Howard Dean

Tools    





Django's Avatar
BANNED
I'm starting this thread to discuss the front-running Democratic candidate Howard Dean--the popular opinion about him, his stand on the issues (esp. the Iraq war), what he means for America, his chances of winning the November 2004 election, etc. Howard Dean made the news recently when he won Al Gore's endorsement, turning from a marginal figure into the front-running Democratic candidate, much to the chagrin, one imagines, of Gore's vice-presidential candidate Joseph Lieberman, who claims that Dean's policies constitute a divergence from those of Clinton, which Lieberman supposedly represents. Anyway, here is the news article about Gore's endorsement of Dean, which contains Gore's speech:

Al Gore Endorses Dean for President
Former vice president praises grassroots campaign
December 9, 2003

NEW YORK--During a breakfast here today, former Vice President Al Gore endorsed Democratic presidential candidate former Governor Howard Dean, M.D., citing his vision for the country and the Democratic party, as well as his grassroots-based quest to take back the White House.

Speaking at the National Black Theater's Institute for Action Arts in Harlem this morning, Gore praised Governor Dean's grassroots-based campaign and the broad coalition that Dean is building to help Democrats retake the White House in 2004. Following is an edited transcript of Gore's remarks and Governor Dean's remarks:

"...Howard Dean really is the only candidate who has been able to inspire at the grassroots level all over this country the kind of passion and enthusiasm for democracy and change and transformation of America that we need in this country. We need to remake the Democratic Party; we need to remake America; we need to take it back on behalf of the people of this country. So I'm very proud and honored to endorse Howard Dean to be the next president of the United States of America," Gore began.

"Democracy is a team sport. And I want to do everything I can to convince the -- anybody that is interested in my judgment about who, among these candidates has the best chance to win and the best chance to lead our country in the right direction. I want to do everything I can to convince you to get behind Howard Dean and let's make this a successful campaign as a group. It is about all of us and all of us need to get behind the strongest candidate. Now I respect the prerogative of the voters and the caucuses and the primaries. I'm just one person, but I'm offering my judgment and I'm also going to say one other thing here," Gore continued.

"Years ago, former president Ronald Reagan said in the Republican Party that there ought to be an 11th commandment, speak no ill of another Republican. We're Democrats and we may not find that kind of commandment as accessible, but to the extent that we can recognize the stakes in America today, I would urge all of the other candidates and campaigns to keep their eyes on the prize. Here we are in Harlem. We need to keep our eyes on the prize. This nation cannot afford to have four more years of a Bush-Cheney administration. We can't afford to be divided among ourselves to the point that we lose sight of how important it is for America. What is going on in this Bush White House today is bad for our country. And it's slowly beginning to sink into more and more people out there. And we don't have the luxury of fighting among ourselves to the point where we seriously damage our ability to win on behalf of the American people this time around," Gore said.

"Now, one other thing, I've spent a long time thinking about national security and national defense. And I've heard a lot of folks who, in my opinion, made a judgment about the Iraq war that was just plain wrong, saying that Howard Dean's decision to oppose the Iraq war calls his judgment on foreign policy into question. Excuse me. He was the only major candidate who made the correct judgment about the Iraq war. And he had the insight and the courage to say and do the right thing. And that's important," Gore said.

"Because those judgments, that basic common sense is what you want in a president. Our country has been weakened in our ability to fight the war against terror because of the catastrophic mistake that the Bush administration made in taking us into war in Iraq. It was Osama bin Laden that attacked us, not Saddam Hussein. Saddam Hussein is a bad guy and he's better off not in power, we're all better off, but it was a mistake to get us into a quagmire over there, so don't tell me that because Howard Dean was the only major candidate who was right about that war, that that somehow calls his judgment into question on foreign policy, so whether it is inspiring enthusiasm at the grassroots and promising to remake the Democratic Party as a force for justice and progress and good in America, whether it is a domestic agenda that gets our nation back on track or whether it is protecting us against terrorists and strengthening our nation in the world, I have come to the conclusion that in a field of great candidates, one candidate clearly now stands out, and so I'm asking all of you to join in this grassroots movement to elect Howard Dean President of the United States," Gore said.

Governor Dean thanked Gore for his endorsement:

"Mr. Vice President, I want to thank you for your generous and thoughtful words.... I thank Al Gore for his extraordinary leadership in this party in the last couple of years. I told him, I say what I think, for better or worse, I told him the two best speeches in this campaign were given by somebody who is not running for president and that was his March and September speech about the war and about foreign policy.

