Dean's Governorship of a population 608,000

[AmericanDem]

http://www.vtliving.com/stats/

I thought it was important to get this info out and put things into perspective. Dean governed Vermont a population of 608,827. From my understanding he holds little if any experience in world affairs. This man now is trying to seak power to our highest office to look over and protect the worlds #1 superpower. This does make me take a step back.

Vermonts population is smaller then many cities in the USA.

[cavebat2000]

1. Just curious...

Did you just find that out?

[AmericanDem]

2. No ,I figured it hasn't been talked about much.

The more I thought about it the more thought others should see the facts as they are is all.

[joeybee12]

4. Good Lord, this has been posted over and over and over

Compare it to Arkansas.

As for foreign affairs, Dean has a great response, if the numbnuts he's running against are so experienced, why did they allow this debacle in Iraq to happen?????????????

[AmericanDem]

7. Compare it to Akansas when,

In 1990 or Arkansas in 2004, with a world climate we have now?

[billbuckhead]

8. Arkansas has minorities and actually has a metro area bigger than

Vermont. Columbus Ohio is about the same population as Vermont.

[dsc]

11. Little Rock

doesn't have a metro area bigger than 600,000 people. Also Columbus isn't over 600,000 either.

[Lorien]

40. I think the metro Columbus area

is over 600,000 now. My hometown.

[AmericanDem]

42. It does, over 711,000

http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Columbus,-Ohio

[dsc]

45. He didn't say the metro area

he said the city.

[AmericanDem]

50. The article I provided doesn't say METRO just...

City.

[Name removed]

Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AmericanDem]

24. That is bull

The problem is anytime people bring up facts of concern, others can't handle it. Anything even appearing negative is pounded on to try and quell it. That is something you have to work on.

[Padraig18]

28. This is about the 114th time this has been brought up.

Dead horse. Stick. Beat. Repeat. :eyes:

[AmericanDem]

31. When

back in Dean's fun days of summer? The important things its being addressed now. Elections are months away and the more information folks have to base a decision on, the better.

[Padraig18]

34. Information of dubious value, perhaps.

How it is either material or relevant escapes me, frankly... :eyes:

[Eloriel]

91. Not that we CAN'T handle it, it's that we're SICK of handling it

As others have pointed out, this amazing factoid has been discussed over and over and over again.

We're fed up.

Eloriel

[coralrf]

171. It is not a "factoid"..it is true.

factoids are false. Dean better deal with this 'dead horse' now or deal with it when Bush points out the size difference between VT and TX. It would be foolish to think the media will not pound Dean with this just as soon as the RNC tells them to.

Dean's quote " took a physical flunked a physical etc" is just getting out there. Why? Because the RNC knows that he is not telling the truth in that statement and has ordered it hammered. They also know that supporters have helped spin the issue so it is ripe for exposure. Dumb move. Dean supporters had best deal with these things. The RNC will make sure that Nov 7 is dead horse resurrection day. You can bet on it.

[drfemoe]

227. Not telling the truth?

Dean's quote " took a physical flunked a physical etc" is just getting out there. Why? Because the RNC knows that he is not telling the truth in that statement and has ordered it hammered.

...

What part of that quote do you consider to not be true?

Don't *worry*. Everything is being dealt with.

[Scott Lee]

96. "Fact of concern" about Dean? LOL!

If you're so concerned about how populous the state he governed is, ask yourself who among the other candidates ever governed anyone in any state.

Let that be your new "fact of concern", and wring hands accordingly.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

193. Deannies - attack the message NOT the messenger. It's a HUGE turnoff

when you do that. It's no way to win followers and it turns off the on-the-fencers. I like Dean - he's my number 2 after Clark and I'd like a ticket of Clark/Dean but you guys make it REAL tough for me to keep on feeling postive about Dean... especially when you continue to attack my candidate. In addition, I also like most of the other candidates (Kerry, Edwards, Kucinich, Sharpton Braun, Gephardt) and I can't stand it when I see you attack their followers and their candidates merely for criticizing Dean at times.

I continue to like Dean him DESPITE your actions. Others may not feel quite so generous.

[RetroLounge]

196. No you are wrong/

Old information that has already been debunked OVER AND OVER.

But just like the right wing, if you post it enough, it resembles truth.

Repeat. Lies. Ad. Nauseum.

_|_

[kerry-is-my-prez]

205. I haven't seen it discussed that much - but guess I haven't been here

that long. A lot of others may have not heard it much. I hear it out there in the media every so often but not that much on here.

It is one of Dean's weaknesses. All of the candidates have weknesses - Clark (my favorite) included.

The issue of Dean being from a small liberal non-representative state with not many blacks will be an issue that will be brought up over and over again in the primaries and in the general if Dean does win the nom. so he and his supporters will need a good answer to that issue. It is one of the smallest states. Sorry Vermontians but a lot of people make fun of your state. I'D love to live there myself and love your state - but middle America kind of sneers at it.

Don't feel bad - I'm from the #1 sneered at state - Florida. You'll get used to be made fun of after a while...

[drfemoe]

226. You must have missed the debate

where the 'journalist' asked Dean about this very issue.
.. She called him a "small time governor" ..

Is VT smaller than Arkansas? I really don't know.
*u*h 'governed' one of the largest states in the republic
.. Texas .. I'm much more interested in HOW someone governs
than HOW MANY.

Feel free to zero out Dean in your selection list if you don't like his supporters here. That's been my decision regarding Kerry and Clark, thanks to their DU mouthpieces.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

229. As I said, I like a Clark/Dean ticket and Dean's my #2

I'm not THAT influenced by the person's followers (or at least I try not to be).

[sleipnir]

3. You're Right! CMB hasn't even governed over anyone!

The horror! What makes her think she can even run for President. We better re-write the constitution to make sure this lack of leadership never comes up again.

[Eloriel]

94. Not only that, but Americans haven't elected a Dem Senator since

1960 -- JFK.

They prefer Governors. I do too. Governors get the full spectrum of issues and problems. And Dean did amazingly well with a small state with a small revenue base. AMAZINGLY well. That's why Vermonters kept electing him again and again (5 times, IIRC).

Eloriel

[Hawkeye-X]

152. Ahhhhhmen to that!

The last two Dem Presidents were GOVERNORS! Three of four Presidents were GOVERNORS. Carter, Reagan, and Clinton in the chronological order.

Washington insiders, as I pointed out OVER and OVER does NOT make good Presidents. I have kept saying that the last Dem insider was JFK.

Hawkeye-X

[Carolina]

106. but she was elected by many more people in Illinois

to the Senate. The number and the homogeneity of Vermont's population do matter in the larger context of the general election. They shouldn't considering the fools currently running (more like ruining) the ship of state. Dean's governance experience is nothing to smirk at, but the GOP will use his small state against him. He is no Clinton and Vermont and Arkansas are not comparable.

[Scott Lee]

5. Who cares? Are you saying that Vermonters don't matter, somehow?

Your arguments smack of "Well, Bush won more real estate" by Limbaugh in the selection of 2000.

What a laugh.

[maxanne]

176. thanks Scott

as someone from a small unimportant New England state I get real tired of this whole line of thinking.

[Scott Lee]

264. Well I grew up in Vermont and this pious crap really chaffes me

So, hello former neighbor! ;)

[maddezmom]

6. he did a good job in VT

and if nominated will do a great job for the rest of the country.

[AmericanDem]

10. As many Mayors have

I'm don't agree with your assessment that he would do a great job for the rest of the country.

[Pastiche423]

16. clark's governing population ZERO!

This really isn't the best way to try to flame Dean, ya know?

[AmericanDem]

19. you have to read more.

Clark has cared for, sheltered and watched over families of the armed forces for many many years. He has dealt one on one with world leaders. He has shown, In magnificent form, great leadership in protecting our country.

[Pastiche423]

21. clark has governed

NO CIVILIANS!

[AmericanDem]

22. I wouldn't call...

Family of the servicemen, troops. He had to set up schooling, medical care, mental health care and everything else we think of in civilian society.

[Pastiche423]

23. CLARK HAS NEVER GOVERNED CIVILIANS!

Nary a one.

[AmericanDem]

26. Clark HAS Governed, Dean has NEVER dealt with the WORLD LEADERS.

In this day and age, that can't happen.

[Pastiche423]

27. What can't happen?

Have you noticed who has been squatting in the White House for almost three years?

:eyes:

[AmericanDem]

33. You are Darn right it can't

And I'll do my part in making sure of that!:kick:

[slinkerwink]

57. Dean actually has dealt with the prime minister of Canada

when Dean governed Vermont since Canada is right there next door and they established trade policies, etc.

[Eloriel]

97. You are wrong on both points

Well, depending on how you define "World Leaders."

Dean actually does have some foreign policy experience -- with Canada, Argentina, and probably others. He's also widely traveled. He speaks Spanish fluently (and yes, I know -- or heard -- that Clark speaks 5 languages).

Here's the deal. *I* could go do a better job of foreign relations than Bush. Millions of Americans could. At this point, it's really a no-brainer: internationalize Iraq. Get our troops out or severely reduced in number.

Further, the rest of the world is so fucking horrified by Bush and what he's done and plans to do that they are going to open their arms wider than they ever have before to any American president who isn't Bush. Mark my words. The WHOLE WORLD will be celebrating ANY Dem President victory. They will bend over backwards to make our foreign policy with them easy and graceful.

Also, Dean is the one person (Clark to a lesser extent) who has pointed out that Bush has actually made us less safe. THAT is the truth, in spades. A number of factors go into that reality, but one of them is the Iraq war. If Dean's smart enough to figure that out, he's smart enough to do something about it.

Despite the fact that many Americans are afraid (with that fear whipped up repeatedly by Bush&Co. for obvious political reasons), terrorism may not actually be our worst, biggest or most urgent problem. Domestic issues like the perilous budget deficits (which has Krugman actually worrying about the very continued existence of the U.S. if serious steps aren't taken and soon) and global warming could actually be more urgent issues.

Finally, it's commonly known that hope trumps fear. Dean offers hope, in abundance. And as a pragmatist extraordinaire he offers commmon sense solutions to go with his dead-on observations that Bush's way isn't keeping us safer. It's a winning combination.

Eloriel

[Donna Zen]

58. Whoops! Wrong

The families of the service members would be considered civilians.

[Eloriel]

99. And he still didn't "govern" those civilian families

They didn't elect him or any representative government which he was the head of; he didn't propose legislation or implement policy that affected them to any great extent. Any "servies" in place were Army services that went on whether he was there or not. Probably didn't even negotiate many if any contracts for those services.

Too, I'm not sure that much (if any) of his experience was even as commander at individual bases. I heard he was at Ft. Hood, but was he base commander there?

AND, most important of all -- when you're in the military, and an officer, your wish is their command. LOL -- there IS no "opposition party." There is no opposition at all. You're KING. QUITE different from being at the head of a government of ANY size.

Nope, no governing. Budget oversight, perhaps. And giving orders. But no real governing.

Eloriel

[Donna Zen]

129. King no; head of state status yes

And sorry but he held accountable for the works, yes, that is governing. No opposition? I'd call Cohen, Shelton, and a congress full of repub cockroaches opposition.

[KaraokeKarlton]

210. No they aren't

They are dependents of US military personnel. All US military personnel are considered property of the US government. Dependents of military personnel are NOT considered "civillians". Dependents of military personnel don't even use their own social security number in anything related to the military. They use the social security number of the one who is in the military. Civillians are those who are not in the military and not a dependent of someone who is in the military. My military ID card that allowed me access to services and facilities on the bases while my ex was in the Navy had HIS social security number on it. I was NOT a Civillian.

[Jai4WKC08]

158. You're kidding, right?

You have any idea how many civilians serve in any military command? Here's a clue--they outnumber the servicemen and women. Did they elect him? No. Did he lead them, manage them, provide for their welfare and safety, "govern" them? Indeed he did. Then there are the indigenous civilians living in Albania. Why don't you ask them what they think of the job he did while essentially in charge of their country.

http://www.madison.com/captimes/news/stories/62179.php

Albanian community rallies here
Clark, Kosovo focus at Flag Day
By Lee Sensenbrenner
November 27, 2003

At the independence celebration of their Flag Day tonight, local Albanians will be rallying around the presidential campaign of retired Gen. Wesley Clark, who as NATO commander led the 1999 bombing campaign to stop ethnic cleansing in Kosovo.

"He saved a lot of lives" of ethnic Albanians, said Gani Ahmetaj, who was born in Kosovo and came to the United States 10 years ago as a refugee. "To Milosevic, he held out peace in one hand and bombs in the other. I like people like this. They can use force effectively as a last resort."

....

"I don't think that the Albanian community has particularly strong partisan leanings naturally," Lease said, but they are "strongly moved to Clark's candidacy on a real personal, gut level.

"There were a lot of Albanians who hadn't missed a day of work in six years who took a day off to meet General Clark when he campaigned in Milwaukee. They love him."

Sheesh. Some people seem to get their ideas about what high level military commanders do from watching old John Wayne movies.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

188. So you're saying that military families/soliders aren't people?

Children and families are also most certainly civilians.

[Carolina]

107. exactly, Clark's appeal

is his leadership experience and ability.

[Cleita]

9. The fact that he governed well speaks positively for him.

We can't say the same for those who have governed badly who seek the Presidency. Bigger is not better. Bush governed Texas badly and he is even a worse President, yet Bill Clinton governed a small state Arkansas very well and he was also a good President.

[AmericanDem]

13. governing a tiny state and

protecting the worlds #1 superpower is too far of a stretch in our current world affairs.

[Upfront]

12. Di It Right

while on the job. More then can be said for B***. He is the guy we need to beat, remember?

[AmericanDem]

17. Yes we do need to beat Bush

with a strong candidate that can not only win but protect us, deal with world leaders and set our country on a strong prosperous course.

As I've said a few times, Dean lacks lil if any world leadership experience.

[Skwmom]

14. If Dean is the nominee, Rove will make sure that this fact is

repeated again and again and again as well as the fact that much of Vermont's healthcare was provided by federal monies.

[ldf]

87. rove won't have to repeat anything

we have plenty of good old democrats that will do it for him. we are SUCH a cantankerous bunch.

the key to a leader is the people he/she surrounds himself with. dean has done a damn good job in that area or he wouldn't have been elected 5 times.

clark is a good man, but again, has no elected experience. running the military, where everyone HAS to do what you tell them to, is a far cry from running the country, where everyone is second guessing every move you make.

i think clark will make an excellent vp, where he will GET the experience needed to take over when dean's terms are up.

sorry, this dean bash won't hunt.

[Bombtrack]

15. exactly, I think Kucinich might have governed more people in Cleveland

or at least, almost as many.

It does matter because Dean commonly berates his opponents for not having executive experience. Vermont is not a complicated state, and the American voters will take that into account. When Dean said that he put another 3 percent of Vermont Chidren on healthcare, what's that, 2000 kids?

It matters because it's one of the MAIN reasons he gives for being a good or better candidate.

[AmericanDem]

49. yes i agree with you.

That is why I decided to write this subject heading. When people can actually see the number of folks he "governed" they also will take a step back. we have Mayors that handle just as much if not more responsibility.

[Carolina]

108. totally agree ...

The size and the homogeneity of Vermont's population do matter in the larger context of the general election. They shouldn't considering the fools currently running (more like ruining) things but the GOP will use his small state against him as a target, as an example of his inexperience.

[IndianaGreen]

18. The same could have been said about Bill Clinton

and as we all know, despite our differences with Big Dog, President Clinton was a far better President than both Bushes and brainless Reagan combined.

[AmericanDem]

20. Clinton was great

Understand, where we were in 1992 and where the world is today.

[IndianaGreen]

30. The world today is no different than it was in 1992

There have always been bad guys and psychopaths. The difference is that now one of the bad guys and psychopaths resides in the White House.

9/11 was a criminal act, not an act of war. Our response to 9/11 has been inappropriate and disproportionate, and we have lost the strategic and moral advantage. Bush has done more damage to this country than 100 bin Ladens could have done in 1000 9/11s.

[ozone_man]

32. What planet is he from?

My take is that today is closer to 1932 than it is to 1992. History tends to repeat itself, though not in exactly the same way. Time to shed our modern day Hoover and restore the Republic and jobs. Bring the troops home for pete sakes and start to fix the economy.

[AmericanDem]

35. Snap your fingers and tell that to the rest of the world.

EDIT Note; This was meant for the post above you.


and until you are able to do that or until you can pull your head out of the sand, we need to be protected. Along with being protected comes the advantage of rebuilding our country with the middle class prospering.

No more top 2% and the crooks running Our White House in power!

[Lorien]

43. We WERE protected

when we had a Dem in office. Clinton thwarted several Al-Queda plots that were similar to 9/11 (read Al Franken's newest).

[AmericanDem]

37. I have respect for pacifists but...

I want family and I to live another day. Best to you.

[w4rma]

177. Straw man argument

Gen. Clark, Sen. Kerry, Gov. Dean, Sen. Edwards, Sen. Lieberman and Rep. Gephardt are not pacifists.

[Carolina]

109. yeah, but Dean is no Clinton

and Arkansas is a larger more diverse state than Vermont, then (in 1992) and now.

[democratreformed]

181. Population of Arkansas

2,673,400

In 1992, roughly 2.4 million

[Don_G]

25. So What!?!?

Experience is experience and he has more on his record of being a uniter that works to solve problems than most.

Exploit THAT flaw in the advertising and we can toss Dimbo out on his ass.

[AmericanDem]

29. He has NO world experience!

In this day and age, we can't have this. Things are alot different now then they were in 1992 or before.

We are a country at war. We will be for some time. One can say there is a learning curve for certain issues pertaining to our way of life etc. There is NO learning curve when it comes time to protect us and our allies abroad. Its a matter of life and death.

[Padraig18]

38. Show me a former President who's running, then.

Your analogy doesn't hold water.

[AmericanDem]

41. If you could write your statement

a lil clearer, I'll try to answer.

[Padraig18]

44. My question was quite clear

According to your criteria, Dean has no FP experience. Well, no one in the race has any executive-level FP experience except *. What's YOUR point?

[AmericanDem]

46. I'm not mincing words with you.

You want to throw in your own words such as "executive-level", words i never used here. You can, start your own subject heading.

[Padraig18]

48. Nice evasion

But you're backed into a corner, and I'm not letting you retreat. YOU make the huge issue that he has no FP experience, not me; I pointed out to you that NONE of our candidates have any. Your 'attack' on Dean in this regard is immaterial and irrelevant. Q.E.D.

[AmericanDem]

51. you don't get it

You are not backing me into anything. You are being avoided at this point because you are trying to start a new subject line using your terms. So go start it and perhaps I'll respond there.

Your having a hard time dealing with what you perceive to be negatives. The info and article I provided are fact. Deal with the facts.

If you think I will allow you more time to blow off steam, think again.

[Padraig18]

53. Sorry, nice try again.

I don't give a rat's arse about your article. The fact remains that NONE OF THE CANDIDATE'S has any actual FP experience, and the whole topic is a bogus, bullshit smear attempt.

[paulk]

78. you mean "executive " FP experience?

I'm sure that all the candidates who served in Congress have had some FP experience, serving on commitees, etc. at some point in their careers. Also they vote on bills having to do with foreign policy.

[Padraig18]

83. Exactly.

And Dean had to deal with the Canadian government. The whole issue is bogus, as I've demonstrated. :eyes:

[Eloriel]

100. Yeah, and they voted on those bills badly

VERY badly.

I for one am NOT impressed with someone sitting on some so-called foreign policy-related Congressional committee. That is NOT to me "foreign policy experience." Period. All it really means is that they're supposed to have access to more information than the rest of us -- you know, the kind of information that would've led them to understand that an Iraq War Resolution vote was NOT a good idea.

But then, common sense could've told them that. Apparently they didn't have any of that, either. After all, the notion of installing democracy at the point of a gun is a little oxymoronic, isn't it? ISN'T IT?

Or, barring all that, they could've listened to their constituents. But nooooo, they couldn't be bothered to do that either. After all, this was a "popular" President and their DLC handlers and advisors were absolutely positive they'd get creamed if they voted against the war.

Well, they are reaping the results of the bad judgment they sowed. And I for one am just thrilled.

Eloriel

[paulk]

156. what are they reaping? Defeat?

Will you be just as thrilled with four more years of GW Bush?

I find this "throw the baby out with the bathwater" anger with the Democrats frightening. Yes, they fucked up. Let's punish them. Let's nominate a libertarian centrist who will drag the entire party down with him to defeat in 2004. That'll show 'em.

Despite their faults, there are candidates running who have a chance to win this election, who's core political beliefs are a lot closer to the liberalism I've seen you espouse here at DU in the past.

But these candidates made mistakes, and they must be punished.

[Carolina]

113. exactly, no world leadership

in military matters in this very different world at war that the Bushistas have created and will exploit to their full advantage.

A President Dean would undoubtedly be a much better leader, uniter, head of state than anything Bush. I just fear that a nominee Dean will not reach that point because he would have to contest Bush on issues of war, military leadership (as if chimpy has any but being COC he will be portrayed otherwise) and world experience. Granted Bush had none of these in 2000 and is still an imposter, but 4 years as the nation's leader (I gag writing that), as the encumbent lend him a stature he is totally unworthy of and that will be formidable to any candidate without military experience and leadership.

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Padraig18]

39. That's a lameass cheap shot!

Dean was in his office seeing patients, for what it's worth...

[rumguy]

47. Dean has pinache and style, more that Clark perhaps

Given the stunt that Bush pulled today, maybe we need someone politically creative like Dean...

what about Clark's beady eyes?

[Skwmom]

54. If calling people cockroaches and boneheads is style

I would say the dumbing down of the American public is complete.

[rumguy]

55. explain?

cockroaches?

[Scott Lee]

71. But what if they ARE cockroaches and boneheads?

I prefer truth. Or, we could have more mealymouthed PC bullshit from McAuliffe-run DLC. Your choice.

[RetroLounge]

192. and you are a prime example

if you can't recognize a metaphor or a simile.

Look them up, you may learn saomething. Though I doubt it.

[Jai4WKC08]

164. Clark's eyes

rumguy, let me introduce you to a handy tool, called a dictionary.

From Merriam-Webster on-line:
Main Entry: beady
Pronunciation: 'bE-dE
Function: adjective
Inflected Form(s): bead·i·er; -est
Date: 1826
1 a : resembling beads b : small, round, and shiny with interest or greed <beady eyes>
2 : marked by bubbles or beads <a beady liquor>

Regardless of whatever else you may think about Gen Clark, he has large, wide, open eyes.

But then, I don't guess you need to allow your opinions to be swayed by objective observation.

[drscm]

52. That's probably more than Bush governs...

if one were to include only those to whom he is beholden.

[slinkerwink]

56. SO WHAT?

The governorship of Vermont has MORE responsibilities than the governorship of Texas does----I should know because I used to effing live in Texas. The lieutenant governor had more control over state affairs than the governor did. Also, Dean had to deal with Canada since it's right on the border of Canada. That to me speaks of Dean's ability to deal with foreign policies.

DEAN HAS BEEN to 52 COUNTRIES-----that's more than Bush ever did.

[AmericanDem]

59. WOW you lived in "effing" Texas?

Do you live or have you lived in "effing" Vermont? I personally don't buy you argument that having to deal with Canada, no matter how marginal I feel it was, gives people the right to say one has "World" experience. Just my opinion.

[slinkerwink]

64. I live in New England right now, so I do know what's gone on in

Vermont now, and let me tell you--------Canada isn't as marginal as you think it is---you underestimate trade relations with Canada at your peril.

[Eloriel]

101. You were the one who said Dean had NO foreign policy exp.

And now that someone has proven you wrong, you reject that. "No, that's not good enough." WRONG.

You were wrong. Period.

And as I pointed out, he also dealt with the head of Argentina.

Eloriel

[Padraig18]

60. This was just flame bait, slinker...

He resuurected some old stuff, because he's probably too tryptophan-ed out to create some new stuff. Holiday work rules at the Anti-Dean Poster's League, don't you know... :eyes:

[AmericanDem]

63. Fill me in on something

When was this "resurrected" from? As you can see from the amount of posts I have, I havent been here forever. I'm suspecting it was during Dean's unchallenged fun time in the summer. Am I correct in assuming that?

[Padraig18]

65. No, you are not correct.

This is raised in some form or another at LEAST weekly, either here or in P&C. This dead horse has been beaten to death.

[rumguy]

67. didn't you think Dean's summer tour was brilliant?

it show's he knows how to attract attention and get his message out...

[AmericanDem]

73. He sure did....

He came up with the perfect thing to say at the time and went virually unchallenged through out that time.

You see it's tough on other candidates when you have major media doing everything they can to get Dean in while avoiding others completely. Its all for a much bigger reason then yourself or his others supports think.

They want nothing more then Dean vs Bush. As i'm sure you are aware. See more news for you resurrected.

[rumguy]

74. Dean's passion is what attracts attention

Clark? Does he have passion?

[Carolina]

119. that's true

but what difference did the facts of the Texas governorship, or any facts for that matter, make in 2000? Nothing Bush did (or didn't do) was examined by the media then while Gore's every word, deed or sigh was mercilessly dissected and distorted.

Now fast forward to 2004 and just imagine what the liberal media that relentlessly fawns over Bush will do to the former governor of a very small, homogeneous state; to the opponent who has no war record or military experience? Oh, and let's not forget their willfull use of wedge issues like gay marriage (or in the case of Vermont, civil unions). The bastards will even challenge Dean's very assertion that he has executive leadership experience. And they will sneer at anything northeastern, as in a very small northeatern state.

[quinnox]

61. Yes, Dean is from a tiny obscure state in New England

Most people don't even know what Vermont is about.

And a grand total of THREE electoral votes won't help a hell of a lot!

This is just another reason to nominate someone other than Dean.

[Padraig18]

62. LOL!

That is THE lamest attack I've heard yet, quinnox. :P

[Scott Lee]

69. So our nominee should only come from a large state....right?

You DeanHaterz are really scraping the bottom of the barrell lately. It's going to be fun watching you all implode when Dean is nominated.

[Padraig18]

72. Im popping popcorn and providing opera glasses ....

.... for the night he's nominated, so we can all watch their heads explode. :P

[Scott Lee]

92. Should be quite a show. But ewww, what a mess.

[Name removed]

102. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Uzybone]

154. Nyah nyah nyah

celebrate watching democrats heads explode whilst Dean is being slaughtered by Bush. Do you guys want Dean to be Dem nominee even more than you want Bush and his GOP brood out?

[Scott Lee]

155. Breathe in....breathe out. Breathe in....breathe out.

Repeat softly to yourself "Howard Dean, Democratic nominee for the President of the United States."

Ommmmmmm....Ommmmmmmmm

[AmericanDem]

77. yes and then

perhaps the country.

[Carolina]

122. no, a more diverse state

I really don't detect Dean hatred but rather Bush fear. Fear that a governor of a small northeastern state with no military record or experience can go up against the Bush machine that will exploit its war experience, it's alleged demonstrated ability (gag, choke, puke) to fight terrorists. Sadly in this case, encumbency carries a lot a weight (and power) and 43 is hellbent on not repeating the fate of his father

Don't get me wrong, I sincerely hope Dean can be our David against the Bush Goliath. But I have that sinking feeling I had after the media spun the 2000 Gore-Bush debates into Bush wins. That gut wrenching foretold of the horror to come in a shrub misadministration.

[AmericanDem]

165. The south is much more needed

:kick:

[maxanne]

179. good idea

Let's modify the Constitution so that only people from big states can run for office. States like TEXAS perhaps.

I think New England should secede from the Union and form it's own country.

No maple syrup for you.

Feel free to write off my concerns, as I am from a small unimportant state as well.

[RetroLounge]

194. And a grand total of THREE electoral votes won't help a hell of a lot!

Tell that to President Gore.

[CTLawGuy]

66. you are going to be sad...

When the Bush-enabling candidate you support is going to have to drop out...

You'll just have to vote for Bush then...

[ibegurpard]

68. As compared to which current candidate's GOVERNORSHIP

of anything?

[ShaneGR]

70. I can't figure out why this wasn't locked

It's obvious flame-bait.

[AmericanDem]

75. Please

That is the #1 famous reply from Dean people that don't like dealing with facts. Your words are groudless!

[ibegurpard]

76. What facts? That he governed a small state?

So what? So did Clinton. And which of the other current nominees has governed ANYTHING?

[AmericanDem]

80. yes and the fact

always crying LOCK

[Carolina]

125. Dean is no Clinton

and Vermont is not comparable to the larger, more diverse Arkansas.
Arkansas roots appealed to southerners, while unfortunately, the GOP has demonized the northeast as a hotbed of liberalism that will not appeal to the red states we will need to carry in 2004.

Clinton and Arkansas won with coattails. I fear Dean and Vermont will lose.

[Pastiche423]

79. WHAT FACTS?

Who here doesn't know that Dean was governor of Vermont for 11 years? Who here doesn't know about the state of Vermont?

At least Dean has governed civilans for eleven years! And he did a damn fine job of it too.

[Padraig18]

81. They don't want to acknowledge that.

If they did, then they'd have to admit he has executive experience, which none of the others do.

[AmericanDem]

82. stay on topic

of my subject heading and please try to keep thing civil, others find this thread helpful!

[Padraig18]

84. Who finds this thread 'helpful'?

:eyes:

Besides, you only start the thread--- you don't control what happens to it.

[bicentennial_baby]

85. I sincerely doubt that

[AmericanDem]

88. I sincerely Know that!

[Scott Lee]

93. If the DeanHaterz don't have flame bait, what DO they have?

Come on don't be so mean.

