Monday, July 07, 2003
DEAN FIRST PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE DECLARED ELIGIBLE http://www.fec.gov/press/20030707matching.html
Thanks to David Nir of New York for bringing this FEC press release to our attention:
For Immediate Release
July 7, 2003
DEAN FIRST PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE DECLARED ELIGIBLE
FOR PRIMARY MATCHING FUNDS IN 2004 RACE
WASHINGTON – Howard Dean today became the first 2004 presidential candidate to be declared eligible by the Federal Election Commission to receive federal matching funds. Dean is seeking the Democratic nomination for president in 2004.
To become eligible for matching funds, candidates must raise a threshold amount of $100,000 by collecting $5,000 in 20 different states in amounts no greater than $250 from any individual. Other requirements to be declared eligible include agreeing to an overall spending limit, abiding by spending limits in each state, using public funds only for legitimate campaign-related expenses, keeping financial records and permitting an extensive campaign audit.
Based on documents filed by the Dean campaign on June 17, 2003, contributions from the following states were verified for threshold purposes: California, Colorado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington.
Once declared eligible, campaigns may submit additional contributions for matching funds on the first business day of every month. The U.S. Treasury Department will pay the FEC-certified amounts beginning in January 2004. The maximum amount a candidate could receive is currently estimated to be $18.6 million.
Go to the 2004 Presidential Campaign Matching Fund Summissions page for more details.
# # #
Target: Howard Dean: Episode I http://www.msnbc.com/news/934761.asp?0cv=KB20
The Republican Unity Coalition, a pro-gay GOP group, is the focus of this Newsweek interview with Former Senator Alan Simpson (R-Wyoming) on MSNBC.
And yet another – yes, one more! – of the great contradictions on the right presents itself. What does Simpson really mean by “kiss half the Congress goodbye?” Sounds like a worried guy to me. I mean, I think the guy might be right, but he’s referring to the wrong half of Congress. Have our current crop of legislative leaders -- many of whom are running for President -- helped us to get or to keep a majority in Congress? If Alan Simpson really cared about our numbers in Congress, he’d be advising John Edwards to run for his Senate seat and not for POTUS. But obviously that is not his real concern.
Simpson’s true sentiment is one of concern for his own party, and thus the oxymoronic quality of Simpson’s dismissal. It’s the gay issue itself and Dean’s support of civil unions that many, left and right, have said makes Dean supposedly unelectable. So what’s Simpson’s beef? Hard to know, but it seems like Dean worries him for the very same reasons that he would join a group like the RUC – because when the GOP demonizes gays, they lose. The specter of Buchanan in 1992 and his famous “cultural war” speech still haunt their nightmares. Note that the goal of the RUC is not “LGBT equality” but rather to make LGBT rights a “non-issue” because when it’s an issue and the right starts frothing at the mouth, they lose. No one knows this better than Rove & The Neo-Cons.
And thus, my final point, which illustrates one reason that Rove and Co. are so frightened of Dean as the nominee: LGBT rights will not be a “non-issue” it will be a huge issue. What at first seems like a liability for Dean quickly becomes an asset, as there is no way, let me repeat no way in hell that the Fundamentalist Right will sit on their hands and keep their lips zipped if Howard Dean is the nominee. But hey, let Senator Simpson tell you himself:
Thanks, Alan. Now we know why you are so anxious to dismiss Howard Dean. As Rove and Simpson and many other smart politicians know, the Rabid Right in full form will be a huge liability for the GOP, and it gives them one more reason get Dean out this race ASAP -- and by any means possible. Which, of course, ain't gonna happen. And best of all voila! a principled position on LGBT civil unions is a winning issue for Howard Dean. Maybe they should quit worrying about the Democrat’s tent and pay a little more attention to their own hot-air balloon, sinking, like a stone.
Q:Is the GOP’s big tent getting smaller? A:I don’t think so. If you want to go and look at the big tent shrinking, go and look at the Democrats. The fabric is unraveling at the edge of their tent because if they nominate Howard Dean, they can kiss half the Congress goodbye.
And yet another – yes, one more! – of the great contradictions on the right presents itself. What does Simpson really mean by “kiss half the Congress goodbye?” Sounds like a worried guy to me. I mean, I think the guy might be right, but he’s referring to the wrong half of Congress. Have our current crop of legislative leaders -- many of whom are running for President -- helped us to get or to keep a majority in Congress? If Alan Simpson really cared about our numbers in Congress, he’d be advising John Edwards to run for his Senate seat and not for POTUS. But obviously that is not his real concern.
Simpson’s true sentiment is one of concern for his own party, and thus the oxymoronic quality of Simpson’s dismissal. It’s the gay issue itself and Dean’s support of civil unions that many, left and right, have said makes Dean supposedly unelectable. So what’s Simpson’s beef? Hard to know, but it seems like Dean worries him for the very same reasons that he would join a group like the RUC – because when the GOP demonizes gays, they lose. The specter of Buchanan in 1992 and his famous “cultural war” speech still haunt their nightmares. Note that the goal of the RUC is not “LGBT equality” but rather to make LGBT rights a “non-issue” because when it’s an issue and the right starts frothing at the mouth, they lose. No one knows this better than Rove & The Neo-Cons.
And thus, my final point, which illustrates one reason that Rove and Co. are so frightened of Dean as the nominee: LGBT rights will not be a “non-issue” it will be a huge issue. What at first seems like a liability for Dean quickly becomes an asset, as there is no way, let me repeat no way in hell that the Fundamentalist Right will sit on their hands and keep their lips zipped if Howard Dean is the nominee. But hey, let Senator Simpson tell you himself:
Q: Where do you want to see the GOP go from here? A: As I see this election coming, it seems that for the first time I see people realizing that these tests of [ideological] purity do nothing at all to help us win [elections]. All they do is energize zealots, [the] 100-percenters. I tell them: “Why don’t you forget this one issue [about gays]” and remember that George W. is going to be with you 60, 70, 80 percent of the time. And that whoever is on the other side is not going to be. So let’s not cut each other up.
Thanks, Alan. Now we know why you are so anxious to dismiss Howard Dean. As Rove and Simpson and many other smart politicians know, the Rabid Right in full form will be a huge liability for the GOP, and it gives them one more reason get Dean out this race ASAP -- and by any means possible. Which, of course, ain't gonna happen. And best of all voila! a principled position on LGBT civil unions is a winning issue for Howard Dean. Maybe they should quit worrying about the Democrat’s tent and pay a little more attention to their own hot-air balloon, sinking, like a stone.
Dean Hits the Trifecta http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/000634.html
Over at the official blog, Matt Gross gives us a Mark Shields column and says that Shields gets it. And Shields does get it, more than any other writer who has gotten it. Even Lizza's early piece (in the New Republic) that picked up on the importance of internet organizing and Manjoo's more recent piece on Dean.com (in Salon.com) have missed something:
We chose Howard Dean.
Last fall, on my first (of now 3) blog, Left in the West, I started writing about Dean and even managed to convince one reader to cut a hundred dollar check. I soon found other Dean supporters. Matthew Yglesias was leaning towards him. Atrios had kind words. Rich Klau was there. Soon, Ezra came along.
And there was, of course, Aziz and this blog.
And you looked around for favorable words about Kerry or Edwards or Gephardt and you could find them, but no one was dedicated.
Soon, I left my blog and moved in to Ezra's netspace. And MeetUp continued to grow and the campaign eventually decided to launch an official blog (still back on blogger in those days).
But all along, it's been Dean who has inspired those of us who are most plugged in to politics (and outside-the-Beltway) and still normal citizens.