"We have needed a strong, steady hand in this party, and I appreciate Al's willingness to stand up and be one. This campaign is not about Howard Dean going to the White House. This campaign is about us going to the White House, all of us, and I look forward to the day on January 20th, 2005, when we do what Andrew Jackson, another great Tennessean did, we will open the doors to the White House and let the American people back in," Governor Dean concluded.

Gore, a former U.S. senator from Tennessee and two-term vice president under President Clinton, was the Democratic nominee for president and won the popular vote in 2000.

Following this morning's breakfast, the two men will travel to Cedar Rapids, Iowa, for a rally before Dean heads to Durham, New Hampshire, for tonight's candidates' debate.



Lieberman made a little personal divergence of his own when he agreed to run with Gore in the election.

Lieberman has lost much credibility to me, he has no more influence on my brain than Al Sharpton these days.

Now, Dean. He's too far left. He's also a person who comes across as having a low moral character as he's prone to personally attacking his 'foes' versus telling us what he thinks and how he'd go about fixing it. He's not appealing to people's intelligence with his current tack... his tactics are much baser than that. He reminds me of the Martin Sheen character in the "Dead Zone".

I don't like his politics. If I vote Democrat this time it won't be for him. Frankly, I haven't seen anyone yet who I'd prefer over Bush for another term.



They need someone better looking. Why don't you run Toose?



Django's Avatar
BANNED
I'm reposting this from anothe thread I posted it in:

Here's an interesting news item I just uncovered:

Liberal billionaire George Soros, who has compared President Bush to the Nazis and said that defeating him is "the central focus" of his life, will now spend $25 million in special interest money attacking him!
This is what George Soros has to say about the Bush administration:

America, under Bush, is a danger to the world,” Soros said. Then he smiled: “And I’m willing to put my money where my mouth is.”

Soros believes a “supremacist ideology” guides this White House. He hears echoes in its rhetoric of his childhood in occupied Hungary. “When I hear Bush say, ‘You’re either with us or against us,’ it reminds me of the Germans.” It conjures up memories, he said, of Nazi slogans on the walls, Der Feind Hort mit (“The enemy is listening”): “My experiences under Nazi and Soviet rule have sensitized me,” he said in a soft Hungarian accent.

Soros’s contributions are filling a gap in Democratic Party finances that opened after the restrictions in the 2002 McCain-Feingold law took effect. In the past, political parties paid a large share of television and get-out-the-vote costs with unregulated “soft money” contributions from corporations, unions and rich individuals. The parties are now barred from accepting such money. But non-party groups in both camps are stepping in, accepting soft money and taking over voter mobilization.

“It’s incredibly ironic that George Soros is trying to create a more open society by using an unregulated, under-the-radar-screen, shadowy, soft-money group to do it,” Republican National Committee spokeswoman Christine Iverson said. “George Soros has purchased the Democratic Party.”

In past election cycles, Soros contributed relatively modest sums. In 2000, his aide said, he gave $122,000, mostly to Democratic causes and candidates. But recently, Soros has grown alarmed at the influence of neoconservatives, whom he calls “a bunch of extremists guided by a crude form of social Darwinism.”

Neoconservatives, Soros said, are exploiting the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, to promote a preexisting agenda of preemptive war and world dominion. “Bush feels that on September 11th he was anointed by God,” Soros said. “He’s leading the U.S. and the world toward a vicious circle of escalating violence.”
Here is a biographical note of billionaire George Soros:

George Soros was born in Budapest, Hungary on August 12, 1930. He survived the Nazi occupation of Budapest and left communist Hungary in 1947 for England, where he graduated from the London School of Economics (LSE). While a student at LSE, Soros became familiar with the work of the philosopher Karl Popper, who had a profound influence on his thinking and later on his professional and philanthropic activities.

The financier. In 1956, Soros moved to the United States, where he began to accumulate a large fortune through an international investment fund he founded and managed. Today he is chairman of Soros Fund Management LLC.

The philanthropist. Soros has been active as a philanthropist since 1979, when he began providing funds to help black students attend the University of Cape Town in apartheid South Africa. Today he is chairman of the Open Society Institute (OSI) and the founder of a network of philanthropic organizations that are active in more than 50 countries. Based primarily in Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union—but also in Africa, Latin America, Asia, and the United States—these foundations are dedicated to building and maintaining the infrastructure and institutions of an open society. They work closely with OSI to develop and implement a range of programs focusing on civil society, education, media, public health, and human rights as well as social, legal, and economic reform. In recent years, OSI and the Soros foundations network have spent more than $400 million annually to support projects in these and other focus areas. In 1992, Soros founded Central European University, with its primary campus in Budapest.

