DFL leaders endorse Dean, tout his knowledge of key issues

[pruner]

By Beth Hornby

Minnesota DFL leaders met at the State Capitol on Thursday to personally endorse former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean to be the Democratic candidate for the 2004 presidential race.

Dean supporters, including Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak and state DFL leaders, gathered behind a podium with “The doctor is in” written across the front — a reference to Dean’s days as a practicing physician.

In order to get the full official DFL party endorsement, Dean must secure at least 71 percent of the vote in a party-wide straw poll March 2. Attendees at Thursday’s event hope their individual support can help make that happen.

State Sen. Mee Moua, DFL-St. Paul, said Dean’s inside knowledge of health care and higher education issues put him above other candidates.

<snip>

http://www.daily.umn.edu/articles/2003/10/03/6800

[w13rd0]

1. Excellent...

...keep moving. We can make it happen...

[w4rma]

2. Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party

Effectively the state chapter of the US Democratic Party. Result of the 1944 merger of the Minnesota Democratic Party and the Minnesota Farmer-Labor Party (f. 1919).
http://www.dfl.org/index.asp?Type=B_DIR&SEC={1D5731E6-5DC8-45E7-8B8B-DF623AFE7863}

[no name no slogan]

3. Good article, but completely predictable

the party hacks have lined up behind Dean, this is no suprise. But I wonder where the PROGRESSIVES have lined up?

(I'll give you a hint: you'll know on October 13 when Kucinich is in town to announce his candidacy).

:hi:

[dpbrown]

4. Too bad the DFL is extending their record of backing the wrong candidate

Senator Bradley last time, Dean this time.

This Minnesota voter is turned off by Dean.

I'm turned off by the way his supporters (some, not all) have gone way over the line in being aggressive. I'm turned off by his co-opting the Wellstone mantle. I'm turned off by his pretending to be an outsider. I'm turned off by his non-plan over health care. I'm turned off by his carpetbagging from his Dean-Witter Republican roots to play politics in Vermont. I'm turned off by his tacking back to the middle now that he thinks he's got plenty of so-called progressives on his side. I'm turned off by how his supporters still seem to be unable to look at other candidates objectively. I'm turned off by the lies and spin I hear from his supporters over Kucinich's courageous stand in Cleveland protecting public power.

I'm just turned off by Dean.

And the one thing, outside of election-stealing, black-box voting, recall, and redistricting, that will cost Democrats the election is nominating someone from "politics as usual" because then people will stay home.

Bush won't get the 50 million votes he got last time, so Democrats will win, even if only everyone who turned out to vote last time votes this time. Bush has turned off enough of the people who crossed over to vote for him, that he can't possibly get 50 million votes again. Can't happen.

So, provided the Democrats handle the black box voting issue, and they handle the other election-stealing techniques Republicans are using, they'll win. Unless people stay home. Then it'll be close again. Close enough to steal? Who knows, but why nominate someone who'll be the cause of that danger?

The surest way to make sure people stay home is by nominating a "politics as usual" candidate.

One who won't make the Pentagon accountable.

One who won't stand up for real reform in health care.

One who won't bring the retirement age back to 65 for Social Security.

One who won't confront the wrongs in NAFTA and the WTO.

People will sit home, rather than vote for "politics as usual."

Unfortunately, that's all Dr. Dean offers, to many people I've talked to.

I can't enthusiastically support a candidate whose platform can be summed up as "don't get your hopes up."

My hopes are up, and I will support a candidate who understands that we've been set back by Reagan, Bush, and Bush, and that we've got a lot of ground to make up.

The mechanism is in place, with all the outside organizations like MoveOn, ActforChange, aflcio.org, the ACLU, etc., to support the leadership of a President who doesn't preach to us about how we have to "settle." The grassroots is there to pressure the Congress to follow the lead of a pragmatic President able to lend his vision to remaking the disasters visited upon us by Captain Unelected, the trickle-down monstrosity that's become our tax system, the Pentagon that's been out of control since Eisenhower, and a privatized health care system that's the laughingstock of the civilized world.

I'm ready to fight for that President. I'm ready to help that President take back our nation from the tyranny of low expecations forced on it by the Reagan, Bush, and Bush kakistocracy.

I'm not ready to settle for a candidate who has nothing to tell me other than "this is as good as it gets, and you'd better just toe the line and get on board."

Hogwash.

I don't believe in the vision Dean is offering. I don't believe that health care is fixable as a privatized boondoggle. I don't believe the Pentagon should just keep getting handouts without having to be accountable to the taxpayers. I don't believe Dean is the one who can take us forward from the darkness of the Reagan, Bush, and Bush years.

I just don't believe it.

No national voting record.

A mixed message, at best, about Social Security.

No message at all about fixing health care permanently.

Few contested elections.

He's just not the one.

If the people who are pushing Dean because he's "popular" succeed in making him the nominee, people will stay home. The Democrat may still win, but people will stay home.

I think it's too bad the DFL has bought into the hype, again.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[goodhue]

5. very well put Dan!

