howard dean is a fraud

[Guest TEARZ]

i've tried to respect people's views on this guy, but come on...

 

check it...

dude is trying to opt out of the public finance system so that he can take big corporate $$$ and become even more "electable." this after he swore on march 7 that he'd never do such a thing and that it was essential to reform elections and get big corporate interests out of the process... so he and his supporters are voting on this issue, as if the fact that he even brought up the issue didn't make him even more of a prevaricating sleaze...

 

it baffles me that intelligent people support this dude.

 

nevermind the false ads he did.

or the confederate comments.

or the 100% NRA approval.

 

gimme a break.

[Guest TEARZ]

yeah, aight.

[!@#$%]

a position change on nearly every important issue.

 

can't this guy make up his mind about anything?

 

hehehehehheeeee...'check it'

 

DEAN FLIP-FLOPS ON COMPLETING MISSION IN IRAQ

 

 

DUCK: Dean Ducked Troops Question. "[Dean] repeatedly declined to say whether he thinks the United States should withdraw its troops immediately from Iraq, as some vocal war opponents urge. Responding to questions before and during the event, Dean declined to call for the troops’ return, saying he didn’t know the implications for geopolitics and soldiers’ safety and wasn’t privy to intelligence on the ground in Iraq. ‘I didn’t get us into this,’ Dean said. ‘Unfortunately, I’m not president now and I can’t get us out of this.’" (Joanna Weiss, "Dean Ducks Prescription For Quitting Iraq," The Boston Globe, 3/27/03)

 

FLIP: Dean Then Berated Bush For Suggesting American Troops Could Come In 18 Months. "If the President thinks our troops will be out in 18 months, he is smoking something he forgot about when he was at Yale." (Rebecca Cook, "Howard Dean Rallies Supporters In Seattle," The Associated Press, 5/15/03)

 

FLOP: Dean Said U.S. Should Not Pull Troops Out Of Iraq. "We can’t leave Iraq. We can’t pull out, because if we do that, chaos ensues or else a fundamentalist Shiite regime may arise with undo Iranian influence, both of which would be more dangerous than Saddam Hussein." (Howard Dean On CNN’s "Crossfire Goes Inside Politics," 9/1/03)

 

FLIP: Only Three Days Later: In Debate, Dean Said Our Troops Should Come Home From Iraq. "We need more troops. They’re going to be foreign troops, as they should have been in the first place, not American troops. Ours need to come home." (Democrat Presidential Candidates Debate, Albuquerque, NM, 9/4/03)

 

FLOP: Now Dean Says Just Some Troops Should Come Home. "Ultimately, over a period of time, assuming you can get the cooperation of the Europeans and others, I would like to reduce by half the number of troops the Americans have in Iraq and increase dramatically so that we get up to a troop strength of between 170,000 and 200,000 in Iraq." (NBC’s "Today Show," 9/8/03)

 

DEAN FLIP-FLOPS OVER AMERICAN LABOR STANDARDS

 

 

July 2003: Dean Called For Strict American Labor Standards For International Trade. "Unlike U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, Dean doesn’t want to get rid of the North American Free Trade Agreement. ‘This trade is important to America. It’s important for our national defense,’ Dean said. ‘But we need the same labor standards in Mexico and China as you have in the United States, and the same environmental standards.’" (Lynn Okamoto, "Dean Calls Economy Top Issue For 2004 Race," The Des Moines Register, 7/19/03)

 

Dean Backpedaled In Debate, Saying International Standards Could Work. LIEBERMAN: "[M]ay I say just briefly that Governor Dean … referred to American standards, not international standards." DEAN: "Either is fine with me." LIEBERMAN: "Well, then that’s a reassuring change of position." (Democrat Presidential Candidates Debate, Albuquerque, NM, 9/4/03)

 

DEAN FLIP-FLOPPED ON PUBLIC FINANCING OF HIS 2004 CAMPAIGN

 

 

Summer 2003 Public Financing Flip-Flop: Dean "backed away from his pledge to adhere to spending limits, saying some advisers want to explore opting out of the Watergate-era public financing system because of his sudden fund-raising success. … ‘Could we change our mind? Sure,’ he said. … [in June,] "Dean signed a letter to the [Federal Election Commission] promising to abide by the program’s rules, including its spending limits." (Ron Fournier, "Dean Pulls Back On Spending Limits Pledge," The Associated Press, 8/15/03)

 

DEAN ALSO FLIP-FLOPPED ON PUBLIC FINANCING OF HIS 2000 CAMPAIGN!