The philosopher. Soros is the author of eight books, including the forthcoming The Bubble of America Supremacy (PublicAffairs, January 2004). His other books include George Soros on Globalization (2002); The Alchemy of Finance (1987); Opening the Soviet System (1990); Underwriting Democracy (1991); Soros on Soros: Staying Ahead of the Curve (1995); The Crisis of Global Capitalism: Open Society Endangered (1998); and Open Society: Reforming Global Capitalism (2000). His articles and essays on politics, society, and economics regularly appear in major newspapers and magazines around the world.
Here is another news article about George Soros' personal mission to put an end to the Bush administration:

Billionaire Bankrolls Bush Bashers
NEW YORK, Nov. 11, 2003

(CBS) Billionaire George Soros has pledged $15.5 million to efforts to unseat President Bush in an election that he sees as a "life and death" struggle to defeat the administration's "supremacist ideology," a newspaper reports.

"America, under Bush, is a danger to the world," the 74-year-old Soros tells The Washington Post. "And I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is."

Calling the 2004 race "the central focus of my life" and comparing the president's ideology to what he witnessed in Nazi occupied Hungary, Soros is fueling attacks on the president that campaign finance reform might have prevented, The Post reports.

Last year's soft-money ban is starving the national parties of the cash they once used to finance advertising and door-to-door campaigns. Soros is filling the gap by donating to independent groups bent on defeating the president, like MoveOn.org, to which he and a partner pledged up to $5 million this week.

He has also raised money directly for former Vermont governor and Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean, and supports Democratic runners Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, retired Gen. Wesley Clark and Rep. Richard Gephardt of Missouri.

Republicans see irony in Soros, who has spent millions promoting open societies abroad, is helping Democratic adherents skirt campaign finance laws.

"George Soros has purchased the Democratic Party," Republican National Committee spokeswoman Christine Iverson told The Post.

Campaign finance advocates have also expressed concerns over Soros' spending, The Post reports.

Soros says his motivation is deeply personal, the result of deep anxieties over the nation's direction that sometimes wake him at 3 in the morning. The Post quotes the billionaire comparing the president's phrase "You're either with us or against us" in the war on terrorism, to Nazi slogans he saw in his childhood Hungary, like "The enemy is listening."

Soros also believes Mr. Bush feels "anointed by God."

In his efforts, Soros has been allied with former Clinton chief of staff John Podestra and liberal heavyweights. Soros' willingness to part with massive sums has spurred other wealthy people to ante up as well — the day after Soros offered $10 million to Americans Coming Together, five friends donated an additional $13.5 million to the group.

This is not the first year Soros has been generous with campaign funds. According to a database run by the Federal Election Commission, between 2000 and 2002 Soros gave $153,000 in soft money to the Democratic National Committee in three massive installments.

Since 1998, he donated $125,000 directly to candidates and committees. Except for one $1,000 check to Republican Arizona Sen. John McCain, it all went to Democratic candidates or PACs that favor Democrats.

©MMIII, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.



Django's Avatar
BANNED
Originally Posted by Sir Toose
Now, Dean. He's too far left. He's also a person who comes across as having a low moral character as he's prone to personally attacking his 'foes' versus telling us what he thinks and how he'd go about fixing it. He's not appealing to people's intelligence with his current tack... his tactics are much baser than that. He reminds me of the Martin Sheen character in the "Dead Zone".

I don't like his politics. If I vote Democrat this time it won't be for him. Frankly, I haven't seen anyone yet who I'd prefer over Bush for another term.
About Dean's position... I'm given to believe that he represents a curious combination of left and right wing ideologies. He also happens to be a wealthy doctor enjoying the support of self-made billionaires, so I hardly think his politics represents strictly left-wing politics.



Django's Avatar
BANNED
Here is another interesting article quoting George Soros's opinions about George W. Bush:

Soros on Bush

George Soros, Wall Street billionaire turned uber-philanthropist, penned this op-ed for the Korea Herald concerning the Iraq crisis. I link it here because I like it when people are able to criticize even after looking at both sides of an argument.

Iraq is the first instance when the Bush doctrine is being applied and it is provoking an allergic reaction. The Bush doctrine is built on two pillars: (1) The United States will do everything in its power to maintain its unquestioned military supremacy; and (2) the United States arrogates the right to preemptive action.

These pillars support two classes of sovereignty: American sovereignty, which takes precedence over international treaties and obligations, and the sovereignty of all other states. This is reminiscent of George Orwell's Animal Farm: All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others. To be sure, the Bush doctrine is not stated starkly; it is buried in Orwellian doublespeak. The doublespeak is needed because the doctrine contradicts American values
.
The doublespeak that he is talking about is fairly evident in the current environment, especially our new security policy (mentioned and linked in this missive). Now references to 1984 are well and good, but then we get to the credibility part.

