jjorge's Dean Diary

Well, c'mon, can't we show this? Looking good, Jjorge!

Here's a great satire on Dean's critics:



The New Stop-Dean Candidate: Howard Dean.
By William Saletan
SLATE 10-15-03


"All year, Howard Dean has been gaining ground in the Democratic presidential race. And all year, Democratic centrists have been scrambling for a candidate to stop him. He's too liberal, they said. He's soft on defense, a Vermont lefty, an evangelist for expansive programs. To stop him, they turned to Joe Lieberman, then John Kerry, then Wes Clark. But the more Dean's rivals expose his record, the more I suspect that the centrist who's going to spare Democrats this left-wing nightmare isn't any of these guys. It's Howard Dean.

Months ago, when the candidates squared off at a Children's Defense Fund forum, moderator Judy Woodruff tried to embarrass Dean by pointing out that he had criticized "liberals" for opposing the 1996 welfare reform law. An article in The Nation complained that Dean had cut welfare spending in Vermont, supported the death penalty, opposed federal gun control, and criticized Dick Gephardt's "radical revamping of our healthcare system." On Sept. 4, in the first of the fall debates, Dennis Kucinich charged that Dean would have to cut "social spending" because Dean was intent on "balancing the budget" and was "not going to cut the military." Five days later, in the next debate, Joe Lieberman protested that Dean had "said Israel ought to get out of the West Bank and an enormous number of their settlements ought to be broken down." In a general election, I figure these attacks would get Dean at least the 537 votes Democrats needed to win Florida in 2000 and probably the 7,211 they needed to win New Hampshire...."

click here for the whole article
http://slate.msn.com/id/2089813

thought id drop by and leave a quote ... :wink:



MSNBC

I think Kerry's campaign is pretty much over, as are the campaigns of Edwards and Lieberman. I am concerned, however, that they will spend the next few weeks or months intentially (or unintentially) damaging Dean's campaign. That would certainly be counter-productive to the greater good.

The Republicans continue to express delight at the possibility of going up against Dean in the Fall. Their arrogance at assuming they have the "real American" vote never ceases to amaze me. They do not represent or advocate for working and middle class Americans at all. (tax cuts for the wealthy). They wrongly assume Americans are buying the economic recovery lies (check out the unemployment roles). They certainly do not own the patriotic vote. (supporting our troops does NOT translate into supporting this awful and unecessary war). And they are nothing less than fools if they think they can win with the right-wing religious bigot vote. Americans have always been and will always be fair and just when it comes to equal rights.


So, fine! Let them think they can count on an uninformed, easily duped electorate. I have more faith in the American people to do the right thing for our country, to get rid of this radical, arrogant, war-mongering, divisive, lying president.

The candidates at the top are all interesting and I'm frankly delighted that Dean is up against Gephardt and Clark.

Though I'm a Dean supporter, I see the primaries not as a time for each candidate to goudge the other out of existence, but for a variety of candidates to test the strength of their positions. All three of these guys are distinguished in their own ways -- any one of them would do just fine(though I have some questions about both G and C), They make a pretty powerful trio.

There was a perfectly awful expert from the Woodrow Wilson School on "Talk of the Nation" yesterday (mumble, bumble,opine, haul out dead horses and beat them) who said one interesting thing during the short time I heard him opining. When asked about the Dem candidates he pointed to the often overlooked importance of being a good organizer/administrator. This is where Dean's campaign shines and where (this fogey pointed out) Kerry's has failed. Kerry is running around now, rather as Gore did, trying to remedy this, but I think the vote is in on Kerry, unless he mysteriously cleans up in NH and proves me wrong! (I have contacts in NH who are rabid Dean supporters and the movement seems strong there...)

Jjorge, on the CNN "Rock the Vote," Dean took a lot of flack for his effort to reach out to the southerners who drive pick-ups and display the Confederate flag. I thought his answer was right on target--that they are folks who have felt alienated from Democrats who have treated them with condecension or simply ignored them altogether.

Here are two letters to the editor of Salon.com., regarding Dean's reply.




