|
Post by Dolphins4Gore on Dec 2, 2003 15:34:47 GMT -5
I agree with the others Yes4Gore. You are giving up way too easily! Al Gore will not run unless the people choose him as their candidate. Someone who admires Al Gore as much as you do shouldn't be passing him off like that! What in the world more could Al Gore have done for his country!? He's done and is still doing all he can. If we want him to be our President now, we the people will have to offer him the job! WE OWE HIM THAT!!! And of course, WE will be the ones to reap the benefits of a Gore administration in the end!
|
|
|
Post by yes4gore on Dec 2, 2003 17:15:57 GMT -5
Well, if GoreSupporterNJ tells me I can't express doubts here, I suppose I *could* go to a Dean forum. And I imagine I could be banned from this forum with the click of a mouse - GoreSupporterNJ probably could authorize that. I should realize political realities on the small scale, too - no reason why this forum should be morally superior to others. But the problem doesn't go away. Al Gore is NOT responding to us; his office continually says he will not run; and he's doing other things like the non-Liberal news channel and waterless urinal. I've heard it said that Gore wants to be a statesman for the party; his actions to date fit this model much more closely than that of a stealth campaign. I don't know how the waterless urinal fits in (environmentally friendly, I suppose) with the statesman part; I could just see Bush pull one out and set it atop his podium. I would donate $100 that I cannot afford if Al would give me a clear statement or even an unambiguous signal that he intends to run. There must be scads of people across the country who would drop support for any other candidate in favor of Al - people have told me, well, I'm for X, but if Gore was in, I'd drop X in a heartbeat. You're not getting the point if you think that I'm dallying with Gore. I supported Al all through the long dark days, from that humiliating motorcade of one cop car after the Inauguration, right up until now. But I don't think there's much chance of a miracle run from early August to election day. I think he has to start now. Instead of dumping on me, how about organizing some rallies at Gore's speaking engagements and getting some air time? All I heard at the liberties speech were some shouted muffled expletives way in the back, far from microphones, that the announcer later told me was "Run, Al, Run", or words to that effect. Why can't we get in front of the cameras, grab some reporters, and get known? Why aren't we even mentioned except in some obscure newspaper as a kind of lunatic fringe? Hell, there's some guy with a Draft Hillary site, and he made the national cable shows. Why is it that in all of Ann Arbor (pop. 100,000) and Detroit (pop. 1,000,000) there aren't enough people for one Gore meetup? Yumpin yiminy - the lower limit is 5, and we can't get 5 people out of 1,100,000? The Dean meetups? That's plural - there are too many for just one location: 85+ people in Ann Arbor alone. So all I'm saying there is a LOT going on with the Dean people - the organization is impressive, no matter who you want to be President. You really do need to cruise their forum, chat, message board, home pages - just as much as you need to cruise BushCheney2004. The Repub. site is very heavy-duty, too. Am I loyal to Al Gore? Yes, I am. I've harangued friends, family and co-workers, e-mailed, distributed flyers, talked to people I'd never met. Will I do anything necessary to get that simpering chimp out of the White House, including working for not-Gore if it comes to that? You bet. Al, we need you NOW.
