Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

12 Traps That Keep Progressives From Winning

By George Lakoff, AlterNet. Posted September 26, 2006.


Progressives need to start talking about values and avoid the common pitfalls that cause us to lose voters' hearts and minds.
42146story
42146_story

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Are the "New Atheists" As Bad as Christian Fundamentalists?
Frank Schaeffer

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
How a Public Jobs Program Could Put America Back on Track
Julianne Malveaux

DrugReporter:
Pot Is More Mainstream Than Ever, So Why Is Legalization Still Taboo?
Steven Wishnia

Environment:
Why We Need Bees and More People Becoming Organic Beekeepers
Makenna Goodman

Food:
The Raw Milk Revolution: Behind America's Emerging Battle Over Food Rights
Makenna Goodman

Health and Wellness:
New York May Stop Heartless Health Insurers from Dropping Coverage When It Stops Being Profitable
William Ehart

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
Focusing on Fort Hood Killer's Beliefs Is an Easy Out to Avoid the Deeper Reasons for the Massacre
Mark Ames

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
What Michelle and Barack's Marriage Has in Common with 56 Million Other Ones
Annabelle Gurwitch

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Fetus-Shaped Potatoes? Going Undercover Inside the Weird World of Right-Wing Abortion Foes
Ann Neumann

Rights and Liberties:
"My Kids Want to Hide Their Identity; They're Scared Someone Will Attack Us": U.S. Muslims Being Targeted
Jaisal Noor

Sex and Relationships:
Instant Sex: Has the Digital Age Destroyed Relationships or Made Them Better?
Vanessa Richmond

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
With Unemployment at 40 Percent, Afghan Teens Enlist in Army, Police
Lal Aqa Sherin

More stories by George Lakoff

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Richard Wirthlin, chief strategist for former president Ronald Reagan, made a discovery in 1980 that profoundly changed American politics. As a pollster, he was taught that people vote for candidates on the basis of the candidates' positions on issues. But his initial polls for Reagan revealed something fascinating: Voters who didn't agree with Reagan on the issues still wanted to vote for him.

Mystified, Wirthlin studied the matter further. He discovered just what made people want to vote for Reagan. Reagan talked about values rather than issues. Communicating values mattered more than specific policy positions. Reagan connected with people; he communicated well. Reagan also appeared authentic -- he seemed to believe what he said. And because he talked about his values, connected with people and appeared authentic, they felt they could trust him. For these four reasons -- values, connection, authenticity and trust -- voters identified with Reagan; they felt he was one of them. It was not because all of his values matched theirs exactly. It was not because he was from their socioeconomic class or subculture. It was because they believed in the integrity of his connection with them as well as the connection between his worldview and his actions.

Whatever we may think of Reagan, this has been a winning formula for conservatives for the past quarter century. Progressives need to learn from it. Politics is about values; it is about communication; it is about voters trusting a candidate to do what is right; it is about believing in, and identifying with, a candidate's worldview. And it is about symbolism. Issues are secondary -- not irrelevant or unimportant, but secondary. A position on issues should follow from one's values, and the choice of issues and policies should symbolize those values.

One misunderstanding, common among progressive circles, is that the Reagan and George W. Bush elections were about "personality" rather than anything substantive. Nothing is more substantive than a candidate's moral worldview -- and whether he or she authentically abides by it.

Wirthlin's discovery happened to be about a presidential candidate, but it applies much more broadly. It should be taken to heart by all progressives: Concentrate on values and principles. Be authentic; stand up for what you really believe. Empathize and connect with the people you are talking to, on the basis of identity -- their identity and yours.

Progressives have not only failed to understand Wirthlin's discovery, they have also not understood recent advances in cognitive science, so they continue to fall into a number of traps. These are traps of our own making, however, and we can get out of them without having to change anything about our values. This is cause for optimism. The purpose of this handbook is to lay out the anatomy of progressive values, ideas and arguments to free us from traps we have fallen into.

1. The Issue Trap

We hear it said all the time: Progressives won't unite behind any set of ideas. We all have different ideas and care about different issues. The truth is that progressives do agree at the level of values and that there is a real basis for progressive unity. Progressive values cut across issues. So do principles and forms of argument. Conservatives argue conservatism, no matter what the issue. Progressives should argue progressivism. We need to get out of issue silos that isolate arguments and keep us from the values and principles that define an overall progressive vision.

2. The Poll Trap

Many progressives slavishly follow polls. The job of leaders is to lead, not follow. Besides, contrary to popular belief, polls in themselves do not present accurate empirical evidence. Polls are only as accurate as the framing of their questions, which is often inadequate. Real leaders don't use polls to find out what positions to take; they lead people to new positions.

3. The Laundry List Trap

Progressives tend to believe that people vote on the basis of lists of programs and policies. In fact, people vote based on values, connection, authenticity, trust, and identity.

4. The Rationalism Trap

There is a commonplace -- and false -- theory that reason is completely conscious, literal (applies directly to the objective world), logical, universal and unemotional. Cognitive science has shown that every one of these assumptions is false. These assumptions lead progressives into other traps: assuming that hard facts will persuade voters and that voters are "rational" and will vote in their self-interest and on the issues, and that negating a frame is an effective way to argue against it.

5. The No-Framing-Necessary Trap

Progressives often argue that "truth doesn't need to be framed" and that the "facts speak for themselves." People use frames -- deep-seated mental structures about how the world works -- to understand facts. Frames are in our brains and define our common sense. It is impossible to think or communicate without activating frames, and so which frame is activated is of crucial importance. Truths need to be framed appropriately to be seen as truths. Facts need a context.

