Faced with Dean's Electability, Vermont Critics Rally Around Dean

[slinkerwink]

Candidate Finds Support From Liberals With Whom He Once Butted Heads




MONTPELIER, Vt. -- They called themselves "the usual suspects." As a steadfast core of liberal Democratic politicians in Vermont, they spent more than a decade working closely, and often butting heads, with Howard Dean.

Now they also call themselves something else -- strong supporters of their former governor's surging presidential campaign.

"I know there are a lot of people up here surprised that I am backing him, 'cause I was one of the group that did not just go along with everything he wanted us to do," said Democrat Cheryl Rivers, a former six-term state senator from Stockbridge, who warred with Dean over his plan to change Vermont's health care system early in his tenure as governor. "I am preparing to be frequently disappointed, as I always am. But I see what Howard did here and what he brings to the race, and I give him my full endorsement."

snip>

Activists who once clashed with Dean over his policy agenda find themselves in a difficult position. Annette Smith, head of Vermonters for a Clean Environment, battled Dean over a gas-pipeline project in Rutland, a prospective mine in Danby Four Corners and a factory farm in Highgate. Under Dean, she once said, "EP meant expedite permits," instead of environmental protection.

But even she is singing a slightly different tune lately. "Look, it's no secret I don't think highly of many things he's done. He has plenty of explaining to do," said Smith, who has not endorsed a candidate despite what she said were repeated overtures from the Dean campaign. "But I also don't want to help Bush to be reelected. I have already seen quotes of mine used by conservatives on Web sites, and that is even worse."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A17514-2003Nov27?language=printer

[slinkerwink]

1. :kick:

:kick:

[Skwmom]

27. Misleading title - electability has nothing to do with it.

Dean supporters are desperately trying to convince themselves that Dean is electable. Where in this article is Dean's electability supported or addressed? Because everyone is saying Dean will be the nominee, it seems like they are trying to do damage control (though some are "excited" about a presidential candidate from VT - nothing like putting state pride before what is best for the country).

PLUS THESE COMMENTS SHOULD BE A RED FLAG

"Freyne derisively referred to Dean as "Ho-Ho" and called him a Republican in his dispatches." DEAM WILL TRANSFORM THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY ALL RIGHT - WE MIGHT AS WELL REFER TO OURSELVES AS DEMOCANS.

"Frankly, I do have some reservations," McCormack said. "He does have a temper. He tends to see disagreements on issues as personal disloyalty." HMM. WHO DOES THIS REMIND US OF? CAN WE SAY BUSH?

Freyne said. "The Dean I see on national television is somewhat admirable. He reflects well on Vermont and the politics we practice here. And many of us had never seen that passion before. Some people who had never seen this new Howard like him better." SO WHO IS THE REAL HOWARD? THE OLD HO-HO OR THE NEWLY PACKAGED HO-H0?

"Largely silent, as the primary season heats up, has been Vermont's Progressive Party, formed in the mid-1990s at least partly in response to Dean's influence on the Democratic Party. A spokesman at the Montpelier office said that the party has not endorsed a Democratic candidate and would not comment on the record about Dean."

[ldf]

81. thank you

i needed to set my watch.

[IndianaGreen]

2. "I have already seen quotes of mine used by conservatives on Web sites"

Like Kerry referring to Dean's plan to balance the budget as a tax increase, even though it is really a reversal of Bush's reckless fiscal policies and a return to Clinton's budgetary discipline.

[slinkerwink]

4. yep.

such....lackadaisal idiotical politicians...

[Bombtrack]

7. it is a tax increase

All the candidates want to balance the budget and raise taxes. But while Dean wants to raise the middle class's taxes, a move which Mondale proved a dooming one, Kerry would raise only the top 2 percent and balance the budget in 10 years instead of 5

[slinkerwink]

8. BZZZZZ

*buzzer* You're wrong.........the middle class will go back to the Clintonian era of taxes when they were prosperous and had a booming economy.

[Bombtrack]

52. That complete bullshit, it's still a middle class tax raise

by you're same UNclever logic, ALL Mondale wanted to do was go back to the 70's era economics

Bush's tax cuts are and will be law when the next president or Bush is sworn in in 05. an increase from that law is a tax raise, plain and simple. Voters will accept one on the top 2 percent, not on the middle and working classes.

[slinkerwink]

53. the tax cuts aren't helping the people where it really counts.....

such as education aid, property taxes, etc----$300 really ain't much.

[Bombtrack]

55. it isn't 300 for alot of people

education aid is a seperate issue, one that I'm not even aware Dean has made a part of his platform, and property taxes are a local issue, that people understand the federal government is not responsible, directly and all around.

The single most important voter group in this country: white, suburban, college educated, middle class, men and women between the ages of 26 to 55 who regard themselves as independants, by a very wide margin believe that there taxes are too high and will vote against an increase.

Even Kucinich realizes it's a bad idea to raise the middle class's taxes

[dsc]

11. false on many counts

First, Dean doesn't say he will balance the budget in five years and Kerry doesn't say he will do so in 10. That is just bildge water. In point of fact, no one can know exactly how long it will take until we see the real numbers and have some idea of an Iraqi exit strategy.

[ozone_man]

39. Not many are talking about the danger that the deficit poses.

Dean understands that we can't keep deficit spending. It will bankrupt us and Social Security, etc. Maybe part of Bush's plan (to bankrupt S.S.?

http://money.cnn.com/2003/05/29/news/economy/social_security_pain/

[slinkerwink]

40. it's one of the Repug's ways to starve SS and Medicare.....

quite insidious plan, isn't it?

[paulk]

60. you can keep the portions of the tax bill Dean wants to cut

and still reduce the deficit.

Why doesn't Dean want to cut military spending, one of the real budget busters? Why does he need to take back the middle class tax cut?

I've asked this before, and never gotten an answer.

[Demobrat]

85. He seems to think so. From his book,

Winning Back America, pg. 108:

The president's tax cuts are much more than simply a giveaway to friends and supporters. They are part of a master strategy to starve the core programs that have shaped our country's safety net for sixty years. And with this strategy, they are putting at risk the future of Social Security, medicare, Medicaid, and countless other programs designed to ensure that our middle class stays strong and working families can make ends meet.

Scary stuff. I'm glad Dean gets it. Now if he just doesn't get Wellstoned.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

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

[IndianaGreen]

12. A very profound and thoughtful post

I am amazed at the depth of your analysis. Wow!

I'll bet you got an MBA from Yale too!

:crazy:

On edit: He turned out to be a Freeper, totally exposing himself in another thread that was thankfully deleted by the mods.


R.I.P nelson1

[slinkerwink]

19. glad you got tombstoned for being a freeper

[Room101]

23. nelson1 - You are ignored

Save the anti-intellectual one-liners for the AOL chat rooms.

[Eloriel]

3. Most excellent

:kick:

Eloriel

[slinkerwink]

5. I agree!!!!

;-)

[slinkerwink]

6. no one's responding to this?

oh.....they realize that their verbal attacks on Dean will come back to haunt them if he gets nominated.

[madfloridian]

13. Of course no one is responding. It is good for Dean.

No one responds to things I post either. I think this is a great article. Thanks for sharing.

[slinkerwink]

15. thanks, no problem

:-)

[Skwmom]

33. Good for Dean? Have you read the article. e/o/m

[slinkerwink]

37. yep, because they know who the frontrunner is and is backing him

duh.

[slinkerwink]

9. :kick:

[DrFunkenstein]

14. Does Anyone Really Think This Is Pro-Dean?

This is just a variation of "Our uncle's a lush, but he's our lush."

The best you could pull from this article is the false dilemma "I support Dean because I oppose Bush." If it comes down to that choice, I'll support Dean, too. But meanwhile, there are still candidates who are much closer to these people's personal philosophy, candidates that actually stand a chance of winning.

[slinkerwink]

17. well, Dean actually stands the best chance of winning

and your man, Kerry, doesn't anymore.

[MercutioATC]

20. It's an endorsement for Dean from somebody he sparred with in the past...

I think that says quite a bit. Cheryl Rivers has 8 other candidates she COULD have endorsed (or, of course, said how she was planning to write Gore in) but she chose to support Dean. The fact that they didn't see eye to eye on some issues but she still endorses him says volumes about his ability to bring people together.

[DrFunkenstein]

22. These Quotes Speak Volumes?

"I am preparing to be frequently disappointed, as I always am. But I see what Howard did here and what he brings to the race, and I give him my full endorsement."

"Look, it's no secret I don't think highly of many things he's done. He has plenty of explaining to do," said Smith, who has not endorsed a candidate despite what she said were repeated overtures from the Dean campaign. "But I also don't want to help Bush to be reelected. I have already seen quotes of mine used by conservatives on Web sites, and that is even worse."

Boy, those quotes sure do impress me!

[MercutioATC]

24. They should "impress" you. She DOES have 8 other candidates to choose

from. Here's somebody who's decidedly NOT a huge advocate of all of his views who still believes he's the best choice to be the Dem nominee. Talk all you like about the "Kool-Aid-drinking Dean robots"...here's at least one example of Dean's ability to draw support from a wide range of people.

[KaraokeKarlton]

58. Oh, he will definitely make people mad at times

But that is only because most people tend to think in the short term rather than long term. Dean has impeccable long term vision. The things that the liberal Vermonters got riled up over at the time are almost always things that they were looking at in regards to the short term. When they saw the long term results they weren't as upset and it made more sense to them. Annette Smith is about anti-everything. She has done a lot to harm Vermonters and our best interests because she's a radical environmentalist. If you judge a candidate based on the quotes and opinions of radicals and discount any candidate they disagree with on anything you'll be left with only candidates who don't stand any chance at winning. But hey, if you want to take radicals seriously, go right ahead.

[TLM]

28. The point is that even some of Dean harshest critics in VT...

the ones tossed around by you basers as the democrats and liberal with whom Dean was so abusive and insulting... the ones that Dean was always undermiing and going against in some evil partnership with republicans... even those folks are saying that they'll back Dean.

Sure they are not exactly thrilled with him, but the point is that even Dean's critics are willing to support him. And this also shows that these folks are not happy having their words taken out of context to attack Dean.

[Skwmom]

29. Where do they say that their words were taken out of context?eom

[sandnsea]

30. The "hometown" boy

Of course they will. Hell, if Judy Martz magically became a frontrunner for President, you'd be hard pressed to dig up any dirt on her and Montanans would rally round. That's just human nature, especially in small states.

The way he treated these people while he was governor is precisely the same way he is treating the Democratic Party now. It's his strategy, slash and burn the opposition and hopefully build a coalition from what's left. Kind of like how Bush slashed and burned France and Germany and built a 'coalition' with 'New Europe'.

This article doesn't change that.

[madfloridian]

16. Kick.

:kick:

[slinkerwink]

18. thanks!

:toast:

[madfloridian]

21. Seems like no one wants to read it.

}(

[slinkerwink]

25. :kick:

:evilgrin:

[slinkerwink]

26. :kick:

:kick:

[FrenchieCat]

31. I read it....

and am not impressed....I try to stay out of Dean threads...but since you were seeking some feedback, I thought that I'd give it to you.

[Skwmom]

32. Dean seems to be from the Republican Wing of the

Democratic Party. This whole thing is insane. I'm really starting to think that the Republicans are hedging their bets with Dean. The best way to destroy the Democratic party seems to be from within.

[sandnsea]

35. He pretty much said so

"But I really have a healthy mistrust of the left as well as the right. I distrust ideologues and I distrust people who find facts inconvenient. My MO has been to be in the middle. Facts matter to me a lot--probably because of my scientific training--and I didn't find it OK for people to be involved in blowing up the ROTC building at the University of Wisconsin and killing somebody who was inside, to protest the war.... I find the right wing equally as concerning. I simply don't trust the extremes on both ends."

How can someone think they have to be involved in bombings to protest a war? Or that the actions of a few reflect the attitudes of the whole? And the more I read what's on DU lately, the more I think the whole country must be moving to the right. This isn't the same place I found last spring. Bizarre.

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20030331&c=2&s=corn

[slinkerwink]

44. oh please.....

how many republicans opposed the war in iraq?

[slinkerwink]

45. oh please.....

how many republicans opposed the war in iraq?

[Hep]

48. Yeah

the candidate bashers are certainly doing your best! Pat yourselves on the back!

[jsw_81]

34. Dean is NOT a Republican in any way

The fact of the matter is that Vermont is one of the most liberal states in the union. It's so far to the left that someone like Dean (who would be considered liberal anywhere else) is considered "conservative" by some of these pathetic left-wing radicals in the state legislature. These are people who probably voted for Nader for heaven's sake! I think they should just shut the heck up because Dean is now the front-runner and their whining will only hurt him in the general election. All this nonsense about Dean being "conservative" and a "Republican" is utter crap and they know it.

