these people are IN JAIL.

[Sick_of_Rethuggery]

16. Amen! And Thanks.

"Devout agnostic": I love that! Me too!

[Cyrano]

19. I've been using that for many years. If there were more of us,

the world might be a better place.

But then again, maybe not. We'd probably get organized, form some types of groups and start promoting our own forms of insanity.

Besides, as Groucho Marx said, "I'd never want to be a part of any group that would want me as a member."

Nonetheless, Sick_of_Rethuggery, I'd love to have you define your (religious) beliefs as devout agnosticism. The world may (or may not) need more of us.

[amjucsc]

20. The great American genius is for compromise...

...so said Shelby Foote, who the Civil War came about precisely because our national ability to reach compromises broke down.

The Republican party has become unflinchingly obnoxious precisely because they extreme wing of their party has become more important than the voice of opposition within their own party-- as such they're no longer interested in reaching reasonable compromises but instead in craming their own agenda down the national throat.

The Dems, should they return to power, will probably do a better job of running the country (and hopefully avert the current level of partisan nastiness that prevails) if they allow the folks across the isle a reasonable voice in the government. Subject to our veto, of course.

[Cats Against Frist]

21. We all have to live together.

You're exactly right -- I think there are new combinations of left-right ideology/philosophy that haven't been tried, and there are some things that we could loosen up on that don't necessarily have to do with giving up principles, priorities or goals -- just giving up or being flexible on WAYS to implement those goals/priorities.