|
|
|
Post by GoreSupporterNJ on Dec 2, 2003 17:33:06 GMT -5
Well, if GoreSupporterNJ tells me I can't express doubts here, I suppose I *could* go to a Dean forum. And I imagine I could be banned from this forum with the click of a mouse - GoreSupporterNJ probably could authorize that. I should realize political realities on the small scale, too - no reason why this forum should be morally superior to others. But the problem doesn't go away. Al Gore is NOT responding to us; his office continually says he will not run; and he's doing other things like the non-Liberal news channel and waterless urinal. I've heard it said that Gore wants to be a statesman for the party; his actions to date fit this model much more closely than that of a stealth campaign. I don't know how the waterless urinal fits in (environmentally friendly, I suppose) with the statesman part; I could just see Bush pull one out and set it atop his podium. I would donate $100 that I cannot afford if Al would give me a clear statement or even an unambiguous signal that he intends to run. There must be scads of people across the country who would drop support for any other candidate in favor of Al - people have told me, well, I'm for X, but if Gore was in, I'd drop X in a heartbeat. You're not getting the point if you think that I'm dallying with Gore. I supported Al all through the long dark days, from that humiliating motorcade of one cop car after the Inauguration, right up until now. But I don't think there's much chance of a miracle run from early August to election day. I think he has to start now. Instead of dumping on me, how about organizing some rallies at Gore's speaking engagements and getting some air time? All I heard at the liberties speech were some shouted muffled expletives way in the back, far from microphones, that the announcer later told me was "Run, Al, Run", or words to that effect. Why can't we get in front of the cameras, grab some reporters, and get known? Why aren't we even mentioned except in some obscure newspaper as a kind of lunatic fringe? Hell, there's some guy with a Draft Hillary site, and he made the national cable shows. Why is it that in all of Ann Arbor (pop. 100,000) and Detroit (pop. 1,000,000) there aren't enough people for one Gore meetup? Yumpin yiminy - the lower limit is 5, and we can't get 5 people out of 1,100,000? The Dean meetups? That's plural - there are too many for just one location: 85+ people in Ann Arbor alone. So all I'm saying there is a LOT going on with the Dean people - the organization is impressive, no matter who you want to be President. You really do need to cruise their forum, chat, message board, home pages - just as much as you need to cruise BushCheney2004. The Repub. site is very heavy-duty, too. Am I loyal to Al Gore? Yes, I am. I've harangued friends, family and co-workers, e-mailed, distributed flyers, talked to people I'd never met. Will I do anything necessary to get that simpering chimp out of the White House, including working for not-Gore if it comes to that? You bet. Al, we need you NOW. >>>>>>> No need to be snide. I wouldn't ban you for expressing an opinion, I simply expressed that DEAN CAMPAIGNING doesn't fly here, as in I don't beleive you will change any minds. SIMPLE. I am also not giving up on Al Gore and am in this to the end. Do what you choose. Jan
|
|
|
Post by yes4gore on Dec 2, 2003 17:59:30 GMT -5
Me being snide? Read your own post, Jan. "I'm sure the Hillary people will like it, too." Pah! I'm not campaigning for Dean - I'm pointing out a reality. The guy is smart, the campaign is effective, and it's very late in the game for Gore to start from scratch, no matter how much you want to believe in miracles. Why am I getting an e-mail titled "Has everyone quit?" from "GSC Admin"? Maybe they wanted to see some definitive action from the top of this organization down, like getting press time. I don't know. As for Dean being Karl Rove's wet dream, that's something I've heard the pretend-pundits say (I shudder to think at what this lizard really has wet dreams about). But Dean really is building a steamroller, and if you're serious about a Gore candidacy, get the other high council members together and map out a plan for getting some serious publicity, and for getting in Al's face. I don't have the political savvy for that kind of thing. Waiting for the convention would be far too long. And so far, he's said he's not running, and he's not running. So, is he being coy and waiting for us? Or is he using this race as an opportunity to make what he feels are important points, like the 1%ers in the 9? Is he that cynical? Personally, I don't think there's a cynical bone in his body - I think he was very disappointed in the American system when he was cheated out of the Presidency, and I think he moved on. I think Al Gore is a great man, probably our greatest V-P. and would make an excellent President. But it's going to take a miracle to get into office 1/21/05, and time waits for no one. Jack
|
|
|
Post by EnemyCombatant on Dec 2, 2003 18:53:31 GMT -5
Not only will Dean win just 1 state, but he will also hurt the Senate elections.
That's just the way it is. His 'steam roller' is laughable. with less than a 1/3 of the vote.
On to the real world.
The draft is very much well and alive. It's just that the people who are doing the real work don't have time to post on message boards.
Personally, I think it's a good sign when the message boards are dead. That means people are out there moving their asses.
If you are in MI, I can network you with some people there and you can find out more what is going on with the 'real draft'. Not the fake one being done on these message boards. That's just the BS draft.
enemycombatant@defendersofgore.com
|
|
|
Post by Gorezilla on Dec 2, 2003 20:28:18 GMT -5
Yes4Gore, you're not living up to your screenname. You need to change it to Sellout. Dennis
|
|
|
Post by GSC Admin on Dec 2, 2003 21:45:00 GMT -5
Yes4Gore, please consider yourself warned. This is not AlGoreDemocrats. We do not allow praising of other candidates and the sniding of Al. I don't know what you expect him to do. He said he isn't running. I know for a FACT he is not coming back. That is why the draft is here. This is the only way it can work. I get so tired of people complaining about his office discouraging them. What do you expect them to say? They know vitually nothing about him or his intentions. I just spoke with Al a week ago and had fire in his eyes. So please, feel free to leave if you don't like the way we run things. But please, don't come here to break our rules and then blame our Enforcers for implying the rules.
