DEAN, DEMS, DEMOGRAPHICS, DENIAL - web, money, confusion!

For the life of me, I wonder what it means to be "strong on national security." Another saber rattler like Bush who likes to dress up like a military man but who never served in real life?

its kinda like "strong family values"

Like D'Artagnan, I am at times mystified by the term "strong on national defense."

Is there anyone who is weak on it?

Or is the term code for "give as much as possible of the nation's treasury to defense contractors and other Republican party contributors?"

Good thread, Tartarin.

In the meantime, I hope the Democrats get their ducks in a row before the next election. Bush and this bunch of...(can't think of a good word)...who pull his strings have got to be sent packing.

"finaglers" (just trying to be nice, but truthful )

I am definitely one of those who is weak on national defense as it is currently being funded and administered.

Thanks, Frank! Welcome aboard.

At last glance (Dean blogsite), the total was $322K at $61/per (average). That's a nice chunk of change in couple of days, and a nice chunk of voters compared to what Cheney gets for his $250K at $2000. So far I think Dean is the smart guy.

I'd say a matter which should be of major concern to us all is making sure the web continues to be completely open, accessible and "free." What say?

Tartarin, I am far more interested in the payback - form Bush/Cheney - payback is to a select group of Corporations, special interest groups and individual wealthy people; while, Dean's payback is the American people. That is where I care.

Easy for me to decide!

It looks, to me, like Dean has a fine plan for Homeland Security -- so I'm with D'Art and Frank on being confused on the DLC's definition of "strong national security."

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

I think the Dems might think about the last elections, and about how many votes were lost to Nader because of the increasing move to the right. Contrary to what they want to believe, Dean might be their only hope of getting Bush out.

It's wonderful that so many are becoming involved in voicing concerns through the internet -- it's working on issues like the FCC problem, and it's obviously working for candidates like Dean. I agree that we should always keep our guard up to protect our resources on the web.

I'm with you BillW. Even if Dean should fail to get the nomination, he almost certainly will have dragged the Democratic Party to the health center, got it onto the machines, got it breathing and thinking -- and for that he is owed a tremendous debt of gratitude.

3:30 EST Dean Team v. Bush-Cheney Update
7,661 Americans have now contributed $398,418.41 to the Dean Team v. Bush-Cheney Challenge.

National Public Radio will be reporting on the day's events in the first segment of All Things Considered today. We've just received word that the story is likely to run at 12 minutes after the program starts (4 pm in most locations). Check local listings.

Hey Tartarin

I meant to mention this earlier...

...and I know I really don't have to, because I'm sure you already know it...

...but I am very, very grateful for your kind remarks in that other thread.

As you know, I've got my hands full in that thread, so I decided not to say anything there, but you know how I feel about the support -- and your helpful comments.

It's always good to see someone fighting the good fight, Frank. Particularly someone who speaks from experience and an independent mind. Awfully rare, even on A2K.

I am developing a distaste for both the DLC and the DNC. Read some recent articles on them and by them, also Mark Penn, their pollster. I really don't understand them - they project negative vibes about the democrats when they should be a strong cheerleading team. One of the things about Dean is that he is positive, and is beginning to demonstrate that he knows who he is and what he wants. I think this is something that a lot of the public is responding to. They've been waiting for that leader the DLC keeps talking about - and Dean is the only one speaking out. Loud, clear, with something to hang on to.

I like Graham - always did. I have a low opinion of Edwards - to me he's on an ego trip. Not much experience, and I've gotten jaded when it comes to pretty boys. And Kerry - who was my original choice - I keep waiting for at least one shoe to drop. We're heading into August - has the DLC and DNC managed to scare off some candidates? They say things like centrist, national security, and the like. Have they ever defined their terms? And how can they be so sure of what democrats want when they don't even seem to know themselves?

Sorry for the rant - but it's one of those days when the combination of Bush and scaredy-cat dems has gotten to me.

The New Republic has featured a debate between Jonathan Cohn,
a supporter of Dean, and Jonathan Chait, who thinks Dean will lead the party to ruination if he wins the nomination. The arguements against Dean aren't any stronger than what we've heard before, but it's an interesting read, nonetheless:

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=express&s=chaitcohn072403

Just looking at the dialogue in TNR (thanks, Liberty, for a great link!), I'd like to pull out some bits and pieces which caught my eye:

Chait: "Dean's analysis of the Democratic Party (that it's afraid to take on President Bush) is simply untrue." Wrong, I believe. I think that's been the most obvious bad move on the part of the DNC/DLC. Terror. Caution. Call it what you will.

Chait: "The problem is that Dean comes across as liberal because he puts himself across that way." My impression is that Dean has tried very hard to avoid categorization, and very wisely. Perhaps the most notable aspect of his governorship is that, at one time or another, he made everyone mad! He has a very strong (and perhaps sometimes annoying) streak of independence. It has been a wonderful, possibly fruitful, mistake on the part of Republicans to label him a lefty, because he can counterpose his fiscal conservatism and his stand against gun control to their deficit, their recent gun control laws (just to name two potent issues for grass roots Republicans). "...tried to run as a centrist..." will get them in trouble -- he's no centrist. He is, as I noted, an independent Dem. A Dem with guts and backbone, etc. etc.

Chait: "But downscale voters tend to be just the opposite; they're socially conservative and economically populist." That's a very good point. But given the adeptness shown already by his campaign staff, that will be (or has been) addressed.

Cohn: "When you consider the excellent point raised by our colleague Noam Scheiber--that Dean has appealed to liberals largely on rhetoric and tone, not substance--he is in some ways better positioned to perform this sort of political magic than most of his rivals." It's a curious thing, not having TV. I've never seen Dean, wouldn't recognize him if he walked in my back door. My take on him comes entirely from the print media and what I've heard on the radio. What got me going was the independence, energy and courage he has shown as a governor and campaigner, and the way he has chosen aides who have used new media to get that across. Those qualities -- and the suggestion of independence from Washington (his method of fundraising, his standing apart from the DNC/DLC -- and they're rejection of him) frees him of old Dem ties -- including Clinton, by the way. That appeals to centrist Republicans, to the guys out here on ranches who think Washington is anathema. It suggests that, if he were choosing a Cabinet, he would choose people who look for new solutions, not just cronies of the establishment.

I hope Dean doesn't spend a lot of time and effort trying to shuck labels. It's far too easy for the media to set up straw man after straw man and siphon off energy and reputation from a candidate. Fortunately, Dean and Trippi have the lousy example of Gore to teach them how to avoid the battering of the press.