In answer to Deandroid whiners, note first that IRAQ SUPPORT

#1 Kerry doesn't always vote with the Prez:


The New Republic asserts:

"...The fallacy underlying Dean's argument is that Democrats in Washington have gone along with Bush's policies rather than resist them. "We are not going to beat George Bush by voting with the president eighty-five percent of the time," he likes to say. Dean seems to be implying that his opponents supported Bush that often, but actually Kerry, Edwards, and Lieberman all had presidential support rates in the sixties and seventies. And even that dramatically overstates their agreement, since many of those votes--say, election reform or defense reauthorization--were, properly, uncontroversial. Most congressional Democrats have held fast in opposition to Bush's conservative agenda. On postEnron reforms, the patients' bill of rights, campaign finance reform, homeland security spending, judicial nominations, oil-drilling in Alaska, and other issues, they have formed a fairly unified bloc. Most of the time, though, Republicans have rolled right over Democratic opposition. That's the way things tend to go when one party controls the presidency and both houses of Congress.



TNR


http://www.demog.berkeley.edu/~gabriel/dean2004blog/Anti_Dean_TNR_July_28_2003.htm

nt

Sometimes I'm too clever by half. I can't help being a dork.

<>

the more lies about Dean, the more support for him from those who generally despise freepshit liars attacking Democrats.

(Note to the moderators: notice the plural and no person mentioned: this is no more a personal attack than the post that started this thread...)

Is one of the most liberal journals in the nation...It so plaeases me to see them pointing out the ONE pathological liar in the entire democratic nomination proceess.


Much, Much Much more to come from what I hear:


It’s a bit odd to begin an article about Dean, written supposedly from a Democrat’s perspective, by quoting the right wing media. Why should we given any credence to what they say about anything? These are, after all, the people who still claim that the U.S. is going to find weapons in Iraq, who believe that defunding the federal government via massive tax cuts for the rich is good for the economy, and who say with a straight face that Bush is a man of integrity and intelligence.


The glee Dean inspires among Republicans is exceeded only by that of his supporters. He has attracted a cultlike following, similar to that of John McCain or Ross Perot, although it is largely confined to liberals. Dean is soaring mainly because he has tapped into the intense anger Democrats feel toward Bush. But, in this case, anger has gotten the better of reason. Democrats' justified desperation to unseat Bush may, paradoxically, render them less able to do so. The trouble is not Dean himself (he is a decent man) nor even necessarily how he might govern (more responsibly than some would think). It's that he has come to represent a political delusion: that on every issue Democrats have a moral and strategic obligation to oppose Bush diametrically. This delusion could enfeeble the Democratic Party in 2004, whether or not it makes Dean its nominee.

The heart of Dean's appeal is his audacious claim that he, alone, has the guts to criticize Bush. "I think that, for too long, Democrats have been afraid to take on the president," he told National Public Radio in March. "The only hope Democrats have to beat this president," he told a Los Angeles rally earlier this month, "is to behave like Democrats and stand up for what we believe." Liberals not only find this talk cathartic, they believe it holds the key to victory. As actor Alec Baldwin told a Newsweek reporter, "I want to know who's the person who's going to take it to Bush. We've got to get rid of this guy."



The fallacy underlying Dean's argument is that Democrats in Washington have gone along with Bush's policies rather than resist them. "We are not going to beat George Bush by voting with the president eighty-five percent of the time," he likes to say. Dean seems to be implying that his opponents supported Bush that often, but actually Kerry, Edwards, and Lieberman all had presidential support rates in the sixties and seventies. And even that dramatically overstates their agreement, since many of those votes--say, election reform or defense reauthorization--were, properly, uncontroversial. Most congressional Democrats have held fast in opposition to Bush's conservative agenda. On post-Enron reforms, the patients' bill of rights, campaign finance reform, homeland security spending, judicial nominations, oil-drilling in Alaska, and other issues, they have formed a fairly unified bloc. Most of the time, though, Republicans have rolled right over Democratic opposition. That's the way things tend to go when one party controls the presidency and both houses of Congress.



http://www.demog.berkeley.edu/~gabriel/dean2004blog/Anti_Dean_TNR_July_28_2003.htm

Yup. as I alway say, supporting Dean becasue of this fire in the belly, he gets me enthusiatic stuff, is the most dangerous reason to support ANY candidates.

