Gary Hart - The courage of our convictions - a manifesto for democrats

[Mass]

I am reading this book right now. I am sure that many of you have probably already read it,but, given the tone on DU lately, I cannot resist posting this excerpt that caught my attention:

In an age of ego, celebrity, and personality, there is an overpowering search for a leader on a white horse, an exciting new candidate who will lead the Democratic Party out of the wilderness. This search has become a subtitute for tought, for purpose, for conviction. Twenty-first-century Democrats cling to the hope of a messiah in the vacant centrist venue where messiahs never appear.

Instead, the Democratic Party must decide what its core principles are and then, and only then, decide which national leader or leaders best embody those principles. No politician can save a political party that does not know what it stands for"

This should be food for thought for all the whiners in different threads that do not seem necessary to tell us why they support a candidate, and if they do, keep this reasonning to the level of the "leader on a white horse".

So, if you have a favorite for 08, please check in and tell us why he is the best on the issues you care about.

[rainy]

1. Al Gore is our best hope. He is everything we need right now,

enlightened over voting, environment, Bush crimes etc...
He is a different person than the man who ran in 00.
Plus, HE IS A KNIGHT IN SHINING ARMOUR! A real american hero.

[Mass]

2. I know making this point is useless on DU. However, I agree

with Gary Hart. We will lose all our elections if we cannot leave the mindframe of a white knight. We will lose it because we will not know where we stand.

This said, Gore is a great man that has a solid stand on issues. Why not try to promote these issues rather than pushing this personnality context that is so boring. If I want a rock start, I will go to Bruce Springsteen. We are looking for a leader here.

[rainy]

3. I did promote issues:

election fraud, environment, Bush crimes etc..
Because Gore is so knowledgeable on the above issues he is a first pick for me. I think he is our best choice for President as he is a leader with great credibility.

[blm]

9. Will he open the books on BushInc, and let chips fall where they may?

Even on the Clinton-Gore administration?

[karynnj]

4. John Kerry is the candidate

He is leading on exiting Iraq,

has a coherent national security plan that even conservative pundits now agree was right. Kerry from his work on terrorism was the politician who had the greatest understanding of non-state global crime and terrorism. In 1997, he was writing about narco-countries and countries where criminals dominate the government.

He is a diplomat who will engage other countries and has the moral leadership to do it.

Environment - the solution Kerry (learned from the Europeans) pushed the NE governors to accept (trading emmissions) which was then used by the Clean air act. Some environmentalist propose using this method for carbon emmissions on power plants as part of regulation. I KNOW global warming has been Gore's issue for decades, but Kerry's credentials on the environment are impeccable as well and go back decades as well. Kerry and Snowe have introduced bi-partisan legislation on global warming.

Kerry's work on the small business committee has led to many pro- minority, pro-women, pro-small business actions. Small businesses are important to the country.

Kerry's history of being able to forgive people who attacked him and he has the ability to be bi-partisan and to heal the country.

Kerry is an eloquent statesman. This will be more an asset as President than as a campaigner.

Rainy: The only other one I see with these characteristics is Al Gore - who I think won't run.

[wyldwolf]

5. Sounds good Gary... but...

..you know as well, or better, than most that getting a diverse party like the Democrats to agree on something as vague as "principles" is difficult enough without expecting us to find a candidate that would make everyone happy as well.

The days of the FDR coalition are, sadly, gone.

[Crunchy Frog]

6. Not doing '08 until '06 is over with.

I like Gary Hart alot. First candidate I ever supported.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

7. I think you're missing the point...

Hart is saying that we need to drop the "Cult of Personality" with regard to our leaders and work more on who we are and what we are as Democrats. When we define ourselves, it makes the job of "painting" Democrats far more difficult for the right wing. And it also makes it easier for us to coalesce behind a leader who espouses those values.

Look at the Republicans -- but wear a welder's mask so it doesn't burn out your retinas. Do you think George W. Bush is anybody's idea of a White Knight? No. But because Republicans have a healthy sense of who they are and what they want out of government, even a complete dolt like Bush can be elected President -- twice.

I'm not saying, of course, that we should aspire to electing the stupidest liberal in the room to the most powerful office in the world. But we should spend more time deciding what we want out of our leaders. Now some would say that we can't organize liberals because we're too diverse.

To that I reply with one word: Bullshit.

The Democratic Party was the dominant force in American politics from 1932 to 1980 (lingering on through the 1994 election). That's sixty-two years of setting the agenda. We did it with intellectuals and labor organizers, with farmers and shopkeepers, and even with some wealthy and powerful industrialists. We did it black and white, city and country, man and woman. To suggest that we can't do it again is to ignore history.

[Mass]

8. I agree with you. I am missing no point, on the contrary!

It is about what we stand for!

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

13. We're in agreement, then...

I'll call of the duel!

[blm]

10. I'd be interested in knowing who Hart sees as that leader, as he observes

from many angles, longterm legislator, outside DC citizen, as a national security leader of some reknown, and as a charismatic figure in his own right.

[Mass]

11. I do not think he sees anybody. That is his point. First you have

to define your issues, then the leader will become easier to find.

He is trying to provoke a reflexion about what the democratic principles should be. His answer is the following:

We, the Democratic Party, believe in:
1/-A national community based on social justice and equality for all;
2/-Restoring popular sovereignty and civic duty in the American republic;
3/-New international alliances to respond to the challenges of our time" ..

But his book also contains a challenge to other democrats to define their own principles if they do not think these are not adequate.

[blm]

12. Yes...I digested his point. Still would like to know his preference for

a leader - given his accumulated sphere of knowledge in world matters.

Me - I'm an anti-corruption, open government Democrat, and I'm not shy about supporting the principled leaders who take these mostly thankless tasks head on - usually to the detriment of their careers.