Thanks, ADMIN
|
|
|
Post by GoreSupporterNJ on Dec 2, 2003 22:05:47 GMT -5
Me being snide? Read your own post, Jan. "I'm sure the Hillary people will like it, too." Pah! I'm not campaigning for Dean - I'm pointing out a reality. The guy is smart, the campaign is effective, and it's very late in the game for Gore to start from scratch, no matter how much you want to believe in miracles. Why am I getting an e-mail titled "Has everyone quit?" from "GSC Admin"? Maybe they wanted to see some definitive action from the top of this organization down, like getting press time. I don't know. As for Dean being Karl Rove's wet dream, that's something I've heard the pretend-pundits say (I shudder to think at what this lizard really has wet dreams about). But Dean really is building a steamroller, and if you're serious about a Gore candidacy, get the other high council members together and map out a plan for getting some serious publicity, and for getting in Al's face. I don't have the political savvy for that kind of thing. Waiting for the convention would be far too long. And so far, he's said he's not running, and he's not running. So, is he being coy and waiting for us? Or is he using this race as an opportunity to make what he feels are important points, like the 1%ers in the 9? Is he that cynical? Personally, I don't think there's a cynical bone in his body - I think he was very disappointed in the American system when he was cheated out of the Presidency, and I think he moved on. I think Al Gore is a great man, probably our greatest V-P. and would make an excellent President. But it's going to take a miracle to get into office 1/21/05, and time waits for no one. Jack In my view Dean is a plant, and he will NOT win against Bush. Rove was cheering for him at a parade not too long ago. They WANT HIM to get the nomination because they know he will not win. What do you want Al Gore to do? You want him to do all the work? He shouldn't have to this time. I say if the PEOPLE aren't energized enough to STICK THIS OUT THIS TIME< and bring it to him, they deserve what they get, and A DEAN nomination will only sew it up for Bush. Praising Dean and tearing down Mr. Gore rather than standing up for him when it counts will only accomplish that. You were also snide to assume that I would ban anyone here for expressing an opinion. I made no such inference. You don't think there are Democrats hoping for a Bush win to pave the way for Hillary Clinton in 2008, however? Don't look at us as the problem. It is this party's so-called leaders who are a bunch of wusses. Again, if you want Dean, then campaign for him, but this is not the place to do it and I won't be going back and forth about this anymore. Thank you. Jan
|
|
|
Post by GoreSupporterNJ on Dec 7, 2003 12:58:02 GMT -5
abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20031205_187.htmlDean Gets Babbitt Endorsement Former Clinton Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt "plans to endorse" Howard Dean -- "further evidence" that Dean "is steadily gaining support" from Democratic Party leaders, the AP reports. Jan
|
|
|
Post by GoreSupporterNJ on Dec 7, 2003 13:11:48 GMT -5
abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20031205_187.htmlDean Gets Babbitt Endorsement Former Clinton Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt "plans to endorse" Howard Dean -- "further evidence" that Dean "is steadily gaining support" from Democratic Party leaders, the AP reports. Jan Again, why does it look to me like the Democrats are SETTING UP this election to lose it? Jan
|
|
|
Post by PaulaB on Dec 19, 2003 0:12:50 GMT -5
www.nashuatelegraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20031218/NEWS08/212180325Dean opens himself to criticism from rivals again By RON FOURNIER The Associated Press Published: Thursday, Dec. 18, 2003 WASHINGTON - By declaring America no safer after Saddam Hussein’s capture, Howard Dean defied conventional wisdom and opened himself to intense criticism from his Democratic presidential rivals. Again. But baiting his foes and plowing new political terrain didn’t irreparably harm Dean when he opposed a popular president’s push toward war, subjected his candidacy to the whims of the Internet or abandoned the public finance system. And several Democratic