-- Larisa Thomason

===============================================




-- Dan Smith

Though I am a Republican by nature and do intend on voting for our man in the next election, I do have one thing to say about Dean that I noticed in all the debates.

I have never in all the times I have seen him, heard him or read his position papers EVER doubted his sincerity or his conviction to do what he thinks is right. I always felt of all the Dem candidates, he and Leiberman have stuck to their principles instead of pandering to the pressures of certain sections of their parties. I have to admire him as one of the best of the Dem. candidates.

That being said, even though I support my man in the Big White Building, if a Dem. DOES get elected, I hope it is Dean. I would like to see a Dem. in the White House that has some integrity.

This isn't meant as a flame of W.J.C., only that I hate to see people compromise on their principles. I feel that Dean wouldn't.

Just my 2 cents........ pre tax.

Well said, Fedral. And welcome! Why (by the way)do we not have a member named FedUp (or do we?).

Federal, welcome to a2k! Your post was well taken. I think that is why most of us are so supportive of Dean.

The way you worded your post makes me think that you will be an excellent addition to the political threads. I read but rarely post as they have become so polarized that I find very little new to be learned on them--just blanket statements. I do hope you get involved--a new, rational and calm viewpoint is badly needed.

Thanks to you Diane and Tartarin, I appreciate your welcome and courtesy.
I believe that as Americans we have an obligation to discuss and even argue with each other over issues because that is the only way that we can understand each other.
I feel there are always ways to disagree without being disagreeable(aka. being a ass).
For those who haven't guessed by my posts, I have been accused of being an Ultra Right Wing Conservative Christian. I have also been called everything from a Fascist to Attilla the Hun on some other boards I have posted on in the past. But keep in mind, that just because some people have chosen to pigeonhole me in their minds doesn't make me a cookiecutter version of what some liberals see as 'The Enemy.'

I believe in the Death Penalty.

I believe that my control over bodily functions ends at the surface of my skin. (ie. Although I despise abortion, I have no right to deny you your right to one)

I believe in a strong military.

I believe that capitalism and industry has made this the richest and greatest place on Earth to live.

I believe that we are rich and powerful enough to conserve our environment properly.

I believe in God.

I believe that you have the right to believe or disbelieve in any God, Gods or Goddesses or anything else you wish without interference from ANYONE.

I believe that every person's opinion in this country counts. (I don't care if you are Joe the Janitor or Noah Chomsky)

I believe that Democracy is the greatest invention of man.

Just my 2 cents....pre tax.

I believe in the Death Penalty.
I don't. I think it more rational to believe the death penalty is murder than abortion is.

I believe that my control over bodily functions ends at the surface of my skin. (ie. Although I despise abortion, I have no right to deny you your right to one)
Pretty much agree, as do many women who have had to undergo the procedure.

I believe in a strong military.
I believe in a small, well-equipped defense force -- probably one tenth or less the size of our current military.

I believe that capitalism and industry has made this the richest and greatest place on Earth to live.
I believe unleashed capitalism + government have made this one of the most corrupt countries in the world.

I believe that we are rich and powerful enough to conserve our environment properly.
I'd damn well hope so.... When do we start?

I believe in God.
I don't.

I believe that you have the right to believe or disbelieve in any God, Gods or Goddesses or anything else you wish without interference from ANYONE.
Well, that makes two of us. But you'd be smart to keep ducking when the "christian" Right is around!

I believe that every person's opinion in this country counts. (I don't care if you are Joe the Janitor or Noah Chomsky)
I used to believe that too. Since joining A2K, I've tried to come up with a new formula.

I believe that Democracy is the greatest invention of man.
Democracy is pretty good; sex is better; and some books and music are better than both together.

I don't see the death penalty as murder any more than I see the euthanization of a rabid dog as murder.


You see, liberals and conservatives can find points of agreement from time to time.


A force that small wouldnt be able to do anything useful other than clean up after tornados and hurricanes, let alone help any allies out or defend out country.


Having visited Mexico, Belize, Italy,G.Britian, Egypt, Germany, Israel, Japan and Taiwan, I think the U.S. has a long LONG way to go before its corruption level can even touch most of those countries.