Here's a crude illustration of the political spectrum to help everyone understand:

FAR LEFT -- VT libs here -- LEFT -- Dean here -- CENTER -- Moderate Repubs -- RIGHT -- Bush/Freepers -- FAR RIGHT

[sandnsea]

36. I think he's a Republican

I didn't vote for Nader. I'm not to the far left.

Almost everything he's said or done has been from the Republican platform. We've got gun rights, states' rights, class based AA, deregulation, land use instead of wilderness, Yucca Mtn, Medicaid HMO's, against single payer... how much more do you need to see that this guy is a moderate Republican?

[slinkerwink]

38. nope, he's what Democrats used to be....

an actual, bona fide Democrat

[sandnsea]

57. In 1950?

If that's your yardstick, maybe. I don't want to go backwards, I thought that was the whole point of getting a Democratic President, so we could stop turning back the clock on the progress we've made.

[slinkerwink]

61. in 1950?

No, a Democrat that actually has a spine unlike Kerry or Gephardt or Edwards.

[sandnsea]

73. He has no spine

He used circumstances to beat up on Democrats and further his Presidential campaign. Of all the candidates speaking against Bush's rush to war Jan - Mar, and almost every one of spoke against it, Dean was the ONLY one to use it as fodder for his campaign. No other Presidential candidate even mentioned the other candidates in their remarks against the war, only Dean. He's worse than spineless, he's an opportunistic little worm.

[slinkerwink]

75. mmmm

"What I want to know is what so many Democrats are doing in supporting the President's unilateral intervention in Iraq?"---Dean


And you say he doesn't have a spine?

[sandnsea]

78. Now that's a lie

No Democrat supported a unilateral war in Iraq.

Only Dean chose to turn something as serious as war into fodder for a political campaign. Slimy little worm.

[Demobrat]

86. That's what she's complaining about.

"He used circumstances to beat up on Democrats and further his Presidential campaign."

She's mad because Dean didn't give her candidate a pass. Where most of us Dean supporters, on the other hand, were just as mad at the other Democrats as Dean was, and are glad he did what he did. What she calls opportunism we call telling the truth, and never the twain shall meet. Oh, well.

skw, I don't mean to talk about you behind your back. I know you'll read this.

[sandnsea]

87. He was no different

He supported the damn war too. He made statements all along about Saddam having weapons, needing to be disarmed, going in unilaterally. Somehow people ignore his own statements on Iraq and this war and only listen to the attacks on Democrats. If he had never made a statement about Saddam needing to be disarmed, I could believe him when he said Bush hadn't made the case. But you can't need to disarm a country unless you think there's something to disarm. His words make absolutely no sense.

People were frustrated with the Democratic Party and he used it to his advantage. Unfortunately, since he's talked out of both sides of his mouth on the war, he's going to be shown to be a fool in the general election. You just can't say a country must be disarmed and then turn around and say there's no case that weapons exist. Makes no sense. And what's worse, the guy governed through compromise, he's worse than the cockroaches he rails against. He is a lose-lose candidate.

[Scott Lee]

41. How many repugs do you know that oppose the Iraq War?

The sound of crickets is heard. Thank you.

[pruner]

42. …

[slinkerwink]

43. lol....

yuck....

[JohnKleeb]

46. Pat Buchanan and Bob Novak

To name some. Oh that I know. Sorry. Most of my ummm peers arent political, I am only 16. But there were republicans who opposed the war, maybe not on the grounds you or I did but they did.

[jsw_81]

47. Try again

Buchanan left the GOP almost 4 1/2 years ago and Novak, while definitely conservative, criticizes Bush all the time.

[Scott Lee]

67. Pat Pukeannan does not represent mainstream GOPer thought

And Bob Novak wasn't against the war based on the legality, loss of life or other more "liberal" concerns.

It's not a stretch to point out that being pro-war is very much the lockstep mainstream GOP position. Trying to paint up Dean as a republican because he opposes the Iraq war just won't fly.

[sandnsea]

56. He didn't oppose it

The only lie bigger than Dean opposing the war Bush's 'WMD intelligence'.

First he says:

"Had I been a member of the Senate, I would have voted against the resolution that authorized the President to use unilateral force against Iraq - unlike others in that body now seeking the presidency."

Then he says:

"Saddam Hussein must disarm. This is not a debate; it is a given."

"In short, America may have to go to war with Iraq, but we should not rush into war - especially without broad international support."

"Now, I am not among those who say that America should never use its armed forces unilaterally. In some circumstances, we have no choice. In Iraq, I would be prepared to go ahead without further Security Council backing if it were clear the threat posed to us by Saddam Hussein was imminent, and could neither be contained nor deterred."

http://www.cfr.org/publication.php?id=5542

A few days later he says:

"See, I don't think the president has made the case. I think what the president has made a reasonable case for is that Saddam is moving weapons around in terms of biologicals and chemicals, perhaps. He has not made a case for the three things that I think require or enable us to invade unilaterally or pre-emptively or preventively, as we are now calling it. He has not made the case for Saddam possessing nuclear weapons. He has not made the case that he has any kind of a credible nuclear program. And he has not made the case that Saddam is giving weapons of mass destruction to the terrorists. If he were doing any of those things, I think we would have a right to defend ourselves, and we should go in."
http://www.cfr.org/publication.php?id=5542

There was more intelligence on the nuclear weapons than there was on the bio/chem weapons. Here we have a man who is saying Saddam must be disarmed and then turning around and saying there's no case. Well either there is something to disarm or there's not.

And his solution:

"The inspectors are now back inside Iraq."

How the hell did they get there? And if there's no WMD, why did they need to stay?

He was the one who said 30-60 days and go in unilaterally. He was as hawkish as Joe Lieberman.

It's too bad the debate on the Democratic side became who voted and who didn't; because if we had had a unified voice back in Feb/Mar, we might have been able to make the case for inspections better. Howard Dean chose to use it to create his campaign 'anti-war' platform instead of joining with other Democrats to simply push this Administration to continue with inspections and diplomacy. He's as guilty for this war as anybody.

[Scott Lee]

69. He certainly did, and does.

What he did not oppose was:

1. A war of defense that was supported by the international community (The UN).

2. A unilateral war in which there was a clear and present, or imminent, danger to the United States.

3. A combination of the two.

NONE of which fits the Iraq War that transpired. As such, he opposed/opposes such a war. Not a single bit of a lie in his statement.

Don't you ever get tired of spinning, dissembling and lying yourself to try and assassinate Dean's character?

[sandnsea]

74. He was the maybe-war candidate

Not the anti-war candidate. Kucinich and Graham were the only anti-war candidates. Dean was a maybe here, maybe there, if this, if that, yes, no, I don't know candidate. If he thought Saddam must be disarmed and that inspections must happen, then he better have had a plan to make it happen. He didn't. And he can't go before the American people next year without being able to point to one. He can't.

There was NO pro-war candidate, except perhaps Lieberman. The rest all had very clear views on the war. Kerry's remarks in Sept, Oct, Jan & Mar are consistent and clear. No equivication. Saddam must disarm, threat of force is necessary to get inspectors back in, Bush must take a different approach internationally. Inspections and diplomacy can last as long as progress is being made, no rush to war.

And, in case you missed it, we already had the debate over whether to go to war with Iraq. Bush won. Over 50% of Americans still believe it was the right thing to do. It's not going to change next year.

[sandnsea]

79. Hagel and Lugar

Lugar, of Biden-Lugar???

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A24964-2002Sep30?language=printer

[reknewcomer]

49. Peter Freyne is the biggest joke in Vermont concerning Dean

Freyne hounded Howard for nine years and never had a good thing to say about him until recently. His two faced spin mastering has been good for laughs but Freyne is still a hack and would not tell the truth if his mother depended on it. He is pathertic.

[TahitiNut]

50. Welcome to DU, reknewcomer!

:hi:

[reknewcomer]

88. Thanks!

I pull no punches and believe in total honesty.

[slinkerwink]

51. welcome to DU!!!!

:hi:

[reknewcomer]

89. Thanks again

I'm here to cheer the one whom is near but never those that jeer.

[newyawker99]

59. Hi rednewcomer!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[reknewcomer]

90. Thanks old-timer

I've seen you around a bit and I promise to be a hit.

[slinkerwink]

54. :kick:

[Uzybone]

62. Almost more kicks in this thread

than actual posts. And damn I thought it actually had something informative to say. The pro Dean faction acts more and rabid by the day.

(Ill still work my ass off if Howie is our nominee)

[paulk]

63. faced with Dean's electibility?

I don't think that's the reason. It makes sense for a Vermont politician to back Dean, even if they don't agree with him politically. Vermont already gets back more in Fed. money than it pays and having a President from your home state means an even bigger payoff.

I didn't find these "endorsements" very complimentary, either. Have you ever heard of "damning with faint praise"? That's what I got from this.

[slinkerwink]

64. not really---my take is that

they realized what damage their comments could do to the Democratic Party if Dean ends up being nominee, so their switching their stance is helping to solidify the Democrat Party. If Dean gets nominated, you'll hear naysayers get on board.

[paulk]

80. that makes sense.

good point.

[shivaji]

65. Why this INDEPENDENT voter will vote for DEAN in 2004

The last democrats I voted for were Carter/76 & Clinton/92. I bypassed 84 since both candidates flunked my criteria.

I generally vote for the person, tend to vote against incumbents to reduce power accumulation, but most of all I like a candidate who seems to be the most honest and has a backbone.

I do not like Bush's out of control spending and deficits. He has
also helped his buddies cash in on the run away military expenditures.

Clark seems to be an opportunist with zero political experience. I simply can not go with a political novice in dealing with foreign and domestic issues.

Edwards seems to be too slick to suit me. Kerry & Gephardt do not come across as likeable.

Dean seems to have a backbone, has actual political and executive experience, ran Vermont from closer to the center, balanced the budgets,
and matches most of my social positions. I can trust this person to make decisions in the best interest of our country and people of all races and economic backgrounds.

[WilliamPitt]

66. HUGE

Good stuff.

[slinkerwink]

72. thanks

[AmericanDem]

68. Vermont has NO other choice but to select Dean

It would be a windfall of PORK for their state.


edit; spell correction

[rumguy]

70. Kinda cynical huh?

I guess Ark. is anxious for Clark to win for their own pork. Anyway Vt. doesn't need any pork, it's doing just fine on its own...thanks to the leadership of Dr. Dean.

It galls you that Dean was such a great governor.

[AmericanDem]

76. no, not cynical

just relating what will be the case. This will also be the case with all other candidates. Home state is usually taken care of. Putting things in perspective is all.

[janx]

83. I don't usually get into these arguments because they turn

into candidate bashing rather fast, but--

Dean was elected to at least four terms as governor in Vermont. I think it's a safe bet to assume that he is well respected there by a lot of people.

And sometimes, in hindsight, it's the people with whom you have disagreed in the past that you wind up respecting the most.

I am sure that whoever you support has backers like that too.

[Scott Lee]

71. Really? Describe the "pork" that is destined for Vt. in that case

Or is this merely the latest iteration of the whacky carousel of hate we call the ADJHS?

[paulk]

82. It always happens, to one degree or another

at the very least it boosts tourism and then afterward the presidential library goes there. It makes a lot of sense to support a candidate from your home state.

It's not even a criticism, it's just the truth.

[Scott Lee]

84. Let's not call it "pork" then

Having a state "benefit" from one of their natives becoming President is one thing, but "pork" is quite another. You really have to be a legislator to deal in pork. The President, being the chief of the executive branch, is really in the wrong chair on that score.

[CWebster]

77. William Greider as well

"Howard Dean is an odd duck, certainly, in the milieu of the contemporary Democratic Party. He is, I surmise, a tough and savvy politician of the old school--a shrewd, intuitive pol who develops his own sense of where the people are and where events are likely to take public opinion, then has the guts to act on his perceptions. That approach--leading, it's called--seems dangerously unscientific in this era of high-quality polling and focus groups, the data interpreted for politicians by expensive consultants. The press corps has not had much experience with Democrats of this type, so reporters read Dean's style as emotional, possibly a character flaw. He reminds me of olden days when Democrats were a more contentious bunch, always fighting noisily among themselves and often with creative results.

... In the higher realms of politics, this is not done. But he is not one of them. And this is no longer the era for "triangulation" between the business-financial money patrons and the party's main constituencies. That new spirit, more than any single issue, is what has drawn together Dean's vibrant and growing base, buoying his candidacy with millions in small contributions. Dean is opening the possibility of transforming politics--shaking up the tired, timid old order, inviting plain-wrapper citizens back into an active role--and that's why so many people, myself included, are for him. Full disclosure: I am among the throngs who have been invited to contribute "forward-looking ideas" to his campaign (I was flattered to be asked and pleased to oblige, with no naïve expectations)...

...Dean continues to up the ante for his rivals--calling for reregulation of key industries and confronting the concentrated power of corporations and wealth. These are solid liberal ideas others are afraid to express so directly. The guy is a better politician than the insiders imagined, indeed better attuned to this season than they are.




http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1126-13.htm