It is sad that the DFL leaders tell us who to support rather than listening to the grassroots. They decided last spring to go with Dean and having been preaching him ever since. They seem generally unfamiliar with Kucinich and smirk much like GW at the mention of his name. Remember in 1990 the leadership did not support Wellstone. The grassroots rose up at state convention and shook the party. Leaders were displeased. They said Paul could never win because he was a shrill leftist without media savy. They were wrong then and they are wrong now. Very sad. Their track record at picking a winner in the last dozen years has not impressed. Where is the vision?

Luckily, not all of the DFL leadership is on the Dean bandwagon. The exciting news is that Eugene McCarthy, Senator John Hottinger and Senator John Marty support Dennis Kucinich for president. Kucinich will be in Minneapolis on Oct 13th as part of his formal announcement. Hopefully the Star Tribune will see fit to report the DFL Senate Majority Leader endorsing the Kucinich candidacy. Hopefully that will awaken the caucus to the reality of what is going on in the real world rather than what is reported in the media.

[JohnKleeb]

9. Eugene McCarthy!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why havent I heard?

[dpbrown]

10. All in good time, my friend

The Senate DFL Majority Leader, John Hottinger

Senator John Marty

Former US Senator Gene McCarthy

Dennis is doing well in Minnesota.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[JohnKleeb]

11. Seriously this is a good endorsement

I would have loved if we had Bobby Kennedy's endorsement but well we know what happened to Bobby but I bet Bobby would have liked him too. Thanks Gene McCarthy, we wont let you down.

[no name no slogan]

21. I WAS THERE!!!!

That is EXACTLY what happened in 1990! All the DFL establishment was backing Tom Berg for US Senate, even though Paul was the better candidate by a longshot. I organized at the precinct level for Paul, and we DOMINATED at the caucuses! We carried that on up to the congressional district level an to the state, and we WON!

This is EXACTLY the reason why the DFL keeps losing elections in MN-- the party heirarchy is notoriously out of touch with their constituency. They keep pandering to the right-wingers and keep nominating yuppie lawyers instead of getting REAL grass-roots DEMOCRATS.

Did you also know that State Sen. John Marty is also a supporter? He's pretty busy and can't really campaign, but he IS on board with Kucinich.

Also, FYI, Dennis is coming to town on Oct 13. I'm taking the whole day off work (if possible) to help out with this appearance. Considering he drew 800+ for the last appearance with little pre-event advertising, just think what he can pull this time!

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, but DK's campaign continually reminds me of Wellstone in 1990. Same issues, same kind of candidate, same grassroots support-- and not just the white yuppies in Audis and Beemers, either! :D

[LuminousX]

6. They backed Bradley

Then I know I'm backing the right guy.

[indigo32]

7. as I said in the other thread where you posted this

and probably will in response to the e-mail you just sent with this in it....
Thats your opinion and should you or anyone else choose to stay home that day (whether Dean in the nominee or not, cuz I'm not assuming he is)... you'll just have to take responsibility for your own choice. I could point out just how off base your characterizations are but frankly I tire of it. Obviously Dean IS reaching people and he most certainly is NOT telling us to settle, he's telling us to take our Country back.

Vote how you like, or don't vote... but don't blame some other candidates supporters.

[dpbrown]

8. Dean turns me off, not his supporters

This is a shorter thread, as well, that's why I posted it here. I'll be happy to respond as well in Dem-MN if you put up a response.

As I thought I made clear, I have looked at Dr. Dean, and the sum of his message, to me, as I interpret it, is "this is as good as it's going to get." That some of his supporters are too aggressive in trying to get people to "take it or leave it" is just a side issue.

So if you'd like to argue that I'm saying he "said" that and then take on the issue that he didn't "say" that, well, then, you win.

But I compared his stand to Dennis' stand on health care, and Dean is advocating "settling" in comparison to Dennis.

I compared Dean's stand to Dennis' on the Pentagon and Dean is advocating "settling" in comparison to Dennis.

And I compared Dean's stand to Dennis' on NAFTA and the WTO and Dean is advocating "settling" in comparison to Dennis.

Those are the three major areas in which I'm woefully disastisfied with Dr. Dean's approach, and, again, as I thought I made clear, are the kind of stands that will not motivate some voters to come out, and hence will lead to another close election, susceptible (possibly, I hope not) of being stolen by the (now more sophisticated) Republican election thieves.

Obviously Dr. Dean is reaching people. That wasn't my point. He's not reaching me. You need to consider that you and I mingle with different campaigns. One of the things I am picking up from not few of the people I meet with is that this is the first time they've engaged in politics, or this is the first time they've switched from voting Republican, or this is the first time they've gotten so worked up over a candidate. (I'm sure you've had some of the same experiences).

But one of the other things I hear from some of these people, is that Kucinich is the reason they're making this choice, and that if it weren't for Dennis they wouldn't consider voting, or wouldn't work for a campaign, or wouldn't even care.

Because what I hear almost universally from the people I come in contact with is that the caring sense that people feel when they meet Dennis or read what he has to say, or when they examine his positions, makes all the difference to these people in getting them motivated to participate in the process and support a real candidate to be a catalyst for change.