Thats what activism is all about, tell you what, you help support my cause and I'll help support yours.


And thats whats great about this country, you don't have to.


I AM the Christian Right and it doesn't bother me what you believe.


LOL


Sex is an invention of nature and most of the best books and music are direct outgrowths of the freedoms that Democracy brings in my opinion.

Former Air Force chief backs Dean candidacy

Retired Gen. Merrill "Tony" McPeak, the former Air Force chief of staff who endorsed
George W. Bush in 2000, has left the Republican fold and is backing Democrat Howard Dean
in the 2004 race for president.

http://www.oregonlive.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news/1069160753167110.xml?oregonian?lcpl

Interesting! And not just McPeak, either:

POLLS: DEAN LEADS IN MASSACHUSETTS!

The AP reports on two polls that show Howard Dean leading among voters in
Massachusetts:

A Boston Globe/WBZ-TV poll released Sunday... showed Kerry and Howard Dean
in a close race in Massachusetts. Dean would receive 27 percent of the votes, while
Kerry... would receive 24 percent.

Another poll, reported by the Eagle-Tribune of North Andover, shows that "If the
Democratic primary were held tomorrow, former Vermont governor Dean would get
23.5 percent of the vote, while Kerry, the Bay State's junior senator, would receive
22.4 percent." But the real numbers come when asked who would be the strongest
opponent against George W. Bush:

Regardless of preference, 33 percent said Dean is the Democrats' best hope,
compared to 19.1 percent for Kerry.The other candidates remained in the single
digits, according to the report.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/11/23/dean_bid_showing_strength_in_mass/

A tad embarrassing for Kerry.

I would say it's DEVASTATING vote of 'No confidence' for Kerry.

Massachusetts voters, after all, know him best. They elected him Lt. Governor and then U.S. Senator for nearly twenty years, and THEY think Dean is a stronger candidate against Bush!

On Trail, Dean Hones a Populist Message
Sarah Schweitzer, Boston Globe 11/26/2003

OTTUMWA, Iowa -- As a presidential contender, Howard Dean has made a name for himself
as a verbal rough-rider -- arguing his case against the war in Iraq and President Bush's tax cuts
with the kind of unstinting rhetoric that has won over Democrats eager to see a bruising battle
against Bush next fall. But on the campaign trail, Dean's throw-down-the-gauntlet mantra is woven
with another message, one strikingly different in tone, that preaches the virtue of community and the
evil of corporate behemoths unconcerned, he says, with the collective good.

"Bigger and bigger corporations might mean more efficiency, but there is something about human beings
that corporations can't deal with, and that's our soul, our spirituality, who we are," Dean told a breakfast
crowd in Sidney, Iowa. "We need to find a way in this country to understand and to help each other
understand that there is a tremendous price to be paid for the supposed efficiency of big corporations.
The price is losing the sense of who we are as human beings."

This Dean message, delivered in a lilting cadence different from the partisan fire and brimstone he serves up
in television ads and debates, strikes a chord in some quarters.

"I love that talk about community because we are supposed to be a Christian nation, and
if we are a Christian nation, I have to be concerned about you, I have to be concerned
about him," said Paul McFarland, 62, a retired military man who listened to Dean at an Ottumwa
VFW Hall. "That's the way God wanted it, that's what a Christian nation is all about and we have strayed
away from that."

Dean's message is tactically sharp, capturing what his campaign believes could be an important factor in the
2004 presidential election: Americans' anxiety about the future -- about jobs and financial security -- born of
corporate mistrust and an attendant craving for more control over their lives.
The message dovetails with a larger critique of "special interests" -- a loosely-defined group of rich, powerful,
entrenched corporations, institutions, and lobbyists -- that virtually all the Democratic presidential hopefuls
have been assailing. In California, Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger campaigned against special interests in
unseating Gray Davis as governor.