strategists and independent analysts predict there will be no immediate backlash this time, either. They believe the Democratic front-runner is up to his old tricks: Preaching to the choir of primary voters angry with President Bush, as well as party leaders. “Dean is saying what a whole lot of people think, and that is a guy running from hole to hole is not a major threat to our country,” said Jeff Link, an adviser to Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa. “There are a lot more dangerous terrorist threats around the world than Saddam Hussein.” While pro-war presidential candidates seized upon Saddam’s capture to reshape their measured messages on Iraq, Dean stuck to his blunt-speaking ways, showing little concern for ruffling feathers or creating a soft-on-Saddam perception that could hurt him in the general election. “The capture of Saddam is a good thing which I hope very much will keep our soldiers in Iraq and around the world safer,” Dean said Monday. “But the capture of Saddam has not made America safer.” He argued that America won’t be more secure until problems bigger than Saddam are fixed, including anti-American insurgency in Iraq, the illegal world market for weapons of mass destruction, tattered U.S. alliances and the nation’s porous homeland defense. In a series of speeches this week, Dean’s pro-war rivals raised similar warnings. But they called Saddam’s capture a boon for the anti-terrorism campaign, saying that Dean’s claim to the contrary belied his lack of foreign policy experience. Sen. Joe Lieberman said Dean has crawled into a “spider hole of denial.” Sen. John Kerry said Dean showed a lack of “leadership skills or diplomatic temperament” to be president. And a shadow group with ties to Kerry and Rep. Dick Gephardt aired ads in Iowa suggesting that the former Vermont governor can’t stand up to Osama bin Laden. It is a risky strategy, borne of their zeal to knock Dean from atop the Democratic field before Iowa’s kickoff caucuses Jan. 19. Strategists and analysts say that by criticizing Dean, the pro-war candidates appear to be siding with Bush - not a good idea in the Democratic primary - and may be out of touch with even swing voters, many of whom don’t feel safer with Saddam in prison. Michigan pollster Ed Sarpolus said voters haven’t considered Saddam a threat to their personal security since his regime was toppled. “For regular people here, how does capturing a guy in a spider hole stop terrorists from bombing me or my kids? It’s great that we got him, but it doesn’t affect me personally. I’m still scared,” Sarpolus said, adding that Dean communicates hopes and fears in ways that fail his Washington-based rivals. John Glenn - former hero-astronaut, Democratic senator and failed presidential candidate from Ohio - paused amid celebrations marking the 100th anniversary of the Wright brothers’ first flight to ruminate on Saddam’s capture. “No,” he told CNN. “I guess I don’t feel that much safer.” Stanley Renshon, political scientist and psychoanalyst at the City University of New York, said Saddam’s capture is helping Bush because it taps into voters’ desire to see their leaders standing strong and following through on their threats - “all very American traits.” Dean may regret the remarks next year if he wins the nomination and faces Bush, Renshon said. But they’re not a problem now. “He doesn’t have much choice in the matter because of the type of people who are fueling his drive,” Renshon said. But even Dean’s advisers concede Saddam’s capture has hurt in one respect: The headline-grabbing news slowed his momentum after former Vice President Al Gore’s coveted endorsement. The same stall hit Dean when Wesley Clark jumped into the race, but the front-runner eventually got back on track. Dean was a step ahead of conventional wisdom on the war (it became less popular among Democrats with time), the Internet (his innovations have been copied by rivals) and public financing (after Dean opted out, so did Kerry). When he used the Confederate flag to talk about courting Southern white Democrats, party leaders said the gaffe would knock him from his perch. Instead, he changed the subject by nailing down two surprise union endorsements. With a record like that, Link says from Iowa, “Why second-guess the guy now?”