[elperromagico]

86. Well, Bush didn't govern anybody in Texas.

The Lieutenant Governor and the State Legislature did.

[quaker bill]

89. None the less, it was chief executive experience.

Five consecutive terms of it as well.

If your argument holds water, then the most qualified for the office will be the only person running in 2004 with experience at running a country of 280 million people. Obviously GW Bush* is the answer in that case.

No one but the President has experience at being the President. I am convinced that there is no other job like it.

However, Chief Executive civilian government experience must be similar in many respects. No one can run a large government, like the State of Vermont, without being able to pull together and manage a competent team. The other thing is that as a Governor, you make the final decisions and take the responsibility for them personally.

This is entirely different than the compromise oriented collective decision making of a collegial body like the Senate or the House of Representatives. This job emphasizes a different skill set.

It is also different from high level command in the military. Clark, while supreme allied commander of NATO was still a mid-level functionary in the chain of command. Don't get me wrong, Clark is a most impressive individual and well qualified for the job. But as a resume item, this position does not have the same solitary command / control / responsibility paradigm of the chief executive of a civilian government. And in the final analysis, the population you govern as a 4 star general is required to take your orders and salute. This is not true on the civilian side.

I think civilian government chief executive experience is the most appropriate resume for the Presidency. I liked Bob Graham as well, he ran a bigger state, and voted against IWR. It's a shame his campaign never caught on.

[LouisFC]

90. mid-level functionary?

I don't believe I have ever heard the Supreme Allied Commander, Europe referred to as a mid-level functionary. Did I misunderstand your post? Correct me if I am mistaken but doesn't this position report directly to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs.

Clark is widely credited for keeping together the 19 member coalition that comprised the Kosovo action. Certainly a far more complex and diverse group than the population of Vermont. They were under no obligation to do as he said. It is not civilian chief executive experience, but certainly he learned the art of getting things done with people who didn't necessarily share his agenda.

[Pastiche423]

95. Like General Sir Mike Jackson?

[LouisFC]

98. Well Yes...

Please see his comments below...

War is the Easy Part
Dominc Lawson & Sean Rayment, The Sunday Telegraph 2/23/03
MIKE JACKSON: The circumstances surrounding KFOR's entry into Kosovo and, in particular, the circumstances which surrounded Pristina airport, which lasted for about 48 hours, were very peculiar to the extraordinarily complex political situation at that point. But I'm not trying to duck the issue. When the stakes are high and you have commanders quite rightly determined to succeed in the mission they have been given, opinions can vary and there can be friction. This is human nature in a way, and military history is full of incidents whereby, under pressure of events, there have been disagreements but which then are overcome”

http://tinyurl.com/qyg0

[Pastiche423]

115. I agree that opinions do vary

And in the case of Pristina Airport, clark's opinion was wrong, and General Jackson's was correct. So says, both clark's and Jackson's higher ups.

[mzmolly]

103. DUP****

ZZZZZZZZZZZZ

[mzmolly]

104. *big yawn*

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Night night.

[slinkerwink]

105. :kick:

[DrFunkenstein]

110. Vermont Population Was 564,964 In 2000, So It's Probably Even Less

As New York magazine put it: About 1/3 of Queens.

So when he says he balanced the budget and gave everyone healthcare (which is apparently a gross overstatement), we should probably take it with a grain of salt.

PS - The New York magazine article reminded that Dean told a joke comparing Bush to the Taliban:

"Dean starts off awkwardly, venturing a Taliban joke, proposing that the Bush administration is so regressive that soon girls won’t be allowed to go to school. No one laughs."

I've already heard Ed Gillespie use this. Think it might come back during the campaign? Do you think the population of the Ben & Jerry state will come up?

[slinkerwink]

111. btw, Dean got the Endorsement of Queens Democrats

[FubarFly]

112. The question isn't whether or not it will come up...

it will, but rather, how will you defend your Democratic candidate when it does?

Maybe you can start by practicing here. ;-)

[FrenchieCat]

114. Well

even San Francisco has got a bigger population than Vermont! 750,000+

and There are more than 600,000+ Puerto Ricans in New York alone!

But the Dean supporters have one goal in mind.....nominate Dean...

The goal of Getting Bush out of the White House is secondary...

My goal is the reverse...why? Because I can see the forest!
The trees do not stand IN MY WAY!

[FubarFly]

116. Yes, yes

and Clark has governed who now?

Last time I checked, 600,000 is greater than 0.

[FrenchieCat]

124. The issue in the 2004 election

will not be governing...it will be National security, Terror war, 9/11 and War.....

Get used to it now.

What Dean is offering is being the former Governor of a tiny populated homogenious state.....offering to raise taxes on the middle class....and with foreign policy experience that is so negligable (Canada???) until it's actually funny.....and Karl Rove will make sure that he has many Americans in stiches over it.

No, Clark has negotiated peace, led and ended wars, seen the dictator he went after sent to the Hague.....

That, sir/madame is the type of experience that will beat George Bush.

Governing is secondary and Clark has done some of that as well.

See those trees in the forest...they are blocking your view of what life will be when Bush is elected for another 4 year term.

Personally, I don't know what I will do if this happens....besides going back to France.

Read it.....the handwriting is on the wall.

[DrFunkenstein]

128. You Are Forgetting Jobs And Health Care

I am a Clark fan, too, but he would do well to address these two issues forcefully and often.

I wish that environment was in there, too, but it always seems to be a secondary issue.

[FrenchieCat]

133. Clark's position on Health Care.....in an op-ed he wrote

http://www.thestate.com/mld/state/news/opinion/7146730.htm
The State Columbia, SC Friday Oct. 31, 2003
Time to help those who can't afford health care
By WESLEY CLARK, Guest columnist
------------------
There is a health care crisis in America — two crises, actually. The
first is that 44 million Americans don't have health insurance,
including 8.5 million children. In South Carolina alone, 500,000
people are uninsured; 55,000 of them are children. This is appalling.

We know what happens to people without health insurance: They wait
until they are really sick to seek care, and they wind up in the
emergency room. For many, the treatment comes too late: The Institute of Medicine has estimated that 18,000 Americans die every year because they don't have health insurance. And the costs get passed on to the rest of us, to the tune of about $35 billion a year.

The second crisis is that many of the families who do have health
insurance are being pushed to the brink to pay for it. More than six
in 10 Americans who are heavily in debt say they are there because of
high medical bills. And nearly half of all Americans say they
routinely have a difficult time paying for their health care.

I have a plan to address both of these crises. This plan has three
components.

First: prevention and cost-effectiveness. My plan ensures that all
people in South Carolina and all Americans have access to preventive
services that would diagnose diseases early, improve health and
constrain long-term costs. It also contains a number of initiatives
to help us get the most value for our health care dollars. That means trusting independent health clinicians, instead of HMO executives, to determine what treatments work best. And it means taking steps to guard against waste and inefficiency, such as instituting competitive bidding for Medicare services and using the latest technology to streamline paperwork and medical records filing.

Second: universal coverage for children and universal access for all
Americans. Under my plan, the government would give parents who need
it a new, progressive tax credit to pay for their children's health
insurance. In return for this assistance, parents would be required
to enroll their children in a responsible health insurance plan. And
my plan would ensure that every American adult has access to
coverage. It would allow those without access to job-based coverage
to purchase health insurance through the same system that covers
members of Congress.

Third: extra assistance to some of our most vulnerable populations,
here in South Carolina and across the country. My plan includes
assistance for low-income adults and workers in between jobs, and it
provides seed money to help small businesses pool their resources to
pay for health insurance for their employees. Finally, my plan
expands health options for reservists and their families, and
provides improved health care services for our veterans. These
individuals put their lives on the line for our country. The least we can do in return is give them the care they need.

How am I going to pay for this? Last week, I released my "Saving for
America's Future" plan, outlining a strategy to save $2.35 trillion
over 10 years. This will provide the money to pay for my jobs plan
and my health care plan, fund education, national service and other
pressing priorities, and still make a significant down payment on
balancing our budget.

Health care in America isn't just a question of what kind of policies we want, it's a question of what kind of country we want to be. And if you share my vision for an America where everyone has access to the health care they need, then I ask you to join with me to create an America as good in practice as it is in promise.

[FrenchieCat]

134. Here's the environmental policy

Protecting the Environment
http://clark04.com/issues/environment/
Responsible conservation of our natural resources, to protect Americans' health and welfare

America's natural resources - our air and water, seacoasts, mountains, wetlands, forests, prairies, and wilderness - are among the glories of this nation. They are a legacy passed down by those who have come before, and a birthright that we are honor-bound to preserve for future generations.

Protecting the environment is a basic and fundamental responsibility of our national leaders. Those who would sacrifice our natural gifts to give well-connected insiders a short-term windfall ignore this responsibility and undermine America's long-term economic strength. As President, I will protect the health of our citizens and conserve the resources our children will inherit. In an era when environmental threats - such as global warming and the loss of our protective ozone layer - pose real and tangible dangers, environmental protection is critical to the well-being of all Americans.

President Bush's environmental record is a disgrace. He has betrayed the public trust and is mortgaging our children's future. The President and his staff of co-opted lobbyists are the true environmental radicals - there is nothing conservative about turning over our public resources to special interests. President Bush has rolled back rules that keep our air and water safe, pushed to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling, worked to increase logging and mining on public lands, left taxpayers with the tab for toxic waste cleanups, and walked away from efforts to address global warming. In light of this record, the non-partisan League of Conservation Voters has concluded that "George W. Bush has compiled the worst environmental record in the history of our nation."

As President, I will immediately halt the Bush Administration's unprecedented assault on the environment. I will safeguard the health of our children and families by cleaning our air, water, and soils, protecting our public lands, restoring U.S. leadership on global environmental and energy security issues, and building a broad coalition of nations to protect our shared values.

My environmental policy has four key elements:


Clean air and water. Americans are entitled to clean air and clean water. We should be proud that our air and water are cleaner today than a generation ago, but much more progress is needed. It is unacceptable that asthma rates have climbed sharply in the past decade, that many lakes and streams remain unsafe for fishing and swimming, and that millions of Americans lack access to safe drinking water. Yet the Bush administration has led a stealth campaign to undermine the laws that protect our air and water. Under its so-called "Clear Skies Initiative," the Bush administration proposes to weaken and delay rules that protect us from soot and smog, and allow dramatic increases in emissions of mercury from power plants. It proposed easing the limits on arsenic in drinking water, backing down only after a public outcry. It abandoned the "no net loss" wetlands policy put in place by the first President Bush. It continues to undermine enforcement of clean air and water laws with extended delays and inadequate budgets.
As President, I will:


Vigorously enforce all clean air and clean water laws, by reversing the Bush administration's cutbacks in environmental investigations, funding, and enforcement;

Enforce the Clean Air Act so that big factories undertaking mammoth expansion projects modernize their pollution controls - just as new plants are required to do;

Impose tough limits on emissions of mercury from smokestacks;

Advance environmental justice by ensuring that health hazards are not borne by the most vulnerable among us-minorities, seniors, children, and low-income communities;

Support aggressive steps to control soot and smog;

Restore budgets for sewage plants and storm water controls; and

Protect our nation's wetlands by enforcing a "no net loss" policy.

Toxic wastes. Polluters should pick up the tab for cleaning up their own mess. It is unacceptable that the tax on companies that generated the most toxic waste has been allowed to expire, that the Superfund program is running out of cash and that the cost of toxic waste cleanups is being shifted to the taxpaying public. Yet the Bush administration has refused to support the Superfund tax on corporate polluters, sought to shift responsibility for cleanup cost to the taxpaying public, slowed the pace of cleanups and supported unjustified exemptions for the Department of Defense from toxic waste cleanup liability.
As President, I will:


Support reinstatement of the Superfund tax on companies that have generated the most toxic wastes;

Support strong community right-to-know rules concerning the presence of toxic chemicals in our communities;

Reject proposed new exemptions for the Department of Defense from toxic waste cleanup liability; and

Promote quick and efficient cleanups to protect public health and safety.

Wildlife and wild places. We are stewards of the land and all that live on it. Our public lands must be available for fishing, hunting, and hiking, and America's scenic beauty must be held in trust for the generations to come. It is unacceptable that the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge remains under threat, that many of our national parks are in a state of disrepair, and that deforestation threatens an epic loss of biodiversity around the world. Yet the Bush administration has fought to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling, broken a promise to eliminate the maintenance backlog in our national parks, subverted the Roadless Rule, and misled the public with a so-called "Healthy Forest Initiative" that in fact promotes logging and scales back review of logging plans in the national forests.
As President, I will:


Oppose efforts to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling;

Fix our crumbling national parks by ensuring sufficient funds for park maintenance;

Codify and enforce the Roadless Rule, which bans new road building on millions of acres of national forest;

Work aggressively to protect communities from wildfires, thinning small trees near homes and towns while rejecting proposals to allow logging of medium and large size trees in remote areas under the guise of fire protection;

Strongly support the goals of the Endangered Species Act - to protect the ecosystems upon which threatened species depend, to protect the species themselves from extinction, and to implement our obligations under international conservation agreements; and

Increase funding for fighting deforestation and protecting biodiversity around the world.

Clean energy/global warming. This nation can no longer defer serious action to reduce our consumption of fossil fuels. We urgently need to confront the challenge of developing a 21st century energy policy, both as a matter of national security -- to reduce our dependence on foreign oil -- and to combat the profound danger of global warming. This is a challenge that we can meet with American ingenuity, resolve, and technological leadership. Yet the Bush Administration has adopted a head-in-the-sand policy of denial, delay, and deceit. Its energy plan is stuck in a past when it seemed that fossil fuels could be burned with impunity. On global warming, the Administration walked away from the Kyoto Protocol, announcing its unilateral approach to the world. At home, it has pursued a do-nothing policy, calling for weak, voluntary measures to cut carbon emissions, while opposing real, bipartisan solutions. And it has even sought to obscure efforts by its own scientists to inform the public about climate change. In June 2002, the President dismissed an EPA report warning of the human impact on climate change, and in June 2003, the White House deleted key language on the health and environmental consequences of climate change from a key Administration report on the environment.
As President, I will pursue a far-reaching, strategic energy plan to reduce our consumption of fossil fuels, including our dependence on foreign oil; cut greenhouse gas emissions; and maintain economic growth. I will:


Promote the use of fuel-efficient cars, SUVs and minivans by --

Strengthen automotive fuel efficiency standards, in consultation with scientists, environmental groups, industry, and others;

Accelerating the use of hybrid vehicles through targeted tax incentives; and

Spurring research into hydrogen-powered fuel cells;

Impose a cap on carbon emissions from power plants by putting the market to work as we did in controlling acid rain -- with tough but fair limits, coupled with an emissions trading program, so that businesses will get the incentives they need to invest in emission control;

Aggressively promote the use of renewable energy like solar and wind, ensuring that we will be capable of producing 20 percent of our electricity from renewable energy sources by the year 2020;

Harness the power of bioenergy, turning farm products into energy and fuel and helping American farmers profit from the fight against global warming;

Use standards, incentives, and other measures to significantly increase the energy efficiency of our power plants, our business equipment, and our home appliances;

Invest in the capture and sequestration of carbon;

Upgrade our outdated electric grid so that power can be distributed efficiently and reliably;

Help communities plan for smart growth rather than suburban sprawl; and

Lead the United States to re-engage in international global warming negotiations, recognizing that American leadership is essential and that all nations must do their part in meeting this challenge.
From the soot and smog that threatens our health to the global warming that threatens our future, our well-being depends upon our ability to meet the extraordinary environmental challenges of the 21st century.

We can meet these challenges - and we can do so while growing a robust, prosperous economy. We can do this on the strength of American technology , American innovation and American drive. All we need is leadership.

[FubarFly]

130. So says you.

I don't think we will beat the Republicans by playing by their rules.

They are vulnerable on both domestic issues and foreign issues. And what we need is a fighter who stand up to their assault, and leave no doubt as to who represents the better party.

And yes, I do think that Clark is a fighter. But so is Dean. Drop the insulting forest BS, and grant me at least this point. Maybe if we respect each others POV's, we can both realize that our enemies aren't each other. Maybe if we found common ground, we could both work out ways to defeat b*sh no matter who the nominee is.

That's the forest I'm in. Care to join me?

[Pastiche423]

132. Read it.....the handwriting is on the wall

[FrenchieCat]

135. That must be pencil.....

because it will be erased.....by Bush and his national security trump card eraser.

[Pastiche423]

136. No, actually

it's a pen from my graphics program.

Since the most important issues of the 2004 election will be healthcare and the economy/jobs (every poll I have read said that), the people will come out in droves and vote for the candidate w/the best domestic record and against the manufactured fear.

[FrenchieCat]

157. Keep kidding yourself....

Pastiche423 says "the most important issues of the 2004 election will be healthcare and the economy/jobs....."

NOT!

[DrFunkenstein]

117. Well Said

"Dean supporters have one goal in mind.....nominate Dean...
The goal of Getting Bush out of the White House is secondary..."

I am against Dean because 1) The thought of 4 more years is anathema to me, and 2) There are several candidates better than Dean, including one of the most progressive candidates ever to have a shot at the nomination (Kerry, not Kucinich).

I think the Rove machine will chew Dean up like a McNugget. There is a very good reason that Dean always does worst against Bush in head-to-head polls. Several reasons, actually.

[FubarFly]

118. Not well said.

The goal of getting b*sh out of the White House is paramount.

It's too bad you have to disparage people, instead of realizing we all have the same goals- even if we have different ideas on how to achieve them.

[DrFunkenstein]

120. I Will Never Vote For Bush-Lite

Dean is an aloof elitist who sold his soul to the devil in order to get elected.

I'm sorry, was that disparaging?

[FubarFly]

121. No, it isn't very convincing,

but it doesn't attack Dean's supporters.

And of course I can replace "Dean" with "Kerry", and come up with a similar assertion. I don't care if you hate Dean, I just wish you would make a little more effort to show the many fine people who believe in Dean a little bit of respect. Is that too much to ask?

[DrFunkenstein]

123. Actually, I Was Replacing "Kerry" With "Dean"

People use much more disrespectful language than that on a regular basis against Kerry.

I don't hate Dean. I just don't like him. More importantly, I don't think he has a snowball's chance in hell of winning. The population issue is just one more nail in the coffin.

And, finally, there are many wonderful Dean supporters, which I mention often. There are plenty of Moonie-types around here, too, but they hardly exhaust the category.

[FubarFly]

127. Were you? Well that was subtle.

I'm sorry that people have unfairly smeared Kerry, but do you really think that justifies doing it in return?

Personally, I don't think we can beat b*sh unless the whole party works together. If Dean wins the nomination, it would be nice to have you on our side. Or is that just wishful thinking?

[maxanne]

180. no,

just boring and repetitious. There are only so many ways you can say it, and you've said them all in recent months. Over and over and over.:boring:

[Carolina]

126. excellent post, F4C

that's exactly why I'm a Clarkie, too.

[Donna Zen]

131. Forest vs Trees

The argument which includes the population of Vermont, to my mind interesting, but on the periphery, is being missed because it has not been identified.

The average American does not question whether Democrats or repubs. can govern a state, any state, large or small. In fact, they often cite Democrats as doing better on what Coulter calls "the mommy issues." The average American, large numbers of them, strongly believe that Democrats are weak on Defense and National Security issues. No matter how often Democrats vote their souls away on pork barrel Pentagon projects, the numbers never move.

"Who do you trust" will be the number on the GOP hit parade as soon as the Dems chose their candidate. Sure it is bogus, but it doesn't matter. Accept it, embrace it, because that is the meme. As Democrats will we receive little to no support from the press in fighting any image the GOP wishes to put out.