When the Dean of 1973 won the nomination, literlly hundreds of thousands of Democratic Party workers walked out on doing party work during the election to punish the party for backing an McGovern, creating a Nixon landslide. Dean is doing the same.

Dean 2004 = Bush 2004

LOL

Fortunately this myth is starting to be dispelled, and Dean's support is growing as people realize he's NOT just a McGovern repeat.

just gave $2000 to Bush and they also were the first magazine to give both Andrew Sullivan and Michael Kelly editting jobs. If that is a liberal publication then we are in deep doo doo.

Too bad, Nicholas makes his decisions about the "evils" of Howard Dean by looking at the National Journal. If one were to TRULY research Howard Dean, one would find out that he isn't a true progressive, and he DEFINITELY isn't a true conservative. Howard Dean is a new breed of politician. He tells the unambiguious truth! He is liberal on some issues, while moderate on others. He doesn't just pander to whoever wants his vote. He has an unambiguious agenda to take back our country. Heavens for bid that Howard Dean should actually be like the rest of the spineless Democrats running for President that are turning into the unfortunate Gore of 2000. (looking at polls and then making policy around what people think they want). See Gore this week, he is showing Democrats how to be Democrats again. The 2003 Gore is such a refreshing turnaround from the actor Gore of 2000. Howard Dean talks about voting with Bush 85% of the time (he is referring to Carnahan and Cleland, great people but had bad strategists)He doesn't want Democrats to fall into oblivion like 2002. I swear to you, I will work my butt of for any Democrat to win in 2004. However, I STRONGLY feel that unless Howard Dean (or another Democrat that starts to act like Howard Dean) wins the nomination, it looks like the Democrats are doomed for disaster. I am not afraid one bit of all these attacks on Dean. They come from the right and they come from the left. This shows how diverse, and electable Howard Dean truly is!

We can not expect the same ole' voters to put us back in the White House again. Republicans are adding voters into the process, as disguisting as that sounds. This is why we lost in 2002. We have to come back, and come back hard. It is exciting to see the number of Democrats getting involved with the campaigns this year. Regardless of who wins and loses this nomination fight, please let us ALL (yes, even you Nicholas J)come together to take out this troll of a man....GEORGE DUBYA BUSH!!!!

I, Robert Glenn, will support any Democrat for President (yes, even the John Kerry)in 2004!

only 60-70%? Well, they should feel so proud of themselves for sticking to their guns and opposing Bush 1/4 of the time. True Democrats, all.

"And even that dramatically overstates their agreement, since many of those votes--say, election reform or defense reauthorization--were, properly, uncontroversial. Most congressional Democrats have held fast in opposition to Bush's conservative agenda."

What were arguably the most damaging issues to America that had to be voted on in the last 2 1/2 years?

1. Iraq
2. Patriot Act
3. Homeland Security (This one was even created by a Dem)
4. Tax Cuts

How did your candidate vote? With the exception of Kucinich, most are 3 for 4 on these. Important votes must be more heavily weighed than less important ones. 75% agreement is hardly opposition.

repukes starting putting in there own shit. You will likely see most dems voting for the democratic version of the homeland security bill as well as the repuke version.

73-26-1

Alphabetical by Senator Name Akaka (D-HI), Nay
Allard (R-CO), Yea
Allen (R-VA), Yea
Barkley (I-MN), Yea
Baucus (D-MT), Yea
Bayh (D-IN), Yea
Bennett (R-UT), Yea
Biden (D-DE), Nay
Bingaman (D-NM), Yea
Bond (R-MO), Yea
Boxer (D-CA), Nay
Breaux (D-LA), Yea
Brownback (R-KS), Yea
Bunning (R-KY), Yea
Burns (R-MT), Yea
Byrd (D-WV), Nay
Campbell (R-CO), Yea
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
Carnahan (D-MO), Yea
Carper (D-DE), Yea
Chafee (R-RI), Yea
Cleland (D-GA), Yea
Clinton (D-NY), Nay
Cochran (R-MS), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Conrad (D-ND), Nay
Corzine (D-NJ), Nay
Craig (R-ID), Yea
Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Daschle (D-SD), Nay
Dayton (D-MN), Yea
DeWine (R-OH), Yea
Dodd (D-CT), Nay
Domenici (R-NM), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Yea
Durbin (D-IL), Nay
Edwards (D-NC), Yea
Ensign (R-NV), Yea
Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Feingold (D-WI), Nay
Feinstein (D-CA), Yea
Fitzgerald (R-IL), Yea
Frist (R-TN), Yea
Graham (D-FL), Yea
Gramm (R-TX), Yea
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Gregg (R-NH), Yea
Hagel (R-NE), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Helms (R-NC), Yea
Hollings (D-SC), Nay
Hutchinson (R-AR), Yea
Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Jeffords (I-VT), Nay
Johnson (D-SD), Nay
Kennedy (D-MA), Not Voting
Kerry (D-MA), Yea
Kohl (D-WI), Yea
Kyl (R-AZ), Yea
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Leahy (D-VT), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Nay
Lieberman (D-CT), Yea
Lincoln (D-AR), Yea
Lott (R-MS), Yea
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
McCain (R-AZ), Yea
McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Miller (D-GA), Yea
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Nay
Nelson (D-FL), Yea
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nickles (R-OK), Yea
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Reid (D-NV), Nay
Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
Santorum (R-PA), Yea
Sarbanes (D-MD), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Sessions (R-AL), Yea
Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Smith (R-NH), Yea
Smith (R-OR), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Thomas (R-WY), Yea
Thompson (R-TN), Yea
Thurmond (R-SC), Yea
Torricelli (D-NJ), Nay
Voinovich (R-OH), Yea
Warner (R-VA), Yea
Wyden (D-OR), Nay

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00247

A bunch of Democrats just jumping at the opportunity to sign away our rights because the screwups caused by politicians in the first place.

Even Cleland has said he would now vote against it and the War Resolution if he could do it over again, does this make him a mindless droid?

It sounds like he's realized his mistake. Have Lieberman, Edwards or Kerry said that they would now vote against the war? Mislead, yes. Change their vote? No. If and when they do I'll accept their edification.

...again!

(o.k., it's not part of my existing criteria, but it IS especially offensive)

More money for the "Dean Eats Puppies" Fund! :bounce:

but you can use your imagination....

This is a GREAT idea!

THey would be in the goddamned majority if they just played the game right, gave folks a good screwing over. Electability, fuck minority parties! Time for us to switch, eh nick???

Then the whining finally will stop...you can be in a group of partisans who will shut their loudass mouths, and just work to reelect a President. Why not give it a try? ;-)

(Honda's robot)

<http://world.honda.com/ASIMO/movies/>

:thumbsdown:

nt

Well, it's true. Jesus is the Messiah.

But you, good sir, are f'n hilarious!!!!

<>

<>

But I am not left-handed!

my name is Inigo Montoya, you killed my father... prepare to die!"

:)

Dean '04...

n/t

n/t

Dean supporters are unimpressed with Rove. Kerry supporters continue to tremble.

Dean '04

WTF? Are you going to vote for Shrub 43 if Dean gets the nomination? You bash him so much that you are doing REPUG work for them. Dean is my first choice right now and because of these anti Dean thread my rebel side kicks in and I just want to give him more money.

I will support the candidate who wins the nomination even if it is not Dean. Except Lieberman.