Congratulations on the success of the 50-state strategy. But there are larger issues to be considered after this victory. It seems apparent that Americans voting Democratic did so for several reasons. Among those reasons: Iraq; the economy; Republican scandal. Indeed, disaffection with the Republicans was THE major cause of the Democratic victory.
An overarching concern, at least for myself, is the influence corporations have on Congress through K Street lobbys. Indeed, one of the campaign promises of Speaker Pelosi that held such great hope for many of us was the promise to clean-up the way business is done in Washington. Unfortunately, it appears this promise will be retrenched upon by Barney Franks and Democrats when it comes to minimum wage legislation. He has stated that he will work with K Street lobbys to convince corporations to "go along" by Franks offering-up more offshoring of jobs and lessening environmental restrictions. To be frank (no pun intended), we have smelled these deals before, and they reek of Congress taking massive contributions from Lobbyests rather than doing the people's business. I don't think you'll find this well tolerated by the electorate if it does occur.
The 50 State effort was important, but at least as important in helping to achieve this victory was the blogosphere. I assure you, if Congress continues business as usual and decides to accept being bedded by corporate lobbys, you will find the blogoshere an effective tool in combating the Democrats during the next election cycle.
I am offering friendly advice. The Democrats in Congress are expected to perform and to do the people's business for the good of America.
Posted by phidipides at December 13, 2006 05:14 PMThank you very much for coming here and spending your time with us, I appreciate it. I do a lot of bitching about the party but I still have my Democracy Bond. 'n my Dean buttons.
Anyway, I wish there was a clear way for a person to say to themselves "I want to switch career and lifestyles--could I become a DNC worker?
How did Sarah do it? Is there one best way? Would it mean moving to the State capital, usually? What is the party looking for in workers? I might have special skills, I'm a web producer. Is that valuable?
A lot of people loathe their corporate slots, their utterly mundane plod of grinding, exploitive capitalism under rapacious management. It sucks. There's a lot of talent for the party out there to tap, but the labor pool and the party can't connect.
I remember pictures of the CA party convention, almost all the hair was grey. They were there and active in for politics in retirement. Seems like more younger folks in a happy career would be a good thing.
Again, thank you. Please have a wonderful holiday season.
Posted by paradox at December 13, 2006 05:25 PMIf we don't have net neutrality, I fear the blogosphere advantage may go by the wayside.
Posted by Sharon at December 13, 2006 05:39 PMOh yeah, congrats and welcome.
Posted by Sharon at December 13, 2006 05:40 PMThis is great to have you come by and post, THANKS!
Before I forget, I just came from a quick look over at ThinkProgress and I see they have a post up about a new bill Sen. McCain is proposing that would severely inhibit the workability of the blogs, particularly adding more liability to the blog owners and probably cutting off comments.
The grassroots is truly the life blood, the think tank equivalent with imagination that blogs bring to the Party and I would hate to think of what would have happened in the mid-terms if bloggers had not stepped up to the plate.
So, hopefully we can watch each others' back now and in the future and KICK SOME ASS!
Thanks again, congratulations on a job well done and please do have a happy holiday season.
Posted by phidipides at December 13, 2006 05:14 PM
Thanks for your comments. I am not saying that the national atmosphere didn't play a huge role in the gains Democrats made this year. But I do think that having the 50-State Strategy in place helped push that wave farther onto the shore. In places like Minnesota with Tim where we won, and even in places like Nebraska, Wyoming and Idaho where we didn't clinch it, but we seriously moved the ball down the field - the strategy is really important. It's really all about making a commitment beyond the immediate future and doing the work to build a permanent democratic majority. Hopefully, in places where our candidates came close in the next cycle they can seal the deal. I once read that candidates run for congress an average of 2.5 times before they are elected. With a network of support in place for them to rely on, we can make that process easier, so being "targeted" isn't the only way to find support. I know that with our organizers on the ground there is a whole host of services any candidate can take advantage of, without ever having to be put on a list by any committee.
Posted by Tracy at December 13, 2006 05:53 PMPosted by paradox at December 13, 2006 05:25 PM
The DNC organizers, although funded by national committee, are hired by the state parties. The goal is to hire local organizers who know the lay of the land and who can best represent their states. Moving into Dem politics is additictive - so be warned! I would start by contacting your state party to see what their current needs are. Each state it's own unique needs. Larger states may spread out their staff, while smaller states may all be based out of the capital. It depends on where you are. Also, talking to people who have worked campaigns in your area and seeing where they started is really helpful.