Dean's campaign has done amazing things figuring out how to steer this rising tide, this Perfect Storm.
But Shields is right when he says it is Dean, not Dean's internet ability, that is getting him where he is.
And that's why we'll hit the trifecta: Dean is a candidate unlike any in recent memory with an amazing ability to be at the center of every political stage. He is the story. His staff has figured out how to take advantage of new situations remarkably quickly and keep 180,000 volunteers happy (that's twice the size of my hometown, folks). And we, his roots, are dedicated. We've got people canvassing, phone calling, fund raising, leafletting, tabling.
Hell, we can have 5 tables at events where other campaigns won't have the volunteers to set up one.
The candidate.
The campaign.
And us.
We've got the trifecta.
So, to give you something to do, donate to the campaign in the name of the Dean Nation (this blog).
This is not just about the quality of the internet organizing. It's about the quality of the candidate.If you read between the lines, a new picture of the Dean internet world becomes clear.
We chose Howard Dean.
Last fall, on my first (of now 3) blog, Left in the West, I started writing about Dean and even managed to convince one reader to cut a hundred dollar check. I soon found other Dean supporters. Matthew Yglesias was leaning towards him. Atrios had kind words. Rich Klau was there. Soon, Ezra came along.
And there was, of course, Aziz and this blog.
And you looked around for favorable words about Kerry or Edwards or Gephardt and you could find them, but no one was dedicated.
Soon, I left my blog and moved in to Ezra's netspace. And MeetUp continued to grow and the campaign eventually decided to launch an official blog (still back on blogger in those days).
But all along, it's been Dean who has inspired those of us who are most plugged in to politics (and outside-the-Beltway) and still normal citizens.
Dean's campaign has done amazing things figuring out how to steer this rising tide, this Perfect Storm.
But Shields is right when he says it is Dean, not Dean's internet ability, that is getting him where he is.
And that's why we'll hit the trifecta: Dean is a candidate unlike any in recent memory with an amazing ability to be at the center of every political stage. He is the story. His staff has figured out how to take advantage of new situations remarkably quickly and keep 180,000 volunteers happy (that's twice the size of my hometown, folks). And we, his roots, are dedicated. We've got people canvassing, phone calling, fund raising, leafletting, tabling.
Hell, we can have 5 tables at events where other campaigns won't have the volunteers to set up one.
The candidate.
The campaign.
And us.
We've got the trifecta.
So, to give you something to do, donate to the campaign in the name of the Dean Nation (this blog).
Today's Note http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/TheNote/TheNote.html
It's loaded up with Dean. Read it all for yourself. Here's just a bit:
Practicing and covering nomination politics are imperfect sciences, but you really can learn something about the mood of a party and — we are serious — about the mood of the nation, when an insurgent candidate does well.
We'd like to lock Congressman Gephardt and Senators Kerry, Edwards, Lieberman, and Graham in a windowless, un-air-conditioned classroom in Concord this afternoon and give them this pop quiz (not open book, and candidates only — no help from Elmo, Jer-dan, Baldick, the Campaign Director, or Jarding):
--List three lines from Howard Dean's stump speech that always get a big crowd reaction and explain why. (15 minutes)
--Write an essay explaining what Dean's surge says about what the party wants in its nominee, and what larger sentiments does his message reveal about the state of the American psyche right now? (45 minutes)
Episode II (Attack of the Clones)
The conservatives are terrified of Dean, because they know he is the real threat. NewsMax insinuates Dean has a drinking problem, and along with American Daily tries to use Dean's son as ammunition (both rags are seemingly unaware of what a Pandora's box this line of reasoning is to their Golden Child, Bush). American Daily is (unintentionally, unlike The Onion) hysterically funny in it's reactionary attempts to spin Dean as the Second Coming of Lenin:
Some conservatives are in denial. Mark Steyn of the Sun Times goes to great lengths to explain just how Vermont is the epicenter of "ponytailed granola progressivism." He also gets in a reference to Cameron Diaz and Miramax somehow. Joseph Farrah of WorldNet Daily is scared enough to actually say "No on Howard Dean" (as if he had anything to say about it), sounds the "danger! extreme liberal!" alarm:
That's real meat and potatoes stuff, but it's not the Machiavellian conservatives who read that tray liner. There's actually an emerging "Conservatives for Dean" movement (not to be confuse with the true principled Republicans for Dean meaningfully who contribute to our ongoing dialouge here at Dean Nation). Some conservatives are actually donating money to Dean's campaign! Rush Limbaugh has an article titled "Please Let it be Howard Dean" which thankfully I'm prevented from accessing unless I become a dues-paying ditto-head. Karl Rove himself has joined in:
(Jerome has covered the convergence between Rove and the DLC's rhetoric in an earlier must-read post).
Now, the American Spectator is concerned for Dean's privacy, claiming that Kerry's campaign is digging through Dean's trash for "oppo" research. And Drudge chimed in yesterday claiming that Dean wants McAuliffe out as head of the DNC (easily refuted by Trippi). Both Daily Kos and Joshua Marshall have covered these events in excellent detail.
What this all boils down to is fear. The DLC is afraid of Dean, so Al From attacks him for being too liberal, invoking McGovern's defeat. The conservative media is afraid of Dean, so they are trying to convince Democrats (leveraging their domination of mass media) that Dean is too liberal. The other candidates are afraid of Dean, so they dismiss the fundraising success as the "crazy base". Karl Rive and the DLC are handing out talking points to their sides, and we are seeing an amazing convergence of rhetoric from left and right.
This all works to the conservatives' benefit of course - after all, you have the moderate liberals denouncing Dean, the quintessential moderate, as being too liberal (exactly which party do the DLC think they belong to?).
But what the conservatives really fear is Dean's ability to reclaim the center. Under GOP rule, this country has drifted so far right that a moderate like Dean looks liberal. And their own position seems moderate. What Dean presents is a real threat that the Emerging Democratic Majority will wake up and realize that the center is theirs. And that's something that threatens the elites at both ends.
Back here in the real world, a man named Howard Dean is running for president, and what he is selling is a snake oil worse than anything ever pedaled door-to-door or at any MLM convention. In fact, what Howard Dean is pushing would make FDR gasp and Lenin applaud.
Some conservatives are in denial. Mark Steyn of the Sun Times goes to great lengths to explain just how Vermont is the epicenter of "ponytailed granola progressivism." He also gets in a reference to Cameron Diaz and Miramax somehow. Joseph Farrah of WorldNet Daily is scared enough to actually say "No on Howard Dean" (as if he had anything to say about it), sounds the "danger! extreme liberal!" alarm:
This idea that discrimination – meaning the making of a value judgment – is a bad thing demonstrates just how whacky Howard Dean is.
This guy is out there. He is trying to position himself as the "most progressive" of all the candidates – and, depending on your definition of the term, he has been successful.
My guess is the candidacy of Howard Dean will not make the first cut of primaries. His attacks on President Bush's character exceed the boundaries of good taste and civil politics – even by Democratic Party standards.
That's real meat and potatoes stuff, but it's not the Machiavellian conservatives who read that tray liner. There's actually an emerging "Conservatives for Dean" movement (not to be confuse with the true principled Republicans for Dean meaningfully who contribute to our ongoing dialouge here at Dean Nation). Some conservatives are actually donating money to Dean's campaign! Rush Limbaugh has an article titled "Please Let it be Howard Dean" which thankfully I'm prevented from accessing unless I become a dues-paying ditto-head. Karl Rove himself has joined in:
Rove told a companion, "Heh, heh, heh. Yeah, that's the one we want, How come no one is cheering for Dean? Come on, everybody! Go, Howard Dean!"
