E-Mail This Article to a Friend Access denied (continued)
	Signing on Sometimes ENDORSEMENTS don’t help (just look what Al Gore’s did for Howard Dean), but in local, low-turnout races, they can make a big difference. Which is why both Linda Dorcena Forry and Tim Schofield must feel better about their campaigns today than they did a week ago. On Sunday, Dorcena Forry snagged the endorsement of Barbara Lee, head of the Cambridge-based Barbara Lee Family Foundation and political patron saint of female candidates. In a press release, Lee cited Dorcena Forry’s potential to be " a tremendous leader in the Massachusetts Legislature " and lauded her for building a " remarkable coalition of support " in the race to succeed Tom Finneran in the 12th Suffolk. (The elections in the 12th and 18th Suffolk take place on April 12; the Democratic primaries, which are the de facto elections, take place on March 15.) Lee’s endorsement didn’t come as a surprise: Melissa Graham, who’s handling communications for Dorcena Forry, ran Lee’s " Revolutionary Women " event at the Democratic National Convention last year, and Dorcena Forry’s assets (personal charm, liberal politics, the ability to embody both minority empowerment and the convergence of black Boston and white Boston) are manifold. But Stacey Monahan, the other female candidate in the race and, arguably, a more assertive progressive than Dorcena Forry, also believed she had a chance to get Lee’s backing. Winning Lee’s support — and, if offered, her help raising money and getting out the vote — could make the difference for Dorcena Forry on Election Day. Two days later, former gubernatorial candidate and progressive darling Robert Reich threw his backing to Tim Schofield, who’s seeking to replace Brian Golden in the 18th Suffolk. Schofield’s camp quickly worked to maximize the value of Reich’s seal of approval, asserting (again in a press release) that the endorsement " undeniably confirms who the real progressive and populist voice of the voters is in this four-way race. " Regardless of whether you see Reich as the arbiter of genuine progressivism, the timing was fortuitous: this Thursday, Schofield is hosting a large fundraiser at the downtown pub the Black Rose, and Reich’s imprimatur should help increase the flow of lefty dollars. — AR

Howard Dean is inevitable again. The members of the Democratic National Committee won’t select their new leader until next week — February 12, to be precise — so the election still could be influenced by some last-minute development. But Dean, who has been a top contender for months (see "Searching for the Democratic Moses," News and Features, January 14), appears to be a virtual lock for the job. Earlier this week, the DNC’s state chairs voted overwhelmingly to back Dean for the post. Since other key groups, like the Democratic governors and organized labor, have chosen not to endorse any candidate, Dean now has the support of the largest single voting bloc in the DNC — which means, to borrow some language from the sports pages, it may be mathematically impossible for Dean to lose. "I think it’s pretty much over," Phil Johnston, the Massachusetts Democratic Party chair, said Tuesday. "I don’t think there’s any question."

If so, F. Scott Fitzgerald will be proven wrong for the umpteenth time. There are second acts in American lives, and in American politics, and Dean’s may be remembered as one of the more remarkable. Remember, this is the same guy who terrified Democratic centrists by channeling Paul Wellstone last year, then embarrassed himself with his primal scream in Iowa, then commodified his disgrace in ads for Yahoo. Which invites the question: by embracing Dean as their savior, what message are Democrats sending about their party?

It depends on whom you ask. Johnston, for example, puts a modest, pragmatic gloss on Dean’s (still unofficial) win. "I think there’s a sense that with certain constituencies, particularly young people, we’re beginning to really slip badly," he says. "In the last few elections, young people are trending much more Republican and conservative, yet Howard Dean is someone who can be quite appealing to young people because he’s blunt and candid and idealistic. And this party won’t have any future if you don’t bring the young people in." At the same time, Johnston notes that Dean outmaneuvered his rivals with some savvy campaigning. For example, he endeared himself to party chairs by promising to funnel more money to the states. And he eased the fears of Kerry loyalists, and others, by ruling out another presidential run in 2008.

Others attribute a more revolutionary meaning to Dean’s ascent. Eli Pariser, executive director of the MoveOn PAC, is careful to note that MoveOn’s members have yet to cast their votes for DNC chair. (MoveOn’s vote, which is purely symbolic, will take place online February 7 and 8.) But Pariser clearly sees Dean’s likely win as a sign that Democrats — even the insiders of the DNC — are prepared to radically remake the party. "I actually think this is a very interesting and possibly a very important political moment that we’re in," Pariser says. "It’s the kind of moment where you can see a paradigm shift — the ground shifting in ways that, as long as you’re on a winning streak, you’re disinclined to allow. The party needs to make some big changes in terms of how it relates to its base, and the issues it advocates on, and what it means to be a Democrat. And because of Kerry’s loss, there’s space for those changes to take place."

Whether Dean will give the Democratic Party an extreme makeover or fine-tune existing ideas and structures is anyone’s guess. The answer depends, in large part, on which incarnation of Dean sets up shop in Washington, DC. Will it be the centrist governor of Vermont or the combative liberal of the 2004 campaign? Either way, one thing is clear: whether you think Dean is good or bad for the Democrats, he’ll make the role of party chair a lot more interesting to watch.

If there’s one group you don’t want to fuck with, it’s the National Rifle Association. Think about it: the NRA’s members are militant, politically powerful, and paranoid — and they’re packing heat!

But that’s not stopping Newton resident John Rosenthal. Rosenthal is best known as the co-founder of Stop Handgun Violence, which advocates smart gun laws and creates those massive billboards that adorn the Mass Pike near Fenway Park. Now Rosenthal has a new project: creating a national organization of moderate-minded gun owners to counter the NRA. "There are roughly 80 million gun owners in America and only three million members of the NRA," says Rosenthal, who is a skeet shooter and gun owner. "Tens of millions of gun owners that refuse or choose not to espouse the extremism of the NRA, which has changed from being a hunting-and-shooting organization to one that promotes concealed carry[ing] of handguns almost exclusively."

Tentatively named the American Rifle Association, the new organization is still in its formative stages. If all goes well, though — i.e., if Rosenthal can drum up enough cash to build a national organization from scratch — it will debut this summer. But when it does, will it really make a difference? And if so, how quickly? Even Rosenthal seems unsure. On the one hand, he cautions against expecting too much too soon. "The NRA’s been around for over 100 years," he warns. "They are very entrenched in Congress, and in Washington, DC, and in every state house, frankly." Rosenthal also warns that the NRA may try to sabotage the nascent ARA even before it’s actually up and running. (Last week, an NRA spokeswoman said she’d never heard of Rosenthal or the ARA.) A moment later, however, Rosenthal excitedly outlines the ways the ARA could shape public policy on a national level — convincing hunters to oppose oil drilling in public parklands, say, or "giving cover" to politicians when issues such as the federal assault-weapons ban (which, thanks largely to congressional timidity in an election year, expired last year) are up for debate.

"Until there is such an organization, there will never be a change in gun policy in this country," Rosenthal insists. "The majority of gun owners are reasonable and responsible, but the whole debate has been co-opted by an extreme group who thinks the solution to school violence is arming teachers. Now you’ve got elected officials who are petrified of this particular gun lobby. There needs to be an alternative."

Adam Reilly can be reached at areilly[a]phx.com