Dean, in particular, has used the anti-special interests idea as a battering ram. At a rally in Houston this month,
the former governor of Vermont railed against the bankrupt Enron and called for greater regulation of industry.
But in the quieter settings, Dean often launches into the theme of uncontrolled power to highlight social policy
issues. He points out the importance of structuring the sale of Canadian drugs in the United States without
enriching middlemen, so that Main Street pharmacies can be saved. He talks of the need to do away with
"No Child Left Behind" legislation, to give control back to local school boards.

This softer side to Dean's rhetoric can be jarring for those accustomed to seeing him in
attack mode. It comes, after all, from a man seemingly determined to keep his personal
biography -- and sentiment -- out of his campaign, and often seems oddly juxtaposed
with Dean's militaristic march though his stump speech or his thunderous "You have the
power" call-to-arms for disaffected Democrats. Indeed, some voters, are taken aback
by Dean's political alter ego.
"We are at a point where we need harshness," said Mary Neis, 51, a community college
secretary in Ottumwa whose military son is stationed in Iraq. "I will admit I was not expecting
to see him less harsh in person -- but I guess everyone has other sides to them."
The message's populist appeal, political observers say, could help Dean move beyond core
supporters attracted by his anti-Bush, antiwar stance, and reach less partisan voters unsettled
by the rocky economy and eager to hear someone talking about the perils of overseas
outsourcing of jobs.
"You could imagine Patrick Buchanan railing about multinational corporations as much
as a Democrat might," said Dante Scala, a political scientist at Saint Anselm College in
Manchester, N.H. "This is Dean's way of trying to reach some constituency that might
not be a natural."
Some say there is a risk in too much dilution -- or, to put a finer point on it, in mush.
"Who's against community?" said William Howell, a professor of politics at Harvard University.
"In the interest of appealing to a broader base, he is potentially undermining the very thing
that has served him so well in the form of a very clear message."

To be sure, Dean is not the lone candidate talking about the value of community and the
perils of corporate control. Two of his Democratic rivals, Senator John Edwards of North
Carolina and Representative Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri, cast themselves as defenders
of the underdog laborer, Edwards reminding crowds of his upbringing as the son of a millworker
and Gephardt noting his Teamster father. Also, Senator John F. Kerry of Massachusetts
has stepped up his critique of special interests on the campaign trail.

The message borrows from a number of previous Democratic campaigns, including those
of Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, and evokes the populist strains of Andrew Jackson,
William Jennings Bryan, and Theodore Roosevelt, who took stands against the dangers
of large entities, from banks to monopolistic businesses.

For a man not given to idle chatter, with an extreme aversion to small talk, Dean seems
surprisingly comfortable offering up his emotive meditation on the nation's soul, telling
one Iowa crowd recently: "We have to talk about real human values. Not the faux phony
family values the president talks about, but the real human values about being able to touch
each other as human beings. What we need to do is talk to each other neighbor to neighbor."

In some ways, it is a dialectic drawn from Dean's biography, one punctuated by his frequent
rejections of the big and hierarchical. The wealthy scion of a long line of Manhattan power
brokers, Dean fled a short-lived stint on Wall Street for a career in Vermont as a small-town doctor.
He embraced Congregationalism in place of Episcopal tenets with which he was raised. He frequently
cites his experience as a college student in the 1960s as a major influence on his thinking, saying it was
a time of hope and promised -- if unrealized -- equality.

Joe Trippi, Dean's campaign manager, insists Dean's call for community is not a message dreamed
up by political consultants. "He was talking about how we had lost a sense of community in this country,"
Trippi recalled of a talk Dean gave in Iowa last spring, one he said propelled him to sign on to the
campaign. "How it's not good enough for me to want health care for my kid. We as Americans have a
responsibility to fight for every kid in this country to have health insurance."

Dean points to a visit of his own to Iowa as the genesis of the theme, recalling the eureka moment at a recent
brunch with reporters, "I couldn't believe that here was this solid group of Iowans and they are not ranting and
raving . . . about evil corporations. They were just calmly telling me the underpinnings
of their lives were collapsing under them.

"There was a fundamental fear for the future. They felt that American corporations weren't American anymore
and the people they work for didn't value them. They could move their jobs anywhere
in the world for the bottom line. It was a complete revelation to me."