Rapid victory in Iraq with little loss of life could bring about a dramatic change in the overall situation. Oil prices could fall, stock markets could celebrate, consumers could resume spending, and business could step up capital expenditures. America would end its dependency on Saudi oil, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict could become more tractable, and negotiations could start with North Korea without loss of face. That is what Bush counts on.
Now these are all certainly possibilities, but Soros' argument that even is these things were to come about, it would be bad in the long run because good results would come from bad actions. Thus reinforcing bad behaviour.

To draw a quick analogy. Say you feel bad. So you shoot some heroin. And you feel better. You've just learned that when you feel bad, shooting heroin makes you feel better. Which is to say, it is a sound strategy in the short run, but in the long run will only lead to disaster, as the gain (of pre-emptive war) is not worth the cost (of war).

I found this article intriguing because it does allow that a best case scenario in Iraq can lead to gains. Unfortunately, the Bush administration (and, I'm sorry to say, a number of my countrymen) will use this high to go after Iran. And then whoever is next. And each step of the way, each movement toward the goal of peace and happiness, will be marked like needle-tracts up the arm of the American People.



I am having a nervous breakdance
Isn't this thread called "Howard Dean"?
__________________
The novelist does not long to see the lion eat grass. He realizes that one and the same God created the wolf and the lamb, then smiled, "seeing that his work was good".

--------

They had temporarily escaped the factories, the warehouses, the slaughterhouses, the car washes - they'd be back in captivity the next day but
now they were out - they were wild with freedom. They weren't thinking about the slavery of poverty. Or the slavery of welfare and food stamps. The rest of us would be all right until the poor learned how to make atom bombs in their basements.



Lets put a smile on that block


I thought this thread was about Howerd Stern at first...i didnt read it properly. How dissapointing
__________________
Pumpkins scream in the DEAD of night!



Django's Avatar
BANNED
Originally Posted by Piddzilla
Isn't this thread called "Howard Dean"?
Well, it's related... George Soros is a major Dean contributor and lends credibility to his camp.



Originally Posted by Django
About Dean's position... I'm given to believe that he represents a curious combination of left and right wing ideologies. He also happens to be a wealthy doctor enjoying the support of self-made billionaires, so I hardly think his politics represents strictly left-wing politics.
Why would having the support of a billionaire shoot down the notion that he is highly left-wing?


Originally Posted by Django
Well, it's related... George Soros is a major Dean contributor and lends credibility to his camp.
George Soros is not a credible individual; he is a hypocrite. As was touched upon in some of the material you posted earlier, he fought vehemently for campaign finance reform; to close up the soft money loophole, in other words. Once done, he proceeded to find another loophole, and used it to donate millions of dollars to the Democratic party.

It should come as no surprise, then, that he likes Howard Dean, as Dean has quite the reputation himself when it comes to contradiction.



Dean is a lefty. If he were a Republican and was a far to the right as he is to the left, he would be savaged on daily basis by all the major media outlets.
__________________
"Let the idiots have their pan and scan." John Carpenter



I am having a nervous breakdance
Originally Posted by MacReady
Dean is a lefty. If he were a Republican and was a far to the right as he is to the left, he would be savaged on daily basis by all the major media outlets.
That is because that would make him a nazi.



Django's Avatar
BANNED
If Dean was so far to the left that he would be the leftist equivalent of a Nazi, he would be a hard-core communist. Is that what he is? A member of the communist party?

EDIT: Incidentally, compare the facts that one of Howard Dean's major sponsors is George Soros, vs. the fact that one of George W. Bush's major contributors, in the recent past, has been Enron Corp. Says a lot, don't you think?



I am having a nervous breakdance
Originally Posted by Django
If Dean was so far to the left that he would be the leftist equivalent of a Nazi, he would be a hard-core communist. Is that what he is? A member of the communist party?
The entire american political spectrum is considerably right wing universally speaking. So you don't have to be a communist to have an extreme right wing equivalent within that american political spectrum.

Actually, my comment was made as a joke. I don't know **** about Dean or the american nazi scene.



Django's Avatar
BANNED
Originally Posted by Piddzilla
The entire american political spectrum is considerably right wing universally speaking. So you don't have to be a communist to have an extreme right wing equivalent within that american political spectrum.

Actually, my comment was made as a joke. I don't know **** about Dean or the american nazi scene.
Oh, a joke! In that case... ha, ha, ha!