6. The Policies-Are-Values Trap

Progressives regularly mistake policies with values, which are ethical ideas like empathy, responsibility, fairness, freedom, justice and so on. Policies are not themselves values, though they are, or should be, based on values. Thus, Social Security and universal health insurance are not values; they are policies meant to reflect and codify the values of human dignity, the common good, fairness and equality.

7. The Centrist Trap

There is a common belief that there is an ideological "center" -- large group of voters either with a consistent ideology of their own or lined up left to right on the issues or forming a "mainstream," all with the same positions on issues. In fact, the so-called center is actually made up of biconceptuals, people who are conservative in some aspects of life and progressive in others. Voters who self-identify as "conservative" often have significant progressive values in important areas of life. We should address these "partial progressive" biconceptuals through their progressive identities, which are often systematic and extensive.

A common mistaken ideology has convinced many progressives that they must "move to the right" to get more votes. In reality, this is counterproductive. By moving to the right, progressives actually help activate the right's values and give up on their own. In the process, they also alienate their base.

8. The "Misunderestimating" Trap

Too many progressives think that people who vote conservative are just stupid, especially those who vote against their economic self-interest. Progressives believe that we only have to tell them the real economic facts, and they will change the way they vote. The reality is that those who vote conservative have their reasons and we had better understand them. Conservative populism is cultural -- not economic -- in nature. Conservative populists see themselves as oppressed by elitist liberals who look down their noses at them, when they are just ordinary, moral, right-thinking folks. They see liberals as trying to impose an immoral "political correctness" on them, and they are angry about it.

Progressives also paint conservative leaders as incompetent and not very smart, based on a misunderstanding of the conservative agenda. This results from looking at conservative goals through progressive values. Looking at conservative goals through conservative values yields insight and shows just how effective conservatives really are.

9. The Reactive Trap

For the most part, we have been letting conservatives frame the debate. Conservatives are taking the initiative on policy making and getting their ideas out to the public. When progressives react, we echo the conservative frames and values, so our message is not heard or, even worse, reinforces their ideas. Progressives need a collection of proactive policies and communication techniques to get our own values out on our own terms. "War rooms" and "truth squads" must change frames, not reinforce conservative frames. But even then, they are not nearly enough. Progressive leaders, outside of any party, must come together in an ongoing, long-term, organized national campaign that honestly conveys progressive values to the public -- day after day, week after week, year after year, no matter what the specific issues of the day are.

10. The Spin Trap

Some progressives believe that winning elections or getting public support is a matter of clever spin and catchy slogans -- what we call "surface framing." Surface framing is meaningless without deep framing -- our deepest moral convictions and political principles. Framing, used honestly at both the deep and surface levels, is needed to make the truth visible and our values clear. Spin, on the other hand, is the dishonest use of surface linguistic frames to hide the truth. And progressive values and principles -- the deep frames -- must be in place before slogans can have an effect; slogans alone accomplish nothing. Conservative slogans work because they have been communicating their deep frames for decades.

11. The Policyspeak Trap

Progressives consistently use legislative jargon and bureaucratic solutions, like "Medicare prescription drug benefits," to speak to the public about their positions. Instead, progressives should speak in terms of the common concerns of voters -- for instance, how a policy will let you send your daughter to college, or how it will let you launch your own business.

12. The Blame Game Trap

It is convenient to blame our problems on the media and on conservative lies. Yes, conservative leaders have regularly lied and used Orwellian language to distort the truth, and yes, the media have been lax, repeating the conservatives' frames. But we have little control over that. We can control only how we communicate. Simply correcting a lie with the truth is not enough. We must reframe from our moral perspective so that the truth can be understood. This reframing is needed to get our deep frames into public discourse. If enough people around the country honestly, effectively and regularly express a progressive vision, the media will be much more likely to adopt our frames.

This is an excerpt from Lakoff's forthcoming book, Thinking Points: Communicating Our American Values and Vision, A Progressive's Handbook.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

George Lakoff is the author of "Don't Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate" (Chelsea Green). He is professor of linguistics at the University of California at Berkeley and a senior fellow at the Rockridge Institute.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
genuine
Posted by: rsaxto on Sep 26, 2006 1:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We need genuine frames based on deep convictions that will appeal to most people most of the time. Like everyone in society should have good health care regardless of financial means. Like peace is better than war. Like everyone should be treated decently. Like presidents should obey our excellent constitution instead of trashing it. Like everyone and every corporation should pay a fair share of taxes. Like crooks in government should go to jail. Like veterans should get whatever treatment they need. Like corporations should allow free and fair discussion of unions and free and fair union elections. Like elections for public office should be free, fair and accurate. Like mud is for mud wrestlers only.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: genuine Posted by: grzeskor
As a life-long traditionalist conservative...
Posted by: ISlamIslam on Sep 26, 2006 3:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I find that #2 and #8 are the only ones to which conservatives might respond and might earn progressives a little more respect. The rest are a lot of nothing, because conservatives don't like or agree with key aspects of the progressive agenda. It won't matter how sincerely you present it or how much new-found respect you show conservatives. The bottom line is, we already know what you stand for, and we reject it.

