|
Post by GSC Admin on May 16, 2003 21:23:24 GMT -5
www.deanforamerica.com/![](http://www.politics1.com/pix1/howard-dean.jpg) Governor Howard Dean, M.D. -- a Yale-educated physician -- did not seek re-election in 2002 to a seventh consecutive, two-year term as Vermont Governor. Instead, Dean became the first Democrat to formally jump into the P2004 race and spent much of 2002 visiting 28 states (including more than 20 NH visits, a dozen Iowa trips, and multiple FL, NY and CA stops). Dean likes to tell how he came into office as Governor with the state in the red and left office with it in the black -- and that he was able to do that while also creating the innovative state program that now guarantees health care coverage for all children under age 18. He also adopted campaign finance reform legislation and increased educational funding for poorer communities. Still -- as the obscure Governor of a rather tiny state -- Dean stayed well-below the national political radar for most of his career (which also included 10 years of practicing medicine, two terms in the State House, three terms as Lieutenant Governor and a term as the National Governors Association chairman). His brief flirtation with a 2000 White House bid went largely unnoticed -- and those that noticed opined that Dean was likely trying for a shot at the VP spot. Dean's obscurity ended instantly, however, when he signed the controversial Civil Unions bill into law in April 2000 -- a law that granted full legal recognition and rights to same-sex couples in the state. From that point forward, Religious Right activists targeted Dean for defeat in 2000 as a supporter of "gay marriages." Dean, however, handily won re-election by a 13-point margin. Not only has Dean refused to back down from his support for civil unions, he stated that his political career would have been "meaningless" had he had not been willing to risk everything to stand up for a significant civil rights law he supported. In November 2001, Dean established a federal leadership PAC (Fund for a Healthy America) -- paving the way for him to begin exploring a 2004 Presidential run. A short time later, he launched an official campaign committee. Dean is making health care reform and opposition to the Iraq war his top issues. Dean -- initially viewed as a long-shot to capture the nomination -- surprised many by quickly building a solid campaign organization in Iowa, New Hampshire and other early contest states. On the stump, his blunt and feisty style sets him apart from the other Dems -- as he is often the only one willing to criticize both the President and the others Dems in the race. He and Congressman Kucinich are clearly the most strident and consistent anti-war candidates in the race -- but Dean is viewed as a much more serious contender. Dean reported raising $2.6 million as of the close of the March 31, 2003 federal reporting period -- with $2 million in cash-on-hand -- and he boasted that his insurgent campaign signed up more than 10,000 volunteers in the same period.
|
|
|
Post by Gorezilla on Jun 21, 2003 14:45:29 GMT -5
Dean sucks!! ![:-*](http://www.z06vette.com/forums/images/smilies/icon_puke.gif) I feel better already. ![:)](http://fool.exler.ru/sm/jok.gif) Dennis
|
|
|
Post by EnemyCombatant on Jun 22, 2003 13:42:09 GMT -5
Word on the street is that Dean is in cahoots with moveon.org. Please give me feedback on this rumor. This may explain why they won't let Gore on the ballot. I don't know how many emails we generated through our email campaign. But their mailbox filled up on Friday. Keep sending those emails. Even if they don't add Gore as a candidate, I think we can petition them for a fantasy primary. We should also do a write-in campaign. I will have more information on that soon. story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030619/ap_on_hi_te/virtual_primary_2
|
|
|
Post by GSC Admin on Jun 22, 2003 16:25:46 GMT -5
I am watching the Presidential forum, and Dean was touting stats about "His State" when governor, and was asked if his state was now in debt and smartley replied "No I am a governor and balancing bugets is what I do", does that remark sound familar? Yep it is the same smart ass reply Bush did in the 2000 debates and you see his balancing of the budget. ![>:(](http://progress.democraticunderground.com/images/anim_pissed.gif)
|
|
blaze
GSC Newbie
Posts: 10
|
Post by blaze on Jun 22, 2003 20:38:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Gorezilla on Jun 22, 2003 22:52:16 GMT -5
His kid was engaged in an alcohol burglary. Figures. Dennis
|
|
|
Post by GSC Admin on Jun 23, 2003 15:40:57 GMT -5
Published June 23, 2003 DEAN23
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- On the eve of the official announcement of his presidential candidacy, Howard Dean, the former governor of Vermont, came under intense questioning Sunday by Tim Russert on "Meet the Press."
Dean, who prides himself on his straightforwardness, equivocated on several issues. He sidestepped answering whether he would support the prescription drug plan backed by the Bush administration and some Democrats.
