Dean Losing Support on Left For His Stances on Its Issues

Howard Dean has rocketed to the front of the Democratic presidential pack with his angry, outsider style and his overt appeals to the anti-war left. But even as the former Vermont governor galvanizes the party's left flank, many liberals are voicing concern over his stances on some of their most cherished issues.

Many single-issue activists who work on Middle East peace, gun control and drug policy reform — including some who say they were initially attracted to Dean — are becoming increasingly vocal in opposing him. Some are speaking about a "reassessment" on the left and warn darkly that Dean's stands are already costing him support among core Democrats.

"Howard Dean could be the worst of both worlds for progressives," said Norman Solomon, a columnist and figure on the left on the West Coast. "He's not a true progressive, but he's been tarred as being this kind of Birkenstock leftist. What's the payoff here?"

Privately, Dean's supporters say that the opposition of activists such as proponents of Palestinian rights can only help Dean by drawing a bright line between him and the other candidate competing for the hardcore anti-war vote, Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio. To a certain extent, their argument goes, a backlash from the left will aid Dean when he needs to tack more to the center in some of the more conservative primary states. Dean's rhetoric is already moving right: In an August 15 speech to Iowa's Hawkeye Labor Council, he touted his support for balanced budgets and the first Gulf War.

more: http://www.forward.com/issues/2003/03.08.22/news3a.html

'Cause you sound like it.

I used to be leaning toward Kerry, but now I am leaning toward Dean.

I'm definately not a Lieberman fan, nor fan of anything DLC. I don't believe we need to side with the official Republicrats (DLC) to have issues with Dean.

I'm saying this as a progressive that voted against Lieberman and Gore when I voted for Ralph Nader. Why did I vote for Nader? Because he wouldn't sell out to corporations and he wasn't playing that "centrist" game.

I've decided to return to the Democrat party because, finally, a true progressive is running for Prez. on the Dem ticket... One that won't say one thing, then do another. One that really does fight for the elderly, the working class consumers, the environment and refuses to do favors for corporate and other elite lobbyists. I understand perfectly well why a lot of activists with singular and multiple causes are turning away from Dean. I chose to do the same.

Has he questioned the Pentagon's purpose and its secrets? I've been questioning the Pentagon ever since I was a teen after I'd learned of their lies and dirty secrets involving the Vietnam War. I'm questioning the Pentagon (along with DoD Rumsfeld) as to why they're telling troops to shut up, punishing them for speaking out, why they put a limitation of one meal and two bottles of water on troops whose bodies are loaded in gear as they suffer 120'F-plus temps in Iraq. I question the Pentagon's contradicting generals and other military personnel in Iraq during the war, which the BBC caught onto eventually.

And Dean isn't for cutting back on Pengagon spending and demanding that they show how they spend our tax dollars?

And as a low-wage worker quite well informed on labor and consumer issues, I wonder why Dean refuses to take a hard stand on NAFTA and on removing the USA from the WTO so we can get our jobs back, get our economy back... Have you noticed that nearly everything is made in China these days? That's a NAFTA and WTO slap on every working American. Dean hasn't shown any concern. He calls himself progressive? Hah!

That's why I'm voting for Kucinich and Dennis Kucinich will keep me from voting for Ralph Nader again, especially if he wins the primaries. He's why I've returned to the Democrat party... Me and whole bunch of other progressives that voted for Nader in 2000.

So true progressives think budgets should be in the red, so our kids and grandkids can pay for it. Credit card nation is now the liberals position?

Progressives include the Naderites who will vote against any Democrat in the general election. (Most progressives are sane, of course, but the sane ones tend not to write that kind of article.)

It's not surprising at all that those sorts of progressives are against Dean, but it's not accurate to call them liberals.

You seem to think there is a war going on where there is none. But hey if you flame it enough there will be one.

...about the fact that we end up paying interest on the debt, which goes into bondholders' hands (people with disposable income): a kind of reverse form of welfare that benefits the /rich/.

I usually associate deficit hawkishness with conservatism, but that's a good countervailing point.

On the other hand, if you can stimulate growth by keeping interest rates low, and you get long term expansion, it may not make sense to be anal about balanced budgets in the short term...this also pisses the bondholders off, since it effectively lets inflation pop up and devalues their bonds...which is a good thing, as long as no one pulls the plug (they won't--where else are they gonna go?)

"it may not make sense to be anal about balanced budgets in the short term"

Trying to do it in this mess of an economy would be devastating to our economy.

I won't take up your strawman, but think of it this way. What are the real priorities? Deficit spending sucks, paying down the national debt is good, but how do you get there? What's you're time frame and what sacrifices will you make to do it?

At the Sheet Workers forum Gov. Dean was asked about universal health care. He said "That is my number one priority after defending America and balancing the budget, is health insurance for every single American...."

Okay, so which is it? Number one? Number two? Number three? What are his real priorities?

As we all know, Dean's health care proposals aren't the most comprehensive or universal. So already his other priorities are keeping him from committing to this rational liberal agenda item. He has his reasons, and you can debate those, but to be fair you'd have to look at all the others' arguments as well, and in that light Dean doesn't stand out as being very progressive.

On the left, Kucinich is for universal health care, no ifs ands or buts. Moseley Braun is also for universal health care and she's for balanced budgets, but you don't hear her talking about prioritizing ballistic missile systems or balanced budgets above fixing health care. Because you have to deal with first things first. Our national economy is being dragged down by this stupid way we have of paying for health care. It hurts workers, it hurts businesses who compete in the export sector, it hurts citizens. And in the end it costs all of us more not to fix it than it would to step up and take the bull by the horns.

On how true progressives feel about "fiscal conservatives," check out Mairead's thread from last month. She makes a good case.

...don't need it isn't liberal. Read The Clinton Wars. What to do with the surplus was a subject of intense debate and discussion in the Clinton White House. The FIRST thing they rejected as too right wing was giving it back as a tax break.

They decided that they would create the Social Security lock box because they thought the the right wing was getting a lot of mileage out of exploiting social security weaknesses.

The point is that, in good times, when you're running a surplus, and the mojo is working, the liberal thing to do is plan for the future in a way which allows the liberal argument prevail about how to run an efficient wealth-producing econonmy which, by defenition, has a good safety net so that people without trust funds can strive higher.

I was talking with this very conservative guy about the show The West Wing and he's like you know the show doesn't make a sense, liberalism could never manage to produce a balanced budget over several years. And I am thinking to myself okay so running up the defecit is a balanced budget, yeah...

It is right-wing to prohibit the Fed govt from running deficits

I haven't read that anywhere. Please inform me.

I believe, the best way to balance the budget is to rely on practicality along with a bit of creativity while never foresaking social conscience.

If we low waged laborers are making more money (that work hard, you'll go far promise works for few), then we can contribute more in taxes.

To balance the budget requires closing loopholes on major corporations and other very wealthy elites that act as parasites on working class consumers. That means, establishing what I like to call the Corporate Welfare Act.

Before making any cuts to certain social programs, it's necessary to get the money circulating in all sectors of our society, instead of the most money being horded by those that work the least and couldn't possibly spend as much on food and household items that the true majority would if we could afford it.

To do so, corporate employers and others that can afford it, would have to pay a living wage to all workers, including foreign ones (to US standards). What I mean, is their minimum would be lower middle class standards, at least. Now, to counter slavelabor-conservative arguments, this is the clincher. Corporations would be forced to pay as much in taxes as they'd profit from if they refused to pay living wages, passed on the expense to consumers, or made budget cuts to reduce the number of workers and their hours. They'd get mild tax breaks for complying without a problem.