(Jerome has covered the convergence between Rove and the DLC's rhetoric in an earlier must-read post).
Now, the American Spectator is concerned for Dean's privacy, claiming that Kerry's campaign is digging through Dean's trash for "oppo" research. And Drudge chimed in yesterday claiming that Dean wants McAuliffe out as head of the DNC (easily refuted by Trippi). Both Daily Kos and Joshua Marshall have covered these events in excellent detail.
What this all boils down to is fear. The DLC is afraid of Dean, so Al From attacks him for being too liberal, invoking McGovern's defeat. The conservative media is afraid of Dean, so they are trying to convince Democrats (leveraging their domination of mass media) that Dean is too liberal. The other candidates are afraid of Dean, so they dismiss the fundraising success as the "crazy base". Karl Rive and the DLC are handing out talking points to their sides, and we are seeing an amazing convergence of rhetoric from left and right.
This all works to the conservatives' benefit of course - after all, you have the moderate liberals denouncing Dean, the quintessential moderate, as being too liberal (exactly which party do the DLC think they belong to?).
But what the conservatives really fear is Dean's ability to reclaim the center. Under GOP rule, this country has drifted so far right that a moderate like Dean looks liberal. And their own position seems moderate. What Dean presents is a real threat that the Emerging Democratic Majority will wake up and realize that the center is theirs. And that's something that threatens the elites at both ends.
Our Goals http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/TR?pg=personal&fr_id=1090&px=1179278
Trippi lays out the Q3 goals on BFA:
Fantastic! We have a lot of work to do, and it starts right here with meeting our goal of $10K that Dean Nationites like you contribute to Dean.
You get the feeling that Dean is going to show up at the Doonesbury House Party (again today).
Our focus for July through September -- is now expanding to at least 8 or 9 states organizationally beyond Iowa and New Hampshire, begin strong outreach beyond the Net -- grow our online support to 450,000 from about 180,000 and grow our offline support to 50,000 using 800 numbers and the tabling efforts etc through our self organizing tools and outreach efforts into every community -- and of course fundraising.
Fantastic! We have a lot of work to do, and it starts right here with meeting our goal of $10K that Dean Nationites like you contribute to Dean.
You get the feeling that Dean is going to show up at the Doonesbury House Party (again today).
Meetup diversity? http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101030714-463096,00.html
Great analysis of the Dean and Internet convergence in TIME Magazine. The great thing about this article is the broad base - TIME is read by millions of people, and the exposure that this article gives Dean is enormous. They also are kind enough to mention Dean Nation :)
One critique in the article stands out however - their observation that the Meetup crowd is highly homogenous:
This same issue was addressed on Eschaton recently, in response to a piece in the WaPo:
However, our own Jerome Armstrong has some rather solid counter-points:
What do you think - how can we make sure that the next Meetup has a broader base of minority support? And what kinds of outreach are you planning? Or did you not have this problem at your meetup?
One critique in the article stands out however - their observation that the Meetup crowd is highly homogenous:
These meetups are evidence of the enthusiasm out there for the former Governor — enthusiasm the other campaigns can only envy. They are also evidence of a homogeneity among those enthusiasts. In San Rafael, Calif., last Wednesday, 75 attendees packed the back room of the Limelight restaurant. There were veteran campaigners and neophytes, a few Kerry supporters willing to be convinced and even a couple of Republicans angry at Bush — but not a single non-Caucasian. An ethnic-outreach subcommittee was swiftly announced.
...
The questions now are whether Dean can broaden his support and whether the Internet is just a boutique fund-raising tool or one that can generate actual votes.
This same issue was addressed on Eschaton recently, in response to a piece in the WaPo:
But had Meetup.com helped Dean reach new constituencies, such as African Americans, other ethnic communities, working class people, non-liberals? Not based on what I saw. Without the Internet, it was likely that Dean would find support among affluent, white, liberal professionals. With the Internet, he attracted affluent, white, liberal professionals who spent a lot of time online. Meetup.com was just a continuation of politics by other means.
But the Internet can't become a substitute for the gritty, difficult work of true grass-roots campaigning in diverse ethnic and socio-economic communities. As it stands, Meetup mostly preaches to the choir.
However, our own Jerome Armstrong has some rather solid counter-points:
If Dean is drawing across the board white people, more males than females, HELLO DC DEM ESTABLISHMENT, this is exactly the vote that the Democrats need more of to win in November!
I don't disagree with Gownder assessment. I'd just point out that if you look at the traditional turnout model for caucuses, this group has not been there. Sure, you could argue that Hart or Tsongas, maybe even Brown, and certainly McCain had elements of it, but nothing near what Dean has in place, not anywhere near this amount of national organization, and we still have months to go before the voting happens.
The primaries in the southern and midwest states are where Dean's campaign needs work on reaching to overcome the problems laid out by Gownder.
However, those are mostly general election concerns, not the nomination. That's the main flaw of his argument. Gownder's laid out a good case for why Dean needs to broaden his appeal to win the general, but applied it to his first need-- winning the nomination-- where it will work.
What do you think - how can we make sure that the next Meetup has a broader base of minority support? And what kinds of outreach are you planning? Or did you not have this problem at your meetup?
Monday's Deansbury http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/
motivating the "crazy base" http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/TR?pg=personal&fr_id=1090&px=1179278
my fellow citizens of Dean Nation, we are $37% of the way to our goal of raising $10,000 for Dean! As of 6:15 AM this morning we have raised $3,662.23!
Remember - we are Dean's supporters - but Dean is ours, too. By donating through Dean Nation, we are demonstrating the true nature of how our government should be - of the people, by the people, for the people. The result will be a President among us, not amongst the beltway elites and the K-street lobbyists. Just remember what we are up against! No one thinks we can do it. Certainly not Al From, the leader of the Democrats Losing Consistently elites:
Apparently the way to beat a President with a "65 percent" approval rating is to pretend you're him, and hope the voters get confused. Apparently the way to win the White House is to lose the nomination. If we - Dean Nation - are the angry voters writing checks, let's show Al that we're the ones to appeal to, not marginalize.
What do the other campaigns think?
Are we the crazy base? well, maybe. Wouldn't it be just crazy if we donated ten bucks now to Howard Dean?
Let Howard Dean be Howard Dean:
So stand up and be proud of what you believe in - not what Al From or "senior aides" to other candidates want you to believe. Let's show them what an opposition looks like!
Remember, we need to reach our goal by Tuesday evening, so time is short. Of course we have all already reached deep into our pockets to help Dean break all Q2 records on $7 Million Monday, but this is our chance to show the campaign that of all the netroots, it's Dean Nation that carries the flag.
I'd also like to make an appeal to other bloggers - please link to the Dean Nation Rally today and encourage your visitors to join us!
Remember - we are Dean's supporters - but Dean is ours, too. By donating through Dean Nation, we are demonstrating the true nature of how our government should be - of the people, by the people, for the people. The result will be a President among us, not amongst the beltway elites and the K-street lobbyists. Just remember what we are up against! No one thinks we can do it. Certainly not Al From, the leader of the Democrats Losing Consistently elites:
"This isn't a personal fight against Howard Dean. It's about taking a party that went badly astray in the 1970s and 1980s and putting it back on course," said Al From, the leader of the moderate Democratic Leadership Council. "Anger can get people excited to write $20 and $25 checks on the Internet, but it is probably not enough to beat a president that 65 percent of the people like."
"The prize is the White House," he said, "not winning the nomination."
