It is a very reactionary strategy, one that is often used when no alternatives are being offered.  Which is not to say that the Democratic Party is not offering alternatives to the Bush Administration and the Republican Party.  Rather, I think that the alternatives being offered by the Democratic Party do not excite people.  The Republicans have capitalized on the politics of fear, scaring people into supporting their ideas for defense, social security and gay marriage.  All the Democrats seem to be doing is offering different proposals, but agreeing that the problems are the same.

Do Islamic extremists really pose a grave threat to the United States?  Is there really an attack on the Bible underway?  Or Social Security?  Or on the "institution" of marriage?  No matter how dangerous Islamic extremists may be, they will never threaten the existence of the Unite States.  Of course no one wants to ban the Bible.  The Social Security Trustees clearly proved that the problems President Bush said threatened Social Security were greatly exaggerated.  Two men or two women marrying does not threaten the marriage of one man and one woman (especially with the national divorce rate at almost 50% .
But the Democrats engaged in debate on Republican base issues that were not really issues that affected many Americans.  40 million Americans not having health insurance is an issue.  Astronomical increases in college tuition are an issue.  Three years of a war with no concrete goals is an issue.  The Democrats need to start debate on Democratic issues and not just respond to issues Republicans create to appease their base.

I think this has prevented a lot of core Democrats from getting really excited about the Party's prospects in November.  There has been a lot of talk about Bush winning in '04 before he articulated a vision of greatness for the country, while Kerry only articulated, however well he did so, how his plans to address Bush's issues were different from Bush's.  Even if his ideas were much more feasible, nobody wanted to hear them.  Even if Bush's vision is unattainable (freeing the world of tyranny), it is inspirational and what people want to hear from their leaders: that our challenges, no matter how intimidating, can and will be overcome by the greatness of the United States and its citizens.  That is why President Bush was so popular for so long and got a free ride from so many in the mainstream media: he empowered people to feel that they too can live a better life, the core of the American dream.  Regardless of if his policies made that better life less probable, people got to hear what they want to hear.  It is also why Kerry lost.  I think too many Democrats just stayed home.  If government is not going to play a role in their everyday life, and indeed if people already think government is largely irrelevant, than the least they want to hear is someone who will tell them they can be great.

The Democrats need vision.  Equal access to quality education is an issue important to many more Americans than is preventing gay people from marrying.  So is affordable health care.  So is energy independence.  So is the war in Iraq.  So is corporate crime and corporate dominance of more and more aspects of our daily lives.  Matt Stoller's piece on Eliot Spitzer's vision is a great place to start, but we need much more.  Russ Feingold stormed out of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing this morning on the proposed amendment to ban gay marriage.  This could be another moment for Democrats to articulate a vision on human rights, but Senator Feingold needs to become even more vocal.  Vision is why Howard Dean was so popular and it is why Bush is popular, even if you think his vision will destroy the world before he ends tyranny.  At least there is a vision.  I think what is going on over at DailyKos with their energy plan is phenomenal.  How long will it take for a candidate to jump on and support it?  Why don't Democrats come out with an education plan?  The Republicans have nothing on education.  If the Democrats came out with a strong plan, the NEA and at least all of the states that have sued the federal government over No Child Left Behind would support and the Republicans would have nothing to say, seeing as no teacher or education group will support them when they tout the "successes" of NCLB.

But instead, all we get is more Bush/Republican bashing.  Which is great and important and always serves as a useful reminder of the havoc wrought by this administration.  But we need inspiration, a vision of a better society, a better country, a better world, a better future.