Most conservatives see progressives as little more than a hodge-podge of people with single-issue passions who do nothing but whine and wait for the government to fix things -- in short, a bunch of losers. No one wants to hang with losers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Faulty view? Posted by: ISlamIslam
» RE: Faulty view? Posted by: sln70
» RE: Faulty view? Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» wow Posted by: sln70
» RE: wow Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» A composite idiot Posted by: ISlamIslam
» RE: A composite idiot Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» RE: A composite idiot Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» The usual ad hominem response Posted by: ISlamIslam
» Yes, I agree Posted by: ISlamIslam
» RE: Yes, I agree Posted by: deejayvee
» RE: Yes, I agree Posted by: ISlamIslam
» RE: Yes, I agree Posted by: nicholasdaly
» RE: Faulty view? Posted by: mjabele
» RE: Faulty view? Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Faulty view? Posted by: Trazom
» RE: Faulty view? Posted by: mjabele
» RE: Faulty view? Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Faulty view? Posted by: hms2004
» RE: Toryism Posted by: Plexius
» RE: "Not that you care..." Posted by: Plexius
» RE: "Not that you care..." Posted by: ISlamIslam
» Level the playing field? Posted by: georip
» RE: Faulty view? Posted by: JimmyJack
» RE: Faulty view? Posted by: ISlamIslam
» RE: Faulty view? Posted by: grammasanity
» RE: Faulty view? Posted by: daytripper
» Yep, # 8 - Nail on the head! Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Yep, # 8 - Nail on the head! Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Yep, # 8 - Nail on the head! Posted by: Conservasaurus
Liberal problems
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Sep 26, 2006 4:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After you get past the obvious that people want honest leaders I don't think that this article has much to say. Liberals have two built-in disadvantages.

(1) It's hard to unite liberals. There are an infinite number of ways to move forward. It's easy to unite conservatives. There are relatively few ways to move bacward.

(2) Progress means change and most people don't like change. This makes liberals a minority.
Bob Reichenbach
Director, The Lincoln Initiative.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Liberal problems Posted by: Ellie1
» RE: Liberal problems Posted by: grammasanity
» RE: Liberal problems Posted by: Plexius
» RE: Liberal problems Posted by: talkville
I think this is an important article
Posted by: sln70 on Sep 26, 2006 5:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
now if only progressives would stop using words like "frame" and "meme" they'd be off to a good start. Words like that serve to prove that liberals are a bunch of elitists who look down their noses at "regular, right-thinking folks"

I want to see the liberals speak more to values!! I want to see the liberals go to the places where their voters might be - not to ivy leagues, (for those voters will stay with them) but to inner cities, where people ARE feeling the pinch of debt and job loss more than ever before.

Conservatives, like ISlamislam said, want to associate with winners. So... win one and then the whole country will be yours.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The move to the right...
Posted by: Steve Adair on Sep 26, 2006 5:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I read ‘Don’t think of an Elephant’. I follow and respect Mr. Lakoff’s points. In this article Mr. Lakoff says that by moving to the ‘right’ the Democratic Party alienates their base. What I would like to know is can we really break the grip that the Democratic ‘right’ has on the party? How?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The move to the right... Posted by: Boomerang
» RE: The move to the right... Posted by: Steve Adair
» RE: The move to the right... Posted by: talkville
Thanks George
Posted by: gjames on Sep 26, 2006 5:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I actually hope Democrats don't take your advice, but your counsel is sound. Pardon my kookery, but our country needs more than two political parties, and I would prefer if a new party were to take up this advice rather than let the Democrats use it for political advantage and then piss all over what it intends to accomplish - which is a progressive political agenda, I assume...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» "I Would Prefer A New Party" Posted by: Douglas
solidarity
Posted by: kelt65 on Sep 26, 2006 5:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The biggest problem with the left today is an almost complete lack of solidarity between minorities - blacks, queers, working class, latinos - none seem to grasp the importance of working together nor do they particularly like each other. What a mess.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: solidarity Posted by: Trazom
» RE: solidarity Posted by: hms2004
» RE: solidarity Posted by: sln70
» RE: solidarity Posted by: hms2004
» RE: solidarity Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» RE: solidarity Posted by: talkville
Rationalism has no place is politics - ever
Posted by: Trazom on Sep 26, 2006 6:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So here we finally have it in black and white. Rationalism is not a motivating tool for voters. No wonder we are where we are today. Facts, empirical data, critical thinking, science, these things do not matter so much as the warm fuzzies we get from hearing our politician speak and "relate" to the people. Kind of makes me think politics itself is nothing but American Idol without the singing.

Maybe that is the thing that liberals just do not get. It really is a popularity contest. A previous Alternet article about Al Frankel mentioned that he wanted to put the science and rational thinking (I am paraphrasing) back into politics. Guess he'll never be elected to the Senate.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Spin and Honesty
Posted by: cellis56 on Sep 26, 2006 7:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Spin and honesty are antithetical. Sessions by PR hacks prostituting their talents for the right focus on the right "word," the right "phrase," have nothing to do with deep values. Conservatives win through manipulation, not honesty.

We see Bush spin his warped version of truth daily. He talks about making the world safe while we see that his "values" (US-centric hubris) have made the world so much less safe. Yet voters still give him credit for keeping them safe. Why? Not because voters sense any deep ethical commitment in George W. Bush but because they have been frightened out of their wits. Americans are the most terrified people on the planet, standing in long lines like sheep while their hair gel is confiscated. Anything to maintain the illusion of safety. In fact, when the airlines were questioned about the fallacy that exclusion of toiletries from online baggage could increase security, a rep from the airlines said quite honestly, "Yeah, but it's about making people FEEL safe."