Apparently the way to beat a President with a "65 percent" approval rating is to pretend you're him, and hope the voters get confused. Apparently the way to win the White House is to lose the nomination. If we - Dean Nation - are the angry voters writing checks, let's show Al that we're the ones to appeal to, not marginalize.
What do the other campaigns think?
"He has motivated our crazy base," said a senior aide to another Democratic campaign. "But I don't think we need to be any more scared of him than the Republicans were scared of John McCain."
Are we the crazy base? well, maybe. Wouldn't it be just crazy if we donated ten bucks now to Howard Dean?
Let Howard Dean be Howard Dean:
"The very things that everyone else is saying make me unelectable I think are what make me electable," Dean said. "The reason the other folks are going to have a hard time beating this president is because they are so afraid to lose. The only way to beat this president is to stand up for what you believe in and be proud of it."
So stand up and be proud of what you believe in - not what Al From or "senior aides" to other candidates want you to believe. Let's show them what an opposition looks like!
Remember, we need to reach our goal by Tuesday evening, so time is short. Of course we have all already reached deep into our pockets to help Dean break all Q2 records on $7 Million Monday, but this is our chance to show the campaign that of all the netroots, it's Dean Nation that carries the flag.
I'd also like to make an appeal to other bloggers - please link to the Dean Nation Rally today and encourage your visitors to join us!
Sunday, July 06, 2003
A Libertarian for Dean http://thatother.blogspot.com/2003_05_01_thatother_archive.html#200320107
Johnny Bardine has a lengthy analysis of Dean's candidacy from the pragmatic libertarian perspective (note: not to be confused with the ideological libertarian perspective). It's exactly independent people like Johhny to whom we need to make the case for Dean. If the message is sound, it will draw support.
Johnny has a number of points but the one I want to excerpt is probably the biggest barrier to drawing in libertarian support, and I think his reasoning is one of profoundly enlightened self-interest:
He summarizes, "Libertarians wondering who to support should ask themselves: Which candidate will be devoted to fiscal responsibility, peace and security, and the protection of our fundamental rights? The answer is Howard Dean". Do you know any libertarians? People who hate big government? Or who are just reflexively against any kind of taxation? Try out these arguments and let us know how you fared!
Johnny has a number of points but the one I want to excerpt is probably the biggest barrier to drawing in libertarian support, and I think his reasoning is one of profoundly enlightened self-interest:
Universal Healthcare
I am a libertarian, and have been for as long as I can remember. But I now firmly reside on planet Earth, and I think that is a fairly new occurrence. In the realm of governance, there is Democratic turf; there is Republican turf. There is not, however, Libertarian turf, so then the libertarian -- when he is not off stockpiling beenie-weenies and starting militias -- must choose which turf makes the most sense. I do not believe that people have the right to health care. But an inescapable fact of reality is that we have a welfare state. America has a government that provides various social programs; they fund these programs through taxation. It is time for reasonable libertarians to give up the fight for a taxless society. Instead, we should work toward spending what we must pay in a cost-effective fashion. That's exactly what Governor Dean's health care plan accomplishes. Health care may not be a right, but it certainly is a desirable thing. And if we can do it in a reasonable way, we should. Dean's does that, which is a far cry from the unworkable monstrosity that is Gephardt's plan. Dean's idea is much less complicated and has actually been implemented on the state level. As he writes, "This plan is affordable and simple, relying on three existing systems -- one for children, one for seniors, and one for those in between -- which all Americans can understand." There are many flavors of libertarianism, but I think this plan sits well with most in the Jeffersonian vein.
He summarizes, "Libertarians wondering who to support should ask themselves: Which candidate will be devoted to fiscal responsibility, peace and security, and the protection of our fundamental rights? The answer is Howard Dean". Do you know any libertarians? People who hate big government? Or who are just reflexively against any kind of taxation? Try out these arguments and let us know how you fared!
Bushed military http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=0-ARMYPAPER-1954515.php
On Meet the Press, Dean was off by 7% on his off-the-cuff guess as to the size of the armed forces. The resulting media elite chatter about Dean's foreign policy experience and supposed "hostility to the military" has been unceasing. But it's not the media elite that Dean needs to address - it's the military itself. And nowhere has Bush's hypocrisy and empty rhetoric - and outright betrayal - been more evident than the issue of supporting our troops.
via Billmon, from the 2nd Presidential Debate (Oct. 11, 2000):
Rebuild the military? Under President Bush, the military that Clinton built has been stretched far thinner on imperial adventurism than it ever was under Clinton. Nicholas Confessore's essential article in the Washington Monthly, GI Woe, details exactly how our armed forces are strained under the neocon-driven foreign policy that Bush, as Commander in Chief, must take ultimate responsibility for.
Pay our men and women more and make sure they are housed better? Ask the Marine Corp Times, which headlined: "House Republicans dig in against child tax credit for combat troops." Or ask the Army Times, which called the praise of the military by Bush and the GOP Congress "nothing but lip service". Army families are noticing- and reacting with anger.
Have a more focused mission for our military? What exactly are we doing in Afghanistan? Where are the WMDs that Rumsfeld knew for a fact were "in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad" ? Is there any coherence to our foreign policy whatsoever besides economic and strategic opportunism?
Then consider Bush's rhetoric for those who served - about veterans, Bush has said (at the VFW 2001 convention):
Understands America's obligations to our veterans? Then why didn't Bush provide additional funding to VA by designating $5 billion appropriated by Congress as emergency spending, as he had promised? Why are veterans in the Priority 8 Group (including vets with incomes as low as $24,644, affecting about 520,000 veterans by 2005) being shut out of health services? Why doesn't VA have sufficient resources to meet its obligations to those who served? Why won't the Bush Administration put its support behind concurrent-receipt - allowing those veterans who incurred a disability while serving the nation in uniform to receive both retirement and disability benefits?
These broken promises are the wounds - but Bush's dereliction of duty, his clumsy propaganda of ingratiation, and his false and harmful bravado thousands of miles from the front, are the salt rub.
These are the simple facts. Bush is unfit to be Commander in Chief, and the GOP is brazen in its attempts to sacrifice the interests of our men and women in uniform for tax breaks for the rich. And armed with these facts, Dean can wipe the floor with any who dare to suggest otherwise. We don't even need Wesley Clark to be onboard to make these simple arguments. The facts speak for themselves. Bush can't hide from his record.
via Billmon, from the 2nd Presidential Debate (Oct. 11, 2000):
It's time to have a new commander in chief who will rebuild the military, pay our men and women more and make sure they're housed better, and have a focused mission for our military.
Rebuild the military? Under President Bush, the military that Clinton built has been stretched far thinner on imperial adventurism than it ever was under Clinton. Nicholas Confessore's essential article in the Washington Monthly, GI Woe, details exactly how our armed forces are strained under the neocon-driven foreign policy that Bush, as Commander in Chief, must take ultimate responsibility for.
Pay our men and women more and make sure they are housed better? Ask the Marine Corp Times, which headlined: "House Republicans dig in against child tax credit for combat troops." Or ask the Army Times, which called the praise of the military by Bush and the GOP Congress "nothing but lip service". Army families are noticing- and reacting with anger.
Have a more focused mission for our military? What exactly are we doing in Afghanistan? Where are the WMDs that Rumsfeld knew for a fact were "in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad" ? Is there any coherence to our foreign policy whatsoever besides economic and strategic opportunism?
Then consider Bush's rhetoric for those who served - about veterans, Bush has said (at the VFW 2001 convention):
My administration understands America's obligations not only go to those who wear the uniform today, but to those who wore the uniform in the past: to our veterans. And at times, those obligations have not been met. Veterans in need of care have been kept waiting, and thousands of veterans' claims have been delayed, or in some cases lost in the bureaucracy.