It's one thing to "take our country back" and it's quite another thing to "heal the country of the damage done" by Reagan, Bush, and Bush.

One candidate wants us to "settle" for the first alone. The other wants both.

My "choice" is to aim high.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[9119495]

12. are you turned off by the way Bush

supporters have handled things? I am a Dean supporter and I did look at the other candidates objectively...then I decided Dean was my clear favorite. Make no mistake, I will vote for the nominee...proudly (well, unless its Lieberman or Gephart--due to a NASTY letter I got from him attacking three other fellow dems).

[gully]

14. Aim high....= supporting Howard Dean!!!

Go DEAN!

Hi Dan!!! :hi:

[gully]

25. Also, Dan you also misunderstand Dean's positions.

I suggest you check them out for yourself at his website.

www.deanforamerica.com

You make several mis-statements in your post.

I won't refute them all because I feel most of us know the 'truth' by now KWIM?

I will address one issue for you. Please look at Deans comprehensive position(s) on labor.

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_statement_labor

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_press_archive_labor

Dennis is full of 'lofty' ideals and sound bites, but I don't see any well thought out solutions to the concerns he raises.

Here is what Dennis says about trade.

http://www.kucinich.net/issues/issue_trade.htm

He says 'we need to do such and such, but makes no effort to explain how he intends to accomplish anything.

Dennis on Health Care...

http://www.kucinich.net/issues/issue_universalhealth.htm

Dean on Health Care.-note the many links on the right...

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_statement_health

Howard Dean is the real deal. He's not pandering, he's got real workable solutions to the issues that face America. Dennis is a good guy, but not ready for prime time.

I find Dean's amazing grass roots campaign is yet another example of his leadership abillities.

[dpbrown]

26. Thanks for the links, I've studied Dean

And he's the one, in my opinion, who's not ready for prime time.

Dennis is the one, in my mind, who's got a pragmatic, and fiscally responsible way of dealing with Social Security, health care, and the Pentagon. It's Dennis, not Dean, who is showing how he's going to get 100% coverage without gutting other spending and risking being labeled a tax-and-spend Democrat. Dean doesn't even get to 100% coverage.

On the other hand, I look at Dean and see Dean's changed his mind on Social Security, refused to determine to cut back on Pentagon waste or hold it accountable for the tax dollars it spends, refused to end the failed Star Wars program, refused to demilitarize space, refused to call for a return to age 65 for retirement, refused to call for universal single-payer health care, refused to condemn the death penalty, and refused to call for pulling out of the failed NAFTA and WTO.

These are not fringe positions. These are easily Democratic Party plank positions. The party has failed to rally around the issues that motivate its base, and Dean rejects them as well. Dennis, however, does not.

Dean has made some progress in getting around to talking about pulling the soldiers out of Iraq. He has made some progress by changing his mind on making Social Security even more exclusive. And he has made some "lofty talk" about getting nearly (not full) coverage for people under the failed privatized health care system we have now, by refusing to re-fund the programs cut by Bush's tax cut, and diverting that money into the pockets of health insurance millionaires instead.

So Dean's positions are not a total debacle.

I can see, however, that you're not hearing what I'm saying. I'm not just criticizing Dr. Dean. I'm saying that I am personally refusing to live within the tyranny of low expectations that have been pushed down on us over the decades of Republican rule. I am looking for a leader who's not going to promise to "take back America" alone. I'm looking for a leader who is going to heal America from the illnesss of aristocracy and want that decades of trickle-down economics have forced upon it. I'm looking for a leader who is going to motivate me to help him or her bring about the sea change that people are hungry for. I'm looking for a leader who is able to pragmatically make change for his or her constituents, and able to translate that into pragmatic and positive plans for how to help all Americans.

I've read about Dr. Dean, and to me, Dr. Dean is a candidate who represents "politics as usual." Sure, he wants to "take back America." And then what? What it looks like to me is - lowered expectations. Not quite full health coverage, not quite rejecting Halliburton's contracts, not quite pulling out of NAFTA, not quite making the Pentagon accountable to the taxpayers, not quite ending Star Wars, not quite returning Social Security elegibility to age 65, not quite ending the death penalty. Just all around...not quite.

I find Kucinich's amazing ability to motivate people who have never been interested in politics, who have never contributed to a campaign, and who have never considered actually enthusiastically supporting a candidate before, to be just one tiny part of Kucinich's amazing leadership abilities.

Dennis IS quite the candidate I've been looking for.

I will work my ass off for eight years to make sure President Kucinich succeeds in creating the America we all know we deserve, but that the other candidates are too timid to call for.

:hi:

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[gully]

29. Uhm, Dan, should I show some old Dennis Kucinich quotes on choice?

Why is it ok for Dennis to 'change his mind' and not Dean?

"On the other hand, I look at Dean and see Dean's changed his mind on Social Security, refused to determine to cut back on Pentagon waste or hold it accountable for the tax dollars it spends, refused to end the failed Star Wars program, refused to demilitarize space, refused to call for a return to age 65 for retirement, refused to call for universal single-payer health care, refused to condemn the death penalty, and refused to call for pulling out of the failed NAFTA and WTO."