Asked whether he would support a constitutional amendment to balance the budget, he said, "I go back and forth on that." Asked whether a same-sex couple that got married in Canada could be considered legally married in the United States, he said, "I can't answer that question because it's a legal question."
Under questioning from Russert, he said he did not know how many U.S. military personnel are on active duty around the world, guessing there were between 1 million and 2 million. According to the Pentagon's Web site, there were 1.4 million as of March.
Dean estimated there were 135,000 U.S. troops in Iraq and said there should be more. The actual number is 146,000. Russert told him that there were 9,000 on duty in Afghanistan. Dean said he would increase that to "at least between 30 and 40,000 additional troops." Dean said that as his campaign advanced, he would hire advisers who would inform him on such military matters.
"For me to have to know right now to participate in the Democratic Party primary how many troops are actively on duty in the United States military, when that is actually a number that is composed both of people on duty today and people who are National Guards people who are on duty today, is silly," he said.
Russert said: "There's concern about your awareness and positions on national security. You must acknowledge that."
"Sure there are," Dean replied, "because just like President Reagan, President Clinton and President Bush . . . I do not have extensive experience with national security."
|
|
nancy
GSC Junior Memeber
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png)
Posts: 60
|
Post by nancy on Jul 3, 2003 13:30:34 GMT -5
Dean' s lies are startingto come out! Besides the fact he is a doctor and won't do jack for health care! BTW how did he get so much money already? Are the white coats supporting him already?
|
|
|
Post by EnemyCombatant on Jul 3, 2003 15:03:02 GMT -5
My theory is that Dean came out against the war to get the liberal base. How else could he get noticed. However, once liberals find out he is conservative he will loose that liberal base. I am not claiming that Dean has lied about his stance on the war. I applaud that courage. However, that will not win him the whitehouse. If he were a little more to the left, then he might stand a chance. But he has something else against him. No one will want to put the world into the hands of a governor from Vermont. Especially considering the mess the world is in today. No one will be able to imagine him as President. If we had a sound economy and weren't on the verge of WWIII, maybe.
So we are chasing our tails. You know what I mean by that. Gore is the only qualified man to take the reigns.
Wake up!
|
|
|
Post by EnemyCombatant on Jul 3, 2003 15:03:55 GMT -5
www.realclearpolitics.com/commentary.html#7_2_03_0824HELPING THE DEMS COMMIT SUICIDE: If Republicans want to make sure President Bush is reelected next year the best thing they can do is to get online and contribute $20 - to Howard Dean's campaign. You think I'm joking? If the economy improves over the coming year - and the indications are that it's going to - Dean will be lucky to win Vermont in 2004. And after his recent appearance on Meet the Press, you'd have to consider George W. Bush to be the favorite in any debate.
|
|
|
Post by TheParaclete on Jul 10, 2003 20:37:41 GMT -5
Tonight I am putting Howard Dean to bed in a final way for me. Why? Because he is nothing but a point to argue over by many and I am sick of it! The big issue as of late is whether Karl Rove wants Dean to run or is afraid of him. I say he is neither. Rove has operatives watching this and just about every forum favoring Democrats just to find points of disunity. Then he plays upon them. While we all sit and scream about Dean then it takes the heat off of BU$H. Make no mistake Rove wants HIS man in for another 4 years, and if he can use Dean as a smokescreen then he will do so. All I have heard about Dean is "bad" news. Has anyone said anything "good" about this man at all? I don't believe there is any good to him or I would have heard something by now. All I do know is his son has commited crimes, and if you think I am am hard on Paul Dean right now, just think of the field day that Rushy-Poo, Fannity, and the Savage Cabbage will have all next year! For this fact alone I consider Dean damaged goods. Don't blame me, BLAME PAUL DEAN! He did to his father the same as Dukakis's wife did to him with personal problems. HE BECAME AN ANCHOR! He destroyed any saving graces his father did have for me, and I am not going to vote for a candidate that has family control problems. Conservative pundits will make political "hay" out of the issue. Howard Dean just stepped on a landmine in his own son. Am I saying we should give America an honest, clean, family man like Al Gore? YES! ;D Then all I hear is how even though Dean claims to be anti-war, he still wants to keep an inflated defense budget. How can you do both? That is duplicity in action! "A house divided against itself shall not stand". And some strange individuals want me to vote for this man? Let me know what drugs you are taking to have such "delusions of grandeur" about Howard Dean because I want some too! I would love to visit Gumby & Pokey!