Home | Community | Message Board

Avalon Magic Plants
Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale, Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]
InvisibleEdame
gone

Registered: 01/14/03
Posts: 1,270
Loc: outta here
Howard Dean?
    #1681309 - 07/02/03 09:33 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

I'm not American, so I'm not exactly up to speed on all of the people running for prez, but I thought that this speech was quite good:

Quote:

Today I announce that I am running for President of the United States of America. I speak not only for my candidacy. I speak for a new American century and a new generation of Americans -- both young people and the young at heart. We seek the great restoration of American values and the restoration of our nation's traditional purpose in the world.


This is a campaign to unite and empower people everywhere.

It is a call to every American, regardless of party, to join together in common purpose and for the common good to save and restore all that it means to be an American.

Over a year ago I began to travel the country in the usual way one does when seeking the Presidency.

I believed that, by running for President, I could raise the issues of health care for every American and the need to focus on early childhood development. I wanted to bring those issues to the forefront of the national debate. And I wanted to balance the budget to bring financial stability and jobs back to America.

Most importantly, I have wanted my party to stand up for what we believe in again.

But something changed along the way as I listened to Americans around this country. On my first trip to Iowa I heard people speak of a profound fear and distrust of multi-national corporations. From New Hampshire to Texas I met Americans doubting the words of our leaders and our government in Washington. Every where I go people are asking fundamental questions: Who can we trust? Is the media reporting the truth? What is happening to our country?

The Americans I have met love their country. They believe deeply in its promise, our values and our principles. But they know something is wrong and they want to take action. They want to do something to right our path. But they feel Washington isn't listening. And as individuals, they lack the power to change the course those in Washington have put us on.

What they know is that somehow 7 trillion dollars of our country's wealth disappeared. Nearly 1 in 10 retired people have had to return to the workforce because they have lost their pensions. Young people are returning to live at home after graduating because they cannot find work.

Companies are leaving the country to avoid paying taxes, or to avoid paying people livable wages. And corporations are doing this with the support of the government and a political process in Washington that they rent -- if not own.

This was the fear that James Madison and Thomas Jefferson spoke of -- the fear that economic power would one day try to seize political power.

Theodore Roosevelt said it best, "Every special interest is entitled to justice full, fair and complete....but not one is entitled to a vote in Congress, to a voice on the bench or to representation in any public office."

Today, our nation is in crisis. At home, this crisis manifests itself in this President's destruction of the idea of community. This President pushes forward an agenda and policies which divide us. He advocates economic polices which beggar the middle class and raise property taxes so that income taxes may be cut for those who ran Enron.

He divides us by race by using the word quota, which appeals to the worst in us by instilling fear that people of color might take our jobs or our places in the nation's best universities. Even the most conservative Supreme Court since the Dred Scott decision did not completely agree with the President's attack on diversity and community that includes all Americans.

He divides us by gender by attacking a woman's right to make her own health care decisions. And even by attacking young women's right to have the same athletic opportunities that young men do. He divides us by sexual orientation by supporting senators who have slandered gay Americans, and he appeals once again to the worst instincts within us, instead of that which is good in all Americans.

The tax cuts that are the radicals' weapon are not about tax cuts for working people. They are not even about tax cuts for millionaires. Instead, the tax cuts are designed to destroy Social Security, Medicare, our public schools and our public services through starvation and privatization.

Our President and too many in Washington are giving away our future so that we pass to our children not a flickering flame of freedom but the chain of insurmountable debt.

No parent would do this and America must not do this.

And so for me the long journey of a Presidential campaign has begun with the people I have met affecting me far more than any affect I may have had on them. And because of that, the reasons why I seek the Presidency have changed.

This campaign is about more than issue differences on health care, tax cuts, national security, jobs, the environment and our economy. It is about something as important as our children. It's about who we are as Americans.

Here are the words of John Winthrop: "We shall be as one. We must delight in each other, make other's conditions our own; rejoice together, mourn together, labor and suffer together, always living before our eyes our Commission and Community in our work."

It is that ideal, the ideal of the American community, that we seek to restore.

An America where it is not enough for me to want health care for my family but the obligation, and responsibility of every one of us as American citizens to insure that each one of us has health care for our families.

An America where it is not enough for me to want good public schools and a better life for my children but an obligation, and a responsibility as citizens to insure that every child in America may go to a good public school and have the opportunity of a better life.

An America where it is not enough to protect my rights under the law but where it is a duty and an obligation for each of us as Americans to make sure every American is equal under the law.

An America where it is not enough to proclaim the words freedom, self-government, and democracy, but where it is a duty and a responsibility to participate together in common purpose with the sacrifice required of each of us to give those words meaning.

If September 11, 2001 taught America anything it is that we are stronger when we are beholden to each other as a national community, and weaker when we act only as individuals. That tragedy gave us an enormous opportunity to focus not only on our common peril, but also on our common dreams. The peril remains, but the dreams must be resurrected -- and they will be in a new American century.

President Kennedy challenged us to "pass the torch to a new generation of Americans." And so, we must issue that challenge again.

So too must we restore the deepest belief of our people that each generation has a responsibility to pass to our children a nation and a world that is better and stronger than the one that was passed to us.

As we experience the crisis of community at home, we are witnessing the effort to repudiate 225 years of American consensus on what our nation's place should be in the world.

Since the time of Thomas Paine and John Adams, our founders implored that we were not to be the new Rome. We are not to conquer and suppress other nations to submit to our will. We were to inspire them.

The idea of America using its power solely for its own ends is not consistent with the idealistic moral force the world has known for over two centuries.

We must rejoin the world community. America is far stronger as the moral and military leader of the world than we will ever be by relying solely on military power. We destroyed repressive communist regimes without firing a shot, not simply by having a strong military, but because we had a better ideal to show the world.

Every American President must and will take up arms in the defense of our nation. It is a solemn oath that cannot -- and will not -- be compromised.

But there is a fundamental difference between the defense of our nation and the doctrine of preemptive war espoused by this administration. The President's group of narrow-minded ideological advisors are undermining our nation's greatness in the world. They have embraced a form of unilateralism that is even more dangerous than isolationism.

This administration has shown disdain for allies, treaties, and international organizations alike.

In doing so they would throw aside our nation's role as the inspirational leader of the world the beacon of hope and justice in the interests of humankind. And instead, they would present our face to the world as a dominant power prepared to push aside any nation with which we do not agree.

Our foreign and military policies must be about America leading the world, not America against the world.

So how did we come to this point?

How is it that our leaders have abandoned our communities and repudiated our idealism and principles?

When confronted with a dedicated band of right wing ideologues, too many Americans have stopped participating, stopped voting, and stopped believing that they can change America.

And we in politics have not given our people a reason to vote or a reason to participate. We have slavishly spewed sound bites, copying each other while saying little. We raise millions of dollars and each year make lofty promises, while every year the struggles of ordinary Americans increase and fewer Americans vote. Our politicians, many of them good people, have been paralyzed by their fear of losing office. Our leaders have developed a vocabulary which has become meaningless to the American people.

There is no greater example of this than a self-described conservative Republican president who creates the greatest deficits in history of America. Or a President who boasts of a Clear Skies Initiative which allows far more pollution into our air. Or a President who co-opts from an advocacy organization the phrase "No Child Left Behind," while paying for irresponsible tax cuts by cutting children's health care.

Martin Luther King, Jr. said, "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter."

The history of our nation is clear: At every turn when there has been an imbalance of power, the truth questioned, or our beliefs and values distorted, the change required to restore our nation has always come from the bottom up from our people.

And so, while the President raises $4 million more tonight to maintain his agenda, we will not be silent.

He calls his biggest fundraisers Rangers and Pioneers.

But today, we stand together with thousands in Burlington, Vermont and tens of thousands more, standing with us right now in every state in this nation. And we call ourselves, simply, Americans.

And we stand today in common purpose to take our country back.