Refused to 'pander'!

Also, Dennis is still polling at about 2%. If he runs the country like he's run his campaign were in a heap of trouble with him at the helm.

In addition I supported HD when he was 'tied' with Dennis in the polls. I did not hop on the 'popular' band wagon as you claim. I can see now I've clearly made the right choice in Dean.

Dean has comprehensive solutions to all the issues you raise. The difference is that Dean's solutions are workable.

I wont address the rest of the 'gobbly gook' because it's pointless. Dennis Kucinich is simply not a contender.

Also, I have very high expectations of a Dean administration. I realize this is contrary to the popular dogma that any liberal who does not support Dennis Kucinich is selling themselves short. :eyes:

Your posts are condescending and insulting to Dean supporters to say the least.

[dpbrown]

45. I'm sorry you had to go right to the personal attack

I presented my measured perception of Dean. I don't think he's the one. I said so.

I think the DFL is out of touch in going with Dean early. Kerry was the early "pragmatist's" choice, now Clark is giving Kerry a run for his money.

Dean has always been the double-edged compromise. Too much of an outsider to get elected, too much of a politician to have appeal to the people that the power-broker Democrats have driven from the party.

To summarize your "defense" of Dean:

1. Kucinich's poll numbers are low. This doesn't mean Dean's ideas are good.

2. Dean has "comprehensive" solutions. Yes, and as I pointed out, they don't go as far as Dennis' do.

3. Dean's ideas are "workable." Exactly as I mentioned - settling for less. "Workable" is code. Don't get your hopes up for change in a Dean administration.

4. Dennis is not a contender. So what, neither is Dean. Kerry or Clark are still the pragmatic compromise candidates, and Dennis is still the best on core Democratic values. The major point I made in my first post is that some people will stay home and not vote, rather than voting for Dean. He's business as usual.

I didn't attack you, or anyone else for supporting Dean. But you've had to go ahead and belittle Kucinich with your "contender" commentary, and heap it on by calling me "condescending and insulting."

One thing I did say, however, was that Dean's people tend to be too aggressive towards Democrats. I mentioned that in my original post as one reason I found Dean distasteful. You have proven that, then, by going right to the "condescending and insulting" attack.

I think Kucinich is the best candidate. I think the DFL is wrong. I said so.

You attacked me.

I win.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[gully]

46. Dan, Im not the only one who felt "attacked" by your statements.

Also, regarding your concerns...

1. Kucinich's poll numbers are low. This doesn't mean Dean's ideas are good.

I means Dennis has not managed his campaign well, and the 'people' are choosing Dean. Why? I think it's because they prefer Deans solutions and or IDEAS. And, I think Deans ideas are great!

2. Dean has "comprehensive" solutions. Yes, and as I pointed out, they don't go as far as Dennis' do.

They go farther IMO.

3. Dean's ideas are "workable." Exactly as I mentioned - settling for less. "Workable" is code. Don't get your hopes up for change in a Dean administration.

No, it's not 'code' it's reality. Additionally, I have VERY high hopes for a Dean administration. And, I will continue to regardless of your profession that I'm settling for less. :eyes:

4. Dennis is not a contender. So what, neither is Dean. Kerry or Clark are still the pragmatic compromise candidates, and Dennis is still the best on core Democratic values. The major point I made in my first post is that some people will stay home and not vote, rather than voting for Dean. He's business as usual.

Dennis is not the best on 'core' issues. That's your OPINION Dan. And, you state it as fact again and again. If you want to stay home when Dennis doesn't get the nom, that's your perogitive. I will vote for the Democratic nominee, because Bush's "business as usual" is a dangerous proposition.

You say Dean is not a contender? Here are some of the latest polling numbers among Democratic Primary voters. Howard Dean is in second place. He has been at the top for months, until Wes Clark mirrored Deans positions and entered the race.

Wesley Clark 16
Howard Dean 12
John Kerry 10
Dick Gephardt 10
Joe Lieberman 9
John Edwards 6
Al Sharpton 4
Bob Graham 2
Carol Moseley Braun 2
Dennis Kucinich 2
Other (vol.) 2
None (vol.) 5
Don't know 20

I didn't attack you, or anyone else for supporting Dean. But you've had to go ahead and belittle Kucinich with your "contender" commentary, and heap it on by calling me "condescending and insulting."

I consider the top 5 candidates 'contenders'. Dennis again is polling at 2% and has been since the beginning.

Additionally, I am not the only one who was insulted by your comments.

I realize you meant no harm, nor did I.

[no name no slogan]

52. If you want to talk about "campaign management"

you need to examine Dean's ENTIRE history.

For each gubernatorial re-election campaign, his margin of victory DROPPED. When he left the governor's office, he didn't even succeed in getting a Democratic successor elected.

Dean was also the person in charge of getting more Democratic governors elected in 2002. He also failed in that task, too.

