Back to Basics

Both Mrs. F and I were shaking our heads after reading Tim Roemer's op-ed in the NYTimes this morning, which tries to rally a comeback for the 1946 Republican campaign cry in Massachussetts, "Had Enough? Vote _____"--and substituting Democrat for Republican. Roemer notes:

"Had enough?" will speak to both Democrats and disillusioned Republicans. Liberals can use "Had Enough?" to reach out to voters enraged over the incompetent management of Iraq. Moderates might use "Had Enough?" to persuade swing voters on fiscal issues. And the implicit rejection of neoconservative politics will appeal to all voters who seek to spurn tainted Republican candidates.

"Had Enough?" also pre-empts Democrats' worst habits. Too often we've made campaigns complicated and policy-heavy. We love to unveil 40-page position papers and wonky diagrams. "Had Enough?" clears a broad path through such minutiae. "Public sentiment is everything," Abraham Lincoln said 150 years ago. "With public sentiment, nothing can fail; without it nothing can succeed."

It's true that the Democratic Party certainly needs a quick, boiled-down, common-denominator phrase that can sum up disgust with the current BushCo Gang administration. But we also need something that reflects that the party has some ideas to change the course of the nation, and isn't just sitting there to be the next warm body in charge.

I was just doing the dishes and ruminating over this (I do some of my best ruminating over the sink) and listening to the new Neil Young album, Living with War, streaming through the new Cracks Centraal music network, courtesy of our new Mac mini (more on both of those in the near future). And my mind was wandering to other folky protest singers and acts, when my mind's rolodex stopped on Billy Bragg--and in particular the CD compilation of his first album and EPs. And I thought, "Yes, that's the phrase--Back to Basics" (which is certainly better than my last attempt).

That's what this country is crying out for after the folly of wishful thinking that has been the Iraq War ever since its concept in the early days of the administration and especially after the absence of government after Hurricane Katrina. We need to get back to the basics of governing sensibly for the people, all the people. That doesn't mean that the rich get richer through tax cuts designed specifically for their needs. That doesn't mean that corporations get federal subsidies without working toward the betterment of America, not just their bottom line.

What it does mean is getting back to the basics of fulfilling the day-in/day-out needs fo all tax paying citizens of the nation. Getting back to the basics of sharing the burden of making this nation great as well as sharing in the successes that that work brings.

Roemer notes a couple of possible examples of using his "Had Enough?" phrase that I think would work just as well with Back to Basics:

"The administration said it was prepared for a hurricane in New Orleans, yet our government's feeble response prompted Bangladesh to offer us $1 million in aid. Back to Basics! Vote Democratic!

"The administration said it would bring competency to our federal budget, yet our nation faces catastrophic deficits. Back to Basics! Vote Democratic!"

Let's get back to basics...