I am a doctor and I was proud to be Governor of Vermont:

* where we balanced our budgets
* where we made sure that nearly every child in our state had health care coverage
* where we are stewards of our land and natural resources
* where, on the first Tuesday of March every year, Vermonters gather to make decisions on matters vital to our communities
* where we hold these truths to be self evident: that all are created equal and are endowed with the inalienable rights of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness
* And, where we, like all Americans, love our country and want to see her flag stand for freedom and justice for all. That flag is not the property of the either party, it belongs to all of us.

It is from this place that the rest of the journey of this campaign continues. We will ask the American people to participate again in our common future. I ask all Americans, regardless of party, to meet with me across the nation to come together in common cause to forge a new American century. Help us in this quest to return greatness, and return high moral purpose to the United States of America.

We are the great grassroots campaign of the modern era, built from mouse pads, shoe leather and hope.

Like MoveOn.org we seek to build a community of millions and strengthen the voice of the people.

And like the founders of our republic, we seek change.

The great lie spoken by politicians on platforms like this is the cry of "elect me and I will solve all your problems."

The truth is the future of our nation rests in your hands, and not in mine.

Abraham Lincoln said that government of the people, by the people and for the people shall not perish from this earth.

But this President has forgotten ordinary people.

You have the power to reclaim our nation's destiny.

You have the power to rid Washington of the politics of money.

You have the power to make right as important as might.

You have the power to give Americans a reason to vote again.

You have the power to restore our nation to fiscal sanity and bring jobs back to our people.

You have the power to fulfill Harry Truman's dream and bring health insurance to every American.

You have the power to give us a foreign policy consistent with American values again.

You have the power to take back the Democratic Party.

You have the power to take our country back.

And we have the power to take the White House back in 2004.




I'd be interested to hear any opinions people might have of Howard Dean or his speech.


--------------------
The above is an extract from my fictional novel, "The random postings of Edame".
:tongue:

In the beginning was the word. And man could not handle the word, and the hearing of the word, and he asked God to take away his ears so that he might live in peace without having to hear words which might upset his equinamity or corrupt the unblemished purity of his conscience.

And God, hearing this desperate plea from His creation, wrinkled His mighty brow for a moment and then leaned down toward man, beckoning that he should come close so as to hear all that was about to be revealed to him.

"Fuck you," He whispered, and frowned upon the pathetic supplicant before retreating to His heavens.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineEllis Dee
Archangel
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/30/01
Posts: 13,104
Loc: Fire in the sky
Last seen: 2 years, 8 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Edame]
    #1681591 - 07/02/03 11:28 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

>>>I'd be interested to hear any opinions people might have of Howard Dean or his speech.

***chanting*** Dean Dean the fairy queen! ***chanting***


--------------------
"If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do."-King Solomon

And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineSolo
enthusiast
Registered: 11/08/98
Posts: 257
Last seen: 17 years, 2 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Ellis Dee]
    #1681660 - 07/02/03 11:51 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

I heard his name mentioned on a conservative radio talk show today. Seems that the conservatives will be very excited if he gets the Democratic nomination. I don't care about his politics...I vote Libertarian.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineSlapnutRob
Toolhead

Registered: 03/31/03
Posts: 520
Loc: Michigan
Last seen: 12 years, 4 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Solo]
    #1681714 - 07/03/03 12:10 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

I am a huge fan of Howard Dean. Conservatives would be excited if he got the nomination becauase they're hoping for a re-run of McGovern vs. Nixon... the last time a real liberal ran for president, and he got trounced. A lot of media pundits believe a true liberal can't win the presidency--Dean is out to set them wrong. He's also not as liberal as they make him out to be... he's pro universal health care, and is generally progressive, but he is also pro gun and I believe pro death penalty. He's also a fierce debater and former doctor. I'd love to see him in a one-on-one with Bush.

I saw that very speech on C-SPAN... that was his official candidacy announcement in Burlington, VT. He just ended his decade-long term as their Governor, where he led them to be one of only five or so states not currently running a deficit, and instituted free health care for all citizens under the age of 18, as well as several other distinguished achievements.

Howard Dean in 04!!


--------------------
Anything stated above is fictional roleplay dialog by the character that is Slapnut Rob, in no way representing the actions or beliefs of the man behind the keys.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineLearyfanS
It's the psychedelic movement!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 32,827
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 54 minutes
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Edame]
    #1681788 - 07/03/03 12:34 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

If he is for the war on drugs, he is corrupt.

If he is against the war on drugs, there is a chance that he is a not corrupt.





--------------------
--------------------------------


Mp3 of the month:  Sons Of Adam - Feathered Fish



Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisiblesilversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Learyfan]
    #1681825 - 07/03/03 12:45 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

^^^^^^^^^A little simplistic, wouldn't you say?


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineZahid
Stranger
Registered: 01/21/02
Posts: 4,779
Last seen: 17 years, 2 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Learyfan]
    #1681865 - 07/03/03 01:05 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

They're all for the war on drugs. But you must vote, otherwise Bush might get re-elected!


--------------------


Edited by Zahid (07/03/03 01:07 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineMalachi
stereotype

Registered: 06/19/02
Posts: 1,294
Loc: Around Minneapolis.
Last seen: 12 years, 6 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Zahid]
    #1681960 - 07/03/03 01:32 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

no, actually I think dean is the most pot friendly of them. the whole homosexual thing is actually really closely tied to the whole pot thing. lawmakers understand that pot laws are basically trite moral judgements, but have traditionally figured that this is a right of the majority. with homosexuals, the majority wants to impose said trite moral judgement, but hold up: fucking is obviously your own fucking business. and, if lawmakers(judges, I mean) think on these lines, it's totally alot more likely that pot will be legalized on 4th ammendment or religious grounds.


--------------------
The ultimate meaning of our being can only be fulfilled in the paradoxical leap beyond the tragic-demonic frustration. It is a leap from our side, but it is the self-surrendering presence of the Ground of Being from the other side.
- Paul Tillich


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineSolo
enthusiast
Registered: 11/08/98
Posts: 257
Last seen: 17 years, 2 months
basdf [Re: Malachi]
    #1682182 - 07/03/03 02:29 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

From what I understand the gay debate is around the topic of marriage..not sex.

BTW, if you are for drug legalization vote libertarian~!


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleMOTH
Wild Woman
 User Gallery

Registered: 06/06/03
Posts: 23,431
Loc: In the jungle
Re: basdf [Re: Solo]
    #1682599 - 07/03/03 04:48 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Well, I wouldn't be able to classify myself with any party. But when I do vote, it will probably be libertarian.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineEllis Dee
Archangel
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/30/01
Posts: 13,104
Loc: Fire in the sky
Last seen: 2 years, 8 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Zahid]
    #1683492 - 07/03/03 11:26 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

Zahid said:
They're all for the war on drugs. But you must vote, otherwise Bush might get re-elected!



Dennis Kucinich is opposed to the WoD.


--------------------
"If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do."-King Solomon

And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleEdame
gone

Registered: 01/14/03
Posts: 1,270
Loc: outta here
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Learyfan]
    #1683905 - 07/03/03 02:24 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

I don't agree that it's as simple as saying that he is corrupt.

Next to Bush this guy looks like a Saint (at least in my limited view), and he's also a doctor so at one point he's taken the Hippocratic Oath which I'd like to believe counts for something still these days. I think it's a little unrealistic to expect to go from one polar opposite (far-right 'Neocon') to another (far-left 'Liberal') so quickly, who knows how millions of people force-fed anti-drug propaganda (for example) would react when suddenly everything changes and they realise that they've been lied to for decades.

Maybe someone like this guy in power could at least be a start right?


--------------------
The above is an extract from my fictional novel, "The random postings of Edame".
:tongue:

In the beginning was the word. And man could not handle the word, and the hearing of the word, and he asked God to take away his ears so that he might live in peace without having to hear words which might upset his equinamity or corrupt the unblemished purity of his conscience.

And God, hearing this desperate plea from His creation, wrinkled His mighty brow for a moment and then leaned down toward man, beckoning that he should come close so as to hear all that was about to be revealed to him.