(I know a few people will take personal offense to this but I cannot help myself because it is so absurd).[/color] Finally I hear that Dean, like Nader is funded by who? Conservative Republicans. When the enemy funds YOUR candidate then there is definitely something wrong here. Then we all know why the Christian Right won't vote for him. I am not predjudiced by any count, but I am religious to the point of the Word. This man has way too many problems, and he is sitting on $money$ with a big war chest, while he claims to support campaign finance reform? Sure he does. I will not allow Karl Rove to continue to use me like a tool! To end this I would just like to say that I will no longer have conversations about Howard Dean. He is a point of contention and just ammo for Karl Rove to use. Bringing up Dean alone causes division among Gore supporters & Democrats alike, and Rove LOVES that to happen. I have BIGGER fish to fry namely GW BU$H! He is the one to focus on. So if I am working on a post and someone wants to talk about Howard Dean, I will totally ignore you. Then maybe you will just go away! I know some have passions against this man because they see a snake in our midst and they want to kill it, and personally I do not like him either. To me though BU$H is the bigger problem. If we want to bash someone then pick on the bigger enemy! The greater evil is who we NEED to focus on. Others may work on Howard Dean and I laude your efforts, but not me. ;D The other main focus is positive encouragement for OUR man. Albert Gore! He said he WILL accept the draft, and that is all I need to hear! Let's help Al take back America! Now is the time![/color][/size]
|
|
|
Post by EnemyCombatant on Jul 10, 2003 20:48:41 GMT -5
The last point was very important. It's an oxymoron. Dean is not for lowering the defence budget. I guess he wants to support the Carlyle group. Here is an article outlining Dean's stance's on the issues. Feel free to refute or support it. www.counterpunch.com/colby02222003.htmlIMHO, Dean is a life saver for our cause. If he weren't in the mix, perhaps Kerry would appear a lot stronger than he really is. That would hurt the chances of Gore re-entering. Thanks Howard.
|
|
|
Post by GSC Admin on Jul 11, 2003 1:58:44 GMT -5
It's time to kick Dean out of this race, dont you all think? ![](http://www.democraticunderground.com/duforum/Images/donkey.gif)
|
|
|
Post by TheParaclete on Jul 17, 2003 10:23:35 GMT -5
I said I wouldn't talk about the man, but here I go doing it again(& again & again...)! I need to purge the issue in my own mind so to speak... Are there ANY Dean Supporters out there with so much as one positive word about this man at all? Is Gary Trudeau right here?(I read Doonesbury) Are you all so wet behind the ears that you don't even know how to campaign for the man? Come On! I have only seen Rove "moles" use Dean to cause disunity and never-ending fights & debates. There has to be AT LEAST ONE positive Dean supporter that has enough brains to enlighten us on this man! Somebody? ANYBODY! Your man is being used and misrepresented by agents of Karl Rove, and somebody on the Dean team has to correct this problem. We want positive info on your man! How can we judge when all we have is molesh*t? Am I totally against this man? Not really. Not wanting to pick for Mr. Gore, but I feel Howard Dean would make a "good" Homeland Security Chief. Throw out Bumblebee Ridge and put in Dr. Dean. At least Dean has enough common sense to know putting plastic on your windows will not save you from a biological or chemical attack! Dr. Dean also knows radiation kills even if the bomb explodes in the atmosphere. I say put Dean in the roughest and newest job of the Gore cabinet! Then we will see how "good" he is at handling a whole nation's security on a daily basis! National Security Adviser would be another good post for him. He can't do any worse than Rice, and he would probably beef up security around the WOPR!(Remember War Games?) Those are good "tests" to me. I am idealistic! I want Mr. Gore to take the nomination and gather ALL of the Democratic hopefuls together then everyone collectively KICK BU$H'S ASS! Rove would be on his knees begging for mercy instead of laughing at us as he does right now! Albert Gore still holds 42% of the Democratic base! United with all the rest of the hopefuls we would be INVINCIBLE! I'm for unity! E PLURBUS UNUM! Of many ONE! ALBERT GORE WILL RESTORE UNITY! ![;)](http://fool.exler.ru/sm/wink.gif)
|
|
|
Post by EnemyCombatant on Jul 17, 2003 15:49:22 GMT -5
I think Dean did a great service to our country by being one of the few to speak out aganst the Bush administration early on. But that is the only thing I can support Dean on. I don't like his stance on the issues. However, I would vote for him if he were the nominee. The only Dem candidate I would not vote for is Kerry. I have explained this in the Kerry thread. Rove does want Dean because he thinks he is easy to demonize and doesn't stand a snowball's chance. I don't think Dean would make a good homeland security chief either. I can't envision him in the cabinet at all. He has successfully knocked Kerry out of the blocks. If he keeps up this momentum he could very well take the nomination. I would rather he gets it over Kerry. www.nypost.com/gossip/pagesix_u.htm
|
|