Dean/Perle debate

[x_y_no]

I watched Thursday's debate between Dean and Perle last night on C-Span, and I have to say that after a slightly stumbling start, I think Dean did quite a good job.

I liked the way he kept hammering on how military spending and a willingness to use military power are but a small piece of the national security picture - how it's every bit as much about energy independence, and structuring trade agreements which lift up the conditions of workers and of the environment around the world, and returning to a posture which gets us recognized around the world as holding the moral high ground.

I liked very much what he had to say about the Bush administration and Republicans in general not seeing the long-term picture in terms of national security.

And I liked how he wouldn't let Perle get away with misstating the Democratic position.

I think General Clark could have stated our case even better, but if this is a representative example of how Dean plans to work on reframing the debate, it gives me a lot of hope.

[immoderate]

1. Perle has helped us here.

Many who wouldn't tune into a Dean speech would watch that debate. After listening to Dr. Dean himself they would know something they didn't know before.

--IMM

[Skink]

2. The audience reaction was great...

especially when he said a strong defense isn't letting china and Japan hold all our paper. I hope we start useing that.

[janx]

3. The Iraq war as "low hanging fruit" wasn't bad either!

I'd love to see that debate again.

[Mr Rabble]

4. While I fully support Dean

I think he was a bit out of his element here.

To me, his responses sounded like pieces of his old stump speeches, rather than refutations needed in debate format.

No one will argue that Perle is anything other than a war monger, maniac, scoundrel; however he happens to be very articulate. His ability to frame that debate was amazing. Democrats need to pay close attention to how he answered questions, rather than what he answered with.

[ecoalex]

5. Well said emperor 72

My take on the whole of it all.Dean needs to expound, not campaign, less slogans more philosophy, a mix would suffice .
He did show Perle to be a war monger , and a history revisionist .

Dean needs to counter the neo con lies , he showed a good start.

I sense a change in the party already, however the Washington crowd needs to acknowledge the shift in the party , if not more of the same.

[janx]

6. Nope. Perle's condescending analogies, e.g.

preemptive war as insurance policy, didn't fool anyone. He came off as an arrogant fool, especially when he replied to Dean's final question. I loved watching it.