"Fuck you," He whispered, and frowned upon the pathetic supplicant before retreating to His heavens.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineSlapnutRob
Toolhead

Registered: 03/31/03
Posts: 520
Loc: Michigan
Last seen: 12 years, 4 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Edame]
    #1685244 - 07/04/03 01:07 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

Well, I wouldn't be able to classify myself with any party. But when I do vote, it will probably be libertarian.



Neither do I, but when a good Democrat comes around like Dean, I give him my vote. He's not your typical Republican accomodationist Democrat.


--------------------
Anything stated above is fictional roleplay dialog by the character that is Slapnut Rob, in no way representing the actions or beliefs of the man behind the keys.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineSlapnutRob
Toolhead

Registered: 03/31/03
Posts: 520
Loc: Michigan
Last seen: 12 years, 4 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Edame]
    #1685250 - 07/04/03 01:11 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

From what I understand the gay debate is around the topic of marriage..not sex.




The "gay debate" encompasses both. Some conservatives definitely want anti-sodomy laws. These are laws that necessitate invasion of privacy to be enforced, so I don't give them any credibility, and only a crazy fundamentalist Xian (read: Rick Santorum) would be in support of them.

Quote:

Well, I wouldn't be able to classify myself with any party. But when I do vote, it will probably be libertarian.



Neither do I, but when a good Democrat comes around like Dean, I give him my vote. He's not your typical Republican accomodationist Democrat.

Quote:

Dennis Kucinich is opposed to the WoD.



Dennis Kucinich makes Dean look like a conservative. I'd support Kucinich, but sadly he's only a House rep. so he doesn't really stand a chance.... he's also just not much of a presidential figure... he looks like an little elf.


--------------------
Anything stated above is fictional roleplay dialog by the character that is Slapnut Rob, in no way representing the actions or beliefs of the man behind the keys.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Edame]
    #1685876 - 07/04/03 07:48 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)



--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisiblesilversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1686247 - 07/04/03 12:40 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

That track record is still a hell of a lot better than Bush's.


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: silversoul7]
    #1686444 - 07/04/03 03:00 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

It would be a fool indeed who based their opinion of Dean by what's written here. Either for or against.

It was just a bit of info I thought might be interesting to some.

I was surprised by the bit about him sealing his records though.

No-one should be allowed to judge themselves whether or not their records should be sealed and for how long.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Edame]
    #1686580 - 07/04/03 04:16 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

From libertarian pundit Neal Boortz -- http://www.boortz.com/july3(2)-03.htm

Super-leftist Howard Dean, the current Democratic frontrunner, wants Bush to send a few thousand troops to Liberal to ?head off a human right?s crisis.?? Dean, you will remember, was steadfastly opposed to our war in Iraq.? He?s all for sending troops to be in harm?s way in Liberia because, he says, ?The situation in Liberia is significantly different from the situation in Iraq.?? Bush, he says, never made the case that Iraq posed a threat to the world.? This would mean that Dean believes that Liberia does pose such a threat.

OK ? so let?s look at this a moment.

Chemical weapons?? Saddam Hussein had used them; Charles Taylor (the president of Liberia) has not.

Biological weapons?? Saddam Hussein said he had them, Charles Taylor has not.

Nuclear weapons?? Saddam?s own scientists have said that he had an ongoing nuclear program, and parts essential to such a program have been discovered in Iraq.? Liberia?? Nothing.

Bloodshed?? Saddam is probably ahead here.? Mass graves in Iraq, and tens of thousands of Kurds and Iranians dead from Saddam?s chemical weapons.? Taylor?? Undoubtedly he?s killed many ? but the count is nowhere near that of Saddam?s

Terrorists?? There is proof that Saddam has supported terrorism financially.? No such proof exists for Charles Taylor.

Dean says U.S. troops should go to Liberia because there is an ?imminent threat of serious human catastrophe.?? And there wasn?t in Iraq.? Again, the mass graves, the torture chambers, and the development of those weapons?

Dean also says ?the world community is asking the United States to exercise its leadership.?? Oh, I get it.? The U.S. can?t send troops to protect it?s own interests, but it?s OK to send them when the world community demands it.

I just can?t wait for this clown to get the Democratic nomination.

************************************************************




pinky?


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Phred]
    #1686609 - 07/04/03 04:39 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Yes.

Dean thinks we should go to Liberia.
France thinks we should go to Liberia.
The UN thinks we should go to Liberia.

Isn't that odd?

:smirk:


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleEdame
gone

Registered: 01/14/03
Posts: 1,270
Loc: outta here
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Phred]
    #1686627 - 07/04/03 04:57 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:


Bush, he says, never made the case that Iraq posed a threat to the world. This would mean that Dean believes that Liberia does pose such a threat.




I think that his arguement falls apart right there. He's basing his entire rant on an assumption. Dean said (according to the article) :
?The situation in Liberia is significantly different from the situation in Iraq.?

'Significantly different', which the author (he got something right) then goes on to prove for us:
Quote:


OK ? so let?s look at this a moment.

Chemical weapons? Saddam Hussein had used them; Charles Taylor (the president of Liberia) has not.

Biological weapons? Saddam Hussein said he had them, Charles Taylor has not.

Nuclear weapons? Saddam?s own scientists have said that he had an ongoing nuclear program, and parts essential to such a program have been discovered in Iraq. Liberia? Nothing.

Bloodshed? Saddam is probably ahead here. Mass graves in Iraq, and tens of thousands of Kurds and Iranians dead from Saddam?s chemical weapons. Taylor? Undoubtedly he?s killed many ? but the count is nowhere near that of Saddam?s

Terrorists? There is proof that Saddam has supported terrorism financially. No such proof exists for Charles Taylor.





So having pointed out some 'significant differences' , as Dean said. He would then have us believe that actually, Dean believes that Liberia is an imminent threat to the United States?

Dean's already said it, to ?head off a human right?s crisis.? He's pointing out the rather obvious difference between an urgent Peace-keeping mission, and an outright invasion and occupation of another nation that was suffering a human rights crisis for 12 years while the US looked on.



--------------------
The above is an extract from my fictional novel, "The random postings of Edame".
:tongue:

In the beginning was the word. And man could not handle the word, and the hearing of the word, and he asked God to take away his ears so that he might live in peace without having to hear words which might upset his equinamity or corrupt the unblemished purity of his conscience.

And God, hearing this desperate plea from His creation, wrinkled His mighty brow for a moment and then leaned down toward man, beckoning that he should come close so as to hear all that was about to be revealed to him.

"Fuck you," He whispered, and frowned upon the pathetic supplicant before retreating to His heavens.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: silversoul7]
    #1686637 - 07/04/03 05:04 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

I wonder how many here would react if a Republican sealed his or her own records "just in case" someone wants to use them as a campain issue?

:lol:


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Edame]
    #1686696 - 07/04/03 05:47 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Edame writes:

Quote:

I'd be interested to hear any opinions people might have of Howard Dean or his speech.




Okay. I'll give it a shot. First, I must say that after a quick preliminary read, the impression I had is that his speechwriter(s) is/are topnotch. It reads well, and I'll bet it sounds good when spoken aloud. It is vague and nebulous without being too obvious about it, and is not too inflammatory. But a more leisurely inspection reveals the substance (or lack thereof) more clearly:

We seek the great restoration of American values...

"We?" Is that the Royal "we"? (Okay, cheap shot. Let's move on.) That aside, bear in mind that he opens the speech with emphasis on the restoration of American values. This must therefore be of some importance to him. Let's see if later it is possible to discern what he believes are American values.

...and the restoration of our nation's traditional purpose in the world.

Likewise, Let's see what he believes is America's "traditional purpose in the world." Should be interesting.

This is a campaign to unite and empower people everywhere.

Well, darn! The very next sentence sneaks in the Collectivist attitude. In fact, American values are not about "uniting", but about allowing people to act as individuals. Also, people don't need to be "empowered" by government -- in fact they cannot be. People need to be left alone to live their lives. The Founding Fathers realized that.

It is a call to every American, regardless of party, to join together in common purpose and for the common good...