Corporations would be forced to pay a corporate welfare tax (quite expensive) for paying lobby groups to attempt to buy Congressional votes or a president's support on anything that causes hardships for the American People as a majority.

Now, that helps to get the tax money flowing, in part.

Now, to cut the fat...

If we had a volunteer-based people's department to determine whether, or not Congress members can get a raise based upon how our economy's going (government budget and the reduction in unemployment, business failures resulting from corporate competition, which would be drastically reduced as a result of wise legislation) then Congress would only be allowed a raise if the majority of Americans (by numbers) are doing great. I thought heavily on this idea when Congress voted itself a raise while millions of Americans were losing jobs.

Cut the fat... Until the budget is balanced, all Congressmen, the President, Vice President and other executive office holders would need to accept a pay reduction. If they enjoy alternative income sources (wife is rich, for example, or they own certain assets that keep them fat and sassy), then their pay gets cut more than those solely depending on what we pay them to serve us.

The ones that are truly serious about our budget will agree to these terms. I mean, we've all had to make sacrifices. It's their turn.

It is possible to balance the budget by setting standards for government contractors. Such standards would include the same ones for other corporations, where they must cut back on the price of items sold to the government without taking it out on the workers.

There would be no allowing the Pentagon and Intel agencies to play that silly "Classified for National Security Reasons" game whenever they're asked to disclose financial records. After all, they aren't the boss. We are and Congress' job is to represent us and serve us while the President's job is to also serve us. We must always remember who's supposed to be boss. US.

We wouldn't need social programs, or at least, not as much as has been and is being used to take care of Americans if serious and practical measures are taken to drastically reduce the NEED for them.

They're not Democrats anyway.

"As members of the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party, The Green Party, Progressives, Independents, and other parties interested in your candidacy, we would like to express our deep reservations regarding your stated positions on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,"

and cause more problems than solve. These kinds of voters would not even vote for Jesus because he told the prostitute he rescued from the Pharisees to "sin no more."

No one would be able to win these voters vote, including themselves.

The "anti-war" left does not make up 33% of the goddamn country who were opposed to this war.

Dean started running on his history of balancing budgets and has always stated he was not anti-all-war. Like 1/3 of the country, he realized that the war was unjustified based on the facts of the matter. He is not moving right, he's been where he's always been.

Were not shopping for a prom dress here. I'm shopping for the one who can beat bush! Dean has the prescription!

Dean 2004.

What has Dean done to contribute to corporate welfare?

War is the only excuse the Pentagon has for existing. Why does Dean support this pork barrel geometric establishment? All I know is that the Pentagon is making a killing off tax dollars. However, the Pentagon and DoD are too frugal to allow our troops to eat more than one meal of crappy rations and drink more than two bottles of water per day. It must really suck being out there in that Iraqi 120' plus heat to guard the oil interests there, especially where the troops can't access alternatives to what the Pentagoons allow them. It must be rough when the Pentagoons are too stingy with tax dollars to provide enough shampoo, deodorant and other supplies to these soldiers. And Dean defends the existence of this parasite? Dean defends the very department that participated in lies and coverups for Vietnam, the very ones that Daniel Ellsburg (Vietnam Vet and former Pentagon worker) exposed while employed there... Which Congress reacted by saying, "If we'd have known this, we would have never allowed our troops to go to Vietnam."

How did Dean vote when the (un)Patriot Act bill was pushed through Congress? I refer to the bill that contained a long list of attacks on our civil liberties.

I know of only one House Representative that voted against this bill. He wasn't provided enough time to read it and put it under the legislative microscope, which is something he prefers to do before acting on impulse that may cause problems for us. He's known to take political risks to protect his constituents and other Americans. His name is Dennis Kucinich. He refused to sign the (un)Patriot Act. Did Dean?

And as a low-wage laborer experienced in production line work, I'm rather offended by the way NAFTA and the WTO (which Dean supports) have participated with corporations to create an environment where good-paying jobs for manual laborers vanished, replaced by low-wage jobs, many of which are part time and temporary. I'm also offended by the way NAFTA and the WTO, with corporations, have shipped our jobs off to China and other countries to exploit low wage labor.

I know that if I don't make money, corporations won't make money and neither will small business owners and market investors. I'd need a living wage for that. I know, a lot of people say, "Well go back to school and be trained for a better paying job." I look at the job market realistically. Of lost jobs, many professionals found themselves unemployed and going through hell, especially ones that wouldn't settle for less (like flipping burgers) and refused to sell off enough assets to keep from losing them to creditors.

Besides, the working class is a country's backbone.

Dennis Kucinich understands this.

He also understand our need for better access to medical and dental treatment. I haven't heard any really good ideas out of Dean, but Dennis' universal healthcare certainly appeals to me. It means, if he's president and he provides us with this, those of us that aren't covered by rip-off insurance hustlers can actually get medical and dental help. It means, if this plus living wages for us go through, thanks to Dennis, I won't go to work sick. Therefore, I won't expose my coworkers and the rest of my community with any contagious (Cough, SARS) illness when I handle products that will be distributed around town, to nearby locations and through the mail to various parts of the country.

What has Dean offered to top what Kucinich offers? Have you read up on Dennis' site? Nothing radical, just things that most Americans can reap.

These are issues affecting more than a minority of people. If not for Kucinich, I wouldn't have dreamed of returning to the Democrat party. If someone beholden to corporations and other groups and/or individuals that I have learned are part of we working class American consumers' woes wins the Dem primaries, you'd best hope Ralph Nader doesn't suddenly announce that he's running again. He may very well get votes that could have gone to a Democrat to beat Bush.

It's a lesson in politics and American social studies. Meanwhile, before the primaries, I'll continue talking to more and more working class Americans, farmers, elderly folks, and progressive activists to show them what kind of man Dennis K is, by describing his background (son of a truck driver that died with his retirement check in his pocket, knows what poverty and homelessness is like and has worked for a living), showing them how he's risked public image and political office to do the right thing, and refuses to curry favor to the corporations and other elites that think they're more deserving than the rest of us.

You are free to vote for whomever you wish. So am I. May the best candidate with the best values, record and ideas win.

Thank you!

And welcome to DU!

to DU! :hi: We can always use another tough mama around here!

Some seem to think that working class people won't like what Dennis has to say. My experiences working in business and industry suggest that they will love what he says about universal healthcare, NAFTA and WTO, Social Security (Yes! Roll the retirement age back to 65!), union rights, restoring family farms and rural communities, etc., and will be glad to see a candidate who's been poor and even lived in cars, scrubbed floors in grade school to pay his tuition, worked "forty-five holes a day, six days a week," carrying two bags, as a caddy in high school and later was an orderly, a cameraman, a surgical technician, who was the first in the family to go to college. (after working for two and a half years after high school.)

Here's Dennis talking to Studs Terkel back when he was Mayor Kucinich, Cleveland's "Boy Mayor," elected at age 31:


"I'd ask myself why it is that with so many people trying to improve society, not that much changes. As I looked around, I saw many of the kids I grew up with trapped, not able to get as far as they would have liked. I started to wonder, What the heck is this? No matter how hard they work, they can't get ahead. Seeing all these people working their heads off, you find out the system is rigged."

"When I first started, I didn't question the institutions. I never really put it together. I think it was the Vietnam War. I'd see that some people were profiting, while tens of thousands of Americans were dying. Friends of mine went over there, and they died. Kids I rode the bus with to school. I started to think: This is a dirty business. I'd better start to find out more about it. "

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020506&c=2&s=terkel


Working class people know what's going on. They often don't vote because they see little use in it but I believe Dennis can get them out to the polls. He may lose some votes on social issues like abortion and same-sex marriage, but most people vote their pocketbooks, expecially when times are tough.

during the debate, Kucinich made said that Dean's executive experience in vermont didnt prove anything about balancing a budget because vermont doesn't have a military. True, but other states haven't been able to balance the budget while paying off 1/4 of their debt. If other governers had been more like Dean, other states would be in better fiscal situations. Kucinich on the other hand, does not have experience of this sort and has no right to spit on Dean's accomplishment.

about the depth and strength of Dean's campaign

"While Dean has done a good job tapping into an angry vein, ultimately people are looking for a candidate with the vision to move the country forward," Chris Lehane said. "What do Democrats really stand for? John Kerry has fought those fights."