Compare that to Kucinich: he won an upset victory in 1996 against a popular, entrenched Republican rep in a conservative district. In each subsequent re-election, he increased his victory margin. In his last re-election bid in 2002, he won 75% of the vote, despite changing his position on abortion earlier that year. He also won half the Republican vote in his district, too!

Yes, Dean's off to a good fundraising start, but he's got party hacks like Joe Trippi working for him, not to mention he takes corporate cash (unlike Kucinich).

Also, if you're going to cite polls, look at the select group for each poll. You'll notice most of them are taken from identified Democrats. Much of Kucinich's appeal is to disaffected voters who haven't voted in years, and also former third-party voters who are not registered Democrats. Dennis' campaign is completely under the radar of the major news media, who choose to ignore him, even though he broke his Q3 fundraising projection.

More proof? Check his MeetUp numbers. Yes, he's behind Dean, but he's also got the second-highest number of any other political candidate on MeetUp-- even higher than Wesley Clark!

[Mairead]

27. Gully, Dean's 'real solutions' are the policies of the past

Keep funding the Pentagon at the same insanely high levels.

Keep funding the drugs war at the same insanely high levels.

Keep on giving money to the insurance company owners at the same insanely high levels. In fact, give them 88G p.a. more money without even fully solving the healthcare problem.

Keep on pumping lives and money into the hellhole we've made of Iraq, keep on financing Israeli right-wing crimes, keep on making enemies for us (after all, the Pentagon budget will start to stink without new enemies).


This is nuts. If this is what 'ready for prime time' means, we need to make drastic changes in the programming!

[gully]

28. politics of the past...

or new solutions to past issues?

Fund the pentagon but eliminate waste.

Fund the war on drugs because kids who live in drug infested neighborhoods deserve peace. They deserve to have the dealers who are in their neighborhoods IN JAIL (take it from someone who knows)

A solution to healthcare that is workable instead of reinventing the wheel

Bring in the UN and give up control, much the same as Dennis's position's on Iraq (less the pandering)

I suggest you all look for choice # 2, as it's becoming clear you may need a back up.

[Mairead]

42. "or new solutions to past issues?"

No: same old same old.

Fund the pentagon but eliminate waste.

Fund it at the same level but eliminate waste? Where's the extra money going to go? And how much 'waste' does he see?

Fund the war on drugs because kids who live in drug infested neighborhoods deserve peace. They deserve to have the dealers who are in their neighborhoods IN JAIL (take it from someone who knows)

Gully, it's been decades, innumerable lives sacrificed, and hundreds of billions of dollars flushed down the rathole. If the drugs war were going to work, it would have worked by now. But it hasn't. For all the murders and maiming, all the imprisonment, all the subversion...nothing has changed. That's a sign of A Failed Policy.

There's a way to get the dealers off the streets: treat drugs like alcohol and tobacco. Once the profit motive goes away, so does all the crime. You don't see shootouts in the streets over who gets to own the liquor store.

Theres a way to get kids off of drugs: offer them real lives. We're not doing that. There are too many people, so the elites are happy to have policies that toss millions onto the midden. They don't see human beings in those millions, but we should. Dennis does (I hope!).


A solution to healthcare that is workable instead of reinventing the wheel

You're joking, right? Carrying on giving the owners of insurance companies money to deny us healthcare is not 'workable'. It's what we have now!

Bring in the UN and give up control, much the same as Dennis's position's on Iraq (less the pandering)

The policy on his website is nothing like Dennis's. Dennis's is hand everything over to the UN, including the rebuilding contracts and the control of the oil as trustees. Dean's is get NATO involved and have a UN-approved (not UN-created) civilian administration. No mention of control of the oil. No mention of the contracts.

I suggest you all look for choice # 2, as it's becoming clear you may need a back up.

er, which one is #2, and why?

[gully]

48. #2 is whomever you want it to be.

No: same old same old.

Funny, you and Dan sound remarkably alike ;) As I said Bush's 'same old same old' is dangerous. And, I consider Howard Dean FAR from the "SAME OLD SAME OLD."

Fund it at the same level but eliminate waste? Where's the extra money going to go? And how much 'waste' does he see?

He sees the same 'waste' Dennis Kucinich does as they all have access to the same information. As to where it's going to go???

Perhaps here:

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_policy_homelandsecurity

or:

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_statement_foreign_homelandsecurity_oped

Gully, it's been decades, innumerable lives sacrificed, and hundreds of billions of dollars flushed down the rathole. If the drugs war were going to work, it would have worked by now. But it hasn't. For all the murders and maiming, all the imprisonment, all the subversion...nothing has changed. That's a sign of A Failed Policy.