 

 

July 2000 Public Financing Flip: "Gov. Howard Dean is challenging his Republican opponents to accept a $300,000 campaign spending cap even if a federal judge overturns the limit. … ‘This law is important in restoring public faith in the election process,’ Dean said in a prepared statement. ‘Vermonters need to know that their small donations are just as important as a $1,000 check from a multi-national corporation or PAC (political action committee).’ Dean said he was at a financial disadvantage, first because he had a lower spending limit as an incumbent, but also because he faced two challengers who were likely to have at least $300,000 apiece." ("Dean Challenges Republicans To Spending Limits," The Associated Press, 7/21/00)

 

August 2000 Public Financing Flop: "Gov. Howard Dean abandoned public funding for his re-election campaign, saying he couldn’t take the chance he would be outspent 4-1 by his Republican opponent. Publicly financed campaigns were part of strict campaign finance reform legislation championed by Dean, who signed it into law in 1997. … Progressive Party gubernatorial candidate Anthony Pollina, the only candidate now using public funding, criticized Dean’s decision. ‘I am not surprised. In some way it shows his true colors,’ Pollina said. ‘Ultimately, it’s a victory for big money and bad for average citizens.’" (Wilson Ring, "Governor Abandons Public Funding," The Associated Press, 8/18/00)

 

DEAN FLIP-FLOPPED ON LIFTING CUBA EMBARGO

 

 

Dean Once Favored Lifting Cuba Embargo, Now Says It Would Be Wrong. "Howard Dean, who sells himself as the presidential campaign’s straightest shooter, is starting to throw voters some curves. … Last weekend, Dean shifted his position on the trade embargo against Cuba. Dean, who had supported rolling back the embargo to foment human rights improvements, said he has become convinced such a move would be unwise. Cuban Americans, who generally support the embargo, are an important voting bloc in several states, including Florida."(Jim VandeHei, "Dean Invites More Scrutiny By Switching Key Stances," The Washington Post, 8/30/03)

 

DEAN FLIP-FLOPPED ON YUCCA MOUNTAIN

 

 

1996 Governor Dean Yucca Mountain Flip: "I am urging you to support changes in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act that would ensure that the federal government meets its responsibility to electricity consumers to begin accepting spent fuel from commercial power plants in 1998. … Opponents assert that the shipment of nuclear waste is highly unsafe, but the facts prove otherwise. Over the past 30 years, more than 2000 shipments of spent nuclear fuel have been made on the nation’s highways and railways. No shipment has ever resulted in a release of radioactivity or public harm. [emphasis in original] … I sincerely hope you will support S. 1271 to establish an integrated spent fuel management program that includes a centralized, interim storage facility, continued site characterization of the potential repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, and an appropriate transportation system to move spent fuel." (Gov. Howard Dean, Letter To Sen. Patrick Leahy, 5/1/96)

 

2003 Candidate Dean Yucca Mountain Flop: REPORTER: "As governor, you supported a plan to store the nation’s waste at Yucca Mountain, Nev. Do you still think this is a good solution?" DEAN: "As governor of Vermont, it was a grand idea because it would get the waste out of Vermont. But now that I’m running for president, I’ve got to reassess it and see what the science looks like." (Amanda Griscom, "Q&A: Howard Dean On The Environment," Alternet Website, www.alternet.org, Accessed 6/4/03)

 

DEAN FLIP-FLOPPED ON DEATH PENALTY

 

 

"Opportunist" Dean Now Supports The Death Penalty In Some Cases. "Vermont liberals say Dean’s governing history suggests more of a political tactician, a strategic opportunist who will ultimately run a campaign that inspires the middle as well as the left. … Some years back, [Dean] reversed his opposition to the death penalty and now supports it in some cases."(Terry M. Neal, "Will The Real Howard Dean Please Stand Up?" Washingtonpost.com, 7/31/03)