This is the strategy that the right has employed to great advantage and it is NOT a strategy progressives can or should consider employing.

In lieu of adopting conservative methods to "win at all costs," perhaps progressives could get some fire in their bellies and stand for something other than "me too-ism." Nowadays most progressive politicans are in bed with the enemies of democratic process, making compromises they insist are necessary for political survival (like Pelosi, Boxer, and Obama). When we toss these wet fingers in the wind out on their asses, we may well see large numbers of formerly disinterested citizens coalesce around real progressive values. They might even bother to go to the polls and vote for a change.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who are these Progressives of which you speak?
Posted by: antiapathy on Sep 26, 2006 7:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's hard to promote a progressive agenda when there is no progressive party. Any progressive candidate who actually wants to be elected to office will call themselves a democrat. But democrats are not progressive in general, and their leadership is decidedly anti-progressive.

We need to unite all the Greens, Dems, Socialists, etc. that consider themselves progressives in a true progressive party. And detatch ourselves from the Dems. They keep promising to promote our agenda, but just not this year because we need to beat those Repugs and the only way to do that is obviously to act like Repugs. So put away your silly little progressive ideals and go sit in the corner until we're ready for you. And the so-called progressive voters are no better. Well gee, I really agree with this Green Party candidate, but if I vote for him the big bad conservative might win, so I better vote for the democrat who acts like a republican.

I completely agree with Lakoff's strategy, but he omits the most important step: dump the democratic party. Dems will NEVER promote a united progressive vision. They are addicted to corporate money, and they know better than to piss off their dealer. Progressives need to present a unified front: Voters should only vote for candidates that represent our values. No more of this lesser of two evils BS.

It's time for the real progressives to stand up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» It's OK to call me a LIBERAL. Posted by: MartianBachelor
» Try again... Posted by: mjabele
» And to finish off..... Posted by: mjabele
#8
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on Sep 26, 2006 7:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Conservatives who "vote against their own interests" (ie, vote for Bush) ARE stupid. It's not an underestimation of them at all to say so. Bush is not a conservative. This government is NOT conservative. How can any conservative be smart if they voted for it? In some ways, liberals are dumb for not supporting Bush. I mean those "fox news liberals" who are for big government, gun control, high taxes. Yes Bush is a high tax president. His policies may appear to be low tax but they still cost us alot and that is a tax folks. It is nothing more than a big lie that they claim to be reducing taxes. They are scamming and stealing money and giving it to the rich. But the media has us so dumbed down that we blindly call this "cutting taxes." When was the last time you heard anyone say that Bush is for higher taxes? lol. Well that's just the truth. It's just not framed that way. When the mafia charges protection money, it's not a tax I guess. When Bush raises the debt by 30%, causing interest payments to also raise by 30% EACH AND EVERY YEAR WITH NO END IN SIGHT, that is what I call A HUGE [CENSORED] TAX INCREASE.

Yet the conservatives vote for Bush because he lowers taxes. Yeah they're not stupid!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: #8 Posted by: Gakl
Only 20 some days
Posted by: robmikejas on Sep 26, 2006 7:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
until the november elections, and still no real consensus on taking back our government and how to do it. You can hate these Republicans, and I do, but without a real movement against the Bush dictatorship, other than Air America Radio, how do we ever rid oiurselves of these Fascist, greedy, lying traitors? What happened to the march on Washington we should've made regarding the criminal war? The countrywide demonstrations against illegal activities like wiretapping? Patriot act? So many crimes and misdemeanors. Impeachment should've been demanded. War crimes were and are being committed. We sit and await the November elections, knowing the electronic machines can be and are hacked, rendering false results. In 20 some days, it will all be over. God Bless America...RIP

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

STOP PERPETUATING THE BIGGEST LIE: The GOP Won on Values
Posted by: alternetleslie on Sep 26, 2006 7:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lakoff's basic assumption that Bush won the 2000 and 2004 election is wrong.

Remember the exit polls said Kerry won and they voted on the basis of values, therefore, it was Kerry's values, not Bush's!!! However, Bush's GOP big corporate media convinced everyone they were Bush's values and Bush won. Remember it was the very first time the exit polls did not match the official election results!

STOP PERPETUATING THE BIG LIE!!!

Look at the track record of this Bush / Cheney administration - He and his gang have set an agenda to destroy everything we hold dear. These are our values: truth, every citizen's right to vote, assurance of the integrity of the election results, checks and balances in govenment, natural wildlife and preserves, labor unions, the middle class, safety regulations, international treaties, equality, scientific facts, independent media as the 4th estate, compassion and social responsibility to our neighbors next door and around the world, freedom to think independently and disagree, freedom of religion, ublic education, privacy of citizens, openness of government, the safety and welfare of our troops and veterans.... These are the values we hold and are shredded by Bush and his gang (group acting in illegal ways). Everyday there is more distruction to our society than Bin Ladin's group could ever do on their own.

Lakoff must have missed all the news about the fraud perpetrated by the GOP campaign managers who controlled the elections of Florida and Ohio as Secretary(s) of State. Remember Katherine Harris who hired a company to disenfranchise black Floridians, who was rewarded with a seat in the House of Representatives. Remember Bush's brother, Jeb, was the Governor of Florida and would not prosecute any of the many mischievous things in his state, a safe steal. Remember Bush's cousin was the one who first pronounced Bush as the winner in Florida on the air and the biased GOP established media just followed suit.