Bull nothing has changed! I lived in those drug infested areas, and I saw the benefit/results of Clintons two fold approach. I saw people 'get out of the business' because they didn't want to be a three striker. I saw neighborhoods become safer, crime/murder rates drop etc... However rest assured, Bush is turning around Clintons accomplishments in this area.

http://clinton5.nara.gov/WH/Accomplishments/eightyears-06.html

I somewhat agree with you and Dennis on this issue. However, Dennis has not come out and said that he would decriminalize drugs to my knowledge. Another vague stand by Dennis Kucinich ??

http://www.kucinich.net/issues/issue_drugwar.htm

I personally feel there are no 'easy' answers to the war on drugs. Also, alcohol is legal and causes many problems in our society; arrests, murder, violence etc... again, no easy answers. :shrug:


Theres a way to get kids off of drugs: offer them real lives. We're not doing that. There are too many people, so the elites are happy to have policies that toss millions onto the midden.

Bravo to you here! I totally agree ;)

Carrying on giving the owners of insurance companies money to deny us healthcare is not 'workable'. It's what we have now!

No, it's not what we have now. There are several people in this country without coverage. In addition, if we switch to universal "single payer" health care, we would not necessarilly eliminate problems.

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_policy_health_healthcareforamerica

The policy on his website is nothing like Dennis's. Dennis's is hand everything over to the UN, including the rebuilding contracts and the control of the oil as trustees. Dean's is get NATO involved and have a UN-approved (not UN-created) civilian administration. No mention of control of the oil. No mention of the contracts.

Your right, they vary on what to do in Iraq. Here is a 7 point plan from Howard Dean...

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_policy_foreign_iraq_7pointplan

I can't find Dennis's reconstruction plan, this is all I found on his website? I hear Dennis 'talk' alot, but once again, I have seen no comprehensive plan on this from him?

http://www.kucinich.net/issues/issue_iraq.htm

[Mairead]

51. Still not following your '#2' comment

Funny, you and Dan sound remarkably alike ;)

Probably because that phrase still hasn't gone stale or bureaucratic the way 'failed policies of the past' has done :)

He sees the same 'waste' Dennis Kucinich does as they all have access to the same information.

That's a rather offhand claim, I think, given that Dean evidently doesn't see 15% that wants cutting and Dennis does.

Bull nothing has changed!

Why, then, are drugs still readily available (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/75464_colombia21.shtml) and, if anything, cheaper (http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0228-05.htm)? Why do people like police chiefs and similar say 'it's not working' (http://www.drcnet.org/cops/)? Please don't confuse movement with progress. Changing the faces involved, changing the street corners, or which crumbling tenements are used by dealers--that's change, but not meaningful change. That's brownian motion.



In addition, if we switch to universal "single payer" health care, we would not necessarilly eliminate problems.

Really? What problems? Or are you saying that in a trivial way, a 'no human activity is problem-free' sort of indictment?


Here is a 7 point plan {on Iraq} from Howard Dean...

Yes, it is, isn't it. NATO-led (i.e. US-controlled) military control, Security-Council-approved (i.e., US-approved) civilian government, shifting the financial burden off US shoulders while keeping the control (and, apparently, the profits) in US hands, and prosecution of crimes committed by Iraqis, but not by Americans.

Such a plan, Gully!

Dennis's is a great deal simpler: hand over control of the whole thing to the UN, with the US paying for all or most of it ('we broke it, we bought it'). (You're right, though, about it not being a policy declared on his site -- he's repeated it in forums and speeches, but for some reason it's not yet on the site)

[Sean Reynolds]

13. This Dean fan is put off by your comments.

I for one do believe that there are a few Dean fans that are total hypocrites and pimp out Howard like he was the messiah, but I must wonder if you were here earlier this year. If you were, you would have seen some great Dean support. There weren't any threads bashing him, and if someone didn't like what he had to say they gave their opinion of him with class. When Dean became the perennial front-runner, things here at DU shifted. People began vehemently attacking NOT only Dean, but his supporters. In a span of a month all Dean supporters went on the defense because of the attacks by a lot of anti-Dean DUers.

The abrupt change turned us against other DUers because every other post was a Dean bash. It continually got old to the point where most Dean supporters found themselves fighting back. We became asses because they were being asses to us. It's sorta hard to stay nice when they continue to slaughter your candidate and your views.

As for Dean taking a step to the center, I totally feel he's doing the opposite. Again you probably don't remember the Dean campaign back before it took off. Dean has really opened his mind to many issues. At one point his stance on marijuana was very conservative, and it's become more liberal. His stance on the Israel/Palestine issue could be deemed Lieberman like last year, but now his opinion has changed to the US *NOT* siding with Israel, but being an even-handed broker. Last year he was steadfast in his support of free trade because of how well it helped Vermont. But when he finally got the full view he changed his opinion on it and now has backed off of the free trade stance and adopted the belief of fair trade. IMO Dean has hardly backed toward the center. If anything, he's slowly becoming further left because he's seeing the true wold. When you're a governor of a state you only get the base of that state - where as people like Kerry, Kucinich, Graham, Gep all worked on national and international policies. They were more in tune with the nation and its problems. Gosh Dean has even changed his mind on balancing the budget in his first year of office. Realizing that he may need to spend MORE money on social issues - a liberal cause since Roosevelt took office. I respect Kucinich and would not waver one bit if he got the nomination. There is only ONE other candidate I can say that about; I happen to be supporting him, that'd be Dean.