 

In Disastrous ‘Meet The Press’ Appearance, Dean Admitted To Death Penalty Flip-Flop. "An appearance on ‘Meet the Press’ by Dr. Dean on Sunday, arranged by his aides as part of this announcement swing, turned into what even some Dean supporters described today as something of a debacle, highlighting many areas of attacks Dr. Dean would be subject to in a general election or a primary. … Dr. Dean also acknowledged that he had changed his position on the death penalty -- he now supports it in some cases, after once having been a strong opponent …" (Adam Nagourney, "After A Year Campaigning, Dean Officially Enters Race," The New York Times, 6/24/03)

 

DEAN FLIP-FLOPPED ON FEDERAL MEDICAL LIABILITY REFORM

 

 

1994 Federal Medical Liability Reform Flip: DEAN: "We’ve absolutely got to have malpractice reform. Absolutely. And I think it ought to be done at the federal level. In fact, that’s- I think all 50 governors think that." (CNN’s "Viewers Call In With Health Care Questions," 7/18/94)

 

2002 Federal Medical Liability Reform Flop: DEAN: "As a doctor, I’d love to have all kinds of malpractice reform. That is not the federal government’s business. This administration, for all its talk about states’ prerogatives and local control, doesn’t believe in it. They simply substituted conservative micromanagement for what used to be liberal micromanagement. It’s like gun control. That is a state matter, not a federal matter." (CNN’s "Capital Gang," 10/5/02)

 

DEAN FLIP-FLOPPED ON RETIREMENT AGE

 

 

1995 Governor Dean Retirement Age Flip: DEAN: "Secondly, I am very pleased to hear Bob Packwood because I absolutely agree we need to … increase the retirement age. There will be cuts and losses of some benefits, but I believe that Senator Packwood is on exactly the right track. … " (CNN’s "Crossfire," 2/28/95)

 

2003 Candidate Dean Retirement Age Flop: RUSSERT: "Would you raise [the] retirement age to 70?" DEAN: "No. No." (NBC’s "Meet The Press," 6/22/03)

 

DEAN FLIP-FLOPPED ON CREATING DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

 

 

2002 Homeland Security Flip: Asked what he thought of the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, Dean said: "I don’t have a quarrel with bureaucracy. I wouldn’t do it that way, but I think everyone does their own thing. … I’m not going to attack the President for trying to create a homeland security office—it’s a reasonable thing to do." (Ann Rostow, "Give ‘Em Hell Howard," Texas Triangle, 9/5-10/02)

 

2003 Homeland Security Flop: Howard Dean "‘says the creation of a homeland security department was a mistake and that Tom Ridge is the wrong man for the job.’ In an interview with CQ Homeland Security’s Freedman, Dean said: ‘I would not have created the Department of Homeland Security.’ He added: ‘Creating a new bureaucracy is rarely the actual solution to creating efficiency.’" ("Dean Takes On Homeland Security, Tom Ridge," The Hotline, 5/21/03)

 

DEAN FLIP-FLOPPED ON CUTTING SOCIAL SECURITY

 

 

1995 Governor Dean Social Security Flip: "The way to balance the budget, Dean said, is for Congress to cut Social Security, move the retirement age to 70, cut defense, Medicare and veterans pensions, while the states cut almost everything else. ‘It would be tough but we could do it,’ he said." (Miles Benson, "And Politicians Wonder Why They Aren’t Trusted," Times-Picayune [New Orleans, La], 3/5/95)

 

2003 Candidate Dean Social Security Flop: RUSSERT: "But you would no longer cut Social Security benefits?" DEAN: "But you don’t--no. I’m not ever going to cut Social Security benefits." (NBC’s "Meet The Press," 6/22/03)

 

from..

 

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/981921/posts

[Guest TEARZ]

well done !@#$%.

 

rage, dean isn't the only guy who can beat bush. with this shit he's pulling, he won't even come close. here comes the politics of electabilty again... jeezus... vote for what's fucking right.