There it is again! We urge you to join together, be part of the gang, the tribe, the hive. "Common good"? Collectivism.

...to save and restore all that it means to be an American.

Again, it is disingenuous to claim that by campaigning for groupthink, one is "restoring" American values.

I believed that, by running for President, I could raise the issues of health care for every American...

Paid for by whom?

...and the need to focus on early childhood development.

What does this mean? Who is to do the focusing? On whose children? With whose money? What a uselessly vague phrase that is!

I wanted to bring those issues to the forefront of the national debate. And I wanted to balance the budget to bring financial stability and jobs back to America.

Clearly he feels these points are important. We now have five things to look for in the rest of the speech:

1) Restoring American values
2) Restoring America's traditional purpose in the world
3) Provide health care for every American
4) Focus on early childhood development
5) Balance the budget (how a balanced budget will bring jobs "back" to America from Mexico and Singapore et al is unclear to me, though)

But something changed along the way as I listened to Americans around this country.

Uh oh. Maybe that list might have to change.

Every where I go people are asking fundamental questions: Who can we trust? Is the media reporting the truth? What is happening to our country?

These are excellent questions. Will we see any answers from Mr. Dean? Let's list them and see.

A) Who can we trust?
B) Is the media reporting the truth?
C) What is happening to our country?

What they know is that somehow 7 trillion dollars of our country's wealth disappeared.

Since Bush took over? Source, please.

Companies are leaving the country to avoid paying taxes...

Yet Mr. Dean is a staunch opponent of lowering taxes. I guess more companies will leave.

... or to avoid paying people livable wages.

This would imply Mr. Dean wishes to raise the minimum wage, with the unavoidable consequence of increasing unemployment.

And corporations are doing this with the support of the government...

News flash to Leftist -- in a free society, companies (and individuals) do not need the support or even the permission of the government to leave the country.

This was the fear that James Madison and Thomas Jefferson spoke of -- the fear that economic power would one day try to seize political power. Theodore Roosevelt said it best, "Every special interest is entitled to justice full, fair and complete....but not one is entitled to a vote in Congress, to a voice on the bench or to representation in any public office."

Ah! It seems Mr. Dean is opposed to the practice of special interest groups lobbying the legislators. Three cheers for him! If he promises to make lobbying illegal, he'll get a lot of support. Of course, he will never do such a thing. It is pure campaign rhetoric.

Today, our nation is in crisis.

Hyperbole. Are there problems? Sure there are -- when haven't there been? But crisis? Hardly.

At home, this crisis manifests itself in this President's destruction of the idea of community.

Whuh? Let's have some specifics.

This President pushes forward an agenda and policies which divide us.

These being?

He advocates economic polices which beggar the middle class and raise property taxes...

These being?

...so that income taxes may be cut for those who ran Enron.

Those who ran Enron are doing time.

He divides us by race by using the word quota...

Which is the word that best fits the practice.

... which appeals to the worst in us by instilling fear that people of color might take our jobs or our places in the nation's best universities.

Which is of course exactly what is happening.

Even the most conservative Supreme Court since the Dred Scott decision...

What? The man can't possibly be serious.

...did not completely agree with the President's attack on diversity and community that includes all Americans.

Diversity. Community. Leftie buzzwords deliberately used to obfuscate the actual issue -- institutionalized racism.

He divides us by gender by attacking a woman's right to make her own health care decisions.

He says he would like to see Roe vs Wade reversed? When did he say that?

And even by attacking young women's right to have the same athletic opportunities that young men do.

Presumably Mr. Dean is referring to the act that eliminated countless men's sports teams in universities across the nation while creating few if any new women's teams.

He divides us by sexual orientation by supporting senators who have slandered gay Americans, and he appeals once again to the worst instincts within us, instead of that which is good in all Americans.

Sigh. Are we finally to the end of the exaggerated, hyperbolic, obligatory mudslinging of the incumbent? Can we move on to Mr. Dean's actual position on the issues he raised earlier?

The tax cuts that are the radicals' weapon are not about tax cuts for working people.

No working people receive dividends? That's not true. The number of Americans holding stock portfolios has increased to around 100 million. You better believe that a hell of a lot of them are working people.

They are not even about tax cuts for millionaires. Instead, the tax cuts are designed to destroy Social Security, Medicare, our public schools and our public services through starvation and privatization.

Mr. Dean demonstrates his inability to grasp the nature of tax cuts and their effect on net government revenue. As for Social Security, it is an open secret that there is no way to save it. No matter what government does or doesn't do, SS is fucked. It's too late to do anything more than admit it and move on.

Our President and too many in Washington are giving away our future so that we pass to our children not a flickering flame of freedom but the chain of insurmountable debt.

It is not a given that the best way to reduce debt is to raise taxes. The best way to reduce debt is to cut spending.

And so for me the long journey of a Presidential campaign has begun with the people I have met affecting me far more than any affect I may have had on them. And because of that, the reasons why I seek the Presidency have changed.
This campaign is about more than issue differences on health care, tax cuts, national security, jobs, the environment and our economy. It is about something as important as our children. It's about who we are as Americans.


Ah hah! The whole opening preamble, the five issues of top importance to him, the three questions asked by all those folks he met in his travels, are in fact now renedered meaningless. Now the real Bleeding Heart Liberal rears his head: "It's all about the children" -- *sniffle* -- "It's about who we are." Standard hackneyed Liberal pap. Can't deal with concrete issues, so let's appeal to emotion.

Here are the words of John Winthrop: "We shall be as one. We must delight in each other, make other's conditions our own; rejoice together, mourn together, labor and suffer together, always living before our eyes our Commission and Community in our work."

Can we say "Collectivism"?

It is that ideal, the ideal of the American community, that we seek to restore.

This is not and never has been the American ideal, so to claim to seek to "restore" it is specious at best, dishonest at worst. The American ideal is individual freedom, individual accomplishment, individual responsibility. Independence, not co-dependence. The ideal Mr. Dean is talking about is the Marxist ideal.

I need a break. I may address the second half of Mr. Dean's manifesto later, or I may not.

If some readers of this forum choose to vote for Mr. Dean, I hope they do so because they are in agreement with his Collectivist vision, not because they have been suckered into believing that he stands for "restoring American values." Cearly he does not.

pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Edame]
    #1686720 - 07/04/03 06:08 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

edame writes:

Quote:

I think that his arguement falls apart right there. He's basing his entire rant on an assumption. Dean said (according to the article) :
?The situation in Liberia is significantly different from the situation in Iraq.?




As far as humanitarian concerns go, it is no different, except that Taylor hasn't yet managed to kill as many Liberians as Hussein killed Iraqis. This is just a matter of scale. But as far as proven belligerence (including outright annexation, in the case of Kuwait) to neighboring countries, there is a world of difference. Let's check another source. From opinionjournal.com:

Dean argued there's no inconsistency in opposing the war in Iraq while backing intervention in Africa. He said Bush never made the case that Iraq posed a threat to the world.

"The situation in Liberia is exactly the opposite," Dean said. "There is an imminent threat of serious human catastrophe and the world community is asking the United States to exercise its leadership."


Pinksharkmark comments -- How can the situation be "exactly the opposite" if one claims that Iraq was no threat to the world, unless one also claims Liberia is? That's what "exactly the opposite" means, after all.

When Mr. Dean says, "There is an imminent threat of serious human catastrophe.." he then neglects to point out that said catastrophe is limited to Liberia, not to the world.

Back to opinionjournal.com:

Does Dean really think there wasn't a "serious human catastrophe" in Baathist Iraq? (What's the alternative, a frivolous animal catastrophe?) No, it seems there are two real differences between preliberation Iraq and today's Liberia. First, Iraq's history of invading its neighbors, using chemical weapons and pursuing nuclear ones, and backing terrorists actually made it a threat beyond its borders--and thus the U.S. had a strategic interest, not just a moral one, in removing the dictatorship. Some on the left seem to think U.S. intervention is just fine, so long as its moral purity isn't tainted by self-interest. In this view, the Liberians are worth helping, but the Iraqis can go to hell (or stay in hell) for the sake of America's moral vanity.