[JohnKleeb]

15. Sean I see your point

and know you are a Dean supporter who has just as much support for Kucinich as your sig reflects but the same things Dean has changed on and for the good I must add are things that Dennis Kucinich has promoted since day 1. I must say and I really dont like Clark much but I saw the same thing happen here with him, I noticed that some Dean supporters wouldnt mind having him as VP then I leave for a week not on my own choice so I come back and Clark is despised by a good portion of Dean supporters. I am not flaming or anything. I am just saying and I am proud that Dean is seeing that we the left are right on the issues, but I am confused that when DK supports these same issues hes still put off as unelectable.

[Sean Reynolds]

16. No doubt Kucinich has supported these ideals the whole time.

And as I've stated, I am a HUGE fan of Kucinich, I attend his meetups, I even have a bumper sticker. I just get sick of the whole Dean bashing. I've put up with it for four months now and it's getting rather old. I don't feel it necessary to BASH any Dem, whether it be Clark, Gep, OR Lieberman. You can get your point across without attacking a candidate or his supporters. The detest for Dean is wreaking from this forum; I don't know why. I respect Gen. Clark and would support him IF he won the nomination. I don't condone the actions by Dean supporters that HAVE attacked Clark. I never will. In the end, we're all liberals and we're gonna have to unite to beat Bush. THAT should be our common goal. It shouldn't be to smear every candidate. Sadly, DU has turned into that. Sadly threads are constantly hijacked and turned into flame wars. It's really sad. Did I say it's sad? Cause it really is SAD

[JohnKleeb]

17. You're fair you deserve props for that

We all put up with it and I am as frustrated as you are, of course its the Kucinich doesnt have a chance ad naseum that pisses me off. I know you dont think that, but its just a cliche and I dont yell at people for it but boy oh boy does it sadden me. Superficality not on the ISSUES is why I see DK bashed here, oh hes too short btw you may or may not know hes only an inch shorter than Dean, hes geeky looking wow can I see your guy in a speedo now and will he please smile for the camera looks are nonsense, and his ethnic name, I told you I am part South Slavic and I would love to elect one of my fellow people to higher office.

[Loyal]

18. I agree

It's sad, and the infighting accomplishes nothing.

[no name no slogan]

22. Good reply, Sean

However, there's going to be criticism of ALL candidates at one point in time. If your candidate is the "front-runner" (perceived or otherwise), s/he will get the lion's share of it. It's been like this in every campaign I've worked in (even the winning ones), and it's probably going to be this way as long as we have contested elections.

However, I don't see anything wrong with bringing up questionable points in ANY candidate's record, whether it be Dean's waffling on the Social Security retirement age, Clark's party affiliation, Gephardt's pro-NAFTA vote, Kerry's IWR vote, or Kucinich's anti-choice votes.

What most bothers me is when candidates won't COME CLEAN about their records with the public. If you voted differently before, but you have an honest explanation, the public will be MUCH more willing to trust you than if you obfuscate behind lies and half-truths.

That was always the appeal of Wellstone, too. Sure, he made votes that I disagreed with, but he was honest and truthful in explaining his position. He didn't change his message depending on the audience. He simply told them why he did something a certain way. Even if folks didn't agree with him, they still supported him, because he was HONEST and didn't try to bs his way out of things.

Kucinich is the same way. He's honest-- brutally sometimes. He's confronted his past, and explained his votes and what he believed at the time. IMHO, more people will vote for an HONEST candidate they only partially agree with than for a dishonest candidate they mostly agree with.

[Sean Reynolds]

23. Like I said........

You can better your argument in a sane way. But when you totally attack the candidate and his/her supporters, you're not doing justice. I will speak my mind on a candidate but will do it in an honest, reasonable way. I'm sorry to say that hasn't happened here at DU. Most people use slanderous words that only bait the candidates fellow supporters. Just go look at the thread calling Dean a dishonest, lying politician. That to me is uncalled for.

[dsc]

19. Put up or apologize

among other things you claim that "Dean supporters have spun Dennis' stand on public power" I want an example of this.

[lams712]

20. An AMEN!!! and a BIG KICK!!!!!

I couldn't have said it better myself. I'm sick and tired of the media ignoring DK and portraying Dean as the "progressive" candidate.

[KaraokeKarlton]

24. I have those same feelings about Kucinich

He comes off as a radical to me, and I don't trust or like radicals on either side of the political fence. Vermont has our share of radicals and they're nuts. Anyone who reminds me of our radicals up here makes me mighty nervous and uneasy.

So, it's a matter of taste. I'm a typical swing voter, and I like Dean best of all. Wherever you land on the political map likely best represents those who support Kucinich.

[JohnKleeb]

30. FDR was considered a radical

etc and etc. Sometimes one has to be radical to push a great agenda. FDR sure was considered a radical but was beloved. MLK too, it goes on and on. I am a radical lol.