[!@#$%]

Originally posted by -Rage-

Would you rather have Bush for another four years?

 

I think not. 87 Billion, fucker.

 

is it so unbelievable that Dean could be almost as bad as Bush..

maybe worse??

 

at least with Bush it's the devil we all know..

 

with Dean it's the devil who we don't know at all because he changes his mind on every issue according to popular opinion [at that moment]

 

why not pick the best candidate possible instead of anyone who maybe has the money to equal bush's campaign?

 

why not try to raise conciousness??

 

fucker.

[Guest imported_Tesseract]

I vote for TEARZ & !@#$% as the cutest 12oz duo.

[!@#$%]

uh oh tearz, our ears are burning

;)

[Guest TEARZ]

hahaha

[Cracked Ass]

I used to be in the "get a third party in here" crew. Sadly, this election I'm going to have to turn my back on the idea and just vote for whoever the democrat is, just to get rid of Bush. He's that bad.

My governor is not Jeb Bush so my vote has a chance of counting.

[mental invalid]

for those of you who sorta know me, please dont hate me....but im afraid we are looking at another 4 more years of you know who....

[Guest]

Just imagine what Bush will do when there's no chance of being

re-elected because of term limits. A politician who doesn't need

to worry about re-election is a very powerfull and scary man.

 

I guess a bunch of you will be my neighbours before too long.

[!@#$%]

come on now..

the election hasn't even happened yet.

 

and more importantly, the next year hasn't either.

 

iraq is far from over.

he only needs to continue bungling that for a little while, more americans dying every day, popular sentiment will turn..

someone on pbs noted last night that the iraqis understand the american democratic process..

 

they know that more attacks now bodes poorly for bush next year..and continued occupation..

 

bush is the type of guy who just needs enough rope.

i'm hoping he's dangling by next summer.

 

of course, it could all just be wishful thinking, in which case i'm back to detesting the lethargic, imperialistic american public..

[suicidebombr]

Krook for president.

[mental invalid]

witty im with ya mangs...

 

its just everytime the dems open their mouth, all i can muster is D'OH!

[Guest im not witty]

^

i think your with someone else there mang, i havent said anything in this thread until now. thanks for the support anyway. hehe.

 

 

i have my eye on our neighbor to the north if shit gets too out of hand.

[Guest imported_El Mamerro]

I'm with roe, unfortunately... things aren't looking good for the dems. The viable candidates screw up every single time they open their mouths, and the candidates that don't simply aren't viable. It's almost as if you have to be a bumbling idiot to have a chance at the democrat seat. Maybe they're taking Bush's example and saying, "Dude, the president is a moron and people like him, so we have to act like morons too".

 

I'm reaffirming my support for the PR Independence Party. I really don't want anything to do with the US if Bush stays.

[Guest ctrl+alt+del]

anythings better than bush. if bush is re elected, i think ill be more disappointed in the amercian people than pissed that the dumbass is back. i will truly be ashamed to be american if bush wins again.

[Vanity]

Originally posted by TEARZ

jeezus... vote for what's fucking right.

 

all the propoganda around here (mostly for clark)

says stuff like "clark in = bush out"

"clark leads the polls"

"vote for someone that can actually win"

 

not even touching on any actual issue...

 

and kilo, i've been planning on moving out of the US since the patriot act (which every canidate that could vote on it, approved, except denny)... just gotta handle some business here first.

[Poop Man Bob]

http://www.fundforahealthyamerica.com/images%5CGovDean.jpg'>

 

But he's sooooooooooooo cute!

 

 

Let's all hold hands.

[$360]

politicians are dirty.dirtier than me.

[Guest TEARZ]

poop man,

i'm interested... has your support for dean waned recently?

 

around my parts, dean support has palpably decreased. supporters have been flocking to other candidates. those who are still around usually don't offer much in why they support him; typically they're in the rage camp (where'd the posts go?)- "he's the guy that will beat bush."

he's run a great campaign so far, i must admit, but he's hurt himself terribly in the past few weeks.