Remember a team of 400 top GOP lawyers worked to stop the vote count through the Supreme Court of Bush's daddy's friends. Remember he was appointed by the Supreme Court's decision, not elected. Remember one of those lawyers, Alito, got rewarded with a seat on the Supreme Court, thereby taking over the Judicial Branch.

Remember the intimidation of tribal people from reservations used by Daschle's opponent to knock him out of the top Democratic spot in the Senate and the Senate itself.

Remember the fraudulent Diebolt software fixes, a company owned by a man who promised Bush to deliver the election to him in Ohio. Remember their were only four private companies that provided the election software and hardware and even Gore knew one of them was in complete control of the election in Georgia and switched the results packs.

Remember the corruption of Bush's buddy, Tom DeLay, redistricting Texas to get a GOP majority in the U. S. House of Representatives, thereby taking over the Legislative Branch as a tool to expand the powers of the Executive Branch. Remember Tom DeLay orchestrated Dennis Hastert's ascent to Speaker of the House, and is keeping the House Resolution for the impeachment of Bush in committee and off the floor of the House.

Remember Blackwell in Ohio. We know of all the fraud, manipulation, conflict of interest, software corruption -- we know Kerry won in Ohio. But the GOP conservatives had placed their people in key places to perpetrate the theft of power of the office.

THE DEMOCRATS DID NOT LOSE, THEY WON ON THE BASIS OF VALUES!!!! Write about the corruption and fraud and how to impeach the usurpers and send the perpetrators to jail for treason and destruction of our democracy!!!!

If the truth were accepted and Gore was able to take his rightful place as president in 2000 how different the world would be now!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Back to the future - Gore or Bush???? Posted by: Conservasaurus
» The job Bush is Doing Posted by: Jnutter
» RE: The job Bush is Doing Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: The job Bush is Doing Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» RE: The job Bush is Doing Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: The job Bush is Doing Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» RE: The job Bush is Doing Posted by: Conservasaurus
» Come on- spit it out! Posted by: Conservasaurus
» Ptooeee. Posted by: Jnutter
» PS Posted by: Jnutter
» RE: PS Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: PS Posted by: hms2004
» RE: PS my last post on this... Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: What a crock of... Posted by: Plexius
» RE: What a crock of... Posted by: mjabele
» RE: What a crock of... Posted by: Jnutter
» My teeth are not sharp! Posted by: Conservasaurus
» I have a FAN! Posted by: Conservasaurus
More Traps
Posted by: StuartH on Sep 26, 2006 8:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Money Trap

This is combined with the "Let the Technical Geniuses Figure It Out" trap. Since about the 1970's it has been possible to set up a small business based on computerized databases that are used for direct mail, phone banking and GOTV efforts. Actually, this has turned out to be better money than just about anything people with a liberal arts education could get into. The previous era's grassroots organizers became obsolete and instead, many people rely on the consultants to do the thinking. Responsibility for what goes on needs to be taken back by people willing to make year-to-year commitments to participate.

This leads to the Money Trap. As experts become the focal point for leadership of any Party, systems necessarily are more complex and need more money to support. This leads to the necessity of becoming good at reaching out to donors who can fund on a large scale. This keeps the system out of the reach of the grassroots. Will starting another Party cure this? Not unless those at the local level who are concerned with the direction things are taking figure out a way to create a grass roots mobilization that can change the trend. A lot of this is not about issues. If you listen carefully at local party meetings, you can hear the consultants talking through the opinions expressed by people who want to sound smart by showing they know what the consultants are thinking. You also may notice that consultants rarely show themselves or will discuss any of this with non-experts. It is very much an elitist system, again, created by our delegating it to elitists.

Another Trap: The Liberal/Progressive Firing Squad

Recently I pointed out to an activist sending out email alerts that if they were trimmed down from 750KB to around 30 that he would likely widen the circle of those receptive to the message. He got miffed at me for offering this critique and eliminated me from any email. I think the tendency of those involved in activism and organizing to get mad on a personal level at the slightest perceived slight, or any deviation from a stated manifesto, and nurse grudges that have nothing to do with achieving policy goals is the most destructive thing about progressive politics. Coalitions are not based on the most pure rendition of a position, but in reality, on finding points of agreement with the largest number of people who might move forward while agreeing to disagree on lesser points.

Thus another Trap: Failing to see opportunities for coalition building, while obsessing on ways to win the contest to be the one to formulate "correct" positions that others should sign onto.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

#9
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on Sep 26, 2006 8:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Chavez ordeal seems to fall into #9, the reactive trap. But I do not like the way it is framed. There's a bigger form of reactionism going on here.

Calling Chavez a thug was clearly a reaction to the looming power of the right wing media. Yeah it's ok to call him a thug, but doesn't change the fact that he's correct on many issues of substance. But dems wont go as far as to admit that. See, in one fell swoop, dems are back to 2002 cowardice. They deserve to lose for acting this way. Gutless. Spineless. Pathetic. They are so disconnected that they backpeddle and hesitate when it comes time to push forth the populist message. Truth to power, it's the one most dangerous weapon pregressives have... and it's one that is most easily sacrificed. Just like the good little conservative sacrifices liberty for security.