|
|
|
Post by GSC Admin on Dec 19, 2003 10:55:56 GMT -5
www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/1203/19dempoll.htmlPoll shows Dean is No. 1 with Georgia Democrats By MONI BASU The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION POLL Zogby America polled 277 voters Monday and Tuesday who said they are likely to cast ballots in the Georgia Democratic primary. The poll showed Howard Dean taking a clear lead, rising from fourth place in an October AJC poll. Both polls had a margin of error of plus or minus 6 percent. Howard Dean DECEMBER: 18.8 percent OCTOBER: 7.4 percent Dick Gephardt DECEMBER: 7.5 percent OCTOBER: 11.5 percent Someone else DECEMBER: 6.8 percent OCTOBER: 1.6 percent Wesley Clark DECEMBER: 6.5 percent OCTOBER: 13.1 percent Al Sharpton DECEMBER: 5.6 percent OCTOBER: 3.3 percent Joe Lieberman DECEMBER: 5.5 percent OCTOBER: 9.0 percent John Kerry DECEMBER: 2.7 percent OCTOBER: 4.9 percent Carol Moseley Braun DECEMBER 2.6 percent OCTOBER 5.4 percent John Edwards DECEMBER 1.9 percent OCTOBER 3.8 percent Dennis Kucinich DECEMBER: 0.2 percent OCTOBER: 0.8 percent Not sure DECEMBER: 42.1 percent OCTOBER 39.1 percent A few weeks ago, Snellville businessman Michael Inya-Agha had no idea who would get his vote in the Georgia primary election March 2. But when he saw Howard Dean anointed the Democratic front-runner, Inya-Agha joined the crowd. "He wasn't always my favorite," Inya-Agha said. "I had an open mind. But I see now that a lot of people are flocking toward him. He's projected to win." Inya-Agha is among Georgia Democrats polled this week by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution who have moved to the Dean camp since a similar poll in October. Buoyed by a surge in publicity -- including former Vice President Al Gore's endorsement -- Dean moved into a solid lead in the survey of 277 likely Democratic Georgia voters, conducted Monday and Tuesday. The former Vermont governor rose from fourth place in the October poll to first, with 18.1 percent. Dean, the choice of only 7.4 percent in October, displaced retired Gen. Wesley Clark, who as a newcomer had registered 13.1 percent approval in the earlier poll. No matter who is the eventual nominee, the Democrats will face a tough general election campaign in Georgia, where President Bush was a big winner in 2000. A wider sample from the AJC poll, including Republicans and independents as well as Democrats, gave Bush a 59 percent approval rating, up from October's 56.1 percent. And with the capture of Saddam Hussein, 63.9 percent said they approved of the way Bush is handling the war in Iraq. But Democrats were far more likely to oppose the war than Republicans, and Dean's credentials as a consistent opponent of the Iraqi invasion have boosted his campaign for the party nomination. His surge in Georgia falls in line with national trends over the last two months, as he has emerged as the Democratic front-runner. "Clearly the Dean campaign is taking up a lot of oxygen," said John Zogby, founder of Zogby America, an independent public opinion firm that conducted the Journal-Constitution poll. "He has gotten a tremendous boost from all the publicity, including the Gore endorsement." It was Gore's support that persuaded Michael Nelson of Marietta, a minister at Pleasant Grove Missionary Baptist Church, to back Dean. "I was hoping Al Gore would run again," Nelson said. "So Gore's endorsement carried a lot of weight with me." Leesa Kellam, a West End diversity trainer and writer, chose Dean months ago and is glad to see other Georgia Democrats joining the Dean bandwagon. She said she identifies with his anti-war positions and feels the Bush administration has dropped the ball on issues such as education and health care. "If other people are swayed positively by Gore's endorsement, I say great," Kellam said. Ferrel Guillory, director of the Center for Southern Politics at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, said Gore helps make Dean, often perceived as too liberal, more palatable in conservative states such as Georgia. "Gore's endorsement made him more acceptable to mainstream Democrats," Guillory said. "It tells them that it's not just insurgents who are bolstering him." Missouri Rep. Dick Gephardt retained his second-place spot in the new poll, while other candidates slipped further behind. The Rev. Al Sharpton was the only candidate besides Dean whose numbers climbed -- by 2 percentage points. Despite Dean's solid gains in Georgia, the top choice remained "undecided." In December, 42.1 percent of Democrats said they were not sure who would get their vote, as compared with 39.1 percent in October. "Nobody has really caught fire," said Democratic pollster Alan Secrest. "There's a long way to go in Georgia." Some polls taken this week in states with early primaries -- where voters are more aware of the candidates -- suggested Dean suffered a slight setback after his assertion that Saddam's capture had not made America a safer place. Campaigning Thursday in New Hampshire, Dean defended his remarks and shrugged off the polls. However, Dean's singular anti-war message resonated with some Georgians who participated in the AJC poll. "I don't like to be lied to. There were no weapons of mass destruction found there," said Tom Collins, a retired elementary school teacher in Americus who identifies himself as an independent voter. "Howard Dean is the person who can take Bush to task for all the things I think he's doing wrong." But some Georgia Demo- crats aren't happy with Dean or anyone else in the nine-candidate field. Seven percent of those polled said they would prefer "someone else." Jackman Christie, a math and physics teacher at Newton High School, said he laments the lack of a viable candidate with colleagues at the lunch table. "I would like someone to speak strongly on health care, someone who is a fiscal conservative," said Christie, a Covington resident. "Nobody is talking about that. All they do is bash Bush. If they keep it up, Bush will win for sure." So who is Christie's "someone else" who could fill what he called the Democratic void? "Hillary Clinton," he said. "If she ran, I would vote for her 10 times."
