The following post is in response to Ron Fournier's article, "Dean brings new ideas to party" published in the Sunday, October 9, 2005 edition of the Washington Post.

I have mixed feelings about your article, Mr. Fournier. While I feel that it succeeds in supplementing the public’s knowledge and/or interest of virtuality as it affects political education/communication, the flavor and general factoid delivery (the word 'factoid' has several definitions – take your pick) really bothers me. The whole point (or so I thought) of the press is to give news without an agenda. The article begins on a sour note: “Howard Dean is no longer screaming. He’s scheming.” How are we supposed to take that, Ron? The only one scheming here is you, it seems. Save bitter attitudes for the blog, man. “Borrowing ideas from President Bush’s re-election campaign…” I can’t see how any democratic campaign would want to borrow ideas from a re-election campaign whose cornerstone strategies/key ideas appealed to guns (The War), gore (Abortion) and going west ("Go West" was a mega-popular Village People hit - you make the connection).

I’m not going to pretend to know much about politics, etc; it’s all gotten rather boring to be quite honest. We cannot ignore, however, that governmental politics has become an incredibly strong ideological machine. If other ideological institutions (i.e. family, educational system – perhaps even mass culture) indeed share a codependency with this overripe tomato of useless rhetoric and conspiracy (filibustering, hate campaigning, finger pointing, hypocrisy), it seems to influence the shaping of the other structures far more than the reverse. What is our fascination (let me go one step further by calling it 'obsession') with maintaining power over others? When does governing become dictatorship? When did our euphemisms of “corrupt government” and “crooked politician” become reality? Did we retreat into a virtual space before virtuality (as we now know it) came to be? When does political apathy give way to madness? (ugh) I’m tired of hearing about our nation’s leaders taking on new strategies to do this or to do that. When do we take responsibility?

I’d like to see video conferencing between classrooms where students can share ideas with other students around the nation. It would be interesting to learn more about the ideologies that shape students’ thoughts and (political) actions in other regions. That way, I’d at least know if what I’m saying is completely off base or (more or less) on point.

You mention “making Democrats the party of values.” What values? Whose values? “…Merging political information about voters with their consumer habits to figure out how to appeal to them.” Does this mean that upon entering the Amazon.com website, we’ll now be greeted by our favorite Democratic politicians? Gross. Although a novel idea (and perhaps somewhat hopeful for some), it seems a touch bit benign. How much useless advertising are we already bombarded with on the internet (for that matter, on the highway, in our living rooms, in church)? I don’t know about everyone else, but it seems as though my ad-filtering skills have become pretty well honed at this point. Will we be able to block Howard Dean’s pop-up message using anti-pop-up software? I’m less likely to check out another political ad than I am to check out a movie trailer for the next installment of the Brady Bunch franchise. Mr. Fournier, why don't you instead use your power of press to beg our politicians to stop the madness!

You claim that “Bush plugged into existing organizations such as churches and hunting clubs.” I can't believe you put the words "churches" and "hunting clubs" in the same sentence, although I can see how the same types of demographics might appeal to both (or should I say how both might appeal to the same types of demographics?) Did Mr. Bush have enough time to do a costume change from priestly robes to camouflage and still have the time for a quick pork rind lunch? I passed the NRA building on my way to my nephew’s birthday party this weekend (he’s 2 this month). I wo ndered if there was some scientific way to find out if this nation’s founding fathers are turning in their graves right now - that would be a great use for loitering tax payer dollars! I recently saw an ad for a gym I once belonged to, using the slogan: "Freedom of the Press." I envisioned two other slogans: “Freedom of Speech” accompanied by two young yuppie moms carrying on a conversation on the treadmill, and “Freedom of the Right to Bare Arms” busting out with this guy’s super huge bicep, mid curl, dumbbell in hand. We’ve just twisted everything up, haven’t we? I wonder if Cameron (that’s my nephew’s name) will be interested in hunting or exercising. I wonder if he’ll be the church-going type. I wonder what types of ads he’ll be seeing on television (or whatever TV is when he’s old enough to despise the rhetoric of his politicians). Will he be able to video (or “virtual-“) conference when he’s in school? Will his generation become more politically homogenous or heterogeneous? Will the Republican party, with frontrunner GWB (a.k.a. Dick Cheney), bring nuclear havoc upon us all? Will Geena Davis’s new television show (in which she plays the role of an Independent female president) take off?

You say that “Dean learned from his own campaign that it is critical to form relationships that turn into small communities.” I think, in order for this statement to have any relevance at all, we first need to define “community” at its most basic level, then figure out how this proposed virtual “community” will affect campaign strategies (and the general well-being of the public) in terms of reinforcing political ideologies within those communities. Let's just hope we've planted a new tomato garden by then.

---

Christopher de la Torre ©2005