Speaking pragmatically, I know it's because the media has it out for them. The republicans can appear confident at all times because the media will spin any story in their favor. But screw the media. In order to conquer it you have to expose it for what it is. A huge disinformation machine designed to keep the masses under control (uninformed and docile).

Let the alternative media tell the story. And if the story doesn't get out, then so what. I've said it a million times. If the media helps the right wing whackjobs win on their bs platform of lies, fearmongering, mass propaganda, and spin, then so be it. That is just a future indictment on the media. But cowering the way the establishment dems do... it's just despicable. No one is going to and no one should vote for cowards. It just further empowers the right wing media. Ignore that. Let them attack on issues of no substance with their ad hominem. Let them speak their Rovish nonsense. But challenge them to debates. Let them refuse. Let their stupid media shills never report on how they refuse to debate. All that's fine and good. But when you do get your chance at the podium, don't waste it by caving into them. Screw them. Let them hide behind their corporate media shield. Just work on exposing it for what it is, instead of giving in and saying what's politically correct. That's what keeps the juggernaut rolling.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

COME ON DEMOCRATS, WAKE THE FUCK UP AND LISTEN TO AND RESPECT YOUR INTELLECTUALS !!!
Posted by: maxpayne on Sep 26, 2006 8:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and one more thing.

STOP GOING TO FAUX NEWS AND ALLOWING THE RIGHTWINGERS TO FUCKING SMEAR YOU TO THE FLOOR !!!! THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY HAS ALREADY BEEN RAPED BY THE RIGHTWING MEDIA JUST BY SHOWING UP AND SERVING THEM AS A PUNCHBAG ! FOR GOD'S SAKE AND THE COUNTRY'S SAKE, BUILD YOUR OWN PROGRESSIVE THINKTANKS AND MEDIA AND STOP PLAYING ON THE RIGHTWING TURF !!!

THERE IS A REASON GEORGE LAKOFF WARNED "IF THE GAME IS FIXED, DON'T PLAY IT".

BUT NOOOOOO, Clinton just like Dean, Pelosi, Reid, and the rest of the pander-to-the-right Democrats and weak and reactive liberals are too monied and dumb to realize that FAUX News is nothing but a rightwing propaganda station designed to elect and re-elect Bush/Limbaugh Republicans office after office !!!

Even bigger news is that Hillary Clinton allowed Murdoch to hold a fundraiser for her recently. Couple this with appearances on FOX, and you can rest assured that she will not address the biggest threat to America – the anti-American propaganda machine operated by Murdoch, ClearChannel, and friends.

But of course, this isn't the first and probably not the last time the Democrats and the liberal groups unaware and too ignorant to understand and prevent the rightwing attacks will keep on committing suicide like this.

As Thomas Bico correctly points out, the rightwing media is out to bulldoze the Democrats any way they can and yet,
Liberal groups that write the media often organize to protest the false stories that prop up the GOP. But they don't even seem to notice that they and the Democrats are disparaged daily simply by omission of any positive comments about them, personally or policywise.

Mr. Lakoff, I thank you from the bottom of my heart for putting out the best of guidelines. Unfortunately, the current Democratic Party, save a few good true reformers, will have to be DEMOLISHED and rebuilt for not listening to your wonderful advice but fortunately, I'll be able to help the new flesh and blood of the party carry out your ideas.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Get behind the American worker, Constitution and Bill of Rights
Posted by: jreinhart1 on Sep 26, 2006 9:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Liberals and pretend progressives have no good news except to accept breaking up unions, accepting corporate destruction of benefits including retirement and replacing jobs done with ILLEGAL alians. They are also push legislation for the PATRIOT Act and REAL ID Act. Repeal the National Security Act of 1947 (the NSA, NSC and CIA are accountable to no one except the President), the Federal Reserve Act and the IRS agression against the worker trading effort for wages (which is not income!). Working people also want gun ownership.

I would recommend reading George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, George Mason and Thomas Paine (the originals please). No standing armies, no favoritisim of any specific country, the right to protect oneself from the government and a tyranical state... These people are the original Democrats (Democratic Republicans).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

THE DEMOCRATS DID NOT LOSE, THEY WON ON THE BASIS OF VALUES!!!!
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Sep 26, 2006 11:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I did take that title from an earlier posting on this thread, which seemed to be the clearest one so far.

That is the essence of the problem - the breakdown of democracy in the USA under the guidance of Karl Rove and George W. Bush, aided and abetted by the corporate media and the oil oligarchs.

Gore won in 2000; the legislative branch went to the Democrats in 2002, and Kerry won Ohio in 2004. These are stolen elections, plain and simple, and the corporate media won't report on it because their owners believe that their financial interests will be better served by Bush et. al.

I admire George Lakoff's work, but I think he needs to take a long hard look at the corporate media framing practices and examine who they are supporting - namely, the corporate-owned Democrats and the Republicans. Without massive change in media ownership there is no political hope for anyone who opposes the current status quo. The decision about what stories to run needs to be taken out of the hands of the corporate oligarchy and put back in the hands of reporters and editors whose main concern is the accurate reporting of information.

If truth-in-advertising rules were actually enforced, about 90% of the corporate media product would have to be prefaced by "This is an Advertisement".