Dean hasn't just tapped into an angry vein, he channelled that energy into doing constructive campaign work -- writing letters to undecided voters in Iowa and New Hampshire -- to promote his vision -- See the Great American Restoration speech http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6455&JServSessionIdr010=71p8wnntb1.app13a&security=1&news_iv_ctrl=1321.

<SNIP>
And so for me the long journey of a Presidential campaign has begun with the people I have met affecting me far more than any affect I may have had on them. And because of that, the reasons why I seek the Presidency have changed.

This campaign is about more than issue differences on health care, tax cuts, national security, jobs, the environment and our economy. It is about something as important as our children. It's about who we are as Americans.

Here are the words of John Winthrop: "We shall be as one. We must delight in each other, make other's conditions our own; rejoice together, mourn together, labor and suffer together, always living before our eyes our Commission and Community in our work."

It is that ideal, the ideal of the American community, that we seek to restore.
<SNIP>

And my favorite part
How is it that our leaders have abandoned our communities and repudiated our idealism and principles?

When confronted with a dedicated band of right wing ideologues, too many Americans have stopped participating, stopped voting, and stopped believing that they can change America.

And we in politics have not given our people a reason to vote or a reason to participate. We have slavishly spewed sound bites, copying each other while saying little. We raise millions of dollars and each year make lofty promises, while every year the struggles of ordinary Americans increase and fewer Americans vote. Our politicians, many of them good people, have been paralyzed by their fear of losing office. Our leaders have developed a vocabulary which has become meaningless to the American people.

There is no greater example of this than a self-described conservative Republican president who creates the greatest deficits in history of America. Or a President who boasts of a Clear Skies Initiative which allows far more pollution into our air. Or a President who co-opts from an advocacy organization the phrase "No Child Left Behind," while paying for irresponsible tax cuts by cutting children's health care.

Martin Luther King, Jr. said, "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter."

The history of our nation is clear: At every turn when there has been an imbalance of power, the truth questioned, or our beliefs and values distorted, the change required to restore our nation has always come from the bottom up from our people.
<SNIP>

What Kerry and the others haven't figured out is that Dean's campaign is about EMPOWERING the PEOPLE. The Established Dems don't want the people enpowered any more than the Repukes because they have their cushy jobs to protect. Empowered People demand accountability and that is what frightens Kerry, Lieberman, Gephardt, Edwards, Graham and Al From.

acting like a Democrat who fights for Democratic values, when he never did in the past.

Kerry, Kucinich, and others have over 30+ years of fighting for progressive Democratic values, and did so against the farthest of the right wing power structures.

Dean stayed a centrist compromising often with the GOP in a state whose legislature was controlled by progressive and moderate Democrats,

Dean's Vermont record proves that a Democrat can balance the budget and champion liberal social causes.

Dean's record and positions are similar to my own. I'm not a liberal on the fringe who demands 100% purity from my candidates. I'm a practical person and want a practical politician who will champion social justice issues but will do it smartly. For me Dean is that champion. He's got the passion, the honesty, and the pragmitism.

But, apparently he will for his own candidacy.

I don't support your definition of a Democrat. I'm a moderate liberal and Dean's positions resemble those of my parents, who when they described themselves as liberals did not include the words "irresponsible behavior." Extremists liberals are really anarchists and I don't support them any more than I do Xtian fundamentalists.

When does democratic values mean extreme liberalism? Progressive Democrats are NOT extremist liberals. Can't you discuss anything without building a strawman? Sheesh. Tucker Carlson can take lessons from you.

Howard Dean is a moderate, liberal on social issues and conservative on budget issues.

Tax and spend Democrats DO NOT WIN elections. Those are the Democrats that Norman Solomon favors. Solomon is a great thinker, but he has never run for office and tried to get his kind of legislation passed.

And I have never used extreme rhetoric. I have consistently said since February that Dean is a DLC style centrist. First I was fought bitterly for that description, now it is accepted by his supporters as fact.

If you call that extreme, I shudder at your sense of perception.

What happened to the "straightshooter" who is not like other politicians?

and parrots what he says?

Why is that?

foreign policy speech from Kerry.

Dean...who HAD NO FOREIGN POLICY back in January when he called Gary Hart to help give him one.

That equates to "no foreign policy experience" when blm repeats the story.

Go ahead and ignore Hart's warnings. Bush and Cheney did and that worked out well, didn't it?

Hart was bragging about his own foriegn policy experience compared to the other candidates. BFD.

He said neither Dean or Lieberman can handle foreign policy. He was not comparing his to theirs, just warned that neither had the capabilities to handle the job.

..it's so obvious. Start with the "Hoover" lines that Kerry has begun using...

When have you "proved" anything?

"America is not Rome. We do not dream of empire. We dream of liberty for all."

-Howard Dean 6/25/03

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_speech_foreign_cfr

"We should be proud: Not since the age of the Romans have one people achieved such preeminence.

But we are not Romans; we do not seek an empire. We are Americans, trustees of a vision and a heritage that commit us to the values of democracy and the universal cause of human rights."

-John Kerry 1/23/03

http://www.johnkerry.com/news/speeches/spc_2003_0123.html

<>

"Frankly, we need a President whose approach to abuse is a little more like Teddy Roosevelt and a little less like Herbert Hoover when it comes to keeping an eye on corporate America.

We need an SEC chairman who will put investors ahead of industry, an Accounting Oversight Board chairman who will make sure they correct the books, instead of cooking them. And we need to give the SEC the tools it needs to enforce the laws."

John Kerry 12/12/02

http://www.johnkerry.com/news/speeches/spc_2002_1203.html

That's from December, 8 months ago at the very latest.

Kerry - like Ralph Nader - has been a corporate crime fighter for years, trying to trim government pork - especially in the defense industry, and BS corporate subsidies and giveaways.

Kerry calls "for a “Corporate Subsidy Reform Commission” modeled after the military base-closing commission. A bipartisan group would recommend corporate subsidies to be eliminated and Congress would have to vote up or down on the entire package."

Some examples of unnecessary pork:

"The Fossil Energy Research and Development program spends more than $400 million on R&D for oil companies who can afford their own R&D- and even duplicates research they’re already engaged in.

And for 130 years the Federal government has allowed companies to mine on publicly owned lands for free, in addition to letting them buy those lands way below market price -- $5 an acre or less.

If we simply required small, fair royalties and eliminated the giveaway of public lands we could save another $519 million over 5 years.

We were presented a defense bill that gave away $250,000 to an Illinois firm to research caffeinated chewing gum; $750,000 for grasshopper research in Alaska; $250,000 for a lettuce geneticist in Salinas, California and $64,000 for urban pest research in Georgia. This is our defense budget?"

And another example:

"20 years ago, the average CEO made 42 times what the average worker made. Now it’s 531 times more. It’s out of whack. Yet 40 percent of Bush’s tax giveaway goes to that very top 1 percent.

And perhaps most outrageous if the violation of generational responsibility -- The largest cost of the Bush tax giveaway will not be born by any of us here today - it will be paid for by our children. That’s right - we’re borrowing from Social Security and Medicare to put money in some peoples’ pockets today - and sticking our children with the bill."