Understands America's obligations to our veterans? Then why didn't Bush provide additional funding to VA by designating $5 billion appropriated by Congress as emergency spending, as he had promised? Why are veterans in the Priority 8 Group (including vets with incomes as low as $24,644, affecting about 520,000 veterans by 2005) being shut out of health services? Why doesn't VA have sufficient resources to meet its obligations to those who served? Why won't the Bush Administration put its support behind concurrent-receipt - allowing those veterans who incurred a disability while serving the nation in uniform to receive both retirement and disability benefits?
These broken promises are the wounds - but Bush's dereliction of duty, his clumsy propaganda of ingratiation, and his false and harmful bravado thousands of miles from the front, are the salt rub.
These are the simple facts. Bush is unfit to be Commander in Chief, and the GOP is brazen in its attempts to sacrifice the interests of our men and women in uniform for tax breaks for the rich. And armed with these facts, Dean can wipe the floor with any who dare to suggest otherwise. We don't even need Wesley Clark to be onboard to make these simple arguments. The facts speak for themselves. Bush can't hide from his record.
the complete Dean-esbury
Monday: Dad, would you ever consider voting for Howard Dean?
Tuesday: Um, Dad, I was alive in 2000, ok?
Wednesday: Let me set the stage for you, Poppy...
Thursday:See, the Dean folks really have their act together on the Net...
Friday: Poppy, I think I'll host a Dean party, okay?
Saturday: Joe Lieberman, the Democrat?
Tuesday: Um, Dad, I was alive in 2000, ok?
Wednesday: Let me set the stage for you, Poppy...
Thursday:See, the Dean folks really have their act together on the Net...
Friday: Poppy, I think I'll host a Dean party, okay?
Saturday: Joe Lieberman, the Democrat?
Dean Nation Rally update http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/TR?pg=personal&fr_id=1090&px=1179278
In two days, we've inched forward to 35% of our goal of $10,000 for Dean! Not bad, but we have a long way to go! Remember, our goal is to have $10,000 by the end of Tuesday - and we know the campaign is watching and deeply appreciative of all we have done so far!
There are over 2000 of us visiting this blog daily. If we all just kicked in $5 each, we'd blow right through our goal in one day! I know we have all given as much as we could to help Dean make history on the Q2 deadline - after all, it was $7 Million Monday - but there's surely got to be some spare change lying around that we can use, to raise our collective voices as Dean Nation, that we are Dean's and Dean is ours!
We are Dean Nation - and we are as much part of the fabric of the Dean Phenomenon as the candidate himself! It's our country and we aren't going to take it anymore - we want our country back, and we want to show the GOP-minion lobbyists on K-street just who the Declaration of Independence was for!
We are Dean Nation, and we can raise $10,000 for Dean. And we will!
There are over 2000 of us visiting this blog daily. If we all just kicked in $5 each, we'd blow right through our goal in one day! I know we have all given as much as we could to help Dean make history on the Q2 deadline - after all, it was $7 Million Monday - but there's surely got to be some spare change lying around that we can use, to raise our collective voices as Dean Nation, that we are Dean's and Dean is ours!
We are Dean Nation - and we are as much part of the fabric of the Dean Phenomenon as the candidate himself! It's our country and we aren't going to take it anymore - we want our country back, and we want to show the GOP-minion lobbyists on K-street just who the Declaration of Independence was for!
We are Dean Nation, and we can raise $10,000 for Dean. And we will!
open thread: meeting Dean http://metajournalism.blogspot.com/2003_06_29_metajournalism_archive.html#105708766677810468
A fellow blogger has a fascinating account of being Dean's chauffeaur for a day in New York:
This intensely personal view of Dean is quite at odds with the view that we tend to get from reading this blog or the campaign site or the other usual stories and coverage. And to an extent, Farhad Manjoo is correct in his recent Salon article, that Dean the real person is almost conspicously absent from the virtual side of his grassroots support (though the recent photo gallery of Dean does help rectify this a bit) Let's try and redress that (unfortunate but inescapable) imbalance - use the comments as an open thread to share your own personal experiences with having met Howard Dean in person.
--Howard Dean was a firebrand when his flame was on.
That is, he seemed to be able to turn his politician face on and off at will. While in the car, he even took a nap, presumably worn out from months of non-stop campaigning. But as soon as the occassion turned to movement and action, he had as much spirit as anyone I've ever seen. Truly, he was a physician. Only a physician can be accustomed to the kind of hours Dean keeps and the kind of work he does, while performing at his peak whenever it's needed. This, ladies and gents, is an extremely efficient human being.
--Dean was gracious but not warm.
Dean was genuinely nice when he first got in the car, introducing himself and thanking me for volunteering. He was being debriefed for most of the rides, but his interactions with his staff were, likewise, gracious, but matter-of-fact. This seems to be corroborated by stories in the press, of which there are many more now that Dean has taken flight.
--Dean was pink.
Not knowing when he'd be thrust in front of a camera, Dean had a centimeter of pink blush coating his leathery complexion. You could barely make out any wrinkles in the jowels of his square-lined face. My first thought was that he looked like he'd just gotten done with dress rehearsal for "Dancing at Lugnhasa," but I realized how necessary this paint job was once he ended up on stage and under harsh lights no fewer than a half-dozen times over the day.
--Dean was an amazing extemporaneous speaker.
Naturally he's practiced his many talking points til he's blue in the face, but he went the entire day without a single written word in front of him. (Try and get President Teleprompter to accomplish that.) I had the good fortune of seeing Dean give his final speech of the night, a 25-minute harangue/panegyric/sermon/inspirational that had the roof shaking. He covered every topic under the sun, and unlike most political speeches, this one was short on platitude and heavy on emotion. At the end, everyone left believing it was up to us to change the world; it felt almost like he'd given us a gift from onstage, passed it around the room and let us all share in a piece of the same token. I got that gentle tickle in my chest I get whenever I feel genuinely inspired.
--Dean never once mentioned his family, and they are being kept out of sight.
I noticed this a couple weeks ago, when the whole thing with dean's son blew up. His family has never been a visible part of his political life. It doesn't look like they're going to be. His wife wasn't travelling with him, even though it's only about a five-hour car ride to NYC.
--Lastly, Dean is an odd duck.
I almost didn't have the opportunity to drive Dean because he had insisted on riding the subway all day. This, in spite of 110 degree weather in the tunnel, unbearable humidity, and largely inconvenient routes for getting from place to place. People have suggested that he just wanted to be 'a man of the people,' you know, for political purposes. Everything I saw yesterday, however, contradicts that impression. Everyone on the campaign was actively trying to convince him to take a car because the weather looked stormy and it was obscenely hot. The distances he travelled by subway made him late for everything. Add to this Dean's relative and continuing annonymity, and he has no reason to go on the trains. No one recognized him; it had nothing to do with political gain. He just wanted to take the train. As a matter of fact, when I picked him up, he had been reluctantly convinced that the distance was too far to manage by train or by foot. The man wanted to walk in 90 degree weather from Madison and 35th Street all the way to Chelsea. Not only would this take far too much time, but it would be unnecessarily taxing on everyone involved.
This intensely personal view of Dean is quite at odds with the view that we tend to get from reading this blog or the campaign site or the other usual stories and coverage. And to an extent, Farhad Manjoo is correct in his recent Salon article, that Dean the real person is almost conspicously absent from the virtual side of his grassroots support (though the recent photo gallery of Dean does help rectify this a bit) Let's try and redress that (unfortunate but inescapable) imbalance - use the comments as an open thread to share your own personal experiences with having met Howard Dean in person.