[KaraokeKarlton]

33. You're not a radical, John

You're just young and idealistic, and perhaps are seeing things through rose colored glasses. It's part of being a kid, and that's okay and kinda sweet, actually. If you were a radical you wouldn't be able to listen to opposing viewpoints without ranting, raving and behaving like an ass. You don't do that. You are idealistic and have your beleifs, but you still respect the rights of those who don't agree with you to think and see things differently.

[Sean Reynolds]

31. Kucinich is NOT a radical. He's a left-leaning populist.

Yes I understand he's the most progressive candidate of the 10, but he's FAR from being a radical. A radical is a communist, Dennis isn't a communist. He's a left-leaning populist, and painting him as a radical only feeds the anti-Kucinich voice.

www.ontheissues.com places DK as a moderate populist:


In comparison here is where they place Dean:


And Lieberman:

[JohnKleeb]

32. Why thanks Sean

Just wish more people had a more fair insight in to the great man who is Dennis Kucinich, Ive seen KK described herself as a centrist before and thats all good and a voter of Bernie Sanders a real hero and dare I say it radical lol.

[Sean Reynolds]

34. No prob.

I'll admit I'm more of a radical than DK is on the issues. If he's a radical, I must be off the damn chart in my views. :-D

[JohnKleeb]

36. yea

Thanks again. I saw tonight that DU's biggest DK critic changed his mind on him that shocked me but it could mean something :) I hope.

[KaraokeKarlton]

37. Yes, I always vote for Bernie because of the office he's running for

I would never support him for president, though. You see, John, like I explained in the last post I made about Kucinich...he's a perfect fit for where he is right now. Why? Because people like him and Bernie help offset the Sanatorums and Lotts of the world. There has to be people in Washington who will always counter those right wingers. That's how it has to be to bring things to the middle and represent the values of the majority of Americans. This is smart voting. I always mix it up a little bit when I vote for these kinds of offices. If one party has the majority here, I tend to vote for some from the other party just for the purpose of trying to keep things balanced and as honest as possible.

[JohnKleeb]

39. Isnt standing up against those who stood with Bush

One of the things that attracts many to your candiate Governor Howard Dean, you would be lying to me if you said it wasnt, it is and I know it and I like DK because hes been doing it too, and he talks about important issues. Rememeber the late Wellstone quote: "Politics is not about winning for the sake of winning it is about doing well for people" We cant be a centrist party forever and it drives me to consider the ineventful that I a person whos family has been in the party for almost forever may have to leave it. Its not something I like to consider but the liberal democratic party is what people loved and admired, thats Dennis.

[KaraokeKarlton]

35. To me, he's radical and shrill

I just don't like him at all. Keep in mind that I am a registered Independent and a genuine "swing voter" who isn't loyal to any party. This is why I feel confident in saying that Kucinich isn't going to appeal to enough people to win in a general election. He's a good fit right where he is because he helps keep the lawmakers honest. We need a few "Kucinichs" in Washington to mix things up and offset the right wingers. But as president? Middle America just won't vote for the guy. 20 years down the road? Maybe. But not at this point. What he's peddling just isn't selling to the majority of people.

[JohnKleeb]

38. Hes not alone in the house

We have people like Barbara Lee, your very own Bernie Sanders who is one of my favorites and others. I am a democrat and I see Kucinich thinks on some issues like FDR did. Truth told this isnt about appealing to just middle america its about appealing to us all, and yes I am idealistic but I also have an eye for history, I know that standing up is right and it should be done. FDR was a radical for the new deal, JFK for standing up for civil rights, and LBJ for pushing the great society. Truth is, we remember those who stand up for whats right and Dennis is one of those souls. Shrill wouldnt that be bashing, I dont know what it is but it is a little bashing or near bashing to me. Your very own congressman is one of these and I think hes one of the guys in congress I admire most.

[Sean Reynolds]

40. He's only a radical because people don't look at him as a whole.

You can continue to call him a radical, but you'll only play into the hands of the GOP and anti-DK fans. You can kill a perception or you can feed it. To me you seem to be feeding the perception DK is a radical, when he is a left-leaning populist. Don't feed the hate, education yourself and evaluate the candidate based on the issues, NOT the opinions of others.

[JohnKleeb]

41. Sean can I say this

:yourock: as does DK and your biggest hero FDR. I have heard KK say this many times that hes radical, but Ive never seen any issues brought up.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

43. Lists Dean, Kerry and Clark with exact same graph.

Interesting.

[Sean Reynolds]

44. No doubt.

Though Clark is based on quotes and not policy statements. And if you notice they're all left of center. Where the rest fall in that middle square.

[blm]

47. That graph is WAY wrong.

Kerry is moderate left liberal, but, Dean is way more Libertarian and centrist than any other candidate. No way should they register the same.

Hell, Dean was pushing the deregulation of electricity, something that is VERY Libertarian.

[Sean Reynolds]

49. The graph updates with the changing of the views.

When I first found this site Dean was located in the center, Kerry was at his present location. Since Dean has changed his views on some key issues he's moved further to the left. Before you say it's wrong, go here http://www.ontheissues.org and read about how they 'graph' people.

[gully]

50. It's not 'wrong' Sean...

BLM just didn't like the results. *surprise* :eyes: