Freepers and Dean--such intrigue!

[janx]

I have been watching the right wingnut reactions to the Dean campaign for months now. There are some thoughtful libertarian types who show signs of interest in Dean--but they don't often come out and say it.

Most of the reactions are those of ridicule. But it's fun to watch. For a plethora of threads (and there are several each day), you can click here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/search?s=dean&ok=Search&q=quick&m=any&o=time&SX=3f2bdb3b741dda864c58011ef7767e387bcd9fa6

[caledesi]

1. Yes, it is fun. Especially like the idea that most of them are grossly

underestimating HD. What's the deal with Hillary? I mean the Freepers are totally obsessed w/ her.

[janx]

3. The gross underestimation is a symptom of fear for some, I think.

For others it's just a classic case of overconfidence, which will undoubtedly trash Bush's chances in the general election.

Lord, if they only knew...

Re the Hillary obsession--I don't know, except I suspect that the hatred for the Clintons has bound the freepers for so long that they just can't shake it!

[janx]

5. I especially like this one:

"To: headsonpikes

Let's ask these questions about Dean:

Would he prosecute the war on terror?
Would he lower taxes or raise them?
Would he stand up for American sovereignty, or would he be a UN sycophant?
Would he appoint people of integrity to the cabinet?
Would he be beholden to every fringe leftist group in the country?
Does that snake pit of anti-Americans in Hollywood support him?
Who would be his vice-presidential preference?

Those are the questions people should ask. I don't care about his position on guns, because he would, if elected, suddenly become "wiser" and would go for a more stringent gun policy. I don't care about his fiscal conservatism (if it even exists) because he would suddenly, like Clinton, decide that the budget needed to be balanced by raising taxes.

He is also tempermentally unsuited to the presidency. He vetoed 8 bills in a row from the Vermont legislature simply because he "thought they were too big for their britches" and then bragged about this action, as if vetoing bills in a fit of bad temper is something to be proud of. He is an arrogant demagogue who should not get the nomination, as he will divide this country, even if he loses (which I think he would).


17 posted on 08/02/2003 8:42 AM PDT by Miss Marple"
_____________________________________________________


She's tripping, just making stuff up as she goes along.

[janx]

6. But every once in awhile, you get someone who thinks...

"To: grania

I really don't know where this guy is at. He doesn't seem to be the pushover and easy win that a lot would think.

He seems to be opposed by both the RNC and the DNC, that is a major point in his favor right there. He opposes NAFTA and the WTO, if he'd throw in the Federal Reserve and WB/IMF I just might support him.


13 posted on 08/02/2003 8:21 AM PDT by steve50 (the main problem with voting is a politican always wins)"
_________________________________________________________


He's beginning to understand.

[janx]

7. Or this one:

"<i>My only concern is that Dean is slippery enough to come back to the middle and tie up the sucker moms' vote</i><p>

After the flight jacket photo's , Bush has this vote in his pocket."

[CWebster]

2. Oh look, another Dean bashing thread!

;-)

[janx]

4. Hey, I've been having fun with this! The right-wing reaction

to Dean is a wonder to behold!

[depakid]

8. Don't much read Freeper threads, but what I read sows the seeds of doubt

Aside from the usual drivel, most of the posters can't seem to get a firm handle on Dean's candidacy and some appear more than a little intrigued about many of his pragmatic positions.

In my opinion, that's because Dean can't be easily categorized and that throws thier comfortable attitude, belief and value constructs out of balance.

I reckon we'll see more of this sort of "cognative dissonance" as word gets out, as friends and loved ones hear more and catch on as the campaign moves forward. For what it's worth, I've seen it with my own eyes and heart, with my liflelong Republican father- a forhtight, briliant and honest man- and a serious player, who's seenway too many many long nights contemplating behind the walls of the Pentagon.

Lately, he has begun reassessing the scenarios and asking questions- discussings them with me, (me of all people). Not that we always agree- not by a long shot, but he likes to read, especialy history and philosophy, The old man still has great takes and a mind like a steel trap- snd one hell of a memory.

I guess the point of this is that maybe in the end, George W. Bush will end up a uniter, not a divider. And maybe we'll end up teamed with strange bedfellows. Common ground, at least. learning ground at best.

Perish the thought - or at least I once would have said so. But maybe that's what all this is (or should be) about.