Originally Posted by Django
If Dean was so far to the left that he would be the leftist equivalent of a Nazi, he would be a hard-core communist. Is that what he is? A member of the communist party?

EDIT: Incidentally, compare the facts that one of Howard Dean's major sponsors is George Soros, vs. the fact that one of George W. Bush's major contributors, in the recent past, has been Enron Corp. Says a lot, don't you think?
Upon further inpsection of my post, I made a bit of a gaffe! Dean is no way a hard-core communist. I realize I had typed a response in haste and not though it through!



Originally Posted by Django
EDIT: Incidentally, compare the facts that one of Howard Dean's major sponsors is George Soros, vs. the fact that one of George W. Bush's major contributors, in the recent past, has been Enron Corp. Says a lot, don't you think?
Of course not. They are one of thousands of donors, and despite giving more to Republicans, they gave nearly $2 million to Democrats. If it says a lot about one side, it says plenty about the other, too. In reality, it says very little about either. Every major modern campaign will inevitably take money from shady people without knowing it.

I'm glad you brought this up, though, because the Enron debacle was caused in part because employees did not have enough control over their 401(k) plans. By my memory, Republicans have been trying to change that for quite awhile by giving employees the option to invest such money where they see fit. They've been repeatedly shot down by the Democratic opposition.

This is ignoring the already proven fact that Soros is a known hypocrite, and therefore does not necessarily reflect well on Dean at all. I really don't think you've done your homework properly on either of them. Both are quite far to the left, and seem to share the trait of self-contradiction.



Django's Avatar
BANNED
Originally Posted by Yoda
Of course not. They are one of thousands of donors, and despite giving more to Republicans, they gave nearly $2 million to Democrats. If it says a lot about one side, it says plenty about the other, too. In reality, it says very little about either. Every major modern campaign will inevitably take money from shady people without knowing it.
Here are some interesting facts about Enron:

The Fall of a Giant: Enron’s Campaign Contributions and Lobbying

Caught in a swarm of controversy over questionable business deals and faulty financial statements that have caused its stock price to plummet, energy giant Enron announced this week that the company could be sold to rival Dynegy, signaling the demise of one of the country’s biggest political contributors–and one of the most generous donors to President Bush.

The announcement comes almost a year to the day after an election in which Enron contributed more than $2.4 million in individual, PAC, and soft money contributions to federal candidates and parties, ranking it among the top 50 organizational donors in the 1999-2000 election cycle. The company’s contribution total for the 2000 elections more than doubled its political donations in each of the two previous election cycles.

Enron has already contributed nearly $173,000 to candidates and parties so far this year, almost 90 percent to Republicans. Since the 1989-90 election cycle, Enron has made nearly $5.8 million in campaign contributions, 73 percent to Republicans.

Earlier this year, Enron was one of the country’s 10 largest companies and the leading energy broker in the United States. But in recent weeks the Houston-based energy trading company has come under fire for entering into business partnerships that presented possible conflicts of interest for several Enron executives. The Securities and Exchange Commission has opened a formal investigation into those partnerships.

The federal government’s involvement could create a quandary for President Bush, who raised nearly $114,000 in PAC and individual contributions from Enron in 1999-2000, making the company one of his biggest donors. Enron also donated $100,000 to the Bush/Cheney inaugural gala in January, a contribution that was matched by Enron’s chairman and chief executive, Kenneth Lay, and his wife. The Lays have contributed a total of almost $883,000 to candidates and parties since 1989, of which 90 percent went to Republicans. They are by far the largest political contributors among Enron employees.

Lay is a longtime friend of the president and was one of Bush’s top contributors during the presidential election and two gubernatorial campaigns in Texas. Lay, listed by the Bush/Cheney campaign as a Pioneer who raised at least $100,000 for the election, reportedly has been one of the administration’s closest advisors on energy policy since Bush took office.

Enron hopes to draw on close relationships with a number of elected officials for help during its current crisis. The company spent $2.1 million lobbying Congress and the White House in 2000, an increase over the $1.9 million it spent on lobbying in 1999. Enron has contributed to the campaign accounts of 71 current senators and 188 current members (43 percent) of the House.

Not surprisingly, the top recipients of Enron’s contributions among current members of Congress are all from Texas. Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R) and Phil Gramm (R) lead the list of Senate recipients since 1989. The seven biggest House beneficiaries of Enron’s giving since 1989 are also from Texas. They are led by Democratic Rep. Ken Bentsen.



Why is it a big surprise that big business gives more to the republican party than they do to the dems? The republican agenda closely supports big business.

What should be surprising is that any money was given to the dems at all.... especially by individual contributors.