|
|
|
Post by PaulaB on Dec 19, 2003 11:58:34 GMT -5
"I was hoping Al Gore would run again," Nelson said. "So Gore's endorsement carried a lot of weight with me." This is exactly why we should continue. Paula
|
|
|
Post by PaulaB on Dec 19, 2003 22:32:07 GMT -5
www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=131&subid=192&contentid=252272DLC | New Dem Daily | December 19, 2003 Idea of the Week: Damage Control It's been a very strange week for Gov. Howard Dean. It was supposed to be the week in which he repositioned himself as a "centrist" and addressed the light-on-issues nature of his campaign with two big speeches on foreign and domestic policy. Instead, as DLC President Bruce Reed told The New York Times: "One day Dean says Americans are no better off with Saddam out of power; now he seems to be saying Democrats are better off with Bill Clinton out of power." The latter utterance was at the heart of Gov. Dean's domestic policy address in New Hampshire yesterday. As with the earlier statement about the relative insignificance of Saddam's capture, the disrespecting of the Clinton legacy wasn't some sort of ad lib to reporters. In fact, it was in the key section of his prepared text. "Some Democrats have accepted the Republican notion that the Social Contract cannot be preserved, let alone made stronger. "While Bill Clinton said that the era of big government is over, I believe we must enter a new era for the Democratic party -- not one where we join Republicans and aim simply to limit the damage they inflict on working families. "I reject the notion that damage control must be our credo." It's never been a secret that some (though hardly all) people in the left wing of the Democratic Party think this way about the Clinton administration and its accomplishments, believing that Clinton accepted the basic premises of conservatism and simply made their implementation a little slower and a little less harsh. And it's also no secret that Gov. Dean has spent much of his campaign harshly attacking Democratic centrists for not making reflexive, unthinking, 100 percent opposition to George W. Bush's policies their only guiding principle. This speech pulls together these two strands of self-delusion, and appears to establish Gov. Dean as the candidate who wants to take the Democratic Party not forward to some exciting project of revitalization, but backward to its pre-Clinton posture. But Dean's speech definitely gives us a new way of looking at the Clinton years. 22 million new jobs -- damage control! Trillion dollar budget surpluses. The first real gains in middle-class income in three decades. Welfare rolls cut in half as poverty rates declined. Eight straight years of lower violent crime rates. The lowest recorded unemployment rates for minorities in history. The highest homeownership rates in history. The smallest federal bureaucracy since the Kennedy administration. Millions of innovative new small businesses, many owned by women and minorities. This is "damage control?" If that's what the Clinton record represents, then count us as vastly preferring -- yea, praying for -- a lot more "damage control" in the future. What Gov. Dean seems to miss entirely is that President Clinton's accomplishments were not based on some sort of easy accommodation with Republicans, but on a modernization of the progressive political tradition to adjust to new times and to address unnecessary Democratic weaknesses that were feeding a conservative upsurge -- an upsurge that would have totally, not just partially, dominated the American political system in the 1990s had Bill Clinton not come along. Believe it or not, Gov. Dean made a second statement yesterday that reflected his outrageous habit of lumping centrist Democrats and conservative Republicans together, while compounding his earlier unfortunate remarks about Saddam: "The capture of one bad man does not mean that this president and the Washington Democrats [Deanie code for everybody in the party other than the Doctor and his supporters] can declare victory in the war on terror." Who's "declaring victory in the war on terror?" And can Gov. Dean really not tell the difference between the foreign policy views of other Democrats, and those of the Bush administration? Maybe not, since he seems to have trouble distinguishing the "damage control" of the Clinton years with the dismal record of George W. Bush. If Gov. Dean's New Social Contract can promise a fraction of Bill Clinton's progressive accomplishments, especially for the unprivileged citizens Democrats are supposed to care about most, then he'd better start proving it, instead of undermining the best evidence Democrats have for their ability to govern America far better than Bush. I say the gloves are coming off Paula
|
|
|
Post by EnemyCombatant on Dec 25, 2003 18:01:26 GMT -5
|
|