Dear George,

I agree there's no reason the right should own the faith factor, but there's a slippery slope the right would love to have Democrats try and play on. If we got too "religion" oriented we would also alienate the core of our base which was basically opposed to the Republican faith based initiatives. Those fringe Americans who believe in the separation of Church and State.

Most organized religion is essentially dogamtic and recognizes some form of male patriarchal order, with a single male leader at the top. Good match for Republican ideology.

It is base and immoral to use religion in politics. We should continue to have a problem with being base and immoral To try to imitate their success would lead us into the underworld. Republicans have no problem with being base and immoral. They have no problem with pre-emptive strikes, double -talk, The Clean Air Act, etcetera. They are purposely borrowing the faith issue to masquerade their complete disregard for any other human interests besides their own. And they use faith to appeal to bigotry in others - not to appeal to actual love and care for other human beings. It's the reverse. What won the election wasn't the morality or faith issue it was the bigotry issue, people just don't like to phrase it that way, they would have to hang their heads in shame. Wear a white cloak. That's really uncomofrtable and they are very itchy for your nose. They claim their running on strength but what their really promoting is racial division, and judgement of others' lifestyle. Tennessee Williams used a word for it: mendacity.

But it worked. The slippery slope is to begin with the belief that the sale is the goal. It is fundamental to their Corporate-Think : "Morality doesn't matter as long as we win. It's all subjective , right?". Actually, good government is not necessarily equal to good business. It's another of the Republican mantras that are more of a justification to have government adopts policies that give business no restrictions.

The irony of the election is that they succeeded in running on their weak spot which is part of the Karl Rove strategy:

#1 - Flaunt your greatest weakness as your greatest strength.
#2 - Attack your opponent's strength as his greatest weakness.

Again, The Republicans approach politics like sales, The Democrats approach politics like politics - going for moderate middle of the road choices, trying to appeal to a broad base. The Republicans were also capitalizing on the purchase the vote theory: The tax-cuts were a purchase of votes - that's one of the reason Bush had to push them through, they were an insurance policy against his otherwise immoral behavior.

All the Democratic winners of the last century have won it on charisma, which is an extension of faith: put more simply, it's the attraction factor, and I'm not talking about looks, I'm talking about passion, and a passion born out of some integrity.

To be emotionally appealing to Middle America, you need to begin with an emotionally appealing candidate. In the primaries the emotionally appealing choices were deliberately mocked by the right wing propaganda machine because they didn't want to face them. We were afraid they might call us sissies. The fact is Democrats keep trying to figure out how to win instead of what they really believe. Stick with the message. You're as good at being immoral because at the heart of it you are. Republicans work on a sliding scale end justifies the means.

The electorate rarely chooses something new unless it seems totally original and then we flock toward it like hens at a feeding. The Howard Dean factor.

To sum it up, my idea is that we have to work for a humanist appeal, and we have to cultiavate and identify candidates now, and begin encouraging their passion and OUTSPOKENNESS in the face of the Republicans. If you oppose these liars from the beginning, they can only accuse you of opposing their lies versus flip flopping.

A friend who was disappointed with the outcome was primarily angered with the Democratic Party. She said, "They got what they deserved." She said, "Two years ago barely any of them except for the oldest ones said anything to oppose Bush because they were afraid it would cost them votes at home and now many of them were paying for it and one of them was John Kerry,". She had a point. Democrats have to stop playing politics. If you want to be the party of salvation you have to stick to your message. Bush and his neo-cons introduced the language of "The War on Terror" even though it was ambiguous and pushed through huge concessions to Bush, without opposition. By contratst his father barely got permission to invade Iraq the first time.

If we want to win we have to put it out there and put it on the line. Not only do people respect it - they need it. Bush impersonated that idealist - he borrowed all of his posturing from watching tapes of Kennedy. Democrats have wasted too much time trying to cozy up to the middle. We are so far right now, the middle has become the radical left.

The next time choose the guy who has less of a record , who they didn't see coming who they don't know how to deal with.

Hamilton Clancy (electronic mail, November 6, 2004)