i had the cutest bag, at least

These are my observations from spending 2 hours with boys in politics earlier this week (and since it was a very long 2 hours, this is a very long post):

- Where are the women, indeed? Other than the woman who won her primary for a heavily contested city position and the women who worked for the host's office, I was the only woman in the room. (And frankly, I was only there because we're the host's client.) We sat around a big conference table to throw questions at Kos and hear him talk about his new book (which I'm excited to read, I'm not ashamed to say) and I couldn't help but look around at all the earnest, serious, white male faces around that table and think, "Wow. And we're different from the Republicans how??"

(They were all very nice guys, yes. And one had a lovely beard and another sported a cuorderoy jacket that was quite fetching. I'm just saying that the organizer couldn't find a few women in the whole of metropolitan Chicago to go to this lunch?? Nowhere? No women running campaigns? No women in charge of strategic communications for some progressive candidate somewhere? No women working for progressive change? Not even a single woman who writes about politics? As a member of several strategic coalitions in the city and state, I find that hard to believe.)

- Never give a vote to a Republican - NEVER. It's no secret or surprise that when NOW and NARAL threw their weight behind a Republican "pro-choice" candidate a while ago, instead of behind the Democrat candidate who was on record being anti-choice, their decision made Kos and his fellows lose their shit. When this was brought up at lunch (as in 'what are we supposed to do when a less than ideal Dem goes up against a so-so Republican?') The answer was simple - primary them. Find the candidate you want, run them against the candidate you don't want. Or, vote for the Dem candidate anyway, knowing their single anti-choice vote will become moot and you get rid of them next time with a preferable candidate. But never give a vote to a Republican. Why? Because in the end they'll totally screw things up: the conservative candidate, though giving lip service to reproductive rights, later backed all of the conservative judges and justices up for appointment (and basically ignored the two choice groups who backed him.) Those justices and their decisions can make life a hell for the rest of us.

-Strategic thinking isn't bad. I never thought I'd say this but the context of my thinking has changed a little. During lunch it was my impression that Kos thinks that women's groups are wasting opportunities, that they aren't thinking long game and are only working short, reactive games. I question that. I don't think groups like NOW, NARAL or Planned Parenthood were caught by surprise by the Alito nomination at all. (Was it even possible to stop the Alito confirmation from happening? I'd say no; the whole game had been lost when we folded on the whole filibuster deal earlier in the year. After a deal like that, made my Congressional Dems, who has room to maneuver at all? Not the groups' fault - I lay that whole thing at Democratic leadership's feet.) All of us were at the mercy of the extremely small window of opportunity we had.

But back to my point. Kos&Fellows has a point about strategery. And I've only just come to this realization just this year; after working where I work and seeing how advocacy strategy isn't *only* about getting people to follow you and support your cause, I see that it's also about insuring that the right people are in place who will make it easier for you to get your work done over the long haul. Who is most likely to support my organization, one that serves women? Who is more likely to understand what I mean when I talk to them about the needs of low-income working women, single mothers or student mothers? Who is more likely to protect the breadth of my interests? This isn't to say that the big women's groups don't do this. I think they do; I think Kos and his Fellows underestimate just how savvy women's groups are. But I think the strategy question is a question that needs to be asked whenever we engage with TPTB.

Our issues (women's issues) are no longer stand-alone. Economic empowerment, reproductive rights, education and health care - these are all related to one another. The increase in opportunity, or access, in one area depends on the strength of the others. Perhaps that's what K&Fellows mean when they keep repeating the mantra that 'single-issue' advocacy won't get us anywhere. (gasp! am i saying that i think single-issue advocacy is bad? no, just that they're not really single-issue.)

Strategy is not the binary opposite to Values. If done correctly, strategy should be a direct product of our ideological values.

-I want to win. Having said that values define strategy, does that mean that strategy is the only thing that matters? That, as long as we feel good about our values and that we have a long-term strategy in place to spread those values, the work ends there? It was funny, sitting there with my cute bag and cute shoes, listening to the boys use military and sports terms for everything. I don't have that language. I have the language of my old corporate world, which mirrors this language, but that's not really my language. My language is academic. Academics don't win anything. For the past 6 years, we progressives haven't won anything either.

But I want to win. Winning is important. Not everywhere or with everything, but in this context of politics and progressive causes, yes it is. It is very Important because the alternative (Losing) is too awful to withstand. But is winning our end goal? (I think this is where people get hung up. 'As long as we win, whatever's ok.' No, there is no 'as long as we win.' That puts winning first and values last. We spread our values AND we win.) No - our end goal should be a place where our values are lived out and demonstrated at every level - but we can only get there if we win.

-Other observations - Kos is actually very nice and seems to enjoy Corner Bakery brownies.