Last week, Dr Steve B asked us which US Senate delegation was the nuttiest, and that was an entertaining contemplation, but it made me think of a couple years ago when I asked which US Senate delegation was the very best.

So I ask again, two years later, which state does have the best delegation to the US Senate? What makes a great delegation? What makes a great senator?

Get around, get around, I get around. But how? How do you get around? And again, as with your housing choices, how do you make you transportation choices? How do these choices define you?

Yes, since we are in the dangerous and ridiculous season of meta navel gazing, I would like to start a conversation about transportation. Transportation, like housing, is a huge part of the economy, a utilitarian necessity, a means of artistic self expression, a use of precious energy resources and in many cases, a political statement.

While we are in the season of mucho meta and community navel gazing, I'd like to ask about housing. So once again, we plunge into the world of non-scientific yet likely fairly representative if-this-gets-rec'd polls.

However, as always with these polls, the most important thing is the discussion engendered. Why do you chooce to live in the kind of housing you live in? Does your domicile reflect your values? If so how? If it doesn't, then what kind of housing would suit you better? Do you view housing as part of your investment portfolio? As an art form? As simple shelter?

I still have a bit of a hangover. Not so much from beer, but from the combination of that and excitement over the Steelers and a mixture of disappointmen and anger over yesterday at The Daily Kos. I logged on during a break in the Steelers game and was shocked to see currents of invective directed toward "The Democrats" here at a blog where I've typically found myself to be less enthusiastic about that party than 75% of the folks who comment here. I was, to say the least, thrown off a bit. Then upon further examination I got a bit more angry. If this, I asked, is what the Democratic Party gets in a dark hour from it's supposed, self-annointed "base", then no wonder the GOP has controlled most of the US government for a quarter century.

We have a thing or two to learn from the rise of the right some 25 years ago.

I am an addict or something. I know it's overdone and it's more useful to focus on 2006 at this point, but I am really curious about how high the negatives are among Daily Kos readers for the primary field. So let's have at it regarding whom you would absolutely NOT want to see get the nomination in 2008. I'm really curious about who has the highest negatives ... and I am not including Bayh, Vilsack or Biden as that would be too easy, they have little love around here these days.

If this has been done today, I will delete this diary, but I couldn't find this.

Some comments in a diary prompted my to wonder what kinds of changes in our personal ideologies we've seen as we've aged. Have we changed, and if so how much and in what ways. I think that the classic tale is of the liberal who becomes more conservative as they gain wealth and stability, joining the establishment. I have a hunch that though that may be the norm, the details may be surprising, especially after having found so many hard core lefties over age 70 while canvassing last year. First, I'd like to share what I've observed about myself.

Yesterday, Christian Dem in NC asked us
which senate delegation was the worst , leading my mind to the question of which delegation is best. I think I may have asked this same question over a year ago, but things have changed since then, both in the makeup of the senate and the makeup of dKos.

More importantly, why are they the best? is it just that their combined voting record averages out the best ... or perhaps they provide a one-two punch with strengths in different areas and both showing real leadership. Perhaps they have amassed real power which they wield skillfully both for their constituents and for the nation as a whole.

What is it that makes a delegation great and why?

I am always pleased when Harper's arrives in my mailbox, but this month, it features some especially insightful articles dealing with the recent growth far-right religion and it's old nexus with market capitalism.

In his short piece, 'Let There Be Markets' Gordon Bigelow reminds us that mainstream economics has it's roots in the early evangelical movement in 19th century England. He doesn't draw the connections back to the Puritans and the English Civil War or over to The Gospel of Wealth movement in the USa, but he does draw the connection forward beautifully to the USA of today.
Jeff Sharlet goes inside the belly of the beast so to speak with "Inside America's Most Powerful Megachurch" and describes a kind of so-called Christianity most mainline Protestants or Roman Catholics of a generation ago would hardly recognize as Christian (I know I don't see my own religion reflected there).
Most frighteningly, the growth of Dominionist power in a broad religious institution is depicted by Chris Hedges in "Feeling the Hate With the National Religious Broadcasters"

For excerpts, discussions, and a poll go below the fold.

It's that time of year. Martin Luther King & the Civil Rights movement, NFL playoffs and Roe v Wade all make their annual entry into the national consciousness.

Since Bush will have the upper hand in appointing his choices freely to the bench in the next 2 (maybe 4) years, Roe v Wade may be a bit more in the picture than usual.

I wonder how much diversity of opinion there is here at dKos on the issue of abortion rights. Do we have many anti-choicers? Should I be scolded for using that term instead of pro-life? To that small anti-choice minority here, before you think ill of me, let me say that I am no friend to the POV that abortion is just a medical procedure and a fetus just a clump of cells. I just don't see banning abortion as a viable & fair option in a culture where the deck is still so stacked against women, especially young single mothers.

First, I apologize for leaving 'FUCK' out of the title and hope nobody is offended by the absence. I just didn't see how it would make sense.