As Orwell said, "Advertising is the rattling of a stick inside a swill bucket."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Progressive Criteria; Drop Out!
Posted by: hot_rad_man on Sep 26, 2006 11:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is only one thing that motivates a political candidate and that is money. There is no hope for the two party system. The last four years has demonstrated that fact very clearly. All the criteria is above is much to abstract for a greedy SOB politician Democrat or Republican. Couple that with the new "rigged" elections and now it is the party with the most money to "manage" the outcome of the election and steal it illegally but they won't get caught because this is accepted now in politics. Why do you people continue to vote for these felons? No one is making you go to the polls so stay away and do something with your family. Voting is useless and a complete waste of your time!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Think outside the Bush!
Posted by: ggmurray on Sep 26, 2006 11:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
People talk about thinking outside the box - but I say now it is time to think outside the Bush! Stop reacting all the time to what Bush & Co are creating - this mesmerism of fear, this fear of terror, fear of fear itself. Enough already.

We who want a different world must share our vision, in words and feelings, with our fellow citizens.

I for one want a country I can be proud of. A country that has real democracy, where people feel empowered to make a good life. I want a country that respects all its citizens, every single one. Where education, health care, clean water and clean air are considered basic rights. A country that other countries can look to for examples of real democracy in action. A country that values human life and human choice in all its actions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Now what to do RIGHT
Posted by: dale0k on Sep 26, 2006 12:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a list of wrongs, and things done wrong. What about focusing on what to do right?

What the right does right, is somehow get ahead in the framing wars. They seem to be able to grab any topical issue, frame and spin it their way, and then get out an all-points bulletin that quickly puts the same spin on every tongue in reach. It elimates thinking. One less thing for Joe average to have to do.

It gives everyone everywhere the same advantageous take - explains things just the way they would like them to be understood.

They somehow put their preferred version of things on the fast-track to popular recognition, and on from there to acceptance, and perhaps just by filling the void, becoming the default point of view.

They make it a POINT to make this a point.

At the basis of this is always a slap at the evil unAmerican liberals, the stupid and weak progressives. An advantageous comparing and weighing of values and principles.

Facts, and truth, and being right just don't hold up, alone, anymore. These just don't matter as much as getting out a succinct message, in a timely and comprehensive fashion, that has enough familiarity and "truthiness" to be acceptable.

In order to gain ground in the framing wars, one must beat them to the punch - get the succinct, consistent point of view out there, one that does the same things - puts the topic in the preferred frame, and shows the opposition as lacking. Since this view also happens to be mostly true - in terms of the current administration's lack of competence, integrity, vision, results, etc., etc. - it shouldn't have to be a great leap or stretch to do this.

What is important, I think, is consistently determining the target message, and getting it out quickly to and from all points. Multiple outlets and voices saying the same consistent message.

Who's in charge of this for the left? Is there an equivalent Karl Rove for the left, for example?

Why can't we do it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Change must come from the top
Posted by: YogiBear on Sep 26, 2006 12:23 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A common mistaken ideology has convinced many progressives that they must "move to the right" to get more votes. In reality, this is counterproductive. By moving to the right, progressives actually help activate the right's values and give up on their own. In the process, they also alienate their base.

This said it all for me. The real problem isn't progressives at all. It's their so-called political leaders.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

More "linguistic" Left self-criticism
Posted by: LegumeSam on Sep 26, 2006 3:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My opinion on Lakoff's schtick is given in detail here. In sum, Democrats are not "progressive" if they have bought into neoliberalism, and thus cannot be counted as "moving to the right," since for our purposes they already are on the "right."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Understand "Conservatives"
Posted by: fanny666 on Sep 26, 2006 5:05 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think that a lot of us fall into the trap of all-or-none With Us Or Against Us thinking. We should try to understand "Conservative Values" as most people see them.

People buy into Republican rhetoric. One of the things we need to do is to demonstrate that there is a huge divide between stated principles and reality. Examples:

"Strict Interpretation of the Constitution"- Is this really what the Republicans want? Take 2 simple and GLARING examples.

Alito, Yoo, Roberts, Gonzales and their ilk claim that they are "Constructionalists" meaning that they want the Constitution interpreted in the context it was written. So, Amendment 13 ended slavery, and Amendment 14 was an attempt to guarantee rights to the former slaves. So then why does the right CONSTANTLY use Amendment 14 to give more and more rights to corporations? That's not why it was written.

Article 6 Section 2 of the US Constitution states very clearly that international treaties into which the US has entered are "The Supreme Law Of The Land." How many times do you hear this brought up while some "Strict Interpretation" Republican is explaining why we should only obey the UN when we want to? The UN Charter is The Supreme Law Of The Land. The Non-Proliferation Treaty is The Supreme Law Of The Land. The UN Convention Against Torture is The Supreme Law Of The Land. Breaking even one of them is an obiously impeachable offense. Breaking all of them is Republican policy.

Just an example.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just DO SOMETHING!!!!
Posted by: spacemarine83 on Sep 26, 2006 10:11 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look, here is the deal. I am a conservative. No I dont believe in abortion, and certainly not gay marriage, but I also dont believe in our "president" either, nor his policies. If you dont like the way things are going, you have two choices:

1. Go to another country and piss and moan about all this shit and be looked upon as imptent a-hole.

OR

2. Stand UP and FIGHT!!!! You have a voice, use it!! You have a vote, use it!!! You can even protest!!!!

Please, just do something rather than sit at home on your comptuer and type away about the evils of the world and bemoan the system with others on Alternet. Just do it!!