Two great resources for general progressive employment is DemocraticGAIN and the Yahoo Mailing List "JobsThatAreLeft".
We are going to have to fight tooth-and-nail to keep the Internet free and open. The entrenched political and economic interests now realize that the Web is a serious threat to their continued domination of our society. I think we ought to be strategizing about how alternative technologies can help us circumvent the big telecoms and have a sort of internet Samizdat.
Posted by global yokel at December 13, 2006 06:04 PMPosted by Sharon at December 13, 2006 05:39 PM
and
Posted by mainsailset at December 13, 2006 05:48 PM
Thanks for the welcome.
You know, one great thing about a Democratic majority is that we control the agenda. Plus our Democratic leaders are increasingly responsive to the online community and are listening to our concerns more than ever. Having a running dialogue is critical for both sides.
Also, I expect the next Congress to see some major changes when it comes to their openness and accessibility. It should be quite cool!
A national party that fights everywhere, and believes winning is possible everywhere, is critical for recruiting top-tier candidates to run in places long-considered to be "out of bounds" for Democrats. The 50-State Strategy is based on the idea that if you show up, work hard and respect people enough to ask for their vote, there is no such thing as "out of bounds". And this election showed us it works.
Tracy - I think this is exactly the ethic to take away from this election vis a vis the Fifty State Strategy. The most beneficial aspect of our successes is that it imparts the lesson of getting working in depth at the state level. More so, it's encouraged local bloggers to get involved in municipal and county government. We're building the infrastructure that will work for every Democrat who runs for office. The netroots is tying itself (or turning itself) into the political infrastructure of the Democratic party around the country.
It's great to hear about the inroads the DNC made. But adding a few staffers in place where we weren't staffing before is just a start. How is the DNC planning to help expand state Democratic Party capacities? Where are you hoping to grow the DNC?
Posted by Matt Browner-Hamlin at December 13, 2006 06:07 PMThank you, Tracy, for both the posting and the work you're doing at the DNC.
My concern is one of the failings we've had as state parties, the DNC, and the federal-level campaigns -- especially the presidential campaigns -- is there is no solid "back office" operation to feed the information the various campaign efforts have gleaned so our data banks, at the state parties (and I emphasize at the state level) grow and become more sophisticated from campaign to campaign. Much of the information about voters is, literally, tossed in the recycyle bin on the closing day of the campaigns. That is a waste of energy, time, money and organizational improvement.
How does the 50-state campaign insure that ALL voter information collected during a campaign is captured and provided to the appropriate state party?
Thanks
Posted by Don at December 13, 2006 06:08 PMHi Tracy--I don't think you're going to get much disagreement about the 50 state strategy around here! As I recall, this vision of Dean's was enthusiastically supported by the online "lib'rul" community, as a reaction to a frankly incomprehensible beltway "battleground states" strategy---which, whatever its original merits may have been, had clearly become a loser and to persist in it, utter folly.
Do there still exist dissatisfied beltway "battelgrounders" who oppose 50 state? Dean should feel free to expose them to the netroots when they covertly try to take us back to the old days of "battleground" loserdom.
My question is, who knows how bad the friction actually is between the DCCC's Rahm and the DNC's Dean and is it now a permanent feature of Democratic politics from now on? Or will the relationship between the DNC and the DCCC improve? I sure didn't sense that same level of conflict between the RNC and the horrible Repub Congressional Commitee---they always seem to move in perfect fascistic lockstep.
Posted by euzoius at December 13, 2006 06:23 PMPosted by Matt Browner-Hamlin at December 13, 2006 06:07 PM
Hey Matt. I think it depends on the state. As the 50-State Strategy takes hold and state parties get into the mode of having the resources they need year round, not just when election time rolls around, we will see additional areas we can move into to offer assistance. But first we need everyone to be able to do the basics and do them well.
Right now the DNC provides a slew of services to the state parties - from our Comm department to regional political directors to fundraising assistance to research - but I'd rather get their thoughts on next steps for you (so I'll get back to you!), rather than try and summarize the massive amount of work that they do. In internet-land, personally, I am hoping to work closer with more state parties in the next year to make sure they are engaging the online political community effectively on a regular basis, and using the tools of the trade to make each state party as open and transparent as make sure they are connecting with their local netroots community.