[S@T@N]

Originally posted by Cracked Ass

My governor is not Jeb Bush so my vote has a chance of counting.

 

 

But... what about we unfortunate saps who DO have Jeb as our

governor?

 

 

 

I knew I shouldn't have moved to Florida.

[Vanity]

tearz,, what's wrong w/ the nra anyway?

 

just how it's basically a big corporation to keep republicans in office?

 

i've actually considered joining them... i'm all about my right to bare arms... i've also thought about joining the aclu.... but i don't have money for either. and im not really a group kinda person.

[Poop Man Bob]

Originally posted by TEARZ

poop man,

i'm interested... has your support for dean waned recently?

 

First off, I don't want to play the role of Token Dean Supporter. I know you're not barracading me into that position, but I feel that if I start to defend any of his actions/motives that I'll effectively be forced to continue doing so until the end of time.

 

So let me make it clear: I support all the Democratic candidates. Everyone. Even Mosley-Braun. (well, save Lieberman).

 

Now on to the question: no, my support hasn't waned, although, to be honest, I haven't followed the news as closely the last two weeks - school's been a bitch. I've only donated money once, and that was a few months ago, so that's not necessarily a measure of my support. I still support Dean; however, like you implied, I'm beginning to think he may have peaked too early. He enjoyed a rather extended honeymoon with the press, emerging from "oops" moments even stronger than before he had to put his foot in his mouth. I think the Confederate flag thing may have stuck a little more than the other comments he's made. HOWEVER (and key), this situation has been blown way out of proportion. Nowhere in the man's statement was he advocating slavery, the Confederacy, racism, whatever. He was merely stating a fact - that the Democrats should be able to appeal to as broad a section of America as possible. [Note this isn't me advocating becoming Republicans-lite, as the DLC would have it]. The sentence right after the Confederate flag sentence is key - to paraphrase, he stated that these Southern Dems don't have health insurance either, plus the education of their children is subpar. Why all the hoopla?

 

Re: the public financing. There's nothing inconsistent about being for public financing while refusing to voluntarily put yourself into a straightjacket. Why handcuff yourself when doing so would eliminate your ability to have any semblance of a level playing field? Why is it that the public campaign finance system is threatened only when Dean chooses to forgo limits, when Bush will spend upwards of $200mil without an opponent? Every Dem candidate should forgo public financing until the system works, which it clearly does not.

 

To quote a reader on another site: "At this point, the closest thing in the world to the goal of public money for campaigns is exactly what Howard Dean has been doing. The average donor to his campaign has contributed less than $80. How many business/special interests is he going to be beholden to in that case? The only special interest that has funded his campaign is his own supporters. There's no Enron working behind the scenes to try to back him up and then demand favors from him later. There's just American people. Dean's campaign is literally closer to public financing of campaigns than any campaign in history, including those that took public money."

 

The only way public financing will work is when all candidates must manditorily choose public financing and the limits incumbent with that choice.

 

 

 

Now, please, don't let this start an efight, certainly between two guys that are both rockin' awesome dudes. You and I both want the same thing - no Bush. :hug:

 

*edit - I cna't splel.

[Guest TEARZ]

vanity, the NRA is problematic for a whole host of reasons... i don't want to sidetrack the debate, but i don't think that fully automatic assault weapons and armor-piercing bullets are needed by the average civilian. i know that i come across as a real lefty, but i'm actually pretty even on the gun control thing. besides what they advocate for, you touched on how entrenched they are in politics- dean has a 100% NRA approval rating- i know he's from VT, one of the most gun-friendly states, but truthfully you don't get a 100% approval rate without being a NRA "buddy." ya follow?

 

PMB, i wouldn't dream of starting an e-fight, i hope you don't feel like i was trying to goad you into one... i simply asked because i know that you would typically be willing to take the time to thoughtfully respond, which i appreciate. i know that there are other dean folks on this site; unfortunately they're not as willing or able to string together a cohesive response. no beef from my end homey, i hope i'm not coming across as incendiary and confrontational. my bust on that.