Weak on defense... Weak on defense... Weak on defense... Weak on defense... Weak on defense... Weak on defense... Weak on defense... Weak on defense... Weak on defense...

Got the message? It has little to do with the population and make up of Vermont. This is not actually about Vermont, and it certainly not going to be about Canada and speaking Spanish.
Why should I agree with the Dean supporters when they come at me with the ol' "you just need a security blanket." Huh? I live in the middle of the fuckin' woods and can and have lived off the grid for years. Shove the security blanket! I want American democracy to survive; I would like to see America live up to her stated ideals and values. Damn, I would like to see my daughter have a future in this country, although she is making plans to leave as soon as she has her degree. Leave...and I advised her to do it. WTF kind of planet is this?

Note: I met Bill Clinton, and Howard Dean is no Bill Clinton. Furthermore, 1992 is over. This is 2003 and you've got your war on. Keep your heads in the sand and you will get another, and another. Not accepting that as part of your belief system, won't change anything. The 2004 election will not be about speaking Spanish.

The population of Vermont is the kindling from the trees that will burn our collective electoral asses. Add removing middle class tax cuts however non-existant, and kiss the forest goodbye.

[AmericanDem]

137. Dean supporters scream foul....

Whenever anything is brought up that shows Dean in a negative light, no matter how small. It's part of the building up of there candidate. Take a look over this entire thread, with the exception of a few posts most are attacks on others for believing what they believe about Dean.

I posted this thread because this is a Major point in selecting the candidate I want. This isn't an attack on Dean. I'm doing my part to get as much information out to as many people as I can.

We are in the nomination process and I see how the GOP along with major media are doing everything they can to pump Dean up. All of the other candidates are being ignored flat out. The Dean supporters like to poo poo this and think to themselves that their candidate is this beloved figure that is on fire, he isn't. The deck is stacked, stacked against everyone BUT Dean.

The issue brought up so much from Dean supporters is his well oiled organization. We aren't nominating a organzation we are nominating a candidate. This origanzation KNOWS that Dean as virtually zero experience dealing with world affairs. They can't just some how make a few changes on their web site or have him say a few canned lines to get out of it. World affairs aren't and never were what Dean was about.

They are now trying to spin this very subject to their favor. They are saying "Clark, capitalizing on Bush fear mongering". Clark has never said or acted this way. This a subject I brought up. Its a subject many many through out this country are concerned with. This is a central issue of this up coming general election. Get out of the bubble you are in. I understand your deep belief in your candidate. You have followed him for months on end, watched as his popularity has grown. Remember something, during that period of growth Dean was virtually unchallenged. Now with a candidate like Clark in the race his supporters are seeing great challenges to Dean they have never seen before. Their reaction is bitterness.

[sangh0]

138. It's called "Attack the critic, ignore the issue"

though I have to admit, the small population of VT isn't much of an issue. It's more like "a cheap shot"

[AmericanDem]

139. Why is it a "cheap shot"

Why is it cheap shot to show Dean, the governor of a population of 608,000 and his wanting to lead our country of 292,704,612? http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/popclock

This is major issue for me and many many others. IT IS NOT A CHEAP SHOT!
Nor was it meant to be. This is a very central point to make available to others.

If you seem to think it is, this is something you need to deal with.

[sangh0]

145. Two words

Bill Clinton

[AmericanDem]

148. Apparently, you...

didn't bother reading this thread.

[Scott Lee]

166. Your post is so full of baloney it's hard to know where to start....

So let's just take it point by point...

Take a look over this entire thread, with the exception of a few posts most are attacks on others for believing what they believe about Dean.

False. What you see are retaliatory strikes for your attacks on Dean. Get it right. Notice that a virulent few (who are identified as belonging to ADJHS) start nothing but attack threads on Dean, or attack posts on him, rather than attempt to stimulate civil discussion about Dean's character, positions, or past.

HINT: When you throw out nothing but negative attacks, expect the same in return. It's called Nature.

I posted this thread because this is a Major point in selecting the candidate I want. This isn't an attack on Dean. I'm doing my part to get as much information out to as many people as I can.

You want as much NEGATIVE CRAP as possible to get out to people, you mean. There is never any serious attempt at civil discussion on Dean from your camp. Ever.

We are in the nomination process and I see how the GOP along with major media are doing everything they can to pump Dean up.

False. Post one major publication owned and operated by the GOP that is "pumping up" Howard Dean. With URLs and examples.

All of the other candidates are being ignored flat out. The Dean supporters like to poo poo this and think to themselves that their candidate is this beloved figure that is on fire, he isn't. The deck is stacked, stacked against everyone BUT Dean.

Laughably false. I would love to see any shred of evidence you have for this wild claim - I mean, besides paranoid fantasy. Lets see the facts, with your sources and links. Dean is being attacked pretty much from all sides, which means he must be doing something right.

The issue brought up so much from Dean supporters is his well oiled organization. We aren't nominating a organzation we are nominating a candidate.

An organization developed and inspired by a candidate. Do you think the Dean Machine would be doing this for Floyd The Barber?

This origanzation KNOWS that Dean as virtually zero experience dealing with world affairs. They can't just some how make a few changes on their web site or have him say a few canned lines to get out of it. World affairs aren't and never were what Dean was about.

How much experience in world affairs did Bill Clinton have before becoming President?

None, you say? Thanks. Next....

They are now trying to spin this very subject to their favor. They are saying "Clark, capitalizing on Bush fear mongering". Clark has never said or acted this way. This a subject I brought up. Its a subject many many through out this country are concerned with.

Who are "they" exactly? I am an ardent Dean supporter and I've never bitched at Clark for "fear mongering", so you'd better be more specific about your complaints, lest you be nailed for painting with that ol' broad brush.

Are you running out of paint?

This is a central issue of this up coming general election. Get out of the bubble you are in. I understand your deep belief in your candidate. You have followed him for months on end, watched as his popularity has grown.

False. I have only supported him for about two months. And I'll tell you what, my support for him solidified when I saw how beleagured he is on DU from the same suspects. This stuff not only seems to roll off of him, it has the opposite effect of making him stronger.

Remember something, during that period of growth Dean was virtually unchallenged. Now with a candidate like Clark in the race his supporters are seeing great challenges to Dean they have never seen before. Their reaction is bitterness.

Our reaction is mostly laughter! What's bitter are the incessant, meanspirited broadsides launched at Dean; for "lying" "dodging the draft" "fear mongering" "governing a puny state", take your choice of ridiculously juvenile jabs.

I have to ask - what about Dean's popularity, amazing organization and campaign building abilities, and strength makes you so furiously against him? Why do you use almost all of your time on DU attacking a candidate rather than building a case for your own?

Or, Gods forbid, attacking Bush?

[AmericanDem]

167. wish i had more time right now

They are now trying to spin this very subject to their favor. They are saying "Clark, capitalizing on Bush fear mongering". Clark has never said or acted this way. This a subject I brought up. Its a subject many many through out this country are concerned with.

Who are "they" exactly? I am an ardent Dean supporter and I've never bitched at Clark for "fear mongering", so you'd better be more specific about your complaints, lest you be nailed for painting with that ol' broad brush.

Are you running out of paint?



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=788596&mesg_id=788596


Quite franky I have no time right now. Your post is the same rehashed stuff said on a daily basis. The opinions I expressed here are ones I use to judge my candidate for election. Not smears as the subject heading I just posted from your felloe Dean supporter. Dean falls completely flat for me. Learn to respect the judgements and opinions of others.

[Scott Lee]

169. ONE post from a Dean supporter speaks for us all?

Good hell! If that's the case, all White people must have my beautiful grey green eyes! *flutter flutter*

You cherry picked one post from TLM to cry about an attack on Clark, then proceeded as if that was the rubrick of behavior and belief for all of us. You really should be ashamed. Us dems are not supposed to be so stereotyping and judgemental, are we? Maybe this has been put on hold by some of you so you can freely smear Dean?

[AmericanDem]

168. after providing a link for this guy, he went and posted there

after i provided a link to this guy, in regards to his tough request;

They are now trying to spin this very subject to their favor. They are saying "Clark, capitalizing on Bush fear mongering". Clark has never said or acted this way. This a subject I brought up. Its a subject many many through out this country are concerned with.

Who are "they" exactly? I am an ardent Dean supporter and I've never bitched at Clark for "fear mongering", so you'd better be more specific about your complaints, lest you be nailed for painting with that ol' broad brush.

Are you running out of paint?


The guy goes there and further posts under this subject heading. HMMMM taking the high road here to sound good, then going to that smear link and participating. Now there is a guy with Class.:puke:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=788596&mesg_id=791570&page=

edit; to provide link to his post

[Scott Lee]

170. Dude, you're really losing it..how is my post relevent to your complaint?

Who do you think I was referring to when I said "Senor Bring It On"?

HINT. I was referring to Bush*. Are you mad that I spoke of him in such terms? Why?

[RogueTrooper]

140. This has been said before

and the only thing that can be said about this particular attack is it's lack of effectivness. Is this the Clark campaign's turn? I am sure they will be no more effective than the others. Nice to see you resorting to the politics of fear. This tactic, against Dean, has not worked in the past; so, by all means, keep on trucking.

There were some posters, upthread, who were saying that Dean was all about winning the Primary at any cost. Wrong. Dean for America has always been geared up to fighting Bush in the election next year. Winning the nomination is what we have to do to get to the big game.

If Karl and George want to talk about Vermont: Fine. We can talk about health care, fiscal competence and civil unions. There is nothing in Vermont to be ashamed about, including it's size. If fact, we are quite proud of our candidate's achievments.

[Name removed]

141. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rumguy]

142. dean will pop that bubble and redefine the entire world

[RogueTrooper]

143. We do see the world as it is

That is why we support Howard Dean for President.

[AmericanDem]

144. Really?

Now try singing your song to the Majority of Americans!

[RogueTrooper]

147. This one?

Howard Dean is magic,
He wears a magic hat,
and when he saw the Whitehouse,
he said we'll take that back!

:evilgrin:


sung to the tune of "my old man's a dustman"

[AmericanDem]

149. He is a Magician all right!

The way he made that back ailment go away right after getting out of Vietnam duty, was a magic act for sure. Go Merlin!:party:

[Davis_X_Machina]

146. If Dean were a fraud and if VT were larger...

...he'd have been able to hide it better.

In a small state basically everyone who wants to gets to meets the governor -- I've met the last four governors of Maine, without really trying much -- and if he were a faker or an incompetent, Dean would have been out on his ass.

No amount of media consultancy or press-office smoke and mirrors will save your ass in a small state.

[brainshrub]

150. I see you point but...

Let's remember that 6 years before Bu$h got selected, he had ZERO political experiance.

[AmericanDem]

151. and considering his...

draft dodging,AWOL from the guard and the times we lived in then, do you honestly think he would have been elected. Gore did serve.

[Name removed]

153. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ClassWarrior]

159. BUUUUUTTTTT!!!!!...

Say it with me now...

WE'LL GLADLY VOTE FOR WHICHEVER OF THESE FINE AMERICANS GETS NOMINATED.

There, that was easy, wasn't it?...

:P

(edited to correct smilie...)

[creativelcro]

160. That's exactly right!

Whomever gets the nomination gets my vote... I'll vote for a particular candidate during the primaries, obviously... I think it's time for people to stop this juvenile, semiveiled smearing of candidates, there is plenty of that going on conservative sites. First, nobody gives a damn, most of us here already know who they are gonna vote for, second, if you have a point, at least make sure it hasn't already been discussed to death before... Don't you have something better to do than starting silly threads on issues that are unfounded, irrelevant, or simply flames ?
Peace

[AmericanDem]

161. "silly threads, unfounded, irrelevant, simple flames"

you mean like this post of a Dean supporter?http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=788596&mesg_id=788596

In your anger you fail to understand the great discussion of the issues this thread has provided. Unlike your belief that this was a "smear" against the candidate you support, it was discussion about concerns that many folks share.

...and to say "nobody gives a damn" is another example of not seeing the big picture. With over 160 replies i'de say "someone" gives a damn.

[creativelcro]

172. you are the angry person here

and regarding numbers of replies, saying that 160 replies imply that people give a damn is ludicrous. Generally, the silliest threads get the most replies. The same way the silliest tabloids have the widest circulation.
People at DU will just vote for the Dem candidate, and they have already made up their mind, whether people like you keep smearing the candidates or not.
So, basically your are wasting your and everybody else's time (you know that everybody dies in the end, don't you? So, use your time wisely because it's not gonna come back; one day, when you are 80, you may think back and feel terrible about all the time you spent flooding DU with silly threads trying to convert the already converted)...

[AmericanDem]

182. OH

Im angry? I guess that is why you have been deleted on this thread. Please stay on topic.

[creativelcro]

184. you have been deleted plenty since you signed up on DU

a few days ago...

[AmericanDem]

187. yes i have

at first when I came here, I seen how others were posting and thought it was within rules to voice an opinion back like that. I then found there is a set of rules, I try to do what I can to follow those rules.

The important thing to me is to express my opinions because I know I'm not alone in them. The next president of this country is so critical to what will happen to America, that I will do everything I can to make people active in the voting process have as much information as possible for making their decision.

Part of me doing that happens to go against the candidate you support. This is life you have to deal with that. You and many here have mentioned over and over again that this is a flame piece. It is anything but that. This has been a thorough discussion about issues that address the election of our next president.

[WillyT]

162. AmericanDem... Exactly When Was It That You Were Supporting Dean ???

Your phrase, "This does make me take a step back." certainly implies a changing of your mind. I don't remember your support for Dean in the past, could you explain please???

:shrug:

[AmericanDem]

163. I did consider Dean

I actually looked at Dean more as a great VP for Clark. I know I have posted either here or another board, Clark/Dean or Dean/Clark. That was until I learned more about Dean's bad back issue, his skiing break before college, his actual experience in world affairs and the GOP and major media doing what they can to pump him up, just to name a few.

Issues I write about are issue I truly feel strong about. This is one of them.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

189. Yep I agree Clark/Dean is the best ticket. Clark has the needed foreign

affairs experience. Dean has the organization and Trippi. Clark is better off at the top of the ticket. Dean can then run for Pres. the next time around and he'll then have the national experience - people will feel more "secure" with him then...

[creativelcro]

217. YUP, Clark is very good at exchanging hats with foreign leaders

that's why he should be prez according to your deep analysis... Very convincing argument.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

231. So because he exchanged hats with someone he's knocked off your

list. Also very deep...

Who do you support by the way? I always try to disclose that...

[creativelcro]

250. he's off my list because he has supporters like you and the other

guy who started the thread, and the other person who brags about having converted 300+ people in her/his church over to Clark...

[K8-EEE]

173. I Really Don't Care About That

It seems to me that nobody and I mean NOBODY is less qualified that GWB. I mean just the fact that Dean had an actual JOB before politics, being a doctor, that he had the foresight and guts to call this freaking war what it was way back, frankly my dream ticket is Dean and Clark!

There is not one person running that you can't say, oh but what does he know about (whatever?) At this point I'll take anybody with a heart, brain and concience because the guy up there now has none of the above.

[Name removed]

174. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[creativelcro]

175. I agree with that... and look a the thread

where somebody is bragging of having CONVERTED 300 people over to Clark during bible study... Those are exactly the people who are screwing this country with this fake religious, neoirrationalism wave... We need people who can think and make rational decisions, not sheep!

[AmericanDem]

183. What are you talking about?

your quote " just like when you actually had the audacity to say Gore was Bushlite". When was this and where. Please post back with the thread. Since I know this has never happened, the rest of your rant is rendered moot.

[jeter]

178. Lets rank that with other candidates

Kerry: governed 0
Clark: governed 0
Braun: governed 0
Kucinich: governed (population of Cleveland)
Lieberman: governed 0
Edwards: governed 0
Gepthardt: governed 0
Sharpton: governed 0

[bobthedrummer]

185. Your small population doesn't matter-he has public experience as

a former Governor of Vermont IMO.

[AmericanDem]

190. and He lacks world experience

In this time we live in we need a president that has the experience and exceptence of america for leading us thru this mess Bush created. A man like Dean that came away from the Vietnam war because of his bad condition does no more for our troops then what we have in place now.

I suggest you read thru this thread to here the views on the population you have brought up. They have been repeated thru out.

[bobthedrummer]

248. I have and you sound like a militarist IMHO.

eom

[creativelcro]

186. kick: Dean for Prez

[Hep]

191. From your understanding

What kindof depth of understanding are we talking about here?

[AmericanDem]

201. perhaps more...

then the depth it took to write your post.

[Hep]

207. That's not much of an answer

Just the fact that you put "from my understanding" in your post indicates that you don't consider yourself to be all that knowledgable on the subject. Not that you care. "Your understanding" is all you really need to go by.

As far as debunking your post, I think Will Pitt did a great job. If this is how you have to set the bar, then whatever. Do what you have to do. But threads like this only serve to demonstrate the langths some people will go to villify someone who they simply don't want to vote for.

Bertrand Russell has something to say to you, below.

[AmericanDem]

215. Dear DEAN supporter

Do NOT take offense to what ever reason this life long Democrat uses to base a decision of the next president of the USA.

Dean's lack of World Affairs experience, his bad back issues, his ability to ski with said bad back and his changing views on use of campaign funding has made this once dean supporter ( as VP ) anyway completely turn away from him.

[Hep]

220. Offense?

Nah, more like uteer confusion. For the life of me I just can't figure out the candidate bashers. And I'm in the majority.

I don't care if you supported Dean for archbishop of canterbury. Your arguments are lame. The funny thing is, you don't even need an argument. You're not voting for Dean. OK. Good enough. What's next?

There's something more than "I just want to share my opinion" going on in this forum. There's a sense of urgency. A lot of anger. Malice. I don't buy the faux objectivity and reason people try to cover it up with. It's discouraging, frankly.

[creativelcro]

222. unless, of course

people playing this game are not who they claim they are...

[RetroLounge]

195. Nothing but bullshit from a whining anti-Dean poster

Old news, been debunked, just like your last few posts.

Gotta suck backing a candidate when you have nothing positive to say about him, but only negative Dean posts to offer.

:boring:

[AmericanDem]

197. Debunked?

There is nothing I wrote that can be "Debunked". Its fact. Unfortunately for you they are facts of a candidate you support.

What last few posts?

[creativelcro]

202. that's exactly my point

The person who initiated this thread has been going around trying to bash Dean and Dean supporters for the last two weeks (i.e., since he signed up on DU) with idiotic posts he claims address legit issues, like this last one. He thinks he's doing a favor to Clark, but in reality he's having the opposite effect: he provides good publicity for Dean, and he also shows that at least some of Clark's supporters are just "converted", they are incapable of thinking.
Exactly, what have we learnt from this thread you claim has provided great insights into some issue ?...

[AmericanDem]

204. you wont learn anything.

As a Dean suppoter the best you can do is avoid what was written thro out this thread. To say I intiated anything and bashing Dean and his supporters is your selective view of what has been written. Anytime facts show a candidate in a negative light, his supporters are going to respond with insults, as you have done over and over.

I don't appreciate you referring to my posts as idiotic. This is your gut reaction to most poists i see by you. Frequent insults and person attacks on others because their viiew doesn't blend with your's. Perhaps you need a lil more growing to come out of tha stage in your life.

[creativelcro]

206. Well, you have to learn to live with that,

don't you ? the piece you posted is idiotic. And you know it. Your buddies are going around bragging that they are CONVERTING people over to Clark... This thread says absolutely nothing, the only good thing is that it provides good publicity for Dean...

[Hep]

198. Hey

Dean's the only one who has governed anything.

Duh.

[KaraokeKarlton]

199. Gee, how many people have the other candidates Governed?

Wow, what do you know? The ONLY one who has governed more people is George W. Bush. We all see how better Bush is than everyone else because he governed a lot of people!

Jesus H. Christ, people! It doesn't matter one bit how many people a politician led, how big the state was or how much money they were in charge of. What matters is what they do with what they have to work with...and Dean did a DAMN GREAT JOB!

Anyone who claims that Dean can't be president because Vermont is a small state must be a Bush supporter because he's the ONLY other governor running for president in 2004.

:eyes:

[AmericanDem]

200. Wrong!

Clark has. I suggest you read the thread.

[KaraokeKarlton]

203. Clark has never been a Governor of a state

If you are trying to compare leading military personnel, forget it becuase the issues and experience is totally different. Those who lead the military have a single agenda...serve the military and the president of the US, NOT the people in the military or their dependents. I know this because my ex-husband was in the military and the rules and decisions are not made to benefit the servicemen and their families. They are purely for the overall benefit of the military and the soldiers are viewed as "military property". Clark would be great at running the US military, but I don't think he is the best choice as president. And if he were to apply that military leadership to the presidency we'd all be in a shitload of trouble.

[AmericanDem]

208. Try reading the thread you are replying to

Thru out this thread it is noted how Clark governed not only troops but the family of troops. He was responsible for the schooling, health care, welfare and all other aspects of life any mayor, governor or president has to do.

get out of lazy mode and do some reading.

[KaraokeKarlton]

212. Military leaders DON'T "Govern"

Have you ever been in the military or been married to or the child of someone in the military? Military dependents are NOT civillians. Military personnel are the property of the United States Government. They can get thrown in the brig for getting a hickey. The military is NOT a Democracy. Military leaders don't make policy or represent people. They enforce the policies put in place by others and they are also the property of the US government and everything they do is to benefit the military machine, NOT the individual people in the military or their dependents. Talk to anyone who has been in the military or the dependent of someone in the military and they will tell you the same thing. In fact, now that I think about this I am having real concerns about Clark as either the President or the VP. I hadn't even considered this before. Military leaders are trained to run things in a totalitarian/authoritarian (sp?) way, and this is NOT the kind of experience that I want applied to the country. I'd like to see Clark run the military, for sure...but I don't think he would be a good president...and I really like him, too.

[FubarFly]

214. So how many people did Clark "govern" as a base commander?

Was it more than 600,000?

Did the families of the troops vote to reelect him him 5 times?

[Donna Zen]

218. Head of State

Actually Clark had "head of state status" if he skipped over being a governor, it might have something to do with choice of path, and nothing to do with his abilities.

Again. Vermont does not matter, the number of people in Vermont does not matter, what matters in 2004 that did not matter in 1992, is national security and foreign policy experience. As Democrats we start this race with the weight of 30 years GOP trash talk propoganda tied to our backs. As I read this thread, you are prepared to accept a lose based on some unknown virtue of Gov. Dean. What that is I cannot see. Fuzzy on the war, but good at spinning his tale. Protectionist economic policy wedded to a tax policy that Americans will not buy. A campaigning persona that turns many people off within seconds. A long hard record of saying things that are in the can and waiting for just that rovian moment to bite you in the ass.

I could certainly go on, but you don't care. I do care. I care very deeply about my country, my daughter's future, and the future of our planet. I understand how important it is to win in 2004, you don't care. Fine, we agree to disagree.

[Hep]

209. Really?

You mean someone has finally given a detailed explanation of exactly how being a general traslates into being president?

Clark would make a fine president, and there are lots of great arguments for him. This is not one of them. The fact that he's a general is definitely good for him, but to say that being a general is more in line with being president than being governor is, no matter how big the state is, reflects a certain lack of understanding of social studies.

[AmericanDem]

213. I suggest you...

put the facts before your distain for informatiomn that shows your candidate in a negative light. I marvel at how you read so much into that 1 sentence and then felt compelled to reply.

It has been repeated thru out this thread and even 1 or 2 above this post how Clark was responsible for the schooling, welfare ,healthcare needs of troops and family of troops. Take some time out and read.

[Name removed]

216. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[KaraokeKarlton]

233. Where are the links?

You are claiming that Clark did all these things for military dependents but you provide no proof of what you say. I've been a military dependent before and you speak as if you have no idea how the military works. Why do you think the enlisted woman who went AWOL to fight for custody of her kids is in so much trouble? She's the property of the military and her responsibilities to the military come before her responsibilities to her dependents. The military leaders are representatives of the military and their job is to make sure that military personnel act in the best interest of the military, period.

[AmericanDem]

247. Claiming?

listen you want links, get off your butt and get them.

Dean supporters will stop atr nothing to remove the stigma alot of feel about him.

He isn't the leader America needs at this time in our history.

[creativelcro]

211. KICK: Dean for President in 2004!!

[AmericanDem]

219. in typical fashion

Spam the thread with repeated insults. Until the subject heading is so off topic its locked down.

[FubarFly]

221. Are you just repeating your M.O. now?

Or are you actually interested in debate. Perhaps you can start by answering the following:

How many people did Clark "govern", and how did he "govern" them?

[Name removed]

223. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FubarFly]

225. Evading the question are we?

I've read the thread. And I am still awaiting your answer.

[creativelcro]

228. apparently, our friend collapsed

keeping up lies must be exhausting

[Name removed]

240. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

244. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

253. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AmericanDem]

260. wow i replied and the mod deleted it

hmmm but allowed this posters to remain

[AmericanDem]

245. i suggest you reread it

Dean supporters stop at nothing to pound there belief system into others.

[creativelcro]

224. HOW? That is simple: with the threat of being court-martialled

That's how the great military leaders "govern".

[KaraokeKarlton]

234. That's what you get when you post inflammatory topics

what do you expect?

And I still haven't seen any of these "Clark Governing" links providing proof of these claims that he served military dependents. Clark has been a military leader, but he hasn't governed anyone. There is a distinct difference between serving the government leaders and serving the people. Clark served the government leaders, NOT the people.

[AmericanDem]

243. inflammatory?

If it was so inflammatory, this thread would have been locked long ago. Truth by facts as shown is more like it.

typical negative reaction from supporters of this candidate.

[Zero Division]

230. This Clark supporter does not agree with these attacks on Gov. Dean

Governing over half a million people is still an impressive accomplishment, and the fact that Dean did so quite well in the minds of many Vermonters gives me great reassurance in face of the strong possibility that he may win the nomination and become our only way to prevent four more years of the * misadministration.

Honesty compels me to see the illogic in questioning Dean for governing a smaller state and yet not applying similar questioning toward Clark with regard to his political experience.

Both of these men possess the will and ideas necessary to free us from the morass of incompetence and corruption that is the Bush administration.

[bicentennial_baby]

232. Same here

Well said! :toast:

[AmericanDem]

241. please

diddle diddle

[slinkerwink]

235. Same here too....

It's not as easy to govern over the apparatus of a state---you have to deal with legislators, constituents, opponents, issues, and veto bills. That's a hard job to do in being a governor. Many people forget that Bush's governorship had no real applicable skills since it was the lieutenant governor and the legislature that did the heavy work according to the Texas state constitution.

In the Vermont state constitution, much of the responsibility is placed upon the governor instead of the lieutenant governor. That's why Dean was able to work part-time as lieutenant governor and still attend to his medical practice.

Let's see the Dean naysayers try to govern a state even though it might be small or humongous.....it won't be an easy task, that's for sure.

[AmericanDem]

252. look at this 1 trying to take the high road.

ms. slinkerwink, taking the high road lol. most know differently.

[FubarFly]

236. I agree.

"Both of these men possess the will and ideas necessary to free us from the morass of incompetence and corruption that is the Bush administration."


Here's to Democratic unity:

:toast:

[maddezmom]

238. agree

:toast: back at you.

[AmericanDem]

249. that is all you do is agree

and post back with 1/2 a 1 lined replies.

respect the wishes and judgements of other voters. If these are issues i find important in the selection of my candidate, respect it!

[AmericanDem]

242. they are not attacks

when are you going to understand that?

[curse10]

237. Yet another thread filled with Dean supporters

freakin' out over someone bringing something up about Dean. Why am I not surprised? :eyes:

[killbotfactory]

239. Yeah, and he accomplished a lot

Surely the greatest nation in the world can have some of that success as well.

[jpgray]

246. This is a fairly worthless thread

And certainly it has no business generating this many replies.

[AmericanDem]

251. at this point i agree with you

as the last 40 posts have been flames and insults from Dean supporters. this thread has sunk pretty low. look at the pause it had and then was restarted by a ( ding ) Dean supporter.

This is typical of all post that show Dean in a negative light. Supporters drag it to the lowest point until the mods lock it out.

so so typical.

[creativelcro]

254. your garden needs watering.... Forgot about that ?

[AmericanDem]

256. what i find funny is...

by donating a lil cash to DU, someone like yourself is given a lil room to be repetitively juvenile.

[Name removed]

257. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AmericanDem]

259. look at his post

i mean does this place getting any worse then what is going on here?

[jpgray]

255. You started it to tweak Dean supporters--we all know this

But the conduct of both those who want to sink Dean and those who want to spend time shoring him up from any attack (however nonsensical) is pretty appalling. This thread has 255 replies! There is a thread on wounded soldiers over in Editorial that has about 8. People's priorities here are so low--all they want to do is bang their personalities together.

[AmericanDem]

258. well i felt since

i started the thread i had to reply to things folks asked. that was until today when the Dean kids came out and did everything to insult and turn this into something that is appalling.

this thread does creep me out at this point. the story is repeated over and over in any thread by anyone that has even a tad negative to say about Dean. Hey its not my site the mods allow it.

the childish behavior has been here long before i signed on. actually folks told me i was crazy for being a part of it.
the story never changes. fact is , it seem many many of these Dean supporters are kids and that speaks volumes as to why most of this goes on.

[jpgray]

261. Well, if you find the behavior childish, you should abstain from it. (nt)

[creativelcro]

262. this is a totally worthless thread

and it was completely predictable when the thread was started. No excuse about that.

[Name removed]

263. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.