The second difference is that, as Dean puts it, in Liberia "the world community is asking the United States to exercise its leadership." But if America simply does whatever the "world community" wants it to do, in what sense can it be said to be exercising "leadership"?


pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Edame]
    #1686740 - 07/04/03 06:18 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

edame writes:

He's pointing out the rather obvious difference between an urgent Peace-keeping mission, and an outright invasion and occupation of another nation that was suffering a human rights crisis for 12 years while the US looked on.

Sigh. The entire world looked on. Many did a lot more than just look on -- you must recall that millions of peace-loving protesters did their utmost to make sure the human rights crisis continued, as did France and Russia and Germany.

Do you believe it was wrong for the US and Britain and Australia and Spain et al to remove Hussein, thereby ending the human rights crisis in Iraq? If so, why do you believe it is correct for the US to remove Taylor and end the human rights crisis there? And, by the way, the UN is not calling for a "peace-keeping" mission, they are calling for regime change.

As it happens, it appears Taylor learned a lesson from Hussein's refusal to step down: http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/africa/07/04/liberia.us/index.html



pinky




--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Phred]
    #1686743 - 07/04/03 06:21 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

If I may borrow a line from that PBS hero, Mr. Rogers.....

Can you say hypocrisy? I betcha can!


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleEdame
gone

Registered: 01/14/03
Posts: 1,270
Loc: outta here
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Phred]
    #1686757 - 07/04/03 06:39 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

pinksharkmark said:
edame writes:

He's pointing out the rather obvious difference between an urgent Peace-keeping mission, and an outright invasion and occupation of another nation that was suffering a human rights crisis for 12 years while the US looked on.

Sigh. The entire world looked on. Many did a lot more than just look on -- you must recall that millions of peace-loving protesters did their utmost to make sure the human rights crisis continued, as did France and Russia and Germany.




I'm aware that the rest of the UN looked on during the sanctions too, but the discussion is about US military involvement so I was trying to keep things in that context.

Quote:

Do you believe it was wrong for the US and Britain and Australia and Spain et al to remove Hussein, thereby ending the human rights crisis in Iraq? If so, why do you believe it is correct for the US to remove Taylor and end the human rights crisis there? And, by the way, the UN is not calling for a "peace-keeping" mission, they are calling for regime change.




I try not to 'believe' anything, and I also avoid using terms like 'right' and 'wrong'. I was against the invasion of Iraq, and I don't see that the crisis there is over yet by a long shot.
I also didn't say that I believe it is correct for the US to remove Taylor, I just felt that the writer of said article was twisting logic to try and make a point.

I was still under the impression that this was being called a peace-keeping mission. If so, a peace-keeping mission could be seen to be the 'exact opposite' of a full-on invasion and occupation .


--------------------
The above is an extract from my fictional novel, "The random postings of Edame".
:tongue:

In the beginning was the word. And man could not handle the word, and the hearing of the word, and he asked God to take away his ears so that he might live in peace without having to hear words which might upset his equinamity or corrupt the unblemished purity of his conscience.

And God, hearing this desperate plea from His creation, wrinkled His mighty brow for a moment and then leaned down toward man, beckoning that he should come close so as to hear all that was about to be revealed to him.

"Fuck you," He whispered, and frowned upon the pathetic supplicant before retreating to His heavens.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineMalachi
stereotype

Registered: 06/19/02
Posts: 1,294
Loc: Around Minneapolis.
Last seen: 12 years, 6 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Phred]
    #1686800 - 07/04/03 07:34 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

pinksharkmark said:
Edame writes:

Quote:





Here are the words of John Winthrop: "We shall be as one. We must delight in each other, make other's conditions our own; rejoice together, mourn together, labor and suffer together, always living before our eyes our Commission and Community in our work."

Can we say "Collectivism"?

It is that ideal, the ideal of the American community, that we seek to restore.

This is not and never has been the American ideal, so to claim to seek to "restore" it is specious at best, dishonest at worst. The American ideal is individual freedom, individual accomplishment, individual responsibility. Independence, not co-dependence. The ideal Mr. Dean is talking about is the Marxist ideal.

I need a break. I may address the second half of Mr. Dean's manifesto later, or I may not.

If some readers of this forum choose to vote for Mr. Dean, I hope they do so because they are in agreement with his Collectivist vision, not because they have been suckered into believing that he stands for "restoring American values." Cearly he does not.

pinky






dude, you've gotta chill on the individualism bit. sure, our relative and liberal tradtion is intended to protect individual rights, but that doesn't mean that unity isn't an "american" value, even _the_ american value. the confederates cared about individualism. United states of america. get it? this is the more basic goal of any society.


--------------------
The ultimate meaning of our being can only be fulfilled in the paradoxical leap beyond the tragic-demonic frustration. It is a leap from our side, but it is the self-surrendering presence of the Ground of Being from the other side.
- Paul Tillich


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Malachi]
    #1686822 - 07/04/03 08:05 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Malachi writes:

dude, you've gotta chill on the individualism bit. sure, our relative and liberal tradtion is intended to protect individual rights...

The Constitution and the Bill of Rights are more than just a tradition. They are the very foundation of the nation.

....but that doesn't mean that unity isn't an "american" value, even _the_ american value.

It is "a" value to some Americans (the special interest groups lobbying congressman, for example are pretty united) as it is a value to many people all over the world, but it is far from being "the" American value.

Besides, what Winthrop (and Mr. Dean, earlier in the speech) are describing is a lot more than just "unity".

this is the more basic goal of any society.

It is certainly the most basic goal of Collectivist societies. Of free societies? Nuh-uh.


pinky



--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Edame]
    #1686833 - 07/04/03 08:18 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Edame writes:

I try not to 'believe' anything, and I also avoid using terms like 'right' and 'wrong'.

I see. Well, that would lead to a convenient.... ummm... fluidity in political discussion, I guess.

I was against the invasion of Iraq...

Why?

...and I don't see that the crisis there is over yet by a long shot.

You are of the opinion there is still a human rights crisis in Iraq? Could you elaborate on this, please?

I just felt that the writer of said article was twisting logic to try and make a point.

I am sorry, but you have failed to demonstrate the "twisted logic".

Let's examine it logically. There was a human rights crisis in Iraq, wasn't there? There is a human rights crisis in Liberia, isn't there? Surely even Mr. Dean would have to agree with those two statements.

However, in addition to a human rights crisis in Iraq, there was also failure to comply with the terms of the conditional ceasefire, a history of annexing neighboring countries, supporting terrorists acting outside Iraq's borders, sheltering wanted terrorists inside Iraq's borders, and more.

This doesn't make Hussein the exact opposite of Taylor, it just makes him more thorough than Taylor. Mr. Dean's argument is specious, and Boortz (and others) have called him on it.

pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleEdame
gone

Registered: 01/14/03
Posts: 1,270
Loc: outta here
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Phred]
    #1686900 - 07/04/03 09:45 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

pinksharkmark said:
Edame writes:

I try not to 'believe' anything, and I also avoid using terms like 'right' and 'wrong'.

I see. Well, that would lead to a convenient.... ummm... fluidity in political discussion, I guess.




Can you explain what you mean? All I'm saying is that I try and approach everything with an open mind and I'm not trying to impose my views on others.
Quote:


I was against the invasion of Iraq...

Why?



I'm sure I went over this in a previous post. The short version is that I think war is barbaric, I have plenty of other reasons too, but this is just going to re-open a whole other debate.
Quote:


...and I don't see that the crisis there is over yet by a long shot.

You are of the opinion there is still a human rights crisis in Iraq? Could you elaborate on this, please?




From the reports I've been looking at there seem to be daily protests and shootings, sporadic electricity at best, insufficient sanitation, water and medical facilities and the entire country is now dependent on outside aid. Not to mention possibly thousands of unexploded bombs lying all over the country. Of course they're also churning out about 800,000 barrels of oil a day now. Personally I'd call that a crisis, but that's me.