 

as you know, i've never liked dean- besides the political qualities, he seemed to have greasy intangibles- like browner said, he gives me the scuzz vibe. he seems like he's real angry under the surface and ready to explode. of course i can't rationally justify any of this...

however, i really took issue with the bullshit ads he put out saying that he was the only candidate against the war. that crossed the line of prevarication into outright lie and intentional and willfull deception of the american public. and he never apologized, although he did drop the ads basically because he had to. i can't stress enough how much it pissed me off that he OUTRIGHT LIED in a contrived, self-produced message that he (and his mostly progressive supporters) paid for. there was no accident or misunderstanding. campaign ads are rigorous scrutinized for the type of message they want to convey.

i agree that the public finance system doesn't create anything close to a fair fight. however, the principle is important, and dean VOWED to use it until the end and criticized those taking corporation funds. where are his principals? he just seems more and more like a status quo politician everyday, and like i felt before, the anti-war stance was an opportunist's move to jump into the arena. he's played himself badly and now people are noticing.

 

no beefski. utmost respect.

tears.

[Poop Man Bob]

TEARZKI - no, no .. I should have clarified my statement, plus eliminated the "Now, please.." portion. I didn't think you were trying to goad me into a fight at all. You're good people - I know you wouldn't create senseless drama with me.

 

I'll respond to the rest later ... I'm off to eat.

[Guest TEARZ]

in support of dean

 

new nation article (i still ain't a fan, but i like balance).

 

Why I'm for Dean

by William Greider

 

 

First, the rivals saw him as a McGovernite lefty from the 1960s. When that didn't take, they decided to depict him as a right-wing clone of Newt Gingrich who wants to dismantle Medicare and Social Security. Finally, opponents sold political reporters on the story of Mr. Malaprop, an oddball from tiny, liberal Vermont so insensitive to the nuances of American politics his mouth will destroy him. Howard Dean surged ahead through all this. The other candidates and witting collaborators in the press got him wrong every time.

 

Howard Dean is an odd duck, certainly, in the milieu of the contemporary Democratic Party. He is, I surmise, a tough and savvy politician of the old school--a shrewd, intuitive pol who develops his own sense of where the people are and where events are likely to take public opinion, then has the guts to act on his perceptions. That approach--leading, it's called--seems dangerously unscientific in this era of high-quality polling and focus groups, the data interpreted for politicians by expensive consultants. The press corps has not had much experience with Democrats of this type, so reporters read Dean's style as emotional, possibly a character flaw. He reminds me of olden days when Democrats were a more contentious bunch, always fighting noisily among themselves and often with creative results.

 

The ubiquitous "party sources" have explained that Dean merely caught a lucky break by declaring early and forcefully against the war on Iraq at a time when Americans were overwhelmingly prowar. Who knew things might change? The doctor knew.

 

A more pertinent question is, Why didn't other leading candidates see this tragedy coming? Their reticence was symptomatic of the inert Washington insiders, exceedingly cautious, indifferent to whatever roils the party's rank and file, and always a few steps behind the curve. The explanation that Washington candidates voted for the war on principle or were misled by Bush doesn't help them. Their blindness to the potential consequences (now unfolding) is another reason to be for Dean. He, meanwhile, speaks plainly to the error of US imperialism. "America is not Rome. We do not dream of empire. We dream of liberty for all."

 

The man also stands his ground in a fight. When someone jabs him, he jabs back. Pundits describe this quality as dangerous, and no doubt it gets him into trouble occasionally, but what a refreshing departure from the rope-a-dope calculations of the Clinton era. This trait is what I like about him most. In my experience, it's more revealing than a politician's positions on issues. With issues, Dean is pretty much what he says: a middle-of-the-road moderate, neither left nor right, though middle in Vermont is liberal ground. As governor, he was skilled at maneuvering through contending forces, sometimes angering both sides in the process.

 

I first observed these qualities during Dean's second-to-last term as governor. Vermonters were inflamed--everyone was coming after him--when he and Democratic legislators enacted the infamous Act 60, a school-financing-equalization law that compelled the "gold towns" to share their property-tax revenues with poorer townships. Faced with general outrage, Dean barked back at the storm. The remark I remember reading in the Rutland Herald went something like this: "I know why people are angry at me. They've been getting away with low tax rates and well-financed schools. They're not going to be able to do that anymore."