Although one would never guess it from the way things look in the recommended diaries, past polls have hinted that this blog attracts a very educated readership. I suspect that is still true.

Let's find out. How educated are you? How did your education effect your politics? Did you go to college at a hotbed of political activism? Were you already active before going to college? Maybe you never went? Maybe you got your politics in grad school? Or perhaps, like me, your politics was only slightly influenced by your education, but has changed gradually throughout your life.

Tell us a story and give us a bit of data-grist for the dKos demographics mill.

And if you missed the other polls, like the one on children for example, please register your info by following the link below.

Here we go with another round of information gathering. Today, rather than doing one of the basics, I am going on a tangent of personal interest: housing. Those who've been around here a while may know that I am very interested in housing, neighborhoods and urban land use issues. So please indulge me and let me know what sort of housing unit you live in and comment.

In addition to the poll, I'd like to know to what extent your housing is a function of economic necessity, of financial strategy, of aesthetic preference or of social pressure. To what extent does your housing make a political or moral statement? Do you live in a home that is of sustainable (or semi-sustainable) design. Do you oppose sprawl? Did you build it by hand? Did you renovate or restore? Do you rent because you're not ready to settle yet? Do you rent, but wish you could afford to buy?

Let this be a discussion of housing, real estate economics, architecture, planning and such.

And below the fold are links to the other polls from the past week.

As part of the ongoing Daily Kos Demographic Project, we now ask: How would you describe your religious belief or lack thereof?

I'd like to make clear here that this is not part of a serious study of religious belief and the categories are not necessarily those that would be used in serious research of religion. We are going by layman's terms and most importantly self-defining. If you consider yourself an Atheist, Jew, Christian or whatever you are one whether I or anybody else here think so or not.

And if you haven't participated in the other Dialy Kos Demographics Project surveys, please do. Here they are:

Age

Geographic Region

Income

Gender

Degree of Religiosity

I think a lot of people missed the gender diary in particular.

If there was one I forgot or missed, please let me know and I'll edit and add a link.

And as alwys, consider this an opportunity to discuss the interplay between beliefs in the religious and philosophical realm and how they play out in political opinions on policy or strategy. And, um, please hit that recommend button if you want to make the Daily Kos Demographic Project succeed.

As part of the Daily Kos census project, I'd like to ask:

How much do the people in your household earn? This should include all income, whether from work or investment. Please participate in the poll and make any comments you find appropriate regarding hos the income of this online community may influence the nature of discourse here or about wealth distribution in America on the whole.

Oh, and in order to get a reasonable representation to participate, please recommend this if you think this is a good idea.

Also ... do you have any ideas for the the census project?

Inspired by JamesB3's music thread, I'd like to keep the lighter weight topic threads going for the evening as we prepare for feasts with family and friends.

I am happy to say that this year, for the first time in 5 years, I am not making a turkey. I really love cooking, and I'll be serving 18 or more on Christmas, but I was getting bored with TG turkey duty, so this year my little brother (a better cook than I anyhow) gets it. My responsibilities this year are wine and potatoes - much easier.

I am torn between two impulses, though I lean toward the latter most of the time instinctively.

First, I see great value in partisanship, message discipline and working to win all the time.

On the other hand, I believe that the truth, however useless it is in actually persuading opponents, is important in understanding the world.

So there it is. There is a conflict there. Am I walking a straight thin line or am I vascillating?
Is this a place to talk among ourselves or is this an organ of propaganda? A little bit of both?

I've long considered what I am now doing to be in bad taste. I still think it is. I cannot help myself though, I often do things that are in bad taste in my real life, so maybe I can do it just once at dKos.

So here's the Lakoff diary by Jeffrey Feldman that I really would like people to see for a while. I almost missed it. Whether one agrees with Lakoff, disagrees with Lakoff or quibbles with him on specific points, I think that understanding the points he is getting at is important in trying to determine who we want to be over the next few years.

This is not a call to rampant procreation (not that there's anything wrong with that). What I am trying to say is that the long-term focus, now that the election is over, should not just be to choose the super candidate with the invincible message and mount his or her portrait in the most beautiful frame. What we need to do is change the way people think on the ground, one by one by one.

Backing up a bit, part of how we do this is reframing. No doubt, when we engage our neighbors and colleagues and congregation members and classmates and drinking buddies, we need to be aware of the power of language and choose our words not just for their denotaiton but for their connotation and association. No doubt. But just sitting in the blogosphere hoping the media picks up the new frames doesn't make them into the new common sense.

We gotta get out there.

Well, the GOP continues it's run of electoral success. I really believed we'd grab the Senate and make a tiny gain in the House much more confidently than I beleived Kerry would win. Alas, we seem to be deep in a Republican period that is built on an angry, rabid base and a frightened, untrusting middle. The countract on America continues.

We need to build. Setting aside the fact that this race was, at the top, a virtual tie, was this year to us what '64 was to the GOP and conservatism? The analogy would be more complete if we had nominated Kucinich and he'd gone down in a landslide, but it still works.