Quote:


I just felt that the writer of said article was twisting logic to try and make a point.

I am sorry, but you have failed to demonstrate the "twisted logic".

Let's examine it logically. There was a human rights crisis in Iraq, wasn't there? There is a human rights crisis in Liberia, isn't there? Surely even Mr. Dean would have to agree with those two statements.




There was a human rights crisis in Iraq for years, the UN seemed fine with imposing 12 years of sanctions. The case for war was that Saddam posed an imminent threat to world security and that he had to be disarmed by force. The dossiers and intelligence were heavily focussed on weapons, resolution 1441 was about weapons. What was so urgent after over 12 years of just standing by and letting it happen?

Dean said "There is an imminent threat of serious human catastrophe ...", from what I can see, he's saying that Bush hasn't proven that the threat (WMD's etc..) was real. He's not saying that Iraq was no threat (IMHO), only that he thinks Bush couldn't prove it. This would then be the opposite because it's widely reported and provable that Liberia is a war zone at the moment with a rising civilian death-toll..

I think that the author was jumping to conclusions based on things that Dean didn't actually say. Considering that we're only really basing most of this on about 3 comments made by Dean, this article can be interpreted in different ways. It's just my take on it.



--------------------
The above is an extract from my fictional novel, "The random postings of Edame".
:tongue:

In the beginning was the word. And man could not handle the word, and the hearing of the word, and he asked God to take away his ears so that he might live in peace without having to hear words which might upset his equinamity or corrupt the unblemished purity of his conscience.

And God, hearing this desperate plea from His creation, wrinkled His mighty brow for a moment and then leaned down toward man, beckoning that he should come close so as to hear all that was about to be revealed to him.

"Fuck you," He whispered, and frowned upon the pathetic supplicant before retreating to His heavens.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineMalachi
stereotype

Registered: 06/19/02
Posts: 1,294
Loc: Around Minneapolis.
Last seen: 12 years, 6 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Phred]
    #1687034 - 07/04/03 11:27 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

funny, I was taught that the constitution was created to unite disparate states into a single entity. regardless, the constitution is just a rip off of locke's liberalism and smiths economic philosophy. while Locke was quite concerned about protecting individual rights, the purpose is still to create a better functioning whole. smith is an even better example of how neo con's with agenda's have twisted "american history" to their own ends. informed consent. It's all about informed consent, which makes totally free higher public education requisite, along with all sorts of shit that people would label "collectivist" or "too 'liberal'", etc.


--------------------
The ultimate meaning of our being can only be fulfilled in the paradoxical leap beyond the tragic-demonic frustration. It is a leap from our side, but it is the self-surrendering presence of the Ground of Being from the other side.
- Paul Tillich


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Anonymous

Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Malachi]
    #1687119 - 07/05/03 12:42 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Yes, there were certain provisions in the constitution to let it pass

but the constitution was the foundation of a good American government nevertheless

A bill of rights was immediately demanded, and individual liberties were to be preserved


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineMaynardIsGod
Chomskyite

Registered: 07/05/03
Posts: 17
Loc: Virginia
Last seen: 18 years, 5 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: ]
    #1687163 - 07/05/03 01:10 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

These people don't care about Dean. They can't judge Dean on the information available, because they've been brainwashed by Neal "I don't trust no big city bank" Boortz and his Libertarian Party. Who, as far as most liberals are concerned, are just pawns of the Neo-Conservatives. But go for it. People who vote Libertarian as a 3rd party generally would have voted Republican anyway.


--------------------

"But we create human nature. Men are infinitely malleable." - George Orwell, 1984.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineRadioActiveSlug
addict

Registered: 03/14/03
Posts: 530
Last seen: 18 years, 5 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: SlapnutRob]
    #1687399 - 07/05/03 04:08 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

i'm going to regester democrate jsut to try to get Kucinich in. If dean beats him out though its ok. as long as its not liberman or kerry.



--------------------
"Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one getting burned." -Buddha
www.impeach-bush-now.org


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Edame]
    #1687537 - 07/05/03 07:28 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Edame writes:

From the reports I've been looking at there seem to be daily protests and shootings, sporadic electricity at best, insufficient sanitation, water and medical facilities and the entire country is now dependent on outside aid. Not to mention possibly thousands of unexploded bombs lying all over the country. Of course they're also churning out about 800,000 barrels of oil a day now. Personally I'd call that a crisis, but that's me.

I'm sorry, I must have misunderstood. Since we had been talking all along about a human rights crisis, I just presumed when you used the term "crisis" you were also talking about a human rights crisis. I was unaware you considered infrastructure insufficiencies and resistance incidents to be a "crisis".

He's not saying that Iraq was no threat (IMHO), only that he thinks Bush couldn't prove it.

And Dean can't prove Liberia is a threat either.

This would then be the opposite because it's widely reported and provable that Liberia is a war zone at the moment with a rising civilian death-toll.

It was also widely reported and provable that Iraq had a rising civilian death toll. Forget about all the other additional transgressions that Hussein committed, and focus strictly on the humanitarian aspect, as Dean is doing. Hussein was killing Iraqis. Taylor is killing Liberians. How is that "opposite"?

pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleEdame
gone

Registered: 01/14/03
Posts: 1,270
Loc: outta here
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Phred]
    #1687664 - 07/05/03 10:29 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

pinksharkmark said:
Edame writes:

From the reports I've been looking at there seem to be daily protests and shootings, sporadic electricity at best, insufficient sanitation, water and medical facilities and the entire country is now dependent on outside aid. Not to mention possibly thousands of unexploded bombs lying all over the country. Of course they're also churning out about 800,000 barrels of oil a day now. Personally I'd call that a crisis, but that's me.

I'm sorry, I must have misunderstood. Since we had been talking all along about a human rights crisis, I just presumed when you used the term "crisis" you were also talking about a human rights crisis. I was unaware you considered infrastructure insufficiencies and resistance incidents to be a "crisis".




I guess we just have different interpretations of what we would consider to be a crisis then.

In the two articles you posted, both use different quotes attributed to Dean, and considering I can't actually find a transcript of exactly what was said, it looks open to interpretation to me:

?head off a human right?s crisis.?

"The situation in Liberia is exactly the opposite," Dean said. "There is an imminent threat of serious human catastrophe and the world community is asking the United States to exercise its leadership."

Not having access to rudimentary medical care and the constant threat of disease I would call a crisis. Having people killed and maimed every day by unexploded ordenance I would also call a crisis. Not having proper water, food, sanitation or electricity in a sweltering summer heat I would call a crisis. I would also call the shootings and death-threats against people who support the occupation (as well as the constant raids and interrogations of Iraqis by occupying forces), a crisis. I think that whether you call them 'infrastructure insufficiencies' or not, I still feel that they affect their basic human rights.

Quote:


He's not saying that Iraq was no threat (IMHO), only that he thinks Bush couldn't prove it.

And Dean can't prove Liberia is a threat either.




I don't think he's trying to prove that at all, I think he saying that it can be proven that there is an "imminent threat of serious human catastrophe". I don't see him mention Liberia being a threat at all, just that he feels that the case for action in this instance is valid and provable (hence him saying that this would be the opposite of Bush's case with Iraq).

Quote:

This would then be the opposite because it's widely reported and provable that Liberia is a war zone at the moment with a rising civilian death-toll.

It was also widely reported and provable that Iraq had a rising civilian death toll. Forget about all the other additional transgressions that Hussein committed, and focus strictly on the humanitarian aspect, as Dean is doing. Hussein was killing Iraqis. Taylor is killing Liberians. How is that "opposite"?

pinky




I've already mentioned this above. The UN watched Iraqis suffer for over 12 years, there was nothing imminent about their crisis. They tried to make it imminent by saying that Saddam had an arsenal of WMD's (which still haven't been found).

The proposed (and it wouldn't be Dean's decision anyway if it did happen) mission to Liberia is a 'peace-keeping' one, not a full-on invasion and occupation. My understanding is that they would be trying to keep the peace, while the 'rebels' (why does the US not call them terrorists?) and the government enter discussions.