Some states are making inroads here already. In Ohio they hired a Online Communiations Director. Nebraska Democratic Party has an awesome site and are blogging and using their e-mail list exactly the right ways. In Kansas the state Democratic Party launched their own blog and I was thrilled to be able to help out with that. The Florida Democratic Party revamped their site and is looking to build stronger ties to the netroots. So it's coming together. It's definitely a process, but I think we'll take some big steps next year everywhere.
Posted by Tracy at December 13, 2006 06:25 PMTracy, thank you, thank you, for all your hard work, and your stressing of organization. Enthusiasm goes way up when people know the goal and how they can best contribute. I back the 50 State Strategy wholeheartedly. I feel the only way to ensure long term strength of the party as a whole is to build up local roots like the Republicans have done for the last 30 years. If the national party is going to stay in office long enough to turn this ship of state around, it's going to need to shore up the foundations, and get everyone involved in it.
My question: the Republicans seem to have the advantage of organizing voting blocs through megachurches and religious organizations. Forget about whether that's right or wrong - it's working. What kind of comparable mechanism do the Democrats have locally that involves large groups of like-minded people getting together and if not explicitly, but implicity, agreeing on Democratic ideals? Or are the Democrats more inclined to try to court Christians themselves? Or does it matter at all, the days of values voting are over?
Posted by iamcoyote at December 13, 2006 06:25 PMDean's fifty state strategy was fantastic, and I'm curious about the lack of recognition by the party machine of its effectiveness. Well, no, maybe I'm not so surprised.
That being said, I have a couple of minor recommendations. People here were really irritated with the humongous number of (A) get out the vote calls, and (B) poll calls, both of which were at the local, state and federal levels. Is there any way to coordinate these? I can't tell you how many times local people told me about how pissed they were at all the calls. It could have cost some votes.
ALSO, a couple of the poll calls sounded like they were from India, with strong Indian accents, barely understandable. NOT GOOD! Can't say for sure which party they were from, but it occurred to me that one way to really get under people's skin would be to pretend to be the opposite party. Regardless, make sure poll companies use American callers who are easy to understand. Job out-sourcing is already unpopular enough in this part of the country.
My last suggestion has to do with Congresspeople only paying attention to the people at election time, bowing to corporatism the rest of the time. Congress needs to earn back the people's trust. Earmarks is a good place to start, as is cleaning up corruption. Bring back government to the people.
Posted by Don at December 13, 2006 06:08 PM
Hey Don -
First off let me say that I completely understand where your question is coming from - having been a campaign gal before coming to the DNC that was a huge frustration of mine too!
So how do we ensure that it happens? We build a lasting infrastruture - both with people and with technology. The whole point of the organizers in each state is that they made multi-year committments to the states they were in to stick around so when we gear up for races in '07 the same folks who where there in '06 will still be running the show.
Now individual campaigns can't be forced to share their lists, but hopefully the bridges we build, along with the infrastructure to absorb the information (the voter file project I mentined which is place and in use) will make this a concern that we never have to deal with as we move forward.
Will it be perfect? I don't know. But I definitely think it is going to get progressively better.
Tracy,
Welcome and thanks for taking the time for writing about the DNC's strategy.
There's a lot in your post to discuss and understand, so let me start with this passage in your post:
"We invested millions of dollars in a national voter file that state Democratic parties successfully used to target and turnout voters in ’06 and will continue to use as we move forward and expand and improve the system. We also made sure we invested time and resources to train state parties on how to maximize that data."
Can you tell us a bit more about the DNC's voter file and how it is similar to or different from what the RNC or other independent organizations may have put together? (I'm not asking for proprietary information - just trying to understand at a high level what the similarities and differences are in how the list was put together).
Posted by eriposte at December 13, 2006 06:42 PMPosted by euzoius at December 13, 2006 06:23 PM
You know, I think that there is always going to be people who disagree. There is always going to be different opinions about resources because there is always a limit to how much money you can spend. But more and more people are coming around to our way of thinking and as we have more successes I think that number will go up.
Posted by at December 13, 2006 06:49 PMPosted by iamcoyote at December 13, 2006 06:25 PM
I don't think values days are over. I also don't think Democrats are willing to cede those votes. This cycle we won about a third of evangelical voters because there are so many values we have in common. Governor Dean said recently that we embrace our diversity - it's not what divides us, it's what defines us. He also says that it's a moral value to want to make sure we have health insurance for every American, that our children don't go to bed hungry, that we take care of our earth...these are values we share - we just need to continue to show up and articulate them.
As far as a church organizing system, I personally think that as a group, Democrats are more diverse and therefore are spread out into different constituencies. I think we focus on organizing around issues and candidates where multiple constituencies can come together and agree and we win.
I also think we are building more and more progressive/democratic spaces and institutions that will bridge these divides in new and different ways - things like Drinking Liberally and meet-ups, etc... are bringing like-minded Dems together in much the same way that a religious community would.
Posted by at December 13, 2006 06:59 PMPosted by eriposte at December 13, 2006 06:42 PM
Thanks for having me! I'm so glad to get the chance to do this.
The truth is I don't think I am the best person to talk about the voter file. What most folks don't know is that there is a split between our internet and technology teams. Yes, we work together, but we are seperate departments. My department (internet) does the external communications (for the most part - I'm simplifying) while the tech department does voter file and back end and such...
But I can direct you to an article that was helpful to me that might answer some of your questions.
Check it out, here
Posted by Tracy at December 13, 2006 07:09 PMThanks Tracy. I'll check out the link. I'd like to add a comment to the great points that Julie made about the GOTV calls. My comment is more general and it's the following. Is the DNC spending some money on strategic thinking -- on what the RNC is likely to do in the future to disenfranchise voters, suppress votes, or otherwise negatively impact the election results through unethical or illegal techniques? For example, for those who followed all the dirty tricks of the RNC from 2002 and 2004, the fraudulent robo-calling (which may have very well tipped some close races to the Republicans, especially in the north-east) may not have come as a surprise. You can bet that the RNC will ramp up newer and more destructive anti-democratic techniques in 2007 and 2008. Who in the DNC is seriously thinking about what we can expect in the future and how we should start acting now to prevent that?
Posted by eriposte at December 13, 2006 07:47 PMThe ardor of my support for the Democratic Party is directly related to the ardor by which Democrats in office ,work to restore government accountabiity.
Posted by Kevin at December 13, 2006 07:51 PMThanks for your response.
Also, I expect the next Congress to see some major changes when it comes to their openness and accessibility. It should be quite cool!
Okay, this just teases the devil out of me. Can you share information about those major changes you expect to see?
One other thing. Carville complained that Dean left $6 million on the table that could have gone to candidates. I think Carville is a big nut job, but I'm wondering what the general reaction was around your offices when Carville's statements painted Dr. Dean in such a negative light.
Posted by phidipides at December 13, 2006 08:03 PMPosted by eriposte at December 13, 2006 07:47 PM
Senator Reid has indicated the Senate may address the dirty phone calls in the future and the NH GOP just got saddled with having to pay huge fines for their phone-jamming schemes. Though, you are right - the GOP method seems to be to keep people from the polls and suppress the vote in order to win.
This year the Voter Protection Teams in all 50-States helped combat that with rapid responses on Election Day. In fact, the DNC's Voting Rights Institute (o which that effort was a project) is working to ensure election integrity and make sure that these dirty tricks are thwarted before they can become. More about them, here.
Our political department is tasked with keeping abreast of and making sure we are prepared for so-called "dirty tricks". I can't speak for their thinking for the future - but I will bring that question to their attention. My personal opinion is that voter education is key. The faster and louder we can bring these atrocities to light, the less likely they are to attempt them. Knowing that they won't be able to get away with cheating democracy is key.
Posted by Tracy Russo at December 13, 2006 08:12 PMWelcome Tracy,
Your comment:
Every state was different - some had thriving state parties and a tightly knit community of local county organizations, others had become so marginalized that they were unable to effectively communicate with the electorate.
Was spot on for Arizona!
Even though our state had 2 significant Democratic victories, I found the DNC somewhat disorganized. We can't even fill the ballot against the Repbulicans. Anybody, I mean anybody that had a 'D' next to his name stood a good chance of winning this year. They were few and far between. How can the DNC help put a name on the ballot to at least compete?
Arizona needs your help in drafting competent candidates!
Happy Holidays, *wink*, Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
Posted by phidipides at December 13, 2006 08:03 PM
haha. Didn't mean to tease. I don't know what specific changes they will be bringing about, but I know that Speaker-designee Pelosi's office is already exploring ways to be more open and more accountable. In fact Karina, her online person (I don't know Karina's official title) and Ari, Senator Reid's online adviser, held a session at the DC RootsCamp to brainstorm with other Democrats and Progressives. Check out the notes from that session and if you have addition ideas, feel free to shoot them to me in an e-mail (russot-at-dnc-dot-org)and I will make sure they get over to Karina and Ari.
Re: Carville
Clearly, I disagreed, and I can't speak for everyone else, but it was kind of ridiculous - we had made huge gains all over the country and someone was still playing a blame game? I think Governor Dean characterized those type of comments well by noting that they were silly inside the beltway stuff. For me, the real opinions that matter are that of our candidates and our activists and those reactions - from those candidates and volunteers who worked on winning races and those who didn't - have been incredibly supportive and encouraging. There is a lot of energy and a lot of hope out there for what the future holds.
One of the best parts of my job is being in a position to hear some of those stories.
Posted by Tracy Russo at December 13, 2006 08:24 PM"Dean and his team drew up a plan to provide staff and funding for each state based on their needs. In some states this meant..."
In some states it meant abandoning the (Democratic) litmus test of abortion-on-demand: Casey in Pennsylvania.
In other states it meant abandoning the (Democratic) litmus test of gun-control: Heath Schuler in North Carolina.
In all states it meant embracing religion (even if it was just a play for votes): see above - PA and NC.
(By the way, how is Ned Lamont doing?)
And, gee, that is only in the third paragraph....
Shall I continue disecting this post. I do not think I need to: down in your bones, you folks know that the Democratic Party is dead if the Democratic Party continues to identify with the "progressive" community.
P.S. Howard Dean is gone soon enough....Hillary needs him out-of-the-way for her run on the White House.
P.S.S. This is just too easy.
Posted by Bagley at December 13, 2006 08:25 PMPosted by Seven of Six at December 13, 2006 08:23 PM
Arizona has made huge strides this year. Two of the AZ organizers were featured on a call during the 50-State Turnout to talk about some of ,a href="http://www.democrats.org/a/2006/10/arizona_democra_2.php">what they had accomplished this year and I know they are hitting the ground running ready to make '07 and '08 even better years for the Democrats there.
I think as a permanent structure is put in place we will see more and candidates step up to the plate - because they will know that there is a system there to help them win.
When I hear that from a local dem that there is a problem with their state party my advice is to make sure that you are taking your concerns to your local county party and to the state party...sometimes the answer is to step up and be the solution. It's all about the fact that "you have the power" (yes, cheesey, I know, but true...).
Posted by Tracy Russo at December 13, 2006 08:31 PMThanks for everyone's feedback. It's been really great. I'll check in tomorrow and try and answer some more questions but I'm on east coast time and it's getting late!
Posted by Tracy at December 13, 2006 08:37 PMWelcome Tracy! Could you please have someone visit our fallen Senator's hospital room with a geiger counter? Thank you.
Posted by TIKI AL at December 13, 2006 08:44 PMBTW, bagley is one of the resident trolls, but I'm sure you figured that out!
Conservatism is dead bags!! Move along now!
Posted by Seven of Six at December 13, 2006 08:45 PM"BTW, bagley is one of the resident trolls, but I'm sure you figured that out!"
So I take it that your definition of "troll" is a poster who points out the circmstances that disprove your position.
"Conservatism is dead bags!! Move along now!"
Yeah. I suppose my observation is true.
Posted by Bagley at December 13, 2006 08:53 PMTracy, thank you so much for your very informative post. I've found the 50-state strategy incredibly exciting and was really pleased to see how effective it was in taking advantage of the opportunity Democrats had in taking back part of the government in 2006. (I wrote about how I thought Dean was doing a wonderful job of Leading Change earlier this year.)
My question is whether the DNC sees any other actions that can more closely connect Democrats to the communities where people live. What I'm getting at is the some of what iamcoyote talked about, but I also think that one of the things the right wing has been able to do is to make their positions "normal" while making Democratic answers to problems unacceptable. It seems like we need to spend some time branding Democrats (like Oliver Wills said) and the best way to do that is to be more visible all the time, and not just when an election is coming up. Is there any plan to raise the awareness of people on what Democrats do and why they think government is part of the solution? This would be beyond the Drinking Liberally work because that engages activists, and I think we need to raise the consciousness of the more normal, non-political American about what is possible.
Posted by Mary at December 14, 2006 02:43 AMMary, exactly! Oliver's branding campaign was brilliant. And now that the Republican brand is being pulled from the shelves, and the Dems have replaced it, how do we get regular people to buy our product next time? The Dems shouldn't be the lesser of two evils, they should be the preferred choice. This next session will be critical, I think; the voters demanded a change from the instability and anxiety brought on by Republican corruption and disastrous foreign policies. Regular folks need to be reminded that the Democrats are the ones fixing things. Without the media's support, how does this message get out?
I've been very lucky, Jay Inslee has close ties to the community, but others in my area don't even know who their rep is!
Posted by iamcoyote at December 14, 2006 05:45 AMDearest Baggy,
...a poster who points out the circmstances that disprove your position.
I love your logic. You use your own definition of what a Democrat is as defacto. Then, using that verbal sleight-of-hand proceed to try and deconstruct the point of the post.
You really are a silly, silly person. Take your litmus tests, crawl back into your cave, hibernate and dream of your former gory (sic) days.
Posted by Simp at December 14, 2006 08:20 AMYeah. I suppose my observation is true.
I don't see where you make any observations beyond simply spouting neo-con talking points.
Conservatism is dead bags!!
Too true. 35 years of spouting "limited government and less spending" and instead we get busted budgets and the highest growth in government from you guys. Conservatism may not be dead yet, but it has always been a lie. Nothing more than a fairie tale for authoritarians.
In all states it meant embracing religion
Ahhh! Poor little neo-cons! Jesus is no longer your buddy. If you see the Democratic ads they are along the lines of: "I have faith, my faith tells me to care for my fellow man." Refreshing compared to the republi-con meme of: "I have faith. It tells me to kill our Little Brown brothers, starve the poor, and collect riches in the name of Jesus!"
In some states it meant abandoning the (Democratic) litmus test of abortion-on-demand:
Tell that to the voters in South Dakota.
(By the way, how is Ned Lamont doing?)
Ask the republi-cons how they enjoyed voting for Lie-berman?
Shall I continue disecting this post.
Sure! You've done a stellar job for the republi-cons to this point. Continue on. I especially love it when you defend the Mad King, idiot son of George. Tell us how he is the greatest leader since...well, since Mao. Do you think you'll be a docent at his pretzledential lie-bury in Tejas? Maybe you'll supervise the Mexicans who'll clean up the place!
Posted by phidipides at December 14, 2006 09:14 AMWhere can I find the names and contact information for all of those 180+ organizers the DNC paid for?
Posted by politus at December 14, 2006 11:51 AMThough I would have loved for Dean to be president, I think he is doing more good for the party (and therefore the country) as chairman of the DNC.
Posted by david in burbank at December 14, 2006 12:17 PMWow, and I thought the trolls we have over at Wschaton were stupid.
Tracy, thanks for the insights and responses. 50 State worked very well. I expect it to work even better in two years, when we'll have a veto proof Congress... Oh, wait.
Why would we need a veto proof Congress, when we'll have a Democrat in the Oval Office?
Posted by Chris Tucker at December 14, 2006 05:01 PMMary said
"...but I also think that one of the things the right wing has been able to do is to make their positions "normal" while making Democratic answers to problems unacceptable..."
I think Mary is right on. In a way, a back-handed way maybe, Bagley is right, too. The old Dem machine has a way of saying things, a use of language, that turns people out of the tent. The Dem tent is a big tent, and it holds a lot of people and different opinions under it. But the supercilious language that is used can turn people away. I'm just thinking of the abortion issue as an example. There are a lot of people who have voted Dem who are at least uncomfortable with abortion. Somehow the Dems need to acknowledge that discomfort, bur balance it against the right of control of a person's body, of a person's organs. This is just one example. Another is immigration. I learned a long time ago from a wonderful co-worker that there are always two ways of saying something--an officious way and a way that encourages cooperation. The Dems need to learn the art of re-framing an issue. Afterall, it's a big tent.
Posted by Julie at December 14, 2006 06:19 PMwoot! keep it up!
Posted by michael at December 14, 2006 09:08 PM