That's why I support John Kerry.

''Here we have the most conservative president since Herbert Hoover,'' Vermont's Democratic Gov. Howard Dean has said, ''and he is proposing that government can take your property to put up a power line.''

http://www.democraticunderground.com/forum_archive_html/DCForumID38/1314.html

What plans has he suggested for corporate malfeasance and government pork? Simply saying Bush is like a former President is not the same as saying why, and what you would do to reverse it. I said that Bush was like Hoover in 2001, but that doesn't mean I should be President.

Dean is good at criticizing Bush, but I can't find much at his website to convince me he has an economic plan to enourage accountability through progressive reforms. You can be fiscally responsible and still lean on corporate shenanigans.

As far as I can see, Dean is a Seurat candidate. He makes vague suggestions, and you connect the dots however you want.

He prefers speech "zingers" to policy.

by Bob Balgenorth...

This date of this meeting was March 19th, 2001. And it was here that one of the first direct comparisons to Hoover was made.
Though all of the other members of congress called the Bush economy the worse since 1929. Deans jump to Herberrt Hoover took little intelligence, if the comparison ever even came to Dean and not one of his speechwriters. Which is why Deans performance on interactive events, such as debates is so much worse than his canned events for his supporters. Dean needs his own dittoheads and control; of the questrions to actually appear knowlegeable, and why Tim Russert ripped him a new orafice.

Art called the Bush program the worst since Herbert Hoover and urged delegates to set up 'Legislative Action Committees' to stop the tragedy that is happening in Washington.

Art Pulaski next introduced Robert Hertzberg, the speaker of the State Assembly. Bob said that the California Assembly had advanced some 28 worker-friendly bills in the last session. He asserted that nobody could claim to be a Democrat without supporting working people. Hertzberg pointed out that Democrats now outnumbered Republicans in the Assembly be two to one.

http://www.sfbctc.org/cal-working.htm



Another similar comparison and this from a STUDENT newpaper on Thursday, April 19th 2001, quoting a Londen Times Article.

Bush on Treading Dangerous Ground

M.A. Urness
Staff Editorialist


President George W. Bush is on dangerous ground these days. He is getting the "enemies" of the United States riled up and he is, at the same time, upsetting our "allies." The nation is entering dangerous territory.

Anatole Kaletsky, in the London Times, wrote a few weeks ago:

"By simultaneously establishing global security in China, Korea, the Middle East and Russia, by recklessly abrogating the Kyoto climate change treaty, by bullying his allies in Europe and Asia, by pursuing a tax policy that will turn America into the most unequal society in modern history, George W. Bush is fully living up to my expectation that he would become the worst U.S. President since Herbert Hoover."

http://www.mrs.umn.edu/register/archives/2000-01/issue12/

LKets got back to the precursor quotes about The Bush economy being the worse since the great depression.

The U.S. savings rate fell into negative territory during 2000 for the first time since the Great Depression. In the first quarter of 2001, the savings rate stood at negative 1 percent, according to the Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis. Total consumer debt, including credit cards and loans, hit a record $1.54 trillion in January 2001. Households with negative net worth increased from 7.3 percent to 8 percent between 1989 and 1998.


https://www.theprogressive.org/pmp0701/pmpcj1801.html

According to the latest figures American industry has been in the grip of recession for longer than any time since the Great Depression of the 1930s. In October more workers lost their jobs (415,000) than any month since May 1980, and trade union data suggests 638,000 jobs have gone since the attacks of September 11. "The huge jump in this month's unemployment rate makes it clear we are at a watershed," says John Sweeney, president of the AFL-CIO.

Savings rates for families are at an historic low, and many were deep in debt well before the economic downturn. Figures reveal that the average outstanding consumer debt per worker is $5,000. But averages tends to hide the real picture. With growing debts and job losses, more and more workers are becoming homeless due to mortgage foreclosures. In Chicago the number of homeless has increased by 30 percent, while in the suburbs it has grown by 100 percent.

Those unemployed are struggling to make ends meet as jobs dry up. The savage welfare counter-reforms introduced by Clinton in 1996 - masked by the boom - have now started to bite, with many denied adequate welfare cover or no cover at all. In the richest country on the planet, only 39 percent of America's unemployed receive any welfare benefits. This is being added to every day as the unemployment lines become ever longer. The callous message of the government is clear: "Go find yourself a job, or go hungry." As always, it is those at the bottom who suffer most. At the same time, America's rich have never been richer in an uncanny resemblance to the class polarisation of the "Roaring Twenties", and the prelude to the Great Depression.

http://www.marxist.com/usa/usa_the_storm_clouds_gather.html


But as we shall see, it is a war that cannot be won. Among other less tangible factors, there is little in the way of conventional armies to destroy, of infrastructure to decimate, of arsenals to blow apart and even of cities to level. Worse yet for American imperialism, it comes at a time when the world capitalist economy has been descending relentlessly toward a major economic crisis that is shaping up to be the deepest since the Great Depression of the 1930s.

It was accepted wisdom a little more than a year ago that America was the only engine driving a faltering global economy. It has since turned into its opposite. Moreover, unlike past wars that have served to stimulate faltering economies, this one at this moment in history precludes such a “beneficial” economic side effect. This is in large part because the American ruling class has sustained its unprecedented half-century of “prosperity” largely by maintaining a permanent war economy since shortly after World War II. Thus, trillions of dollars have been spent over the last fifty years for the construction of an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction greater than that of the rest of the world combined.

http://www.socialistviewpoint.org/nov_01/nov_01_1.html

Love them socialists...they always get the economics right on the money, long before anyone else does....


But A Dean quote is nothing, unles you look at the results of HIS own fiscal ideas in the little domain he ran like a dictator. opposing all but the most Bush Like fiscal policies for his own state:

This is a mere analysis of the Vermont Economy in the 1990's and early 2000. You know the years whwn Dean did his miracle working balancing of budgets:

Vermont at a Glance

Many families in Vermont saw moderate improvements in their standard of living over the 1990s as the wages of median-wage workers grew. However, low-wage workers saw their wages decline over the 1990s, and median income stagnated. The poverty rate and income inequality in Vermont grew over the 1990s (see link below for table).

Median family income for four-person families
Middle-income families in Vermont have not fared particularly well during the current economic expansion. The incomes of families in the middle of the income distribution stagnated over the 1990s. Median family income for four-person families was $53,691 in 1998, compared to its 1989 level of $53,103 (in 1998 dollars).

Income inequality
Income inequality in Vermont grew over the 1990s. In the late 1990s, the income of the wealthiest 20% of families was 8.4 times that of the poorest 20% of families. By comparison, in the late 1980s, the wealthiest 20% of families had 7.4 times the income of the poorest 20%.

Poverty rate
The poverty rate in Vermont grew during the 1990s, from 8.1% in 1987-88 to 9.6% in 1997-98. However, the poverty rate in Vermont in the late 1990s remained below the national rate (13.0% in 1997-98).

Wages
In Vermont in the 1990s, the wages of low-wage workers declined, while the wages of similar workers grew at the national level. In 1999, the inflation-adjusted hourly wages of low-wage workers (workers at the 20th percentile) were 0.4% lower than they were in 1989, but due to wage gains in the 1980s they remained 10.5% higher than they were in 1979. The wages of workers in the middle of the wage distribution grew over both the 1980s and 1990s. The inflation-adjusted median wage (the wage of workers in the middle) in 1999 was 12.2% higher than it was in 1979.

http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/datazone_states_usmap_vt

Is a man who's economic philosophy favored policies in which the rich grew richer, the poor poorer, the gap between the rich and poor grow wider, and caused the stagnation of the middle class, and finally, caused a decline in the REAL wages of workers, best prepared undo the worse economy since the great depression.

The economy of Vermont during three 1990's is a study in miniature of the effects of the Bush Economy on the nation in the last 3 years.

Dean brought more jobs into Vermont, but these were all low paying minimum wage jobs. while at the same time, displacing people who were running their own small businesses in downtown areas into which Dean brought the Wal-Marts, which destroyed the smaller busnesses. Ibn the end, the self employed lost out on a decent means of earning a living, to drop into the status of taking jobs at those Wal-Marts that put them out of businress, with Governor Denas assistance.

SO yes, Dean's underlings heard a few lesser known people comparing Bush and his economy to Herbert Hoover, but even this is an inexact political comparison, given the total differnce in historical events.

I suppose Dean had the same researchers who ripped off the college students graduate report about weapons of mass destruction, to rip off a quote in a college newspaper.

A though crossing the space between Denas ears is taking the shortest trip in the universe. As a matter of fact they seem to be crossing nothing at all, as it is mathematically possible for two points to occupy the same place.

that Dean was a centrist for months. Now the Deanies embrace the centrism.

Kerry never had to crib shit from Dean.

Dean didn't lead Kerry to rescue trapped soldiers in the jungles of Vietnam.

Dean didn't lead Kerry to the protests of the Vietnam war at home.

Dean didn't lead Kerry to the BCCI investigations.

Dean didn't lead Kerry to the IranContra investigations.

Dean didn't lead Kerry to advocate for gays to serve openly in the military.

Dean didn't lead Kerry to advocate for restoring voting rights to those who served time.

Dean didn't lead Kerry in his work on the Kyoto Accord.

Dean didn't lead Kerry to be debate champ at Yale, and to win the series of debates with the popular William Weld, which many analysts consider to be the greatest debates in modern political history.

Geez...where would Kerry and this country be today without Dean to lead the way.

btw....who led Dean out of the woods when he was lost?

I cannot remember running across any Dean supporters or, indeed, Dean himself, claiming the Liberal mantle. That was the erroneous assumption of other people. If you went to heard Dean speak, or read the issues section of the website you would not think that he is a "liberal" in the classic derogatory sense. Those were just lazy assumptions by people who are now paying dearly in the polls.

Kerry's war record is commendable. You will get no argument about that from me. Howard Dean, as you well know, was declared unfit to serve by an army doctor.

I am glad that Kerry protested against the Vietnam war.

BCCI, IranContra went no where. If Kerry did such a stellar job why are these people working in the Whitehouse? Why are they not in jail?

As for equal rights for gay and lesbian soldiers and ex-felons, both men seem to have the same positions. I have a feeling that neither man took the other's lead in coming to those decisions.

College is college. The real world is the real world.

btw. Who's internet campaign is Kerry desperatly trying to replicate? Not very successfully, I might add but God loves a tryer.

lawmaker to ADVOCATE for gays to serve openly in the military. He was behind it in the 80s, long before anyone took on gay issues. Dean didn't say squat until the Vermont Supreme Court weighed in (2000).

After Kerry investigated BCCI and exposed most of the malfeasance, the Dems kept him OFF the Senate committee because they considered him too hot.

If BCCI and IranContra went nowhere then how is it that Bush Sr. had to pardon 6 of them? Why Oliver North had to have his conviction overturned by a wingnut judge? And how is it that we know so much about the BFEE today if it wasn't for Kerry's work exposing it?

You haven't pointed to ONE half-truth, smear, or wishful thinking. In fact, if you think one thing you said in your post is accurate, then I pity your lack of facts.

I am glad Kerry was advocating equal rights in the military in the eighties. Howard Dean, however, has long been held in high opinion by Vermont's LGBT community. This proceeded the 2000 civil unions issue.

Good. But he did not finish the job. It is results that count after all.

There was quite a lot in my previous post that was accurate, BLM. I think you should go back and give it a more thorough read.

ever for the BFEE. There is no lawmaker that has ever exposed the BFEE to the degree that Kerry was able. Joe Moakley and Henry Gonzalez were his best allies in that fight. RIP.

The result is jail.

You want to BLAME Kerry? Hahah. Blame the guy who did all the exposing that forced a president to hide behind the pardons? That's some sense of perspective you have there.

I'm sorry if Sen. Kerry wasn't able to single-handedly convert the conservatives on the gay issue. I mean, Howard Dean did it right? Wrong. For one thing, he lives in a liberal state. The supreme court is very liberal there. They demanded from him that he either allow civil unions, or undertake creating a new set of parallel laws for gays. He chose the former. And he got some criticism from the gays and lesbians for not pursuing further. Kerry is a senator. He does not have the power that Dean had. But within his power, Kerry has always backed up the the gay community. How many times do I have to say this? In the Defense of Marriage Act, Kerry was one of merely 14 dissenters. That was a bill approved by Bill Clinton. When Matthew Shepard was beaten to death, he made a speech advocating acceptance and embracing of gay youth. Not to mention the work he did in the eighties, like BLM said, and when he voted YES to include anti-gay crime as hate crime, and when he voted against using someone's sexual preferences as a test in hiring practices. Although Kerry did not accentuate his pro-gay stance with one bang, like Dean, he has consistently been a great advocate for them, ever since gay issues became a topic. He backed them up even when it wasn't that high-profile or well-known.

Barney Frank was

Dean was not declared unfit by an army doctor.

Dean had to go into the draft board with a stack of medical records in which a doctor stated that he was unfit for medical duty.
Which is why Dean gets almost no support from veterans who were drafted and KNOW without a doubt that Dean is lying about his deferment. He didnt walk in, get examined and have a doctor say, you are unfit for duty, come back when your country needs you. Dean was scared shitless, and used his fathers money and connectrions to get a doctor who the draft board members liked, and they gave him his deferment.

The fact that Dean could go skiing after his deferment is a CLEAR indication that he was perfectly fit for military duty,as your condition MUST be severe enough to interefere with normal daily activity, and completetly prevent you from performing ANY actions as strenous as skiing. ANd that the medical information that he provided to the draft board was exagerated in the extreme.

Fortunately, among the many television news blurbs that are being planned for the fall is an in depth documentary on the draft and draft DEFERMENTS during the Vietnam era, and what really consitututed valid medical reasons for deferment. WHile some peoples relatives cannot spend money directly on campigns, there is nothing to prevent them from sponsoring programs about the deaft during the Vietnam era.

Dean has been quite clear about this in interviews. Are you telling me that an army doctor did not give him a medical? Where is your evidence?

I have a condition which doesn't interfere with ordinary daily activity which the leading ear specialist in the Eastern US says would have made me 1Y. I think he knows one fuck of a lot more than you do.

VoteClark tried to pull this bullsh!t lie. I called him on it to provide concrete proof, and he never did.

So now, I call you out. Prove that Dean deliberately sought to deceive the army's doctors. Or, alternately, prove that Dean's father's connections got him out of serving.

Skiing and pouring concrete are not proof of either of these. I'm asking for a dot-by-dot connection, a detailed diagram, of how Dean did either of these two. It's easy to throw-around accusations about the front runner when you're frustrated in second place. It's more difficult to actually back-up those accusations.

Well? Can you back them up?

You're saying one of two things here:

1) An Army doctor did not give Dean a 1-Y classification (or recommend it, I suppose) or,

2) A 1-Y classification is not an "unfit" classification.

Which is it?

Dean was not declared unfit by an army doctor.

Dean had to go into the draft board with a stack of medical records in which a doctor stated that he was unfit for medical duty.

You do not get declared unfit.. The Army doctor simply agree with your own doctors diagnosis that you are not....


Have you ever been drafted. Either of you.

I have, and know the procedure for APPLYING for deferment...

WHich is what Dean did.

Attack constantly the Democratic candidates who are the most popular at the moment, provoking infighting and dragging all of them down. The quite logically most effective variety: pretend to be a supporter of the second most popular one and hurl disgusting BS attacks against the most popular.
:think:

br the Vermont state troopers, of course. Good thing he had his cell phone with him so he could call 911.

thanks for "getting" the joke.

enjoys but Kerry has to settle for 'kite fishing' or 'tree climbing' or 'spider eating contests' or something perceived as risque. The problem with his 'hawg riding motorcyle' image is that it appears 'sad' and besides... captivated 7th graders can't vote.

Dean '04...

some of whom even voted Green in 2000.

We talked about how coalition-building is crucial in order to defeat Bush in 2004. I.e., we need to build a very strong center/left coalition to offset Bush's far right/center coalition. We believe that Dean is the candidate who can achieve this. We weren't saying that it was impossible for other candidates to do this, but we liked Dean because he seemed to be most successful at developing such a coalition.

Interestingly, a rightwing Bush supporter where I work was ribbing me today about supporting a candidate who is "going to lose".

I jokingly said, "I don't support Bush, what are you talking about?" And I reminded him that Bush didn't win the last election.

He changed the subject then and asked if Dean had voted for the decision to invade Iraq. I said Dean couldn't vote on the issue because he was not in Congress, but that he opposed the invasion.

To which the person replied: "What, is he French?" I said, "No, he's American, the last time I checked."

You had good retorts to your Repub co-worker.

The success of the draft Wesley Clark movement is garnering attention throughout the nation. Do you think it would be possible to turn this whole field into a Vice Presidential candidacy with someone who has already beaten president Bush? I believe Al Gore and Wesley Clark would be formidible. At the very least, the Cons would have to empty their bag of dirty tricks to damage them.

Speaking of dirty tricks, what have you heard about the 94,000 Florida voters who were illegally expunged from the voter roles just prior to the election of 2000. It seems to me that they should still be allowed to vote and the election should be overturned, even with only one year left. It would be another Constitutional crisis, at the very least an informal voting of those 94,000 woulud be newsworthy.:thumbsup:

I predicted the same thing, but so far it's not happened.

I'm thinking now that we won't see the leftist backlash against Dean until he's elected President, if that happens. Or possibly the Greens will go after him if he gets the nomination.

This website's campaign gossip page is pretty good. It has a pretty funny thing about a typo from the Dean campaign:

Desert Hallucinations?: Dean Daily Digest, an electronic newsletter sent out by the campaign of the former Vermont governor, contained a hilarious typo in its August 15 number. "From the Arizona Republic: 'Howard Dean Says His Views Will Appear to Arizonans,'" it said. We ask: with or without the help of peyote?

He'll lose more support. I once worked on Dean's campaign.

Your insider status should help us blow the lid off this thing. List them out for us here. What are his "Right Wing" positions?

Dean does not favor the overthrow of the Constitution, ignoring the rule of law, and breaking our national word on treaties. Sounds right-wing to me!

:crazy:

what you know? It seems that we have a Dean worship going on with a lot of posters on DU - they obviously have not done a lot of research.

Give me your candidates positions on the following issues.

Gay rights
abortion rights
Iraq
taxes cuts
patriot act
death penalty


Here are my answers for my candidate of the top of my head. In other words I do know what the fuck I am talking about.

Dean signed the gay civil rights bill for Vermont in 1992 after being governor for a matter of months. He gave all state employees partner benefits in 1994. He permitted gays and lesbians to adopt as couples in 1996. He appointed the first openly gay Vermont House member. In 2000 he signed the civil unions bill

Abortion rights. In favor of them completely. He fought the few attempts that Vermont saw to diminish them.

Iraq He was against the invasion and is now in favor of getting the UN involved so we can leave.

Tax cuts he wishes to repeal all of Bush's tax cuts. In Vermont he kept sales taxes at 5% but removed their application to clothing. He slightly cut income taxes across the board. He drasticly shifted the burden of property taxes from poor to rich via Act 60. He increased cigarette taxes to fund Dr. Dynosaur and gas taxes to build roads.

Patriot Act He is in favor of ending all the unconstitutional aspects of this act. Including but not limited to the expansion of warrentless and no notice searches.

Death Penalty He is in favor of the death penalty in three cases. Terrorism or mass murder, murder of children, and murder of cops. He made no discernable attempt to enact this in Vermont.

So I do know and I will answer any question abut his believes or actions that you may have. Can you do the same on Kerry? I do know what I am talking about and am sick to death of your condescending tone.

Drop some "kryptonite" or something?

Cue crickets as we wait...

eom

responded to Molly's post within 14 minutes. Take into account the lag between your viewing the post and then responding to it, it indeed appears that you answered off the top of your head.

14 hours later and still no Molly.

I don't know what to make of it. :shrug:

the past week - molly has had major battle with comcast - molly sorry!

on edit - you guys are a major TRIP! here's the link for Kerry's stance on issues....

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/

Already seen the stances. Now that you're back feel free to rattle them off. No cheating...

I usually check to be sure a person has posted since before I do what I did here and I didn't. So I am sorry. My basic point though is you publicly accused all Dean supporters of not knowing his stands on the issues. I think you have to admit that in my case you were dead wrong on that. It took me 14 minutes to post a detailed post in several of his positions and over two days later you nor anyone else has corrected anything in it. I think that fits the definition of knowing one's candidate's positions.

And, given recent poll results, I'm not sure who they are referring to? I couldn't get the link to work?

Dean's support has been growing over the past few weeks. Dean is beyond the margin of error in his lead of Kerry in NH, and leads Gephardt in Iowa.

In addition, Dean is already going to be attacked in the general election with the "too liberal" bs do to his opposition to Bush's war and tax shifts, and his support for civil unions.

Too conservative? Too liberal? As the stones put it:

You can't always get what you want
But if you try sometimes you might find
You get what you need

:beer:

Now we'll hear from some Kucinich supporter who will tell us that those lyrics are OBVIOUSLY an endorsement of DK....

weeks - maybe it's just on DU?

For example, Dean now has a seven point lead on Kerry in NH.

It's not even on DU. Dean supporters are just as numerous as ever. You just don't notice because the Kerry, Kucinich and Clark supporters have finally met their personal goal of being more obnoxious. :7

While Dean did get a bump during the summer of Arnold, people are growing more and more weary of Dean's sniping and shifty campaigning - especially since he's supposed to be a "straight-shooter." Not the best way to convince people from other camps to join you.

You've always been kind of anti-Dean, but fair (and very funny, most of the time).

You're REALLY going to go on record calling Dean's first foray into the "winner's circle" (up in a poll beyond the MOE) a "bump during the summer of Arnold"?

and my Dean Meetup Host conference call that I participated in today was the largest that they have had to date.

Dean is blowing past the expected expectations.

I almost supported Dean, but there were some issues I'd had with him, not anything that I cared to compromise. I stopped compromising years ago. I vote my conscience and I prefer to vote for candidates that truly represent me, not just kinda-sorta, or half way... But really.

'nuff said.

And right now he is on the top of my list for Presidential candidates. But liking a candidate does not preclude me from posting an article which discusses some legitamate issues about Governor Dean.

Howard Dean is a loser. I won't vote for him.

Don't throw stones when you live in a glass house, my friend.

I think your mother never read you bedtime stories.

"Slow and steady wins the race"

Dean is an empire supporting, environment destroyer, campaign lying, modern day lyncher.

If that is the "democratic wing" of the democratic party...I'll be voting Greens come 2004 for they leave me the only hope of leaving the future in good hands.

www.kucinich.us

There are MANY passionate people out there supporting this man. You may be pleasently surprised.

- http://www.rifordean.org

"Deans rhetoric is already moving right........touted his support for balanced budgets......." THAT PART.

For crying out loud many on the left act as if most money spent is on social programs. The fact is that its military spending,prison budgets, and especially corperate welfare and tax loopholes for the wealthy (dont these people know that in addition to paying no payroll taxes the top 50 income earners in the country pay an average of 20% in income taxes thanks to loopholes and the such?)that run up our budget.

To me a true fiscal conservative is the most progrsssive position one can take. It signifys saving nearly a half a trillion a year in bloated right wing programs.

HOWEVER Dean has said he wont cut deffense and Gephardt is the only top tier canidate who has talked about tackling corperate welfare. So with Dean you never know what is up his sleeve. I found his anti civil libertys comment a few weeks ago to begin to fulfill something that I have always feared about him: he will move right before the election and by the time in office he will continue full speed.

I think Nader will seriousily consider jumping in if Dean is the nominee and I probabilly wont blame him. Its looks as if the choice is between Liebermann (UGH!!), Kerry, and Dean at this point. Gephardt is sadly broken and trails in his only bright state iowa which could have given him an upfront push and given this dead horse a shot. Kerry and Dean are the only realistic choices. Neither excites me at all. Dean is starting to bug me the most because Im afraid he is going to feel the need to "prove" that he is moderate as opposed to the liberal fascade by taking endless right wing stances after another. Kerry is a buttkisser but seems to have good leftward pargmatic positions on almost every issue thought out. Kerys health care plan seems eficient and able to contain costs but still as weak as Deans. Dean on the other hand has a proven track record of fiscal managment plus managing to expand important programs . Both are similar . Both are political animals. Dean will stick it hard on reporters and Bush and the nasty right wing.

I dont know who to choose...Dean has me pissed over his left wing charade but Kerrys war stand was pretty disgusting (Kerry just looks like more of a looser due to his half assed political posturing / ass licking on the war). Dean still has the slight edge. Anybody who can tell a reporter "bull shit" to their face stands out as fresh in these days.

The problem is that while I want Dean to beat Bush I still at the same time want Nader in there reminding everybody that Dean falls short and WAY short on 95% of issues . Man I dont know what we would do without Nader around. The man is a true anchor for the left and a walking talking reality check.Without Nader then people like Liebermann would probabilly be passed off by the media and DNC as "liberal" and Zell Miller would be "center-left". Nader has been our countrys anchor pulling the rightward drift closer in line back towards the left (well not far enough but he's only 1 man .... well actualy Dean deserves some credit on health care coming back as the issue was totaly abandoned by Democrats till he brought the issue back early on)

give him money.
recruit people to join his campaign.
have those people get people to join his campaign.
recruit more people.
have those people get people to join his campaign.
make sure you attend your caucus/primary.

And wish for the best!

I'm with ya on this. Dean is an evil evil man.

www.kucinich.us

let's end the American Empire!

There is no excuse to not vote for Kucinich. The most progressive 9or least centrist more accuratly put) top tier canidate Gephardt is dead in the water. And right wing Liebermann isnt going anywhere.

Dean/Kerry might very well win infact its almost certain. But I vote for issues not faces or names or personnalitys (which is the only real dividing line between The Dean/Kerry conjoined twins). On the issues we should vote and maybe some election cycle down the road we can have 2 real progressive's in the top tier and nobody will be calling us unelectable anymore.

Id rather loose to Bush 54%-44% and have it be a true progressive than get into a 49%-49% stalemate with some centrist nominee. Not that those are our 2 choices but even if they were then I would pick laying the groundwork for the furure and building progressive movments over staying stagnant election after election with lame canidates.

The good thing about the near clones Dean/Kerry is that we dont have to care who wins..each is the other guy essentialy . Stop worrying about them (unless Liebermann surges)and vote for the issues we care about (hence vote Kucinich).

The movement to draft Wesley Clark seems to be gaining momentum. I don't see why it is out of the realm of possiblitiy to draft someone who has already beaten Bush once and add Wesley Clark to the ticket as Vice President.

The whole presidential candidate field should somehow be turned around and made into a Vice Presidential field for a running mate for the real winner of the last election.

Damn! If only he weren't so stiff.

..... I doubt Wesley Clark is an improvment over anybody . Im one of the few, the proud , maybe the only pogressive schmuck who was absolutily freightened by the blind follow the leader mentatility I saw when everybody started worshipping McCain because the media told them to. I even heard band musicians say their most important issues were choice and gun control (obviousilly out of touch to begin with if those are somebodys 2 MOST important issues)and bash Bush in 2000 then went on to beg John McCain (who is pro life and pro gun diometric opposites to the artists 2 most important issues) to run as an indipendent to "save the country" . (Wish I remembered that guys name....he had long blonde hair and somebody watching TV with me said he was similar to Ozzy). I am highly suspicious of Clark and dont ever want to hear anybody talk about how great he is when we dont know where he stands on anything (well he prosecuted an illegal war in the late 90s strike 1-2-3 get OUT of my site).

Hell I dont even want him on the number 2 spot come to think of it.

more than made up for by Swing and New voters.
Being a left winger, I guess I am more pragmatic that idealogical.

I figured Kerry was a foregone conclusion because of his 'in' with the biggies @ the DNC + his wife's money.

Then, I actually researched Dean after watching one of my heroes, Jim Hightower, mention that while Kucinich is closest to his views that Dean had some fresh ideas.

One of the things Dean has said is that his views on the I/P issue are closer to AIPAC than to those of Peace Now. So are mine.

Please hate me silently; I don't need any nastiness re my opinion, please please please...thankyew!

Wow. How can that be? I mean Hightower and everyone else of stature who is behind Dean must be MISLED and STUPID and WILLING TO DESTROY OUR IDEALS.

Donchaknow?

Welcome. :toast:

On Edit: It's funny how the people who claim Dean is not a "true Dem" signed into legislation the civil union bill. Hmmm.

It's funny how people who support the candidate's that voted the Chimp line have the nerve to suggest that those who disagreed with it are damn near Republicans.

Now that's funny.

interview several times because I couldn't figure out where this was coming from. (I knew I hadn't heard Hightower say he supported *any* of the candidates.) He mentioned Kucinich and Sharpton, praising both for their ideas. He said Dean had really surprised people and had "run around the party structure," made a reference to the money Dean has raised. He mentioned Kerry, saying something to the effect that he was the traditional Democratic leader at present, now that Lieberman has kind of fallen by the wayside, and there was the implication that Dean was the leader at present among non-traditional Democrats (for want of a better term.)

He also said something about the party's chances with Dean OR KUCINICH.

Bottom line: Jim Hightower likes Dean's success in campaigning and he likes the ideas of Kucinich and Sharpton. But he didn't single anyone out as "the best" or his favorite.

Yours in support of truth in journalism and at DU,

DB DB

the CSPAN interview. Who is he?

Jim Hightower would be that rambunctious child -- mad as hell, with a sense of humor."

That's what fellow Texan Molly Ivins says about Jim Hightower.

Here's a bit of bio from his website:

"National radio commentator, writer, public speaker, and author of If the Gods had Meant us to Vote They Would Have Given us Candidates, Jim Hightower has spent three decades battling the Powers That Be on behalf of the Powers That Ought To Be - consumers, working families, environmentalists, small businesses, and just-plain-folks. "

"Twice elected Texas Agriculture Commissioner, Hightower believes that the true political spectrum is not right to left but top to bottom, and he has become a leading national voice for the 80 percent of the public who no longer find themselves within shouting distance of the Washington and Wall Street powers at the top."

<snip>

"Hightower is a modern-day Johnny Appleseed, spreading the message of progressive populism all across the American grassroots."

I discovered him ta few years ago through his book "If the Gods Had Meant Us to Vote, They Would Have Given Us Candidates," an informed and witty look at how politics really works, with neither Democrats not Republicans being spared criticism. (Hightower is a Democrat, but the progressive populist kind of Dem.) Another book, which I really must read, is "There's Nothing In the Middle Of the Road But Yellow Stripes and Dead Armadillos," and he's now on a book tour promoting his newest book, "Thieves in High Places: They've Stolen Our Country and It's Time To Take It Back."

Jim didn't like George W. when he was in Texas and he doesn't like him any better now.

He puts out a free newsletter, which doesn't appear in your inbox very often and is a good reminder to go read, or listen to, all the new stuff he's put up on his site: http://www.jimhightower.com

I didn't tape it but I swear he said something about Dean's 'fresh ideas'. I know he doesn't 'support' Dean, but having him refer to fresh ideas was enough to move me from the Kerry deal to Dean. I, like Jim, prefer the ideas of Kucinich and Sharpton, however, with that current crowd in Washington - I WANT THEM OUT!

Apologies if I hallucinated; I don't think I did, however; but, I'm sure I'm looking for anything to swing me to someone electable by the general population.

I voted for Nader in 1996 and 2000, but in 2004 I believe things have gone so far that I can't afford to vote anything but Democratic.

:hi:

a guy who'd do enough to undo what they have wrought. If his affinity for AIPAC is the main thing for you, I;m wondering how you voted for Nader? Maybe I'm mistaken, but I didn't think Nader was as pro-Israel as AIPAC would want. Am I wrong about Nader? :shrug:

I'd be delighted to watch the interview again and transcribe what Hightower said but I erased my TiVo after replaying that part five or six times. I decided not to post about it at the time but then I started seeing other people saying Hightower was behind Dean because of your post in GD. (I just answered you over there, too, BTW.) Gully posted a link to C-SPAN video but I can't get it to work. :argh:

Short answer is that Hightower praised ideas being expressed by Kucinich and Sharpton but I don't think he said anything about Dean's ideas. Rather, he complimented his campaign.

And, if you think about it, why would Hightower, who calls himself a progressive populist, support a centrist like Dean? Kucinich, on the other hand, is the founder/leader of the House Progressive Caucus.

My best guess is that Hightower won't back anyone until the nomination's decided and he can see whether he can back the Dem or will go Nader again. As another Hightower fan, what do you think about that scenario?

And I won't pick on you. I just wonder, are you saying you're for Dean? If so, then I strongly disagree with your choice, even if Mr. Hightower's views may have influenced you.

I'm just ready to stop voting Green for this one election.

I can't vote my conscience while this repig group takes us deeper into 4 more years of hell. It will be the first time in my life I have voted pragmatically rather than the way I want and, believe me, I hate myself for it, but another 4 years with this group could very well completely destroy this country!

:loveya:

Belies the systematically-violent reality of AIPAC's agenda.

PS - Nader said that Kerry is closest to Kucinich for real progressive reforms. Dean's "fresh ideas" are the brainchildren of his internet-saavy staffers, not Dean nor Trippi. I'd rather have a progressive agenda than a campaigning novelty act.

all but your opinion of AIPAC (sorry).

But this election is too important to continue to vote my conscience. I am truly :scared: :scared: :scared: of another 4 years with Bush et al!

:loveya:

301,000 people and counting prove your premise false. I realize you are frustrated that your pet candidate isnt getting anywhere but making shit up isnt going to make the truth go away!

Good choice.

I find it amazingly difficult to believe that there is any anti gun single issue voter who didn't know the stand of Dean. And any that there may be should look in the mirror to find whom to blame. He has been crystal clear on guns from day one. If a person is that committed to gun control then it is incumbent on them to figure out where a candidate stands on it before they support him.

I also think this applies to drugs. His position on it is reasonbly well known.

The only people to whom I think slack can be given here is the I/P single issue voters. It did take awhile for him to offer up a position on that.

His under-funding of the public defender's office (putting money over the right to a fair trial), his focus on convictions and desire to rid the justice system of technicalities that prevent faulty evidence from being used to convict innocent people and his strong support for the death penalty (while he says that the execution of the innocent is an acceptable risk) are what frighten most people who support the Constitution away from his campaign.

most of you for a civil, sensible debate on this thread. With only a few exeptions, folks kept their emotions in check and talked things out.

Good job, folks! :)

Plenty of liberals and progressives don't realize the power of controlling one of the two major parties. Those who do understand the importance of trying, at least, to offer a populist alternative to the DLC in guiding the direction of the future of the Democratic Party.

Liberals and progressives who think they can go at it buffet-style, taking a bit here and there but retaining their overall aloofness, only add to the weight of the contention of the centrists that it won't pay in the long-term to embrace common sense progressive issues.

Dean embraced, at one time, the DLC ideas. If he is thinking he must do so again, to remain relevant, he's doing so now.

Progressives who want to fight to bring the party back to its "core" of fighting for unions, farmers, a social safety net, against the death penalty, and for overall fairness need to slog it out, and grow their numbers such that the DLC edges further into irrelevance.

If they just shrug their shoulders and say, "Oh well, I guess I'll go (or stay) Green," are delivering the party, and the nomination to people like Dean who ultimately won't rock the boat.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

edit: grammar

Dean has a reputation for saying what he wants his audiences to hear and all of those angry people who were pissed because Dena was trying to pose as the person who was goint to oppose Republicans more than the DLC is now being seen as the rather conservative politician he really is.

And I am going to post it again:

Howard Dean: the Progressive Anti-War Candidate?
Some Vermonters Give Their Views
By DONNA BISTER, MARC ESTRIN
and RON JACOBS
(The Editorial Collective of the Old North End RAG)

Howard Dean the liberal, anti-war candidate? The laughter rings most loudly in Vermont

I know that a lot of you are going to vote for Dean -- he talks a good game; he can be charismatic and charming. But I'm warning you. This man will tell you what you want to hear, or at least tell you something that has some little kernel of something that you can interpret as support for the things that are important to you. But when the time comes to stand up and lead on the issue, to take on the money interests and backsliders in his own party, that stiff little spine will turn into a slinky.

If you vote for him, it's your job to stand behind him with a poker and keep him headed in the right direction. Don't give him any honeymoon period, either--keep the pressure on from the second you drop that ballot in the box. The minute you relax, he's going to turn right back into what he really is...a privileged, arrogant, middle of the road republican. Put your political energy into getting some truly progressive folks into the House and Senate, and into State legislatures around the country so that there will be more pressure from more directions. We need to get together our sophisticated progressive thinkers to develop policy ideas in every area, so that we're ready with real, well-thought out counter-proposals for the incremental changes a Dean administration might put forth. If you feel you must, support Dean, do--but then go do the work necessary to make real change.

Ron Jacobs, Donna Bister and Marc Estrin comprise the OLD NORTH END RAG collective. The RAG is an agitational community newspaper serving the Old North End of Burlington, Vermont. This neighborhood is a primarily working class section of Vermonts largest city that has a history of political activism

http://www.counterpunch.org/jacobs08292003.html

A lot of people are starting to realize that Dean has been stringing them along and only telling them what they want to hear for political reasons and that his actual performance is a far cry from the candidate who is not being "Bush-Lite"

Hey Mercutio, if you're out there, I think it's time to resurrect the Gov Dean Eats Puppies threads. If he posts this same article again (by "the Green, the non-voter and the one who thinks Dean is a Republican"), we're going to have to either drink or donate. Or both.