The two situations are entirely different (I'm not saying that I agree with either). As for the 'opposite' thing, again we're looking at two different quotes (and no actual transcript). One has him saying that the situations is "significantly different" and the other saying "exactly the opposite". It's all open to interpretation. As many of us are aware of, journalists are not immune to quoting people out of context.


--------------------
The above is an extract from my fictional novel, "The random postings of Edame".
:tongue:

In the beginning was the word. And man could not handle the word, and the hearing of the word, and he asked God to take away his ears so that he might live in peace without having to hear words which might upset his equinamity or corrupt the unblemished purity of his conscience.

And God, hearing this desperate plea from His creation, wrinkled His mighty brow for a moment and then leaned down toward man, beckoning that he should come close so as to hear all that was about to be revealed to him.

"Fuck you," He whispered, and frowned upon the pathetic supplicant before retreating to His heavens.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinesomebodyelse
In_Is_Out

Registered: 06/12/03
Posts: 296
Last seen: 18 years, 4 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Edame]
    #1688211 - 07/05/03 04:58 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

PSM - your critique is flawed on one basic point. You believe it is possible to live as the founding fathers intended. Well, big difference. They lived in a land of "boundless resources" . We live in an overpopulated world fast running out of resources. Any president who is about the rights of the individual over the survival of the collective is either not seeing the problem, or is attempting to prompt a dieoff of the masses.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineSlapnutRob
Toolhead

Registered: 03/31/03
Posts: 520
Loc: Michigan
Last seen: 12 years, 4 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Phred]
    #1691360 - 07/06/03 11:38 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

I just got back from out of town and there's no way I'm going to read all this stuff, but I want to point out how horribly flawed this editorial is:

Quote:

pinksharkmark said:
From libertarian pundit Neal Boortz -- http://www.boortz.com/july3(2)-03.htm

Super-leftist Howard Dean, the current Democratic frontrunner, wants Bush to send a few thousand troops to Liberal to ?head off a human right?s crisis.?? Dean, you will remember, was steadfastly opposed to our war in Iraq.? He?s all for sending troops to be in harm?s way in Liberia because, he says, ?The situation in Liberia is significantly different from the situation in Iraq.?? Bush, he says, never made the case that Iraq posed a threat to the world.? This would mean that Dean believes that Liberia does pose such a threat.

OK ? so let?s look at this a moment.

Chemical weapons?? Saddam Hussein had used them; Charles Taylor (the president of Liberia) has not.

Biological weapons?? Saddam Hussein said he had them, Charles Taylor has not.

Nuclear weapons?? Saddam?s own scientists have said that he had an ongoing nuclear program, and parts essential to such a program have been discovered in Iraq.? Liberia?? Nothing.

Bloodshed?? Saddam is probably ahead here.? Mass graves in Iraq, and tens of thousands of Kurds and Iranians dead from Saddam?s chemical weapons.? Taylor?? Undoubtedly he?s killed many ? but the count is nowhere near that of Saddam?s

Terrorists?? There is proof that Saddam has supported terrorism financially.? No such proof exists for Charles Taylor.

Dean says U.S. troops should go to Liberia because there is an ?imminent threat of serious human catastrophe.?? And there wasn?t in Iraq.? Again, the mass graves, the torture chambers, and the development of those weapons?

Dean also says ?the world community is asking the United States to exercise its leadership.?? Oh, I get it.? The U.S. can?t send troops to protect it?s own interests, but it?s OK to send them when the world community demands it.

I just can?t wait for this clown to get the Democratic nomination.

************************************************************






First of all, as I said before, anybody who calls Dean "super-leftist" doesn't know what he's talking about. A "super-leftist" would never be pro-gun or pro-death penalty. He's just very progressive.

"Bush, he says, never made the case that Iraq posed a threat to the world. This would mean that Dean believes that Liberia does pose such a threat"
-Give me a break! That is severely flawed logic... Dean said Bush never made the case that Iraq is a threat to the world, which he didn't. He also said that the situation is very different in Liberia. By looking at these two statements and saying that he thinks we should put troops in Liberia for the same reason pro-war pundits wanted to put troops in Iraq shows the logic of a grade schooler. He never claimed Liberia "is a threat to the world."

THEY ARE TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THINGS. This idiot who wrote this column assumes the whole time that we're invading Liberia. A POLICE MISSION IS NOT A WAR, IT IS NOT AN INVASION. Please don't tell me this guy makes sense to you... if he does, you've lost all my respect.


--------------------
Anything stated above is fictional roleplay dialog by the character that is Slapnut Rob, in no way representing the actions or beliefs of the man behind the keys.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineSlapnutRob
Toolhead

Registered: 03/31/03
Posts: 520
Loc: Michigan
Last seen: 12 years, 4 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Phred]
    #1691375 - 07/06/03 11:44 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

pinksharkmark said:

And Dean can't prove Liberia is a threat either.

pinky




I'm sorry... I can't believe I just read that.

Dean has never claimed Liberia is a threat! Bush made endless claims along with his pro-war buddies that Iraq was a direct and imminent threat (which is ridiculous... even their closest neighbors weren't afraid of a country with a military 1/3 as powerful as the first gulf war). NOBODY has claimed Liberia to be a threat to us. You're arguing against a point of view nobody has and that moron created with his truly twisted logic.


--------------------
Anything stated above is fictional roleplay dialog by the character that is Slapnut Rob, in no way representing the actions or beliefs of the man behind the keys.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: SlapnutRob]
    #1691448 - 07/07/03 12:02 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

SlapnutRob writes:

Dean has never claimed Liberia is a threat!

Yes, I know. He says that Iraq was never a threat, and presumably he believes that Liberia is not a threat either. How does that make the two situations opposite, or even "significantly different"? It doesn't. Neither (according to Mr. Dean) was a threat.

There was an ongoing human rights crisis in Iraq. There is an ongoing human rights crisis in Liberia. How does that make the two situations opposite, or even "significantly different"? It doesn't. Both are/were crises.

The objection is not to Mr. Dean's position on the issue, but on his self-contradictory justification of said position. To claim that the situations are "different" is just not true. Boortz and Opinionjournal.com are asking, "If it is correct to send US troops into harms way to end a human rights crisis in Liberia, why was it incorrect to do the same in Iraq?"

pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineSlapnutRob
Toolhead

Registered: 03/31/03
Posts: 520
Loc: Michigan
Last seen: 12 years, 4 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Phred]
    #1691482 - 07/07/03 12:13 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

pinksharkmark said:
SlapnutRob writes:

Dean has never claimed Liberia is a threat!

Yes, I know. He says that Iraq was never a threat, and presumably he believes that Liberia is not a threat either. How does that make the two situations opposite, or even "significantly different"? It doesn't. Neither (according to Mr. Dean) was a threat.

There was an ongoing human rights crisis in Iraq. There is an ongoing human rights crisis in Liberia. How does that make the two situations opposite, or even "significantly different"? It doesn't. Both are/were crises.

The objection is not to Mr. Dean's position on the issue, but on his self-contradictory justification of said position. To claim that the situations are "different" is just not true. Boortz and Opinionjournal.com are asking, "If it is correct to send US troops into harms way to end a human rights crisis in Liberia, why was it incorrect to do the same in Iraq?"

pinky




Claiming the situations are "different" is exactly true. Sure, there was a big humanitarian situation in Iraq, but Iraq cost us like 100 billion dollars, and was an invasion resulting in an occupation. It was called a "war" by the media. Liberia is not a "war", and that fact alone makes them different situations.