P.S. Do it for your fellow Americans, especially the soldiers...they dont want to do what they are doing, but their hands are tied...they took an oath to the constitution and for America. Help them too!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Just DO SOMETHING!!!! Posted by: Plexius
» RE: Just DO SOMETHING!!!! Posted by: kittynboi
Interesting 'frame'
Posted by: talkville on Sep 26, 2006 10:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mr Lakoff's article seems founded upon a ground of another 'value' which is individualism and the individual, atomic ego (as does the cognitive science he seems to marshall to its defense). Here in the USA, if we deal only with individuals and their individual morals and ethics, there are a great many 'values' and 'morals' shared -across the board- among conservatives, liberals, progressives, libertarians, socialists, the 'left' and the 'right', etc. It doesn't seem like advocacy of "fight values with values" is going to be altogether the best strategy to counter the over-all shift (also across the board) to the political (besides the cultural) right. It seems to amount to simply a different view of placing faith over reason in our political and social relations - tending once again to a theocratic rather than oligarchic or plutocratic or corporatist manner of dealing with our affairs.

The problem of capitalism is not so complex; it has only one value - profit. All other mention of 'values', 'traditions', 'moralities', etc are used (not practiced) to justify its rule over all our lives in unlimited benefit to the few at minimal (if not by now existential) costs to the many in our society.

We need to consider for ourselves differences between Reason and reason-ing. It would also be helpful to consider what particular value or principle one is referring to rather than just mention 'values' in general - and also who precisely would most benefit from these.

Meanwhile, the 'value-added' continues to be extracted from workers to subsidize the 'good life' for the rulers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Some Truth To This, But Overblown
Posted by: Jim Shaw on Sep 27, 2006 7:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is some truth to what Lakoff is saying, but he overstates his point.

The reason that a focus on policy isn't working, is that Democrats are offering watered-down policies. For example, rather than pushing for a universal, single-payer health insurance program, they come up with Hillary's hodge-podge compromise.

Of course, the reason they do this is that they are compromised by corporate cash almost to the same extent as the Republicans.

What will do more to fix this problem than anthing else, is to adopt public financing of all political campaigns.

That is what we should be pushing for, rather than spending an inordinate amount of time fretting over the definition and presentation of our values.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Finally! Posted by: Plexius
» Shore up Democracy Posted by: Jnutter
It's the hate, stupid.
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Sep 27, 2006 8:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You over-complicate the problem, and overestimate the masses.

Politics is about playing to prejudices or hatreds, which means nationalism, anti-immigration, anti-gay, anti-Muslim, anti-Communism, anti-poor...Anything where they can frame things in terms of Us and Them. Get people angry, and give them someone to kick.

You are right in that issues and facts don't matter, but neither do values, in the more noble sense of the term. As some bumper stickers said a few years ago: "Hate is not a value."

But it's all about the hate. Or as Goebbels said "It's the hate, stupid." Sad, but true.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's the hate, stupid. Posted by: Plexius
» RE: It's the hate, stupid. Posted by: Moondog
Here's a good reason why progressives won't win anytime soon
Posted by: ISlamIslam on Sep 29, 2006 3:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't say it any better than Thomas Lifson re the Islamic threat to America and the West:

"Political correctness has cut off a vital source of feedback to both the Islamists and the so-called progressives of the West. They are blind to the realities of the American Street. Gradually, more and more Americans are beginning to entertain the concept that drastic measures may well be necessary to ensure our survival. It is only a half-thought position, outside of the circle of passionate advocates who write on the web or occasionally break into media notice on talk radio or a cable news channel. But it is part of a growing acceptance that we might need to go a bit Roman, or at least contemplate the exact mechanisms which brought an end to World War II, our most recent war fought against an existential threat.

America is generally slow to awaken to danger, but once roused it is a fierce fighter. A few voices are warning our potential foes. But they are not listening.

Those of us who do not want to see a convulsive death struggle play out on the world stage, who want to see the drama go from a tragedy to a farce, have our work cut out."

If progressives wonder why conservatives or, more specifically, anti-Islamists, such as myself post comments to this website, it is because I feel a duty to warn Dhimmicrats about not only the threat from the slow but steady Islamization of the West but also of an undercurrent growing in the American population that is likely to burst forth with a violence against this Islamist threat the likes of which have not been seen since WWII. Those repressing honest criticism of Islam will pay a price.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Drastic measures Posted by: ISlamIslam
» RE: Drastic measures Posted by: Jnutter
» RE: Drastic measures Posted by: ISlamIslam
» RE: Drastic measures Posted by: Jnutter
» RE: Drastic measures Posted by: ISlamIslam
» RE: Drastic measures Posted by: Plexius
» RE: Drastic measures Posted by: ISlamIslam
The 12 Real Reason Progressives Cant Win
Posted by: TooDamnCool on Oct 2, 2006 2:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In no particlular order:
1. No Ideas
2. No Ideas
3. No Ideas
4. No Ideas
5. No Ideas
6. No Ideas
7. No Ideas
8. No Ideas
9. No Ideas
10. No Ideas
11. No Ideas
12. No Ideas

Lakoff thinks this is just a rhetorical loss, when, in fact, the American people, by and large have said NO to the post modern worldview of the left. Look at right now, the democrats have a opportunity to easily capitalize on the political climate in America, but since they bring nothing to the table even remotely resembling substance, the voters will not reward them this movement no matter how much help the media is in spreading their non message.

Believing that this is just a “framing” debate as Lackoff the Jackoff seems to think will ensure perpetual defeat, and that’s music to my ears.
.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement