Dean: Americans don't like "Left-leading" regimes -

[rman]

for certain not in Latin America according to Dean.

It seems unlikely that Dean thinks Americans don't like "left-leading" regimes in Latin America while liking it in the US. Which implies Dean thinks the Dem party should not be and/or is not "left-leading". (Dean's particular choice of words beats me; why "left-leading" instead of the more commonly used "left-leaning"? Still, i think it's clear what he means.)

If the Repub party is Right-Wing, and the Dem party is not Left-Wing, then what do Dems stand for? Has the Dem party forgotten already that "Left" typically means pro-labor as opposed to pro-corporate?

=====

CNN LATE EDITION WITH WOLF BLITZER
Aired January 8, 2006 - 11:00 ET

DEAN: Look at what's happening in Latin America. This president (Bush), while saying that he wants to further democracy and capitalism, is driving people in the opposite direction.

We need real leadership in this country and we don't have it right now.

BLITZER: Are you blaming the president on the elections in Bolivia or on the elections in Venezuela? Is that what you're saying?

DEAN: We had an enormous opportunity, when this president took office, and he said he was going to reach out to Latin America. Instead, he has turned them off. He's been high-handed with them; he's rejected them.

He's ignored the economic plight of their folks. And so, we're getting something that I think most Americans wish we didn't have, which is left-leading regimes in these places. We need a president who will work constructively and cooperatively with our allies around the world so that we really can move capitalism and democracy further into the world and not turn off people. When you turn people off, as the most powerful nation in the world, they are obviously going to do something that is not in our best interest. And that's exactly what's going on right now.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0601/08/le.01.html

[montanacowboy]

1. When I head Dean say that

I almost came unglued - for the life of me, what the hell is he thinking?

we should want Right leaning regimes????????????

[alarimer]

92. This is about American corporations

They will no longer be able to exploit the workers. And possibly the governments might decide that free trade agreements are not in their best interests and this upsets all the corporatists (they infect both parties) here in the good old USA.

[NativeTexan]

95. Could be that leaning too much...

...in either direction might not be especially good. We HAVE to have EXTREMES to find something close to the middle. THEN you lean a little left or the other side leans a little right.

As a left "leaning" moderate, on most issues, I have my own definitions of many things I hear from the extremes. The worst I can honestly say about the extreme left is that some of the ideas seem to me to be so extreme they are "silly".

The BEST I can say about the the extreme right is that MOST of the ideas are just MEAN AND VICIOUS!

I tend to believe that maybe that is what Dean was talking about, in his own kinda way. But internationally? Left-wing dictatorships or right-wing dictatorships are BOTH bad.

Take for instance the right-wing dictatorship in America....wait....thats not internationally is it?....oops

[MetaTrope]

131. But maybe he MEANT "leading"...

In other words, Latin American countries are now taking point on progressive thought, while the U.S. sinks into a quagmire of regressive oligarchy.

[rman]

149. Dean certainly SAID that Americans don't like it,

Which going by your interpretation of Dean's words would be: "Americans don't like taking point on progressive thought", nor do they like other to do so - especially in Latin America since it implies those nations do not have US interests at heart. Not my idea, but Dean's words. It doesn't take much imagination to realize that doesn't resonate well in a certain section of the dem electorate.

For the moment though i'm going by the interpreation of other folks, which amounts to Dean using RW talking points against the RW. Or in the words of The Magistrate: "we must play on the ground that exists, not that which we would like to have".

Which doesn't stop me from pointing out all that's wrong with the "ground that exists", lest anyone would think no other ground can exist.

[Dhalgren]

147. Bolivia and Venezuela are not dictatorships, they are

democracies. So Dean wasn't talking about dictatorships vs. democracies. He was talking about "free" capitalism vs. "citizen oriented" capitalism...

[rman]

148. Leaning somewhat in one direction or another might not be that bad

Especially since we'll need something to balance the far-right leaning of a certain political party, in order to balance things out a bit.

Besides, there is no dictatorship in Venezuela nor in Bolivia.

[madfloridian]

2. You are making the point that we have making here.

You don't want success for our side. You are taking two words...and you are attacking and attacking.

I hope people stand up and not just let DU be taken over this way.

[rman]

7. I don't want a RW or Center Dem party

What you call "attacking", i call criticism. And i think i have good reason for criticism.

[madfloridian]

9. I don't an extreme left party in which people take two words....

out of a great interview. So we are even.

[rman]

17. there's plenty room between center and extreme left, don't you think?

Why do you frame it as though anything left of center is extreme?

[Peace Patriot]

18. Bullshit, Madfloridian! I DO want success for "our side," and I've been

working on it for forty years as a loyal Democratic Party member! I also recognize Howard Dean's qualities, and SUPPORTED HIM IN HIS PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN.

That DOESN'T mean that I can't call him on it when he is dead wrong--as he is on South America.

They have TRANSPARENT ELECTIONS in South America now--heavily monitored by the OAS, by EU election groups, and the Carter Center. That is WHY leftist--pro-worker, pro-peasant, pro-poor--MAJORITY governments are sweeping South America!

We DON'T HAVE transparent elections HERE. We have Bushite corporations counting all our votes with 'TRADE SECRET," PROPRIETARY programming code, in the new electronic voting systems, funded by a $4 billion boondoggle from Tom Delay's Congress (straight into the pockets of Bush's buds at Diebold and ES&S), with virtually no audit/recount controls. That is WHY we don't have a leftist government in THIS country--the true leftist majority in this country has been DISENFRANCHISED.

And THAT is the fault the Democratic Party leadership, as much as it is the fault of Bush criminals. They sat back. They said nothing. And they're STILL saying almost nothing, with Dean in charge.

He's wrong about South America. And he's wrong to be silent about OUR crap-ass Bushite-controlled election system.

And I STILL support him as DNC chair!

How dare you say that people who disagree with Howard Dean on such a critically important matter as our relations with South America are "taking over" DU! --as if we were some foreign element, as if we were "pinkos" and "communists" who need to be "purged." By God, you sound just like the McCarthyites who "purged" all the best people from the unions in the 1950s in the great "red scare." Anybody who supported civil rights for black citizens. Anybody who was "leftist." All smeared, denounced, purged. This kind of talk is sickening. You're saying we can't discuss a WRONG position of our party leader? We can't oppose it? After the history of the United States in South America?! Tens of thousands slaughtered by death squads trained in the U.S. Tens of thousands tortured by bloody regimes that we supported. Centuries of oppression at the hands of our corporations. Assassinations of democratically elected leaders. And, recently, US-gov't funding of a coup against Chavez in Venezuela, and funding of his opposition--the rich minority oil elite.

And now, after all that history, South America is FINALLY getting free and fair elections, and electing the governments that SOUTH AMERICANS want, and our party leader sides with Bush--and says that the DEMOCRATIC choices of the people of South America are not okay with him?

Sorry, but it was more than "two words" that he was saying. He was saying that it is the position of the Democratic Party in the U.S. that DEMOCRATICALLY elected governments in South America, if they are "leftist," are not okay--and are not in our "interest." And that position is WRONG. And I will shout it from the rooftops.

[madfloridian]

21. You found two words..... using them forever.

There will be a whole hell of lot more. Dean is no liberal, he never claimed to be. The DLC attacked him and called him that.

You are not tolerant of moderate views. You are taking two words which he used nicely instead of communistic and make a big deal.

[rman]

33. There is no communism in Venezuela and Bolivia.

There's a fair free market, there's differentiation in wages, corporate media are allowed (even though those are dominated by the opposition).

Dean is causing confusion by being "nice" in saying "left-leading" instead of "communism". If he thinks there's communism, he's ill informed. Is that an attack? No, it's fact.

[radio4progressives]

71. Please Explain What "Moderate View" has to do on the Villification of

Chavez?

I want to know what is a "moderate" position to take on the question of NO INTERFERENCE of Chavez's efforts to govern his OWN COUNTRY .

Is the "Moderate" position, one that says it's ok that we run interfence on a soverign nation? that we impose a regime change because we don't like that he won't let our ANTI-DEMOCRATIC Multi-National Big Buisnees to run rough shod on their country's resources and cheap labor (read slave wages)?

Please explain exactly what the "Moderate" position on Venezuela is.

[madfloridian]

128. You don't care what I think at all.

It would not matter what I wrote.

[radio4progressives]

167. Why don't you admit that You Simply "Don't Know" because

You are not informed enough on the issue of discussion to offer a definition of what a "Moderate" position is or should be as to the question of what the United States Foreign Policies ought to be, especially with regard to the fledgling and emerging democracies in Latin and South America? Should the foundation of our polices be imperialistic in nature, which is at the core of most (if not all) our foreign policy decisions and the way we conduct those affairs?

It's ok not to know what it is, or what it should be.