This alone proves they're different:

Iraq:
Mission: Liberation/Invasion
US Troops Committed: 300,000 +
Civilian Casualties: estimated at least 5,000

Liberia:
Mission: Police/Humanitarian
US Troops Committed: 500-2,000
Civilian Casualties: obviously unknown, but sure to be much less


--------------------
Anything stated above is fictional roleplay dialog by the character that is Slapnut Rob, in no way representing the actions or beliefs of the man behind the keys.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineMaynardIsGod
Chomskyite

Registered: 07/05/03
Posts: 17
Loc: Virginia
Last seen: 18 years, 5 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Phred]
    #1691527 - 07/07/03 12:30 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Boortz has his head up his political ass. Iraq was in the "Axis of Evil" not because of it's human rights violations, but because of it's supposed WMD. Saddam was evil, according to Bush, not because he gassed his own Kurdish rebels, but because he was a threat to the United States. He lied to the American public. He lied about "Mission Accomplished". He lied about the costs, and I want to say he lied about the reasons, but I don't know what they are. How is the proposed Peace Keeping mission in Liberia the same as that? We are keeping the peace not invading another country who's populace doesn't want us there in the first place.




--------------------

"But we create human nature. Men are infinitely malleable." - George Orwell, 1984.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: SlapnutRob]
    #1691533 - 07/07/03 12:33 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

SlapnutRob writes:

Quote:

Claiming the situations are "different" is exactly true. Sure, there was a big humanitarian situation in Iraq, but Iraq cost us like 100 billion dollars, and was an invasion resulting in an occupation. It was called a "war" by the media. Liberia is not a "war", and that fact alone makes them different situations.

This alone proves they're different:

Iraq:
Mission: Liberation/Invasion
US Troops Committed: 300,000 +
Civilian Casualties: estimated at least 5,000

Liberia:
Mission: Police/Humanitarian
US Troops Committed: 500-2,000
Civilian Casualties: obviously unknown, but sure to be much less






The figures quoted are quantitative, not qualitative. Military interventions do not all involve exactly equal sums of money, troops, or casualties, but that is a only question of scale.

As for what the media chooses to call it, I am sure the people of Liberia see themselves as living in a war zone. And let's not forget the media called the recovery of Private Jessica Lynch a daring rescue, and they routinely call various miscreants either rebels or terrorists, depending on the whim of the story editor.

Edame points out one thing to bear in mind, though... the possibility that Mr. Dean was either misquote or quoted out of context. Boortz says the phrase used was "significantly different", while opinionjournal.com says the phrase was "exactly the opposite", so we know that at least one of them has got it wrong. I did a quick google search hoping for a verbatim transcript, but had no joy. It must be out there somewhere, but I'll be damned if I can find it.

pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Phred]
    #1693499 - 07/07/03 04:58 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

To anyone:
I heard Russert creamed Dean in his interview.

Anyone see it?


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1693628 - 07/07/03 05:35 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

I live in a third world country. I have no television and no radio and virtually no English language print media. All my news comes from the internet. Two questions:

1) Who is Russert?

2) Does Russert ever post transcripts of his/her interviews on the net?

pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineMaynardIsGod
Chomskyite

Registered: 07/05/03
Posts: 17
Loc: Virginia
Last seen: 18 years, 5 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1693640 - 07/07/03 05:40 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

You should stop going on what you heard, Dean stood up like a pro to Russert.


--------------------

"But we create human nature. Men are infinitely malleable." - George Orwell, 1984.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineSlapnutRob
Toolhead

Registered: 03/31/03
Posts: 520
Loc: Michigan
Last seen: 12 years, 4 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: MaynardIsGod]
    #1693723 - 07/07/03 06:17 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Pinksharkmark, they may be living in a war zone, but the difference is Iraq was our war... we're not there for a war, but for peacekeeping. I'm neutral on the subject as of now... I don't see why Liberia is necessary when there are similar situations on the same continent (especially Congo, over 3.3 million dead over the last five years or so).

LDS, I saw that interview. I wouldn't say he got creamed by any means, but he could have done better. The one instance on the show that everyone mentions when they speak of Dean's "poor performance" was when he was asked how many persons we have in our military. Dean didn't know, and contended that it's not important for him to know (which I agree with)... however, Dean then estimated that it's in the region of 1-2 million (the answer was app. 1.4 million). A dead-on estimate. That part usually isn't mentioned when an opponent of his brings up this little incident.

I think he did fine, he just doesn't give conventional answers we're used to.... he'll question the questioner's questions quite often. Anyway, whether or not he did fine, it's not hurting him right now.... his popularity has been on the rise for the longest time.


--------------------
Anything stated above is fictional roleplay dialog by the character that is Slapnut Rob, in no way representing the actions or beliefs of the man behind the keys.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineSlapnutRob
Toolhead

Registered: 03/31/03
Posts: 520
Loc: Michigan
Last seen: 12 years, 4 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Phred]
    #1693728 - 07/07/03 06:18 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

pinksharkmark said:
1) Who is Russert?

2) Does Russert ever post transcripts of his/her interviews on the net?

pinky




Tim Russert is the host of "Meet the Press"... you should be able to find a transcript on their website.


--------------------
Anything stated above is fictional roleplay dialog by the character that is Slapnut Rob, in no way representing the actions or beliefs of the man behind the keys.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Phred]
    #1693803 - 07/07/03 06:49 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

pinksharkmark said:
I live in a third world country. I have no television and no radio and virtually no English language print media. All my news comes from the internet. Two questions:

1) Who is Russert?

2) Does Russert ever post transcripts of his/her interviews on the net?

pinky



1. Tim Russert / Meet The Press

2. They have a web site but if you want a transcript it's $10.00 per.
I don't want one that badly.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: MaynardIsGod]
    #1693808 - 07/07/03 06:50 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

MaynardIsGod said:
You should stop going on what you heard, Dean stood up like a pro to Russert.



And you should pay more attention. If I went by what I heard, I wouldn't have asked.

But what else could be expected from a Chumpskyite.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: SlapnutRob]
    #1693816 - 07/07/03 06:54 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Thanks for a straight answer. I heard it was a bit worse than you describe it, but opinions will vary.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisiblesilversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1693907 - 07/07/03 07:29 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

luvdemshrooms said:
To anyone:
I heard Russert creamed Dean in his interview.

Anyone see it?



I saw that interview. Dean handled himself pretty well for the most part, but there was once question he stumbled on. He said that we should have more troops in Iraq, but he didn't know how many we have in there right now. What Russert seemed to miss, though, was that he did give a rough estimate. Dean defended himself by saying that when he's president he'll have advisors to tell him these kind of things. I admit, he did look bad at that point in the interview, but I don't think you could really say that Russert "creamed" him.


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: Phred]
    #1693954 - 07/07/03 07:47 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Found the transcript....

Here.

My read is he didn't do so well but as it's in print with no body language or facial expressions, I guess I'll never know.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineSlapnutRob
Toolhead

Registered: 03/31/03
Posts: 520
Loc: Michigan
Last seen: 12 years, 4 months
Re: Howard Dean? [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1694403 - 07/07/03 10:19 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

True... Dean handles himself with body language and such very well... he's not one to be intimidated or defeated. I'll have to read this though because I didn't see the whole thing.


--------------------
Anything stated above is fictional roleplay dialog by the character that is Slapnut Rob, in no way representing the actions or beliefs of the man behind the keys.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]

Shop: PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale, Red Vein Kratom


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Vote for Howard Dean question_for_joo 535 3 08/30/04 04:51 PM
by question_for_joo
* Howard Dean - WTF?
( 1 2 all )
SoopaX 3,452 30 06/09/05 12:56 PM
by Silversoul
* Howard Dean: The last true liberal
( 1 2 all )
silversoul7 2,388 39 06/30/03 02:38 PM
by drfrei
* Howard Dean - Chairman of DNC daimyo 454 2 01/12/05 10:17 PM
by Annapurna1
* Howard Dean
( 1 2 3 all )
superpimp 2,525 58 08/07/03 02:18 PM
by Phred
* Dean and the Corporate Media FrankieJustTrypt 955 5 02/15/04 02:51 PM
by silversoul7
* Dean = Out Strumpling 795 4 02/19/04 04:40 PM
by JonnyOnTheSpot
* Will We have a Vermonter President??? GGreatOne234 633 9 08/12/03 04:54 AM
by atomikfunksoldier

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
4,965 topic views. 1 members, 2 guests and 8 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Print Topic | ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2021 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.055 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 16 queries.