Saturday, July 05, 2003
THANK YOU -- It Started Here as Much as Anywhere Else htp://www.deanforamerica.com
We just wanted to post a big Thank You to those who started this blog, those that were among its earliest visitors and commentors -- and to all those who visit here now and make the Dean campaign stronger everyday.
While the press and other campaigns try to figure out what has happened and what it all means -- we at Burlington HQ know that it was this blog and a few others that have from the very beginning sustained the campaign -- taught us so much -- and helped us grow to the 180,000 strong that we are today.
Thanks Dean Nation Team -- and we will be watching with everyone else on Tuesday as you hit $10,000.
Joe Trippi
campaign manager
Dean for America
While the press and other campaigns try to figure out what has happened and what it all means -- we at Burlington HQ know that it was this blog and a few others that have from the very beginning sustained the campaign -- taught us so much -- and helped us grow to the 180,000 strong that we are today.
Thanks Dean Nation Team -- and we will be watching with everyone else on Tuesday as you hit $10,000.
Joe Trippi
campaign manager
Dean for America
Short-Fused Populist, Breathing Fire at Bush http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A11710-2003Jul5¬Found=true
The Washington Post has been publishing what it calls the Contender Series in which it profiles each of the Democratic candidates running for president. This weekend, the paper printed the sixth profile of the series on Gov. Howard Dean, MD.
The article, as most have to date, recognizes the progress and growth the the Dean Campaign as experienced over the last several months.
It also sheds some light on the nick name "Ho-Ho."
And it's always refreshing when you see the media recognize the fact the the conventional liberal/conservative labels can't be fairly put on Howard Dean:
The story traces Dean's history and politics. It's worth the read. There will probably be a few tid bits of information in it that you haven't heard about the governor before.
He says he is running for president because he is too upset at the direction the country is heading not to do something about it. Howard Brush Dean III, 54, a Park Avenue-bred medical doctor, is the Democrats' angry Everyman, heading to Washington to make things right.
The article, as most have to date, recognizes the progress and growth the the Dean Campaign as experienced over the last several months.
After six months of full-time campaigning, he has gone from being the asterisk to the rising star of the nine Democrats vying for the nomination to challenge Bush. In aggressively confronting the administration, Dean has tapped the discontent, and even anger, among the party's ranks with the self-assurance of the doctor he once was and the combativeness of the governor he became. Now Dean, the shortish (about 5-foot-8) contender with the flushed face and the rolled-up sleeves, is the one with the buzz and the blogs.
It also sheds some light on the nick name "Ho-Ho."
"Sometimes Howard's tongue is faster than his brain," said Peter Freyne, a columnist for Seven Days, a weekly newspaper in Burlington, Vt. It doesn't help matters that Dean speaks off the cuff; out of hundreds of campaign speeches he has delivered, only four were written in advance. The rest were ad-libbed. "He's smart and energetic," Freyne said. "I've been calling him Ho-Ho for years, because he's like the little engine that could."
And it's always refreshing when you see the media recognize the fact the the conventional liberal/conservative labels can't be fairly put on Howard Dean:
"His being called a liberal is one of the great white lies of the campaign," said Tom Salmon, a fellow Democrat and governor of Vermont for two terms during the Nixon-Ford era. "He's a rock-solid fiscal conservative," Salmon said, "and a liberal on key social issues. But we're talking key issues."
The story traces Dean's history and politics. It's worth the read. There will probably be a few tid bits of information in it that you haven't heard about the governor before.
Rove is for Dean, and the DLC is against him, OK?
When you have the DLC and Rove saying the same thing, all kinds of red things start popping up in places. A top-of-the-pile rule is that when your opponent is going down what you know is a dead-end road, the last thing you do is show up to say so. You just let it be. Karl Rove is a professional liar. If you take anything he does at face value, you are being taken. As such, the press and Democratic establishment are regularly taken for rides into the long night by Rove:
What Rove fears is anything that upsets the current makeup of the electorate.
If the Democrats actually turnout their base to vote, that equation shifts to equal number of partisan voters. No one besides Dean, in the current field of Democrats, has the look of being able to energize the base to do this. Yet without it, as NDOL points out, Democrats have a slim chance at winning. If they can acheive that parity, then the Democrats have good odds in their favor in reaching the moderate voters:
I read that and see Howard “Social justice can’t occur without a balanced budget” Dean.
If you can believe that Karl Rove sees the netroots and grassroots activism that's happening in the Democratic Party for Howard Dean, and fathom him in thinking it's a great thing for Bush, he's fooled you again. What Rove is really doing is giving the DLC candidates and the media some fodder to try and take down Dean with, because Rove knows Dean is the strongest Democrat in the field-- which is why he's saying the exact opposite.
As a dozen (actually three dozen) people marched toward Dana Place wearing Dean for President T-shirts and carrying Dean for America signs, Rove told a companion, "Heh, heh, heh. Yeah, that's the one we want, How come no one is cheering for Dean? Come on, everybody! Go, Howard Dean!"
What Rove fears is anything that upsets the current makeup of the electorate.
For the past decade, the American electorate has been 30 percent conservative, 20 percent liberal, and 50 percent moderate...
If the Democrats actually turnout their base to vote, that equation shifts to equal number of partisan voters. No one besides Dean, in the current field of Democrats, has the look of being able to energize the base to do this. Yet without it, as NDOL points out, Democrats have a slim chance at winning. If they can acheive that parity, then the Democrats have good odds in their favor in reaching the moderate voters:
The Bush years have created a long list of unfinished business -- restoring an ethic of responsibility in Washington and in corporate America, asking more Americans to serve, rewarding work instead of wealth and privilege.
The way for Democrats to recapture the high ground and the White House is not to spend big, but to be genuinely bold. We need a president who, unlike Bush, won't give away money the country doesn't have. We need a president who doesn't think a new tone in Washington means putting his party's special interests first. Most of all, we need a president who won't just tell his friends what they want to hear, but will ask more of Americans and give them the chance to do better.
I read that and see Howard “Social justice can’t occur without a balanced budget” Dean.
If you can believe that Karl Rove sees the netroots and grassroots activism that's happening in the Democratic Party for Howard Dean, and fathom him in thinking it's a great thing for Bush, he's fooled you again. What Rove is really doing is giving the DLC candidates and the media some fodder to try and take down Dean with, because Rove knows Dean is the strongest Democrat in the field-- which is why he's saying the exact opposite.
Friday, July 04, 2003
The Dean Nation Rally Day http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/TR?pg=personal&fr_id=1090&px=1179278
Next Tuesday, July 8th, is Rally Day on this Dean 2004 weblog. By the close of Tuesday, we want to meet our goal of $10,000 in Dean Nation contributions.
As of June 29th, we were at $1,800. Today, July 4th, we are at $3,300. So give now, or come back on Tuesday for the webathon. $10 or $20 dollars, whatever you want to contribute. Tell your friends in the other chat message board sites, blog it, get out the netroots.
We'll post regular updates on the top of the left column sidebar. Lets kick off the 3rd quarter here by showing some people-powered-Howard action and sending the red up to the top for Dean Nation!
As of June 29th, we were at $1,800. Today, July 4th, we are at $3,300. So give now, or come back on Tuesday for the webathon. $10 or $20 dollars, whatever you want to contribute. Tell your friends in the other chat message board sites, blog it, get out the netroots.
We'll post regular updates on the top of the left column sidebar. Lets kick off the 3rd quarter here by showing some people-powered-Howard action and sending the red up to the top for Dean Nation!
Dean on ESPN http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/quickie
We know Dean's hit the big time when he gets off-hand mention on ESPN. But what's especially great about it is the context:
that's right - the Ichiro of the Democratic Party is all about letting the "fans" have a real say. The Daily Quickie gets it! Wish we could say the same for the DLC...
How appropriate: a Fourth of July voting controversy. Japanese baseball fans took advantage of online MLB All-Star voting to surge Ichiro and Hideki Matsui to likely starting spots, when the teams are announced on Sunday (7 p.m., ESPN).
Don't be an "international-hater": Plenty of U.S. fans propped up undeserving domestic stars or hometown players when the All-Star Game was decided on paper ballots available only in the U.S.
The point is that letting fans have a real say -- about anything -- is one of the best sports traditions, a reflection of uniquely American democracy. Technology has just made it easier for everyone to take part (just ask Howard Dean, the Ichiro of the Democratic Party).
Don't like Japanese fans running the show? It's the same as when you don't like the politician running your town: Exercise your opportunity to vote, and get others to vote, too. That's the American way.
that's right - the Ichiro of the Democratic Party is all about letting the "fans" have a real say. The Daily Quickie gets it! Wish we could say the same for the DLC...
reclaiming liberty from the Liberals http://www.denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/2003/07/Suicidebybureaucracy.shtml
Steven Den Beste has another essay I can agree with - about the absurdity of the EU's proposed regulations to force individual companies, not public agencies, to guarantee the "safety" of chemicals in industry.
The deeper problem is the same thing that afflicts the Right as well as the Left - taking your view too far on ideology rather than looking for a pragmatic synthesis (and willing to accept compromise). The necessary and counterbalancing principles that can safeguard our society from such dangerous folly are principled pragmatism and perfection is the enemy of the good, respectively.
I'm not a true conservative, so I'll leave the redefinition of conservatism to my equally principled and pragmatic friend Tacitus, who occupies the sole position in his niche as far as I am aware in the Blogsphere.
But I do identify myself as a liberal, and so it's reclaiming the word from the idealouges that I turn my attention towards. By liberal, I mean that I want liberty - to practice my faith, to pursue happiness, to make personal decisions and raise my family. I am liberal because to me liberty means removing obstacles to these pursuits and freedoms. And throughout history, the major barrier to the common man achieving them has been the interests of the Uncommon man - the powerful, the elite, the upper class, all those who have sought to concentrate economic, social, and political power in the ranks of the few.
The worst terrorists can do is kill me. I will live free and die free. But the worst that the Powers can do is make me live without freedom - because their goal is to bend my existence towards supporting theirs. Such is the foundation of their power. I prefer to live free or die.
To understand just how essential the struggle against these Powers has been, and how dearly bought our freedoms are, I strongly recommend Howard Zinn's book, A People's History of the United States. The foundations of American freedom were laid in 1776 on today's date, but they were not achieved until much later for blacks, women, American Indians, war resisters, poor laborers... The spirit of America is the struggle to put the written words of the Declaration of Independence into actual tangible reality for all those without the money or the influence to have mattered.
But Howard Zinn's history book is not a paean to socialism! It is simply a reminder using historical facts of what being Progressive means, of the goal of freedom and the details of teh struggle of the journey towards that goal.
For many Liberals today, however, that journey is equated with the goal. There is no recognition that the journey and the goal of the Progressives throughout history were to redress a balance, not serve as a complete system of philosophies on their own. The European Union is in many ways the ultimate manifestation of embracing the mechanisms of the Progressive movement while having completely lost sight of their rationale.
I mourn what Europe will become if it continues. And I know that there are many Liberals in America who see themselves as the intellectual heirs to the Progressive movement, but who do not realize the simple truth that by following the Liberal ideology they risk everything that the Progressives fought for. If the economy is destroyed as business moves away, there will be more poor and fewer rich - and the yoke of class tyranny will rise. If we abandon our sovereignity to higher and higher supra-national entities whose decisions are made in remote assemblies, then we again shackle ourselves to government without representation.
It's why I cannot support Dennis Kucinich - his vision of where America should be is fixed with Europe as an ideal. That way lies the destruction of our society. It is why I support Howard Dean, who has demonstrated the ability to find balance between principle and pragmatism. Dean is not a Liberal but he is a better guardian of Progressive ideals than any self-labeled Liberal candidate. The irony of his being labeled "unelectable" because of his supposed extreme liberalness is ironic - and even hilarious, as Republicans donate money to Dean thinking that they are torpedoing the Democratic party.
We must avoid the temptation of the extremes. Europe's Liberal implosion will take decades to play out - and we have to act in 2004 to avoid the mirror image process occurring here under extreme Conservative rule. This is why Dean matters. More than just his abiliity to raise funds from the Internet, even more than just his ability build the greatest grassroots suppport than any other candidate in history - it's his ideas that matter. And the process by which he arrives at them.
The deeper problem is the same thing that afflicts the Right as well as the Left - taking your view too far on ideology rather than looking for a pragmatic synthesis (and willing to accept compromise). The necessary and counterbalancing principles that can safeguard our society from such dangerous folly are principled pragmatism and perfection is the enemy of the good, respectively.
I'm not a true conservative, so I'll leave the redefinition of conservatism to my equally principled and pragmatic friend Tacitus, who occupies the sole position in his niche as far as I am aware in the Blogsphere.
But I do identify myself as a liberal, and so it's reclaiming the word from the idealouges that I turn my attention towards. By liberal, I mean that I want liberty - to practice my faith, to pursue happiness, to make personal decisions and raise my family. I am liberal because to me liberty means removing obstacles to these pursuits and freedoms. And throughout history, the major barrier to the common man achieving them has been the interests of the Uncommon man - the powerful, the elite, the upper class, all those who have sought to concentrate economic, social, and political power in the ranks of the few.
The worst terrorists can do is kill me. I will live free and die free. But the worst that the Powers can do is make me live without freedom - because their goal is to bend my existence towards supporting theirs. Such is the foundation of their power. I prefer to live free or die.
To understand just how essential the struggle against these Powers has been, and how dearly bought our freedoms are, I strongly recommend Howard Zinn's book, A People's History of the United States. The foundations of American freedom were laid in 1776 on today's date, but they were not achieved until much later for blacks, women, American Indians, war resisters, poor laborers... The spirit of America is the struggle to put the written words of the Declaration of Independence into actual tangible reality for all those without the money or the influence to have mattered.
But Howard Zinn's history book is not a paean to socialism! It is simply a reminder using historical facts of what being Progressive means, of the goal of freedom and the details of teh struggle of the journey towards that goal.
For many Liberals today, however, that journey is equated with the goal. There is no recognition that the journey and the goal of the Progressives throughout history were to redress a balance, not serve as a complete system of philosophies on their own. The European Union is in many ways the ultimate manifestation of embracing the mechanisms of the Progressive movement while having completely lost sight of their rationale.
I mourn what Europe will become if it continues. And I know that there are many Liberals in America who see themselves as the intellectual heirs to the Progressive movement, but who do not realize the simple truth that by following the Liberal ideology they risk everything that the Progressives fought for. If the economy is destroyed as business moves away, there will be more poor and fewer rich - and the yoke of class tyranny will rise. If we abandon our sovereignity to higher and higher supra-national entities whose decisions are made in remote assemblies, then we again shackle ourselves to government without representation.
It's why I cannot support Dennis Kucinich - his vision of where America should be is fixed with Europe as an ideal. That way lies the destruction of our society. It is why I support Howard Dean, who has demonstrated the ability to find balance between principle and pragmatism. Dean is not a Liberal but he is a better guardian of Progressive ideals than any self-labeled Liberal candidate. The irony of his being labeled "unelectable" because of his supposed extreme liberalness is ironic - and even hilarious, as Republicans donate money to Dean thinking that they are torpedoing the Democratic party.