But it's not ok to pretend to know or act as though what we do is "moderate" and any rejection expressed with regard to how we conduct our imperialistic adventures, be it military or economic, as "extreme left" or "left leaning"

that's not an answer, there's no substance. Rather it's simply meaningless rhetoric, but divisive in nature.

editing to add: More to the point, it does not serve the American People well when people in leadership positions, such as the Chair of the DNC, does not at least make an attempt to shed a little more sunshine on these matters, at least by highlighting some positive aspects of Chavez's governance, which may go some way to to illuminate rather than by responding with the status quo anti-Chavez rhetoric devices.

[madfloridian]

175. Don't imply I lack intelligence and knowledge to cover up your insults.

because I don't agree with you. My friend, I taught school for over 30 years, I have several degrees, and I don't have to put on a front of pseudo intelligence.

I don't have to do that. I have a different view than you do on the topic, and nothing I said would convince you of mine.

Please do NOT keep doing this. Oh, and no one told on you. A lot of us visit various forums. It is no secret, the board is open. Quit doing this.

http://www.progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=11366&mesg_id=12766

[radio4progressives]

194. With all your degrees, you cannot offer a simple but clear definition

of what a Moderate Position is or should be on the question of Chavez and Venezuela, or more broadly, Latin and South America?

I never asked for a pseudo intellectual explanation, i asked for a non-rhetorical explanation. I never asked for a tombe or treastsie or set of policy papers, i just want to understand what you mean, by a "moderate" position on these questions.

You love to demonize those of us who have spelled out our own positions, and you say that is "extremist" - in general but you never ever say what isn't extremist.

So shame on you!

[madfloridian]

204. When you guys quit insulting people like me, you find out more.

I have no desire to put forth my views on any topic, because I seen some progressives in action. It is their way or the highway...I mean everything better be right in line with their belief.

With no compromise ever, we win never....and that is a serious concern of mine. I have every thread I post about Democrats, especially ones that make it to Recommended status just be absolutely damaged until no one is willing to post on them anymore.

So don't put the shame on me. Go read what you progressives are saying. You will never get all that, you will have to compromise, and yet you won't.

Talk to me when you don't blame me for everything. I don't OWE you anything.

[radio4progressives]

209. Me thinks she protests too much...

self projection is indeed an interesting phenomenon.

have it your way, i am bored and i am done with this exchange.

[madfloridian]

210. I just saw a reply to you....an old friend of mine making fun of us also.

That breaks my heart. He always had an open mind about things. I read that and it was painful.

I will remain a Democrat. The utter contempt you guys hold us in has made it easier for me to stay in the middle....cause your way is NOT going to work.

And our country is desperate. You are going to give it all back to the GOP on a silver platter, while at least the guy who is being blasted here is trying to change things.

[Djinn]

221. ah yes

the old "more dangerous than Bushco" paranoid rant

"You are going to give it all back to the GOP on a silver platter"

:rofl:

[madfloridian]

130. Dark side of the moon?

"same thread - GAAAAWWWWWDD - what a bunch of fucking lamos!
arrrgghh.."

Your quotes. If you want a dialogue with me, then treat me with some respect. And treat others here the same way. Being polite pays.

[Capn Sunshine]

155. How is "most Americans don't like left-leading regimes"

Villification?

God, if you guys spent ten minutes in the real world you wouldn't be so obsessed microparsing everything.


NOTE: Dean never said " I hate Chavez and all that he stands for" he pointed out something which is 100% correct. Unless you can find a poll that thinks otherwise.

[dorktv]

219. wooooo slow down there tiger. Have a drink of some tea and

reread what Dean said in its entirety<-spelling. I got the sense he meant that we do not need "communism" coming back. And we do not especially since that generally only works with 100 people. Left leading countries could do that.

Capitalism with a firm social safety net in a fully function democracy is what we should be working towards everywhere and our current President can easily push people into rejecting democracy.

[d_b]

3. Furthermore

he says "they are obviously going to do something that is not in our best interest. And that's exactly what's going on right now."

Please tell me that's from The Onion and not CNN.

[rman]

31. The good old "they must act in our interest" pervades both parties

Makes one wonder just what those interests are.

Sorry, the nightmare is real.

[radio4progressives]

74. "Our Interest" Means Multi National Big Buisness Interest

is NOT the interest of We the People, either in here America or in South America.

[alarimer]

89. Yes it does

These countries finally have free and fair elections (freer and fairer than ours even) and they choose to elect populists. Good for them for that! The best thing for the Americas is governements of the people.

I think Dean (and others) are afraid that American corporations will no longer have free reign to expoit the workers in these countries as they have for decades. THAT is what this is all about.

[radio4progressives]

96. Bingo! ding! ding! ding! ding! ding! ding! ding! ding! ding! ding!

:applause:

[RJnAbbysNana]

198. "AMEN!!!!!"

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Kudos!

Regards,

Janet

[MrModerate]

4. Clumsy phrasing, IMO . . .

Something Dean -- for all his virtues -- is prone to. For one thing, I'm sure the phrase he intended to come out of his mouth was "left-leaning," and what he probably meant was confiscatory-socialist.

With regard to dems and what they stand for, I have to chuckle when I hear party positions called "leftist." As I see it, the dem ideal of fairness, prudence, and tolerance is about as centrist as it gets, and it's only because crazed conservatives have veered so far to the right that moderate, centrist policies could possibly be considered "left."

[rman]

8. VERY clumsy - is Dean incompetent to?

Are all politicians incompetent and do we think it's not really a problem?

[MrModerate]

11. Well, they're certainly all fallible . . . but there are degrees. n/t

[DJ MEW]

5. I think he is talking about Communism

when he says left leading.

[madfloridian]

10. He chose not to use communist.

And look what he gets for it.

[rman]

24. So you're sure Dean meant "communism"? Do you also know why

Dean was being so ambiguous about it?

[madfloridian]

26. I am done arguing with you.

You screwed up a nice post I made, then pretended you did not mean to do it. You are fixated on two words. That is dangerous now, when our whole country is in peril. We are not going to win this one, I fear, but I intend to try.

[rman]

30. how can you be so sure i "pretended"?

[Peace Patriot]

46. "our whole country is in peril." True enough. But so is the whole country

of Venezuela--if not Bolivia and others as well. Pat Robertson, who dines regularly at the White House, called for the president of Venezuela to be assassinated. The Bush junta supported and funded a coup against Chavez, and funds his political opposition (including funding the recent recall election against him, which he won). The Venezuelans fear assassination, invasion and CIA black ops--with very, very good reason. The Bushites talk about Venezuela the way they talked about Iraq, and the way they're talking now about Iran. As an enemy. As if--with virtually no defenses, compared to the U.S. aggressive war machine--Venezuela wants to, or could, harm us. And there is not even the slightest cause to talk this way about Venezuela--and only one reason for it: Venezuela sits on the 5th largest oil reserve in the world.

So, when Howard Dean chimes in, and says "most Americans" don't like these governments--these DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED governments!--it is just a bit alarming to those us who know something about South America.

South Americans are AMERICANS, too, and they like the governments that they have CHOSEN, in free and fair elections, just fine. And whether or not NORTH Americans approve is an open question, but I think the majority of us WOULD approve of democracy in South America, if we knew anything about it. But US war profiteering corporate news monopolies contain a barrage of propaganda--much of it sounding just like these remarks of Dean--implying that there is something WRONG in South America, because the people there are electing leftists governments--and often leaving out the fact that they are ELECTED.

Anyway, I don't want US to be in peril--and I don't want the South Americans to be in peril either. BOTH of us are in peril--from the Bush junta, and from disinformation and lies.

[rman]

12. Why does he not say that, and if true is shows how ill-informed he is

about Latin America - more incompetence?

There's no communism in Venzuela or Bolivia. There's a fair free market there, there is differentiation in wages. Chavez has left the RW corporate opposition led mainstream media alone.
It's just that they spend national weatlh on "the people" as opposed to primarily on an already rich few. It's called socialism. Or perhaps more accurately: it has strong socialist tendencies.

If Dean thinks socialism is the same thing as communism, that'd be more demonstration of being ill informed.

[ProudDad]

73. What's wrong with Communism?

Do you really know ANYTHING about it? Have you read Marx and Engels? Or are you just parroting the capitalist party line?

Capitalism WILL die.

It will either be because it has killed us all due to the pollution of the Earth beyond repair, global warming or some other result of "Profit Ubber Alles". I give that scenario about a 75% chance -- humans are fuckin' stupid.

If we do survive our innate stupidity, capitalism will collapse under its own weight and due to the fact that its very STRUCTURE and nature will NEVER allow it to do anything more than enrich the very few at the expense of the very many. Someday the very many will realize that fact and build a new system to replace capitalism that's more fair and just.

[rman]

153. No way to know, since it has never seen the light of day

on this planet.

But more importantly, there is no communism in Venezuela or Bolivia. In Latin America there are some remnants of RW dictatorships from the era of very successful interference by the US in that region, but that's about how extreme it gets over there.

[LittleClarkie]

6. Been there, done that. Got the t-shirt. Why bring it up again now?

Might I ask?

Dude, he's a Centrist. This isn't unexpected.

[NYCGirl]

13. Because there's not enough fighting on here today for the OP.

He wants fisticuffs!

[madfloridian]

14. Because it is being organized elsewhere with glee.

They talk about us moderate fools.

[JNelson6563]

132. Yes and

people who actually do work to improve the political landscape are suckers. The only way to make it better is on-line pontificating. Oy! Self-important blow-hards are a blight to mankind.

Hope it's all good in your world MF! :hi:

Julie

[Djinn]

220. Julie that's completely unfair

yes there are some people on the "left" that may say that, but they aren't in the majority. You may also want to acknowledge that the CONSTANT claim by "moderates" that those on the left do nothing but pontificate online and are self important blowhards is every bit as insulting and unfair as the claim that working within the system is a suckers game.

the vast majority of those on the "left" respect people who work within the Dem's (or the ALP down my way) even if we don't beleive it's the best way.

[madfloridian]

222. The ones Julie and I are concerned about are not supportive of Dems.

Sorry, but there is such an opportunity for progressives and "moderates" to work together.

[Djinn]

223. hello...is this thing on???

madfloridian, try to understand this

NOT EVERYONE BELIEVES THE DEM'S ARE WORTH SUPPORTING

and even amongst those who still support the Dem's maybe they don't feel the way to convince them to change their policies on certain things is to work from the inside.

Julie (who I have a lot of time and respect for) and yourself regularly disparage these people as much as they do you - remember the "more dangerous then Bushco" thing?

BOTH "sides" could occasionally benefit from taking a step back and realising that people are allowed to make up their own minds on this stuff (and yes I include myself in this)

[madfloridian]

224. I was called a "good German", djinn. I was disparaged.

Julie and I work hard in our local areas, and we hold a lot of feet to the fire. I don't disparage unless I have been done so first. I won't sit by and let anyone keep tearing down the one chance we have.

Walk in Julie's shoes, walk in mine. Julie does great things for the party, far more than I do. I have heard glowing reports on what she accomplishes.

I won't be called names anymore and let it slide by.

BTW, I thought you lived elsewhere. Maybe I got you confused with someone else.

I remember well and long.

[rman]

15. It means the Dem party wants no part of leftism, no part of a pro-labor

agenda.

on edit: some in the Dem party do, but as per official leadership it does not.

How do you feel about that?

[madfloridian]

16. Bullshit.....Gov. Dean is very big on unions. He always has been.

It is the DLC who formed to get money without unions. NOT Dean. You should be ashamed of attacking without having all the facts.

[rman]

20. There's more then unions

Does Dean want more limits on corporate power?

And if Dean is in fact pro-labor, being the opposite of the Re's pro-corporatism, then why does he not just acknowledge it is a Left-wing position in line with the positions of certain leaders in Latin America? And why does he say Venezuelan policies are economically hurting the people there?

[madfloridian]

22. He is very much pro-regulation of big business.

He is for regulating media ownership as well. Where are you getting your views on this? Please be fair.

[rman]

27. Why does he not just acknowledge it's a Left-wing position?

If the Dem party wants in many ways the opposite of what the Right-wing wants...

Don't you think there us in fact room between the center and the extreme left?

[madfloridian]

36. No, not the extreme left.

And not the extreme right either.

[rman]

40. So just "Left" would be ok, and it would be accurate.

But for some reason Dean avoids associating the Dem party with "Left".

In the same breath he misrepresents the political situation in Venezuela and Bolivia.

[Dr Fate]

116. In reality, these positions are moderate.

A fair wage? Sticking up for the little guy?

That's not really radical or leftist at all.

It's labels. Even moderate, fair-play issues seem left in todays far-right atmosphere.

[LittleClarkie]

19. Not supporting Chavez does NOT mean you are not pro-labor

Being pro-labor does not mean you have to support Chavez.

He is not the gatekeeper of all things labor or left. And I suspect Dean mean far-left, as in socialist. Just being a Dem means you're left of center. Esp. as far right as the Repubs are right now. I know I just called him a centrist, but I almost have to rethink that, looking at Hillary or Lieberman or even Biden.

He's a progressive. He's a Democrat. He just isn't a socialist.

How do I feel about that?

I support Howard Dean.

That's how I feel about that.

[rman]

23. Is there no room between the center and the extreme left?

Why do so many Dems and dems seem to think anything left of center is extreme?

[madfloridian]

25. That is where most of us are. Most of us support our own country...

over other countries though. No matter what kind of man a leader is in Latin America....it is not my country. I will do what I can to get change instead of taking a stand with them over my own country.

That is going to hurt us with so many here doing that.

[rman]

28. Then why does he say "Americans don't like left-leading regimes"?

Or is he saying Americans don't like left regimes in Latin America but do like m in the US?

[janx]

151. "Left leading regimes" in Latin America are NOT

your average Democrats in the U.S.

(sigh)

[IndianaGreen]

63. I don't support America, I won't be a good German, unlike some around here

I support people that are trying to break the chains of oppression. That's what Jesus would have done. That's what Moses would have adviced people to do.

I will never, ever, take the side of the oppressor.

Haven't we have enough of jingoism?

[madfloridian]

69. I think you implied I am a what? Surely you did not mean Nazi...

when you said German. I surely hope not. You know I am not like that. And you know also that I am opposed to this war, was from the beginning.

You read far too much extreme stuff into anything I say. I am very far from being jingoistic.

[madfloridian]

79. Did I misread you on that, IG.

I sure hope so.

[IndianaGreen]

86. The "good German" part was not addressed to anyone specifically

It was addressed to those that "rally around the flag" whenever Bush decides to attack any country.

I am an internationalist, which means I reject nationalism in all its permutations.

[madfloridian]

91. Well, then you would like the PPI internationalism maybe.

It is called progressive internationalism.

It is a kinder gentler version of empire building.

I don't do terms like that very well. You know I don't rally around Bush. You know I don't, and you are making stuff up. I don't know why, but I don't like it.

[IndianaGreen]

103. PPI is the DLC/neolib side of the neocon PNAC coin

There is nothing progressive about the neoliberal globalism that PPI advocates.

[madfloridian]

106. I know that. But I said it because it was just words.....

Believe it or not, IG, I may be moderate but I am most certainly NOT ignorant as some elsewhere have tried to portray me.

I don't have many opinions on any kind of internationalism, but I have read up them. I don't like what our country does, but I don't think it is fair to say Dean is advocating doing what Bush is doing.

I don't think any of our Democrats would. Does that make me German?

[IndianaGreen]

108. The only difference between the GOP and Democrats when it comes

to foreign policy, particularly in Latin America, is that the Democrats use Vaseline to screw the workers and peasants while the GOP does it the hard way.

Let's not kid ourselves, both parties are imperialists and they both pursue the interests of the corporations at the expense of the people.

[radio4progressives]

117. Dems use Vaseline, eh?

:rofl:

sorry, i know you're being deadly serious (and i agree with you, ya know i do) but that's funny... ;)

[madfloridian]

126. You think that's funny?

I don't. I think it is tasteless.

[radio4progressives]

190. tasteless? I think it's painfully accurate .

[madfloridian]

202. Then that is very sad in itself.

.

[radio4progressives]

118. MF Please, Explain what is a Moderate Postion on Venezuela?

I asked you up thread, but i really want to understand this.

[madfloridian]

129. Dark side of the moon?

"same thread - GAAAAWWWWWDD - what a bunch of fucking lamos! "

Thanks. Your words not mine. Such a shame to do this when so many of us are sincere in working to change things.

[rman]

133. Why do you go out of your way to avoid answering a reasonable question?

[madfloridian]

141. Why do you organize elsewhere to come here and insult me?

You answer me, I will answer you later.

I have been bashed here, practically called a Nazi, and other things. Mostly because I am a Democrat.

You answer me.

[rman]

145. I don't organize elsewhere to insult you.

Your turn.

[radio4progressives]

154. Excuse me, will you please Explain what a "Moderate Position "

on the quesiton of Venezuela is?

this is the third time I'm asking this question.. you assert that the villification of Hugo Chavez and what he is trying to do there for his people, and that America shouldn't be tolerating Chavez and his efforts, is a harlmess remark. You assert such a comment is a reasonable position from a Moderate, such as yourself.

I'm asking for an explanation of what a Moderate position should be with regard to how we should conduct ourselves, and how to communicate our "message" (as a country )to the people vis a vis in the media and through diplomatic channels, to the leadership of Latin and South America?

Indeed what exactly should a "Moderate" message and policy be on the issues of concern ?

[madfloridian]

156. I live on the "dark side of the moon" and am a "lamo"...

and I am not worthy to give you brilliant folks an answer.

When you wish to apologize I accept it.

[radio4progressives]

196. You're wrong.

you took a quote that was never directed to you, did not name you. but was merely a late night general venting (in a different forum) which i have a right to do, but you were not mentioned in that post. It is you who have violated my rights, and it is for you to apologize to me.

[madfloridian]

199. Wrong. This thread was fed on that.

It is wrong.

[The Magistrate]

159. It Would Seem To Me, Ma'am

That there would be several features to a moderate position on this matter.

Perhaps the most important would be that it is really not of much importance either way, compared to the political developments in our own country. Therefore, if disparraging comments in that direction seem better for securing, or not offending, some block of votes, then they should be made, and not complained of.