 

Wow, I thought. This is a different kind of politician--no ducking the blame, no cute obfuscation. The law isn't perfect, Dean added. We will fix it later if we have to. (They did.) Vermont progressives were upset, too, because Dean had refused to consider raising income taxes to finance the schools. His logic, however, was more liberal than it appeared. Raising income taxes would put all the burden on Vermonters, many of whom are poor. Raising property taxes--with a generous homestead exemption for full-time residents--put the big hit on the out-of-state people who own so many lovely vacation homes there. Dean did not explain this to the "flatlanders," but we figured it out.

 

The governor has shown flashes of the same bluntness in his prime-time campaigning. Last summer, he told a revealing story on himself--a conversation with Robert Rubin, the former Treasury Secretary and Wall Street's main money guy for Democrats. Rubin had warned that unless Dean stopped attacking NAFTA and the multinationals for the migration of US jobs, he couldn't raise contributions for him from the financial sector. As Dean told it, "I said, 'Bob, tell me what your solution is.' He said, 'I'll have to get back to you.' I haven't heard from him." What I like so much about the story is that powerful, influential Bob Rubin pokes Dean in the chest, and he pokes him back. Then Dean discloses the exchange to the Washington Post.

 

In the higher realms of politics, this is not done. But he is not one of them. And this is no longer the era for "triangulation" between the business-financial money patrons and the party's main constituencies. That new spirit, more than any single issue, is what has drawn together Dean's vibrant and growing base, buoying his candidacy with millions in small contributions. Dean is opening the possibility of transforming politics--shaking up the tired, timid old order, inviting plain-wrapper citizens back into an active role--and that's why so many people, myself included, are for him. Full disclosure: I am among the throngs who have been invited to contribute "forward-looking ideas" to his campaign (I was flattered to be asked and pleased to oblige, with no naïve expectations).

 

Dean, I suspect, learned in the up-close-and-personal politics of Vermont that you don't win elections by keeping the people at a safe distance. You can't do it in that state, even if you try. He governed with strong, well-organized progressives and environmentalists on one flank, conservative business interests on the other and a mass of native working-class Vermonters who don't much care for either. Dean collected a lot of lumps and resentments, many compromises and setbacks, in ten years as governor. Insiders remember him as shifty and unreliable. But he also learned how to stand his ground in a fight.

 

All that helps explain why the party establishment had a hard time understanding the man and is so upset by the thought that he might be the nominee. Corny as it sounds, he might actually bring voters back into the story. Washington's smugness was shattered in the past few weeks as Dean picked up pathbreaking endorsements from Representative Jesse Jackson Jr. and SEIU and AFSCME, the two largest unions and heads-up, aggressive organizations. Dean continues to up the ante for his rivals--calling for reregulation of key industries and confronting the concentrated power of corporations and wealth. These are solid liberal ideas others are afraid to express so directly. The guy is a better politician than the insiders imagined, indeed better attuned to this season than they are.

 

It's still early and Dean will be field-tested in the next few months, but so will they. If the party establishment succeeds in derailing him or declines to rally around him as the nominee, Democratic status as the minority party may turn out to be a very long Vermont winter.

[rip]

its cause he's a liberal.

[T.T Boy]

Originally posted by TEARZ

i don't want to sidetrack the debate, but i don't think that fully automatic assault weapons and armor-piercing bullets are needed by the average civilian.

 

holy shit, who in the fuck could possibly need this? honestly. i cant think of one reason for any person aside from a law enforcer or a military guy to have such weapons. you know youve got a problem in your country when...

[old*824]

id kinna like a fully auto assauly rifle with armor peircing bullets.

 

you know why?

 

i bet you a frosty old english forty ounce bush is gonna steal the election next year and we are going to have another HUGE terrorist attack, probably involving weapons of mass destruction in which case they will repeal the consititution entirley.

 

in the words of kabar. go buy a good rifle or two and a whole lot of bullets.