Missing the forest for one BIG tree

[millsaps28]

HI guys.

I've been thinking. Is it really so wise to put so much emphasis on winning back the presidency that we risk any chance of real change by neglecting the Congress. Even if Dean, Kerry, or whoever, wins the Whitehouse, the right wing will still be in control of the Law making aperatus of Congress. This leaves us with a president that only has the Bully Pulpit and veto power. I think instead of focussing every bit of every ounce of energy on the presidency, we should also contemplate a strategy to win back the Senate. The Democrats can use the Senate Judidiary Commitiee to initiate investigations into everything that this administration has tried to hide. Don't yall remember when Dick Cheney had to beg Tom Dashel not to investigate 9/11. Now we see why. There is no way they could have hidden that Saudi info if the Senate Democrats were conducting their own investigation. I think that we could accomplish a sort of political re-alignment with this strategy by exposing as much as we can instread of focusing just on gaining the Whitehouse and leaving the law making apperatus in the hands of the Republicans. In closing, I think we need to do all that we legally can to get Bush out of the Whitehouse. However I also think that we need to also take Hillary's suggestion: take an asprin, calm down, and think out a rational strategy to not only return to power, but to build a new progressive legacy for the 21st century.

[liberalhistorian]

1. That makes a lot of sense to me.

It's what the repukes did, they pulled together despite their differences and crafted a strategy to gain full political power and control both Congress and the Senate as well as the WH. A strategy that, unfortunately, has worked all too well. We need to do the same.

[sandnsea]

2. Progressive Legacy for the 21st Century

Love it!

[Clete]

3. We need to concentrate on both.

A Congress controlled by Republicans will only make a Democratic President ineffective. Lyndon Johnson was able to get through a lot of progressive legislation because Congress was also Democratically controlled.

[TheEarthIsFlat]

4. Why are you posting this?

It has nothing to do with Wesley Clark.

[millsaps28]

5. LOL

to bring perspective to the debate

[TheEarthIsFlat]

7. Yeah

I know -- just joshin'. Your post is thoughtful though and plenty to think about. For example, I think the senate is within reach -- barely. It would help if John Edwards would decide what he wants to do in NC. There are democrats waiting in the wings, but his reticence to decide puts them at a disadvanage against the already declared repub candidates.

[salin]

6. LOL... but truth be told

there was a time when there were the same number of Dean threads generated within minutes as what we see about Clark right now. It does wax and wane. But this post at this second - really struck the funny bone.

[millsaps28]

8. Kick

[millsaps28]

9. Kick

[ryharrin]

10. I believe that's another reason we need a candidate

(like Dean or maybe Kucinich) that is going to really energize activists and volunteers. I know that my local Dean group will be campaigning for local candidates too. So that's another 100 people interested in local races, that might not even have voted in them otherwise.