Another would be that disapproval need not be translated into action. Persons of moderate temperament are generally disinclined to interefence unless it is deemed necessary for self-defense. This is different from the current regime's clear desire to overthrow the Venezuelan government, and democstrated schemings towards that end.

Yet another would be the basis of disapproval, which is likely to concentrate on the means employed rather than the end sought. Here it does seem to me the moderate position is rooted in a starry-eyed idealism, for the end sought really cannot be obtained without a degree of unfairness and violence. As Mr. G. B. Shaw said long ago: "If Socialism ever becomes the law of the land it will be enforced just as the present law is, by knocking on the head and imprisoning those who disagree." Certainly not all of the people disadvantaged by what Col. Chavez does are bad people in and of themsleves, and a moderate view will often concentrate on this fact, and ignore the bad inherent in the system which they are, for better or worse, advbantageously placed in.

[radio4progressives]

203. I understand the point you're making, and in general i agree with it..

here's the issue of serious and urgent concern to me on this specific matter wrt Chavez.

When our leadership (with the help of the MSM) engage in what amounts to constant and escalating saber rattling, (and i say that with all due respect and deference to recent history, i.e. Iraq etc)using all manner of rhetorical devices in addition to actual CIA and other paramilitary operations which backed the Coup in 2002, by this administration, and have openly expressed on going plans to oust Chavez, this Sir, is of major significance and has significant consequences to the entire hemisphere, i trust you will agree?

This should be a matter for all Americans to be better informed about, plus there's the openly discussed Anti-Castro group in Florida and their plans for a coup d'etat when Castro passes away, that too is of major significance, and any assistance on our part will have negatively impact the people in both countries and our relations for decades to come.

How does one parse out a "Moderate" position on whether we should or should not intervene/interfere when clearly, lines in the sand are being drawn and we cannot simply squat in the middle as it were. In fact we have not "squatted in the middle" as we have been meddling in all manner of ways and to the extreme.

It would seem to me, that the Moderate position, would be one to say, we will engage in friendly, neighborly co-operation, negotiate on terms that are in the best interests of the American People (as opposed to Multi-Nationals who do not operate on behalf of the American people)and as often is the case, what is in the best interest of one people, is generally in the best interest of another people..

or at the minimum, keep a rather Neutral position and allow the governments to work out their economies in the way that they see fit, not in the way that we see fit.

Is that an Extreme position? Is a position which offer mutual respect, extremism? One that wants to avoid tensions which could lead to warfare if allowed to fester and escalate using divisive rhetoric and other machinations?


corrected major contextual error

[The Magistrate]

208. What You Suggest As A Moderate Position, Ma'am

Most people who call themselves moderates likely adhere to. What seems to be the basis for this discussion around us is an interpretation of Gov. Dean's remarks that is probably not what he intended by them. He was, in fact, criticizing, to most ears, the current regime's actions in Latin America, and pointing out that they can be said to have resulted in developments a great many of our people, and particularly people who tend to support the present regime, do not like. That is one reason not to support the present regime, after all, and fits into the whole miasmic picture of incompetence and unintended consequences that is one of the principal lines of attack against it: even a middling average reactionary should be able to see this is not really the first team, so to speak.

The ignorance of the populace on this question has benefits as well as problems. There is not really a constituency for an attack on Venezuela, precisely because the people neither know nor care what happens there. The present regime will not invade the place, and any attempt to work against Col. Chavez using Venezuelan elements will fail: he is much too popular among the rank and file of the armed forces.

Cuba is a seperate matter. It is a fact that the people of our country are mostly, one might by now almost say hereditarily, hostile to Castro's government. This is not going to alter. Hostility to Communism was, and remains, genuinely popular, and is not even a reliable indicator of position on the left v. right scale: there are plenty of sound leftist reasons for opposing the form and actions of Soviet Communism, of which Castro remains, for better or worse, an heir.

[radio4progressives]

211. This explanation is very much appreciated..

But i would argue that there was not a general constituency to support an attack against Iraq in this country, but for the use of propaganda and other rhetorical devises used to promulgate the necessities for war - Iraq was an unarmed and defenseless nation after all, indeed so was Granada, unarmed and defenseless.

Chavez is not unarmed as you point out, which may support the popular thinking that we will not go to war against a well ARMED enemy, as recent history dictates...

but we can't know that for sure, and we only have history as regards to Latin and South America with which to gage the agenda, and the potential impact the current anti-Communist rhetoric from Congress members, or wacko fundamentalists, to the Secretary of State and the President with the aid of their controlled media devices - in shaping public opinion, and creating in true Orwellian fashion the perception of American Peoples support for war or other types of hostile policies against these burgeoning populist supported democracies and their leaders. Sometimes, it's communicated in a sort of code, other times there is open blatancy about our intentions. That's why it is so important to be clear, and to push against the direction the status quo would have us go, on this matter.

As to Cuba, "some say" as much as the anti-Castro communities in Florida are hoping to see happen, and hard at work on these regime change plans they have been at developing, that the Cuban people are very much aware of these aims and are prepared to resist any attempt for a 'regime change'. I strongly suspect that the people and armed forces in the neighboring countries in Latin and South America, will likely come to Cuba's aid and defense.

I tend to believe that would be the case, and since our intelligence communities really should know as well, the notion of "boots on the ground" warfare against Cuba should seem insanely extreme, yet those are the contingency plans.

So i would extend the question on what is the "Moderate" Position in such a scenario. What would that be, or what should it be? If we continue to engage this situation on the rhetorical level we have been, the standard "anti-Communist vs Pro-democracy rhetoric, we as a country will ultimately lose that debate on the international front - despite the domestic indoctrinations necessary to ratchet up nationalists fervor and militarism in my view. others mileage may vary.

edited spelling/context/etc

[The Magistrate]

217. Thank You, Ma'am

Unfortunately, it does seem to me there was a considerable constituency for an attack on Iraq. A good many of our people have viewed that as unfinished business for a long time: it has seemed to me that one of the leading reasons for the collapse of support for the elder Bush in '92 was a feeling among many he had not really finished the job there. People expected that the '91 expedition would remove Hussein, and yet a year later he was secure as ever, and consolidating his power further in Iraq in a most brutal manner. It was not a thing that, a dozen years on, people placed a high priority on, mind, but the feeling was there, and could be readily roused, like the sight of someone who looks like an old flame can rekindle the emotions of the affair long past, at least briefly.

But there is no such lingering inclination regarding Venezuela, and so the basic elements for rousing a genuine war-fever are absent. The place is a nullity to our people; they neither know nor care about it. There is no fuel for the kindling of propaganda to ignite. Action by the present regime, or for that matter, any U.S. regime in present circumstances, would have to take either the covert form of attempting to rouse a revolution in that land, or perhaps, as a longer shot, securing a war between it and Columbia. Neither of these seem likely to succeed; Col. Chavez is too popular among people equipped with weapons, and Columbia and Venezuela too evenly matched for an expectation the former would triumph over the latter.

Regarding Cuba, open armed action by the U.S. seems unlikely to me, but there is no denying popular feeling exists on the subject that could be roused. An attempt to do so by a U.S. regime would put the left in a most difficult position politically. Many who consider themselves moderates might well be moved to support it, as Castro does partake of a tyrant's character in many respects, and moderates tend to dislike tyrants, if for no other reason than that tyranny is an extreme, and they do not like extremes of any sort. But there is also a bed-rock under most moderates, which underlies my views as well, and that is a feeling that people have the right to convey themselves to the hell of their choice by their own chosen road in whatever conveyance they prefer, and it is nobody else's business that they do. That would armor a great many moderates against serious support for such a venture aimed, at least in the propagandas supporting it, at saving people from themselves....

[rinsd]

165. "I reject nationalism in all its permutations"

So you dislike the nationalistic flavor of Chavez? And his rally round the flag tactics of immeninent invasion?

[madfloridian]

113. I do support America.

I will work to change what I can. I hate to see people here say things like that on a busy night at DU..kind of thing some folks like to use.

I don't like what my country does, but I will work to change it.

[madfloridian]

143. The more I think about it.....I don't like that implication. "good German"

The use of the words "good German" were about as close as you could get to calling some of us here Nazis.

I resent it, I think it is wrong. I do support our country first, and your statement that you "don't support America" leaves this board open to criticism.

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

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

[madfloridian]

75. Really? I did not know I was that either. Learning about myself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenophobia

[ProudDad]

80. You wrote "Most of us support our own country

over other countries." (right or wrong?)

That's a good definition of political xenophobia.

It's also exactly the recipe the created Osama Bin Laden.

[madfloridian]

82. I support but I criticize. You called me a bigot. I resent that a lot.

I work to change things. You and IG have just been very insulting to me. I hate that, and I see no need for it.

You guys take statements and you just twist them as badly as the right wing does the other way.

Fair is fair, and you are not.

[LittleClarkie]

60. Two different questions.

There's room between the center and the far left, for many things.

And I'm not saying that anything left of center is extreme. I'm left of center. I suspect Dean in some ways is to the right of me. But that doesn't make me extreme left.

How would Pres. Chavez fit into our American spectrum. Compare him to someone I'd know here. How far along on the spectrum is he.

[ProudDad]

81. George McGovern

with a little of Thomas Jefferson and Chief Joseph is where he'd fit.

[radio4progressives]

97. I Personaly don't care what Dean's personal position is ...

What I care about is his joining saber rattling rhetoric, the demonization and villification of Chavez and the DISTORTION and MISREPRESENTATION of Chavez's policies and the way that he is governing his country -

Dean can at least take the position, by representing the facts, and make it clear as long as Chavez is a democratically elected and representing the needs of his own people according to THEIR own ideals, and we STAY OUT OF IT and SHUT UP.

You don't have to be a Socialist to understand and agree with the basic principles of respect for a nations Soverign Right to be governed as THEY CHOOSE.

Not as the United States chooses.

and that's essentially what Dean needs to say on the FCMSM.

[madfloridian]

109. Oh, good grief. He is not saber rattling.

Statements like that are why a lot of people can't relate to "progressive" causes....

That is just BS and you know it.

[radio4progressives]

122. He's amplifying the GOP Saber Rattling with a Statement like that

it is the same as encouraging it. he's giving it credibility, and so that's exactly what it means by not denouncing the "anti-Chavez" rhetoric and the reactionarism in the media, in the white house and among some in Congress. It's got to stop now before it escalates. It's exactly like the run up to the war in Iraq - it's exactly the same .

That's why this is important.

[madfloridian]

127. He was advocating working with those leaders and the people.

You guys are just overboard on this stuff. He was blaming Bush for ignoring their needs and not working with them.

I don't give us a chance in hell in winning this year or 08. Too many just want to divide.

[McCamy Taylor]

29. Ooo. Dean meant "American business doesnt like..." Thinking big $$.

The Democrats seem poised to snatch the whole enchillada from the Republicans. Next Dean will have a "No non-oil company left behind" initiative to court the business's which have been screwed by W's blind devotion to Big Oil.

[paulk]

32. most Americans will understand that by "left"

Dean is referring to Communist or Socialist regimes taking root in S. America.

And he's no doubt right - most Americans are uncomfortable with that.

The term left can have quite a few different meanings, depending on the context.

The context is what's important here.

[rman]

34. There's a fair free market, there's differentiation in wages,

There's a fair free market, there's differentiation in wages, corporate media are allowed (even though those are dominated by the opposition).

There is no communism in Venezuela and Bolivia.

If Dean thinks there's communism there, then he's ill informed about those regimes.

[IndianaGreen]

77. Americans don't care about the suffering they cause throughout the world

Our "way of life" is nothing but an illusion resulting from our military might being used to enslave people and steal their resources in the Third World.

G-d will judge America very harshly!

[Andromeda]

214. Absolutely!

Communism and Socialism will never take hold in the US for that very reason.

My head is spinning by all the overreaction to Dean's comments. Who cares if he said left-leading or left-leaning? He meant extremists, not the left-leaning Democrats.

There's a big difference.

[paulk]

215. overreaction

there's a lot of people on this board with an agenda

not specifically anti-Dean

just anti-any Democrat

they're as bad as the RNC when it comes to distorting a statement

to fit their ends

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

35. I know he couldn't be referring to President Chavez. Because he was

elected in 1999. If people want to "blame" somebody then blame Pres. Clinton. Maybe blame the Venezuelan people for..... oh I don't know voting. I mean the arrogance of these people.

[rman]

37. I think it's clear Dean was referring to Venezuela:

"BLITZER: Are you blaming the president on the elections in Bolivia or on the elections in Venezuela? Is that what you're saying?"

Dean does not deny this, in effect confirming Blitzer's assertion.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

38. That's my point. If this is the case, then he has no fucking clue

what he's talking about. Bush has nothing to do with this. People were tired of 80 years of the same shit and they wanted some change. Same could be said about Bolivia.

[sendero]

39. Who gives a fuck?

Dean said "Americans don't like left-leaning" - anyone want to argue with that? It is factually correct. He did not say that "I don't like left-leaning".

Whether or not Bush** had fuck-all to do with Venezuela/Bolivia is moot. Who the fuck cares, it is a talking point. Dems have to learn to use rhetoric to make the other side look bad.

It is not a lie, it is an opinion, neither provable nor disprovable. The Repukes do this shit to us ALL THE TIME AND IT WORKS.

[rman]

41. Dean perpetuated a RW lie in the process;

namely that the left-wing regimes in Latin America are bad - because they don't have US interests at heart.
That to is a RW talking point: that (developing) nations should put US interests before their own. And history shows that if they do put their own interests first, a US supported opposition will rise, resulting in dictatorship.

How the heck is supporting those positions helping Dems?

[sendero]

43. No...

.... he's USING the opinion of the VAST MAJORITY OF AMERICANs to attack the Republicans.

For God's sake, he cannot change the body of public opinion on every issue, nor is it his job to. Why would he want to tar the Dem party by trying to talk up situations that Americans are not happy about?

Really, this is politics, not grammar school.

[rman]

45. I think i see your point. But i think it's shame that the public discourse

on politics has been reduced to rhetoric.
I realize no single person can change it, but it's so unproductive.

[sendero]

47. It is a shame..

.... but we have to deal with the world as it is, not as it should be.

I'm an idealist at heart, but I've learned through bitter dissapointment and hard experience that standing back and dealing with things AS THEY REALLY ARE, and being open to understanding HOW THINGS REALLY ARE has helped me get through life more than my naive idealism ever did.

Republicans are MASTERS of taking advantage of predujices, fears, and even dreams. Dean is one of a HANDFUL of Dems who can match them toe to toe rhetorically.

We have to do this or we are never going to govern this country again. Having to say something that is a bit disingenuous is a small price to pay for not giving our country to tyrants.

[madfloridian]

62. Thanks for the sensible view.

We can not change opinions overnight when there is no media on our side. We do what we can, and then go further. It does not matter I like respect Chavez, or that someone else does. The vast majority of Americans are clueless on the subject.

[ProudDad]

83. You are right about that

The vast majority of Americans are clueless about everything.

The problem is that Dean's repeating of this drivel for whatever reason doesn't make them any smarter.

Trying to out-evil evil just makes you more evil!

[madfloridian]

87. What is with all the insulting going on here?

Can't you make your points without being ugly?

[radio4progressives]

123. No, you're wrong.

Dean is not USING the opinion of the VAST majority of Americans.

The VAST Majority of Americans don't even KNOW what the fuck is going on, except what the FCMSM tells them, are you kidding?

[sendero]

134. The vast majority of Americans...

... probably have a negative opinion of Chavez because negative is all you will hear in the MSM.

[The Magistrate]

140. And That Is A Real Shame, Sir

Because Col. Chaves is an excellent fellow. What he is doing in Venezuela is not only proper but necessary. Like most of South America, Venezuela is still afflicted with social conditions more in the nature of feudalism than capitalism, and the country cannot possibly develope to anything like its full potential until this is rectified. Since the evident policy of the present gang of ultra-reactionaries in power in our own land is to create feufal conditions here, in Venezuela today we may be looking at the politics of our own country should we fail to expell this current crew of reptiles from power here.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[sendero]

142. I couldn't agree with you more...

... but I'm merely speaking to the mindset of the American people. They have been sold, very effectively, an idea of what is going on down there and reality has little to do with it.

Same as Cuba, same as our own country. We are losing the war of words but in this case I think Dean's strategy, if it is one, to take advantage of popular misconceptions, is better than the nothing we get from most Dem leaders.

[The Magistrate]

144. And In That, Sir

It seems to me you, and Gov. Dean, are correct.

The conditions of our political life are what they are, and we must play on the ground that exists, not that which we would like to have....

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

48. Apparently you do. So fuck, fuck, fuck,fuckity fuckn/t

[sendero]

61. Fuckin'..

.... "A"

[radio4progressives]

104. Actually You are acutally quite incorrect.

Some Americans, like Right Wing Capatalists don't like "left-leaning", but MOST Americans support "left - leaning" policies, health care, education & social security , you know Left Wing stuff like that.

And whether or not Bush had fuck to do with Venezuela and Bolivia is ANYTHING but MOOT.

it isn't talking points, the Bush administration attempted in 2002 to overthrow a democratically elected president of a soverign nation- for 48 hours Venezuela was without their president - because the CIA took over the fucking Compound and the Congress AND the MEDIA - (guess who? CNN)

The Coup FAILED after 48 or so hours, and Chavez was rightfully restored to his office, but ever since then Condi Rice and these FUCKS have been SABER RATTLING to INVADE VENEZUELA among other things. and there's a whole lot more to this but you obviously have got some HOME WORK to do!

And you better do it quick because these bastards in the white house are out of fucking control..

edited to make correction

[Gloria]

119. South America is moving away from the US because of the

interference of the US. They've put together a media network SPECIFICALLY to counter US propaganda as well as an oil consortium. They are trading with China like crazy now, a further move to try to bring the US influence down a peg or two....

[madfloridian]

125. And Bush is to blame. Dean was blaming Bush.

He said he was not paying attention to the needs of the people there, yet you below joined in this as well. I was surprised.

[radio4progressives]

207. Yes, indeed the evil policies of Neo Liberal Imperalism is comming home

to roost, and that has got them shaking in their boots, no longer the King of the Planet.

We're going to be forced to learn how to be a bit more humble and be a bit more respectful of other countries.

[sendero]

135. What you know and think..

.... and what the average American knows and thinks - couldn't be more divergent.

[LittleClarkie]

42. Too bad Jimmy Carter's people couldn't certify the results from 2004

not transparent enough.

And how committed to democracy could a man be when he attempted a coup a while back?

[rman]

44. The coup argument also applies to the opposition

in Venezuela - which happens to be a US supported RW.

Chavez was pardoned and released, while the RW was still in power in Venezuela.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

50. I have no idea where you got that from.

As far as the coup is concerned. He along with other military officers felt the government violated its oath to protect the people. Because they were using the military to abuse poor people. Especially along the Colombia-Venezuela border. Since then he has said that a political struggle instead of armed is the way to go. He admitted he fucked up and his people elected him. Hopefully our government will learn to deal with it, and stop fucking up our elections in Latin America.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

51. .

[LittleClarkie]

54. Oh, excuse me. My memory sucks. It was 2000 that Carter couldn't endorse

1998 looks to be fine, as was 2004. Still, a spot on his record, election-wise.

From Wikipedia:

Elections for the new unicameral National Assembly were held on July 30, 2000. During this same election, Chávez himself stood for reelection. Chávez's coalition garnered a commanding two-thirds majority of seats in the National Assembly while Chávez was reelected with 60% of the votes. The Carter Center monitored the 2000 presidential election; their report on that election stated that, due to lack of transparency, CNE partiality, and political pressure from the Chávez government that resulted in unconstitutionally early elections, it was unable to validate the official CNE results.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

57. Even opposition polling firms (exit polls) showed the end result to

be accurate. Keller and Keller (local polling firm) showed the same results. That from a firm whose CEO said that the way to get rid of Mr Chavez was with a bullet.

[Selatius]

49. SOCIALISM. That's what I am reading from his words. He means SOCIALISM.

I, as a libertarian socialist, realize that I am and will always be a minority here and in the rest of society. I've been redbaited and bashed more times than I care to remember, and maybe it's because I've been attacked one too many times, but I feel he's using code words for socialism, and frankly, I think he's right in his observation of America. Most folks, when you mention the words "communism" or "socialism" almost instinctively have negative reactions to the economic philosophy.

[rman]

53. That's plausible

If true then Dean is technically correct about the political situation in Venezuela and Bolivia.

It's to bad Dean makes it out to be as though socialism is bad. This while such a thing as tax-funded "universal" health care - which is supported by the vast majority of Americans - is in fact socialistic in nature. It's not coincidence that it is the opposite of what the RW wants, which is to privatize everything (and they've come a very long way since they started that).

[ProudDad]

70. Negative knee jerk reactions

with NO facts to base them on.

And comments like this mindless one from Dean are a major part of the reason.

Hell, they're all bought and sold and screw them all, I say.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

52. The way I see it. His comments are open to interpretation.

I personally found them paternalistic and even condescending (given the usual gringo attitude towards Latin America). After reading what others have said. I see some valid points. The fact that I didn't like the way it was phrased doesn't mean I do not support this man. Having said that. I was hoping to meet him and shake his hand when he was here yesterday. I was hoping to ask him about this very subject (to get it straight from the horse's mouth). Unfortunately I made to the state capitol too late.

I don't have a problem with this man as others seem to have interpreted. The way I see it President Dean would handle things a lot better than Mr Chucklenuts the giggling murderer.

[rman]

55. I concur.

Various points well taken.

In the mean time however it doesn't have to stop anyone from pointing out the disingenuousness of the rhetoric. Whether it's the RW pushing their talking points or Dean using those against them.

For me Dean (still) has at least the benefit of the doubt, and next time i'll take a different approach when commenting on his talk.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

58. Hopefully, we are all working toward the same goal. Which is

COMMUNISM .........Just kidding. Right wing assholes love hearing that.

[rman]

59. LOL. nt

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

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

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

72. Wrong choice of words. I do think that some Democrats can do better

in Latin America. I realize that being better than bush means jack shit. Clinton cut some deals with Chavez that were beneficial for both administrations. In other words he wouldn't fuck with his government. He treated him with respect. At least according to Palast.

[madfloridian]

94. When Carville worked against Chavez, was Clinton aware?

Or was it business with Carville? I never did figure that out.

Oh, and Dean was saying to treat them with respect and work with them.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

112. I always thought Carville was a weasel. He was good

at what he did, sure. But I couldn't tell you who knew what about his dealings with these people. I will say that his clients were some of the worst that the Ven. right wing had to offer. It's like some of these guys don't like the right wing here, but it's just fine for others. No matter how much they lie cheat and steal.

[radio4progressives]

157. Clinton? MF you don't even want to go there! Trust Me!

It appears to be a significant learning curve on these matters, i strongly recommend doing some reading up on the subject of Neo Liberal Imperialism, which essentially defines what the DLC is all about.

By the way, my fervent support for Dean, was precisely because he communicated a passionate rejection of Neo Conservative foriegn policy (which is Neo Liberal Imperialism with a bit different embroidery), and so i am most certainly entitled to speak my peace on this matter especially as it regards to people we work are working with.

If it's a learning curve matter with Dean, then how about proposing a way to communicate his mistakes with regard to these comments. If it's a question of Dean taking his marching orders from the DLC on these policy questions, then that is a very serious problem, because that says we are not remodeling the party at all, we are operating a dog and pony show and that my dear will be the absolute death nell of this party, once again.

[madfloridian]

164. You should be ashamed of yourself.

.

[radio4progressives]

184. For what exactly?

[madfloridian]

186. Whining.

http://www.progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=11366&mesg_id=12766

And you are wrong. It was not him, it was me...I read many forums.

[radio4progressives]

206. Shame on you for Whining..

[Douglas Carpenter]

56. well unfortunately, the Democratic Party's record in dealing with

Latin America and the third world in general is nothing to be proud of.

I have long argued that progressives (or left-leaning Americans-if you will) should work in, support and be loyal to the Democratic Party. But the broad issues of foreign policy in the Democratic Party are only marginally better. Sometimes that margin is enough to make the difference for millions of lives. Jimmy Carter's human rights policy still allowed for significant but somewhat reluctant shipments of arms to the El Salvadoran death squads even after they murdered Arch Bishop Romero. But it was massively accelerated under Reagan. If Carter had been reelected I suppose the blood bath would have been less and across the border Nicaraguan independence and democracy might have survived. This is not a stellar record. But it is significant.

Those of us who are concerned about issues of democracy and national self-determination have a lot of work to do within the Democratic Party and the American media which propagates this distorted world view.

[ProudDad]

64. He just fuckin' lost my vote!!!

We need MORE left leaning governments in the world, not less.

What a prick!!!

[NYCGirl]

65. Lost your vote? He's not running for anything.

:eyes:

[ProudDad]

67. He will

he's just part of the two right-wings of the suck up to big business party.

[NYCGirl]

78. Your crystal ball is a little cloudy.

I'm sure the Greens will be glad to have you. So long.

[ProudDad]

88. The greens

are too corporate :evilgrin:

[NYCGirl]

90. Did you ever think of moving to Venezuela?

Or maybe that's too corporate for you.

[DemBones DemBones]

100. You can take that to the bank. There's no way Howard Dean

intends to be DNC chair forever; his presidential ambitions will lead him to run again. And he is no progressive, never was, never will be. In another thread, though I was not a Dean supporter, I just gave him credit for having said and done some good things as chair. Then I read the OP of this thread and I need to go edit that. . .

[ProudDad]

85. Ok

he lost my vote for "nice guy of the week" :)

[madfloridian]

76. LOL your vote for what?

I love this forum. People are threatening not to vote for people who are not running for anything...and calling others Nazis, Xenophobes, and worse.

[clarknyc]

84. Don't worry.

This isn't about Dean or anyone other than those that oppose him. They would help themselves with honesty, but it may be beyond their capability. Don't worry. They'll screw themselves...

[madfloridian]

93. My brain is reeling.

I hope they figure out soon that I am neither a nazi, German, jingoistic, and Xenophobic/Zenophobic.

God, I hope someone gets a clue soon. They might end up voting for someone who is not running. :think:

On another thread in which a person was stretching things, I was told not to be "harsh."

Oh, well

[DemBones DemBones]

98. Dean's no progressive. nt

[madfloridian]

99. Never claimed to be.

But he is doing a lot of good, and he does not deserve to be so villified. Neither do I...deserve to be villified that is.

One can be moderate, still be a good person, sincere and honest.

[DemBones DemBones]

101. Who vilified you? Who vilified Dean? Not me. I said he's no progressive

and you obviously agree.

[madfloridian]

102. No, you didn't. The whole thread is out of hand,though.

He has always used the word centrist in regard to himself, but that does not preclude accomplishing good things.

[DemBones DemBones]

105. I agree that true centrists can accomplish good things but

the problem is that the center has moved so far to the right. Today's centrists are essentially Republicans, and I include both Clintons as well as Dean and Kerry.

[madfloridian]

107. I disagree on Dean and Kerry, but you are right on the Clintons.

Dean and Kerry are not really liberals at all, but they are not in the league as the Clintons and their thoughts of deregulation of media and other corporations. Huge differences.

The word centrist is like the weather in Florida, it changes all the time....it especially changes with the person.

[DemBones DemBones]

111. At last, we agree on something: the Clintons.

;-)

[rman]

182. That's one thing we agree on.

"The word centrist is like the weather in Florida, it changes all the time..."

I think that's all the more reason to define it before it is used as a label.

[IndianaGreen]

110. The alternative to GOP and Dem's neoliberalism

World Social Forum Kicks Off in Venezuela on January 24th

More Than 100,000 Social Justice Activists from Throughout the Western Hemisphere Will Gather in Caracas to Envision a Better World

Largest US Delegation to the World Social Forum is Being Organized by the Human Rights Group Global Exchange

SAN FRANCISCO, California - January 18 - Tens of thousands of peace and justice advocates from throughout the Western Hemisphere are gearing up for the World Social Forum, to be held this year in Caracas, Venezuela from January 24 – 29. The World Social Forum is an annual gathering that brings together peace activists, fair trade crusaders, environmentalists, and advocates of indigenous, workers’ and women’s rights, among others.

The largest US delegation to the World Social Forum in Caracas is being organized by the San Francisco-based human rights group Global Exchange. Some 200 people from throughout the United States, Canada, Australia and England will travel to Caracas with Global Exchange’s Reality Tours program and then stay on in Venezuela to study the transformation that the country has been undergoing under the leadership of Hugo Chavez. Delegates will be available for interviews from Venezuela at the cell phone numbers above and will be blogging about the World Social Forum at http://www.worldsocialforumlive.org.

The World Social Forum was created as an alternative to the World Economic Forum, which is a gathering of economic and political elites that happens annually in Davos, Switzerland. The World Social Forum is meant to be a place where activists from around the globe can envision a better world – one where people’s basic human needs are met, where international cooperation replaces war and militarism, and where governments and corporations respect the earth and its inhabitants - and share ideas about how to create it. Past World Social Forums have spawned important global collaborations, including the largest public mobilizations in human history - the February 15, 2003 demonstrations against the Iraq war.

“Being at the World Social Forum is like being at a huge family reunion of people who share the same values and are doing the same work to improve the world. There’s no other place where you can meet leaders of the landless workers movement of Brazil, who are fighting for the right to land for 250,000 displaced workers; representatives of the indigenous movements of Ecuador and Bolivia, who are fighting extractive industries in the Andes and Amazon; and women from across the Western Hemisphere who are joining together to push for peace in Iraq,” said Zach Hurwitz, an organizer of the Global Exchange World Social Forum delegation.

Speakers at the Caracas World Social Forum will include Nobel Peace Prize Winner Adolfo Perez Esquivel; Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez; Gold Star Mother Cindy Sheehan; and renowned author Eduardo Galeano. In the past, the World Social Forum was held in one location per year, but this year it has been split into three gatherings in different parts of the world. In addition to the Caracas gathering, there will be a World Social Forum in Karachi, Pakistan and also one in Bamako, Mali.

http://www.commondreams.org/news2006/0118-23.htm

[Gloria]

114. Jeez, it seems like the wheels really are coming off with this party....

this rather broad comment, Alito, Feinstein's stupid comments about a President having to obey the FISA rules "whenever possible," having to hear Hillary blab about sanctions on Iran, Bayh, Kerry seemingly on the bandwagon, the guy with his own ethics problems being chosen by Pelosi, etc. etc.

I'm beginning not to care...

[Dr Fate]

115. Dean is saying that Bush is a failure at working with other countries.

He is right about this- he is also correct to note that Americans dont like extreme left or right politics.

Over 50% does not like the extreme right politics of Bush either!!!

[madfloridian]

120. Don't bother.

You might get called names. Ain't worth it. You make a sensible statement in this thread you get treated like a pariah or worse.

[Dr Fate]

121. I criticise Dean when I think he is wrong. He is not wrong on this. n/t

n/t

[rman]

138. Dean did not say "Americans don't like extreme left politics"

Dean did say "Americans don't like left-leading regimes"

Yet again "left" is construed as being equal to "extreme left". It is dishonest to do so.

[madfloridian]

124. Such a lovely inspiring thread this has been.

And it is being replayed elsewhere right now. Only there most are agreeing and nodding about how Dean and all our Democrats are neocon PNACers.

At least some are partly disagreeing here.

When we need to work together is when certain ones come to drive us apart and divide the effort.

And some are falling for it all over themselves....that Dean is as evil as Bush. Lovely thread.

[leesa]

136. It was a very ignorant thing to say. None of these "new"governments are

dictatorships, ALL are democracies, except the older ones like Cuba...and we all know what a stellar success rampant capitalism has been. Very stupid!

[Freddie Stubbs]

137. Dean is a centrist

That is how he governored Vermont. Why would anyone think that he would want to change his stripes?

[jonnyblitz]

139. exactly. it amuses me that he is viewed as a lefty.

I do admire his frank talk that pisses all the right people off but he is hardly as left as people are led to believe. He will never go against what is good for business(he never did in Vermont) and leftist regimes in other countries aren't good for US business.

[rman]

146. Increasing minimum wage, supporting universal health care,

is bad for business, and by extension bad for people - if you'd believe the RW.

I'm getting the impression though that Dean has other ideas about what's good for business and what's good for people, then the RW does. So what'd be problem with him positioning himself and the Dem party as the opposition of the RW, which would be Left-wing?

I could be completely wrong though about Deans actual political position. As i've said elsewhere, for me Dean (still) has the benefit of the doubt.

[madfloridian]

150. Ever heard of research? I could do it for you, but I won't.

I could give you all kinds of research, but I won't. I don't like people at another forum using us as punching bags.

Jumping into posts I do which are presenting the good things going on go to showing motive. The motive is to hurt the party, then act outraged when you guys are called on it.

People can read, and no one here in this thread defended me when the words "good German" (meaning Nazi) were used against me.

You do what you have to do....I will do what I need to do.

[rman]

152. I think i better don't respond to that,

as to avoid giving a mod reason to lock this thread for it having turned into a flame-war.

[madfloridian]

158. Well, let me count the ways...

that doesn't make sense. It has been that for hours now, and it just keeps on. I am tired of being insulted for being a Democrat who is sincere in her efforts for change. I don't like it and I will fight back if necessary.

I had a good thread going about Dean's reorganization. It is not so good anymore. Thanks.

Flame war? What's that.

[Freddie Stubbs]

171. Some liberals didn't like his evniornmental record

http://www.counterpunch.org/colby02222003.html

[Freddie Stubbs]

173. He pushed through welfare reform

It's true that, as governor of Vermont, Dean was a proud New Democrat, championing welfare reform and balancing budgets. During the Clinton years, Dean was condemned by liberals, such as Marian Wright Edelman of the Children's Defense Fund, for his rabid defense of welfare reform.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/12/18/opinion/main589288.shtml

[Freddie Stubbs]

174. He cut taxes

Don't look at what a politician says. Look at what they do.

[rman]

177. thanks for your info and advice

[MrBenchley]

161. Please don't introduce actual facts (snicker)

[rinsd]

166. It kills me.....

Dean makes a comment that is true and people go into "how dare he utter a single negative word about Saint Chavez" mode.

It this Democratic underground or the Chavez Bolivarian Revolution underground?

[madfloridian]

195. The latter, I fear, or so it seems lately.

I know the feeling. ;(

[rinsd]

201. And what Dean said was right....

It's not that Dean thinks Chavez and other socialist leaning people are doing badly. It is the constant stream of anti-American rhetoric and sentiment emmanating from that region coming almost entirely from left-leaning governments which has been exacerbated by the actions of Bush.

Add to that that most Americans are not comfortable with socialist government. I'm not even sure you would find a majority on this board that would wholeheartedly support of Bolivarian type socialist government.

[Capn Sunshine]

160. This is just Bullshit

Dean pointed out something that isa sentiment among Americans. He did NOT decry populist movements, he did NOT most assuredly say anything anti-union.

Yet you insist on imbuing this into his comment.

Why? because there's too many keyboard commandos who don't go out in the real world to effect any change, but prefer to stir up folks online by deconstructing things and slanting it some other way.

Where is the outrage against anything---anything at ALL -- that Bush or Cheney have stated about specifically Venezuela?

I note you haven't mentioned the words of Chavez that were "misconstrued"

"El mundo tiene para todos, pues, pero resulta que unas minorías, los descendientes de los mismos que crucificaron a Cristo, los descendientes de los mismos que echaron a Bolívar de aquí y también lo crucificaron a su manera en Santa Marta, allá en Colombia. Una minoría se adueñó de las riquezas del mundo, una minoría se adueñó del oro del planeta, de la plata, de los minerales, de las aguas, de las tierras buenas, del petróleo, de las riquezas, pues, y han concentrado las riquezas en pocas manos "

My translation:

The world has enough for all of us, then, but it so happens that minorities, the descendents of the same ones that crucified Christ, the descendents of the same ones that kicked Bolivar out of here and also crucified him in their own way over there in Santa Marta, in Colombia. A minority has appropriated all of the wealth of the world, a minority has appropriated of all of the gold of the planet, the silver, the minerals, the waters, the good lands, oil, all of the wealth then, and have concentrated the wealth in the hands of a few"

But that's OK, he only attacked the Jewish people like every anti-semite has since Jesus was killed.
Or did he?

Parse that for awhile. Looks pretty anti-semetic out of context.

Oh no, it's much more important to impede Howard Dean in his mission.
There's a LOT of axe grinders who pretend to be Democrats but whose true goal is to bring the party down, because that would "help" third parties.

[The Magistrate]

162. A Pleasure To See You About The Place, Captain

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Capn Sunshine]

169. I can't bear to look at the market any more

:headexplode:

[The Magistrate]

172. If You Find It Quieter Here, Sir

Matters must be truely explosive in the pits....

[Capn Sunshine]

212. well, we wiped the debris from our faces, straightened our ties,

And it all evened out. I'm in Treasuries, so it was a good thing, but I still own stocks personally, and a quick review shows quite a beating.

Oh, except if you own the XOI, which is oil related, that of course is up like 6% today.

I guess I'll go back in Monday.

Thanks for caring, Magistrate
:hi:

[rman]

168. You're trying to tell me which topics i should or should not post about?

[Capn Sunshine]

170. Nope. You're trying to tell me not to call Bullshit?

This happened over a week ago and was beaten to death by the usual suspects. But nice dodge of the comparative anti-semitism issue with Chavez.
Not.

[rman]

185. There are many other issues regarding both Chavez and Dean

besides this one that could be discussed. I think Chavez's alleged anti-semitic remarks are tangent to this particular issue.

[madfloridian]

163. A google search on "good german". or why madfloridian is insulted.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ned=us&q=%22good+german%22&btnmeta%3Dsearch%3Dsearch=Search+the+Web

Hey, George Clooney is making a movie about it, and there are websites and books.

I was called a "good german" because I support Dean's effort to rebuild the party.

AND no one defended me....not one person.

Just like when my church called me unpatriotic...no one defended me then, not my family not anyone...because I did not support the war.

[madfloridian]

193. A Yahoo search on "good german"...aww I think I'll cry .

http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=%22good+german%22&sm=Yahoo%21+Search&fr=FP-tab-web-t&toggle=1&cop=&ei=UTF-8

What a sad thing to say to each other, you know?

[rman]

176. i think this thread has run its course

please lock

[madfloridian]

179. It is not bothering me at all

.

[rman]

180. oh well, fine with me

[radio4progressives]

181. It's unfortunate that the question at issue..

so vital to restoring sanity, (or rather creating a SANE and respectful policy for once in our history)is met with such abject hostility by "moderates", instead of engaging with an OPEN MIND and with a keene sense of CURIOSITY, which was once touted as a chief charachterization of Liberalism, as in the days of Enlightenment.

too bad, so sad..

[madfloridian]

183. There are varying kinds of extremism.

On both sides of the aisle. One day I think one side is worse, but then other times I realize I was wrong.

I am tired of having good Democrats torn and ripped apart by people who organize elsewhere and have no party loyalty at all. OOPS bad word, madfloridian...loyalty...now you will be called a "good german".

[radio4progressives]

188. What are Varying Kinds of Extremism, and what is a Moderate?

please define instead of tossing the words out there.. My "loyalty" goes to the Constitution, and most especially the Bill of Rights first (such as it is it could be improved)and formost - then my loyalty goes to the leadership who adheres to the principles and embues the values of that which i have just pledged my loyalty.

For me, I try to sort through the players within the system and outside of the system, and by that I mean organizers who have shed blood sweat and tears (who have laid their bodies and lives on the line over the decades) for the cause of socio-economic justice and equality and all that implies. The Democratic Party is supposed to be the party which embues these same values.. we know that hasn't been the case and the history is checkered at best, and progressives have struggled and pushed and organized to advance these principles.

But the Dems have shifted their agenda ever rightward, which enabled the extreme right to remake the Republican party into a fascists party. And now we are under a Fascists Rule, (it is no longer approaching, it is here)and we will be for decades to come, as long as "Moderates" continue play the role of the appeaser and enabler.

[madfloridian]

191. As I said before.

First get your facts straight, blame the right people. It was not him it was me.

http://www.progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=11366&mesg_id=12766

[radio4progressives]

205. well then shame on you.. NT

[peacetalksforall]

178. I don't know what is wrong with me - I always thought that I was in the

grand middle which was quite wide and that John Birch type people who lynched and whose dogs ripped up those they hated were on the extreme right, and the left extreme took people hostage and took great risks that too often ended in deaths. Both extremes were passionate in their own ways.

The middle I marched with was tolerant of each other and we all seemed to honor separation of church and state and though drummed in, we really believed that our Constitution and B of R's was a good deal and should be treasured and improved. Too many were not passionate; too many were quite apathetic. We operated on momentum and the dis-reality that our leaders were taking care of us and most importantly, that a momentum brought by one Party that went too far could be corrected with an election. When raised and educated, our consciences took us far along on the path to equality and justice. And though slow, there were always heroes and heroines who would push us along in a persuasive or demanding way. We thought of the FBI as non-partisan and few would have remebered hearing the words of warning from Pres. Eisenhower. Corporations preached an internal family policy that valued employees.

So now I find people calling me a progressive when I think of myself as a preservist. Not getting stuck in time, but preserving the Constitution and Bill of Rights and keeping consciences raised and improving on protections and opportuniteis for all, including all non-citizens who are here on visas, work permits, and pending citizenship.

I also want to preserve the right to travel safely, with dignity, and a welcome without having to support corporations who have destroyed and claimed other peoples properties and cultures. The hate and bigotry that reigns in this country can be reversed by knowing the other humans we share the earth with and exposing and reversing the destruction by corporations on the ownership and rights of other people to the earth under their feet, their banks, cultures and beliefs and too often, their leaders.

The middle is an OK place - but diviseness now rules in this country and those who were tolerant are now forced to take sides and choose enemies and new labels are being thought up to try to address the phenonema of our divisions. We now have to defend ourselves by those who moved faster than we did to label us.

[rman]

187. Don't look at what a politician says. Look at what they do.

(thanks Freddie Stubbs)

It looks like Dean is weak on environmental protection:
http://www.counterpunch.org/colby02222003.html

Supported so-called "welfare reform":
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/12/18/opinion/main589288.shtml

And it seems that he cut taxes:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3933215/from/RL.2/


That's to much pro-corporation for my taste.
I suppose the only reason to support him is because he's the best we've got at that level.

[madfloridian]

189. He wanted to repeal most of the tax cuts.

I don't know where you are getting all that.

Counterpunch does nothing but present one-sided arguments against Democrats. One of the sources they constantly use, won't say the name out loud because I think he hangs around here....has been discredited for a long time.

You are very hard to please. Have you thought of moving to Venezuela?

[rman]

197. I ask no-one to please me. And yes i have thought of moving to Venezuela.

Still thinking about it.

[The Magistrate]

192. But The Reason You Give, Sir

Is an excellent reason for support at present. Into the bargain, Gov. Dean is a fighter, and has the knack of inspiring passiionate response, which is very valuable on the national scene.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Mass]

200. Do we really need these types of debates - We need to unite and call

our senators to tell them to filibuster Alito.

In addition, if you want to change the foreign policy of this country, dont call Dean. Call our Democratic Senators and Representatives, particularly those on the Foreign Committee. I dont think any of them would disagree (at least publicly) with Dean on that, and Dean is right in what he is saying. People have been taught to see any foreign leader who is not ready to see the good of his country before the good of international capitalism as left-wing, and they have been told that it was bad.

[zann725]

213. Times change. Needs change. The Right has gone sooo far Right...

something like the Progressive Party created by Wallace (who worked for FDR; and also ran for Prez) may have simply been ahead of its time.

I keep hearing the word "Progressive" used, and each time it's repeated...the "progress" in "progressive" sounds better and more widely aceepted NOW more than ever...

Besides, "progress" is SUCH an American concept to aspire to. So red-white-and-blue...IF we market it right.

Everyone wants Progress. Everyone wants to be the BEST country...or simply the BEST.

[greiner3]

216. Yeah, I'd need a transcript and a translation;

To make a decision on this. If not, Dean should resign as he would not have a job in the morning.

[madfloridian]

218. So if you don't get a transcript....Dean should resign.

Or if you get a transcript, you don't agree then he should resign.

Oh..Kayyyy.