We must avoid the temptation of the extremes. Europe's Liberal implosion will take decades to play out - and we have to act in 2004 to avoid the mirror image process occurring here under extreme Conservative rule. This is why Dean matters. More than just his abiliity to raise funds from the Internet, even more than just his ability build the greatest grassroots suppport than any other candidate in history - it's his ideas that matter. And the process by which he arrives at them.
open thread: Independence Day
let's reflect on our nation today - share your thoughts, your dreams, and your aspirations, your vision of a better America. And celebrate our fortunes to live in the greatest country in the history of the world.
Thursday, July 03, 2003
Statement by Governor Howard Dean on Bush’s Failed Economic Policies
From the Dean Campaign...
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 3, 2003
Statement by Governor Howard Dean on Bush’s Failed Economic Policies
DAVENPORT, IA--While campaigning in Iowa today, Governor Howard Dean, M.D., released the following statement on today's economic: "Today's economic news provides further evidence that America's working families are under siege-by the Bush administration and by the worsening economy.
"New unemployment figures show that more Americans are unemployed than at any time since the end of the last Bush recession. For the first time since Herbert Hoover, there may be fewer Americans with jobs at the end of a Presidency than at the beginning.
"The Bush administration's economic policies give with one hand and take away with the other: While giving enormous tax cuts to those who need it least, they're taking away protections for workers who need it most.
"In the midst of an economic recession hitting hardest at America's working families, the President should not be trying to take away basic protections for workers that have been in place since Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal.
"I call on the Bush administration to end its efforts to take away from eight million middle class workers the protections afforded by the Fair Labor Standards Act-a 40 hour work week and overtime pay.
"For the millions of Americans without a job, the millions who may lose overtime and worker protections, and the millions more who have stopped looking for work, today's headlines only confirm the reality they know all too well-George Bush's economic policies are failing America's working families."
-- 30 --
Washington Post's Cohen http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1907-2003Jul2.html
Today, Richard Cohen of the Washington Post published a column in which he accused Gov. Dean of changing his position on the death penalty for political benefit. The article quotes extensively from the governor's Meet the Press interview not too long ago.
I disagree with Gov. Dean on the death penalty. But I respect the fact that he stands by his position. Dean did not change his position for the 2004 presidential race. He changed his position in the early 90's. Cohen plays loose with the facts and in the process paints the governor as a fraud - one who portrays himself as a straight talker for political benefit, and then turns around and flip flops.
If the governor was really picking and choosing the positions he takes to appeal to the majority as Cohen asserts he does on the death penalty, would he really have signed civil union legislation? Further, would he continue to advocate for gay rights? Would he have opposed military action in Iraq? Would he attack a popular president? Of course not. We know better than that, and I'm fairly sure Cohen does too.
I would encourage you all to write letters to the editor and send them to the post. letters@washpost.com is the address to use.
The Washington Post is a very big paper in Washington, as I'm sure you are all familiar. Gov. Dean's credibility being called into question before the crowd down there is not a good thing. Please take a few moments to send The Post a note regarding the article which you can read in whole by following the link above.
UPDATE: The Dean Defence Forces address this topic online here.
I disagree with Gov. Dean on the death penalty. But I respect the fact that he stands by his position. Dean did not change his position for the 2004 presidential race. He changed his position in the early 90's. Cohen plays loose with the facts and in the process paints the governor as a fraud - one who portrays himself as a straight talker for political benefit, and then turns around and flip flops.
If the governor was really picking and choosing the positions he takes to appeal to the majority as Cohen asserts he does on the death penalty, would he really have signed civil union legislation? Further, would he continue to advocate for gay rights? Would he have opposed military action in Iraq? Would he attack a popular president? Of course not. We know better than that, and I'm fairly sure Cohen does too.
I would encourage you all to write letters to the editor and send them to the post. letters@washpost.com is the address to use.
The Washington Post is a very big paper in Washington, as I'm sure you are all familiar. Gov. Dean's credibility being called into question before the crowd down there is not a good thing. Please take a few moments to send The Post a note regarding the article which you can read in whole by following the link above.
UPDATE: The Dean Defence Forces address this topic online here.
Computerworld on Dean http://www.computerworld.com/developmenttopics/websitemgmt/story/0,10801,82771,00.html
Excerpt:
"He's really leveraging the medium, putting it in the hands of the people," said Carol Baroudi, an analyst at Baroudi Bloor in Arlington, Mass., and a co-author of The Internet for Dummies. "This medium is the most dynamic medium available. It's when I want it, it's there, and it keeps getting refreshed."
....
"What he's done is substantiated a community."
....
"To me, this is hopeful because it has a way of reaching out and touching people in a way that can't be controlled yet," Baroudi said. "[President] Bush has been putting all of his money into owning the media, and this is a medium he doesn't own."
Templates for Dean flyers and leaflets http://annatopia.com/pics/dean/flyers/
I've got a small collection of flyer and leaflet templates on my site. With Dean currently barnstorming the country, I've noticed lots of comments on the zonkboard from people requesting flyers. Feel free to grab what I've got. Most of the files are pdfs, so you can modify them to suit your local events. There are four brand-new flyers, each named Rally*. You'll notice that there are spanish-language flyers, and I'm waiting on a friend to email me the templates for flyers written in Mandarin Chinese.
And as a general shout out, if anyone has flyers in Korean or Vietnamese, please leave a comment. My town has a very large Korean and Vietnamese population that we'd like to reach out to.
Go get 'em!
update July 4th flyers can be download from the great people at DeanVolunteers.org. Grab the pdf by clicking here.
And as a general shout out, if anyone has flyers in Korean or Vietnamese, please leave a comment. My town has a very large Korean and Vietnamese population that we'd like to reach out to.
Go get 'em!
update July 4th flyers can be download from the great people at DeanVolunteers.org. Grab the pdf by clicking here.
Kos Cattle Call: Dean #1 http://www.dailykos.com/archives/003269.html#003269
Kos ranks Dean at the top:
read the full entry for his analysis of how (poorly) everyone else fared in the Week of Dean. Also, Kos has some fairly insightful critiques of just what the hell Joe Biden thinks he is supposed to be doing. Maybe Biden wants to challenge Joe Lieberman for last place - or has his eye on the Republican primary, I don't know. But he's making himself irrelevant.
Yup, he deserves top dog status. $7.5 million when everyone expected $3 million will do that to a candidate. Every other candidate is talking about Dean. The press is talking about Dean. Events in Iraq are supporting Dean's war stance, while the Supreme Court's ruling on Sodomy Laws vindicates his civil unions stance. Heck, even his much-maligned MTP appearance was a catalyst for his unbelievable fundraising numbers.
And word from the campaign is that money continued to pour into the campaign via the web even after the Q2 period ended (though obviously not at a clip of $600,000/day!).
Of course, now every other candidate is training his guns on Dean. One interesting advantage Dean has -- the GOP thinks (erroneously) that Dean would be the easiest candidate to face in the general. So expect the Mighty Wurlitzer to take a pass on Dean for the moment.
read the full entry for his analysis of how (poorly) everyone else fared in the Week of Dean. Also, Kos has some fairly insightful critiques of just what the hell Joe Biden thinks he is supposed to be doing. Maybe Biden wants to challenge Joe Lieberman for last place - or has his eye on the Republican primary, I don't know. But he's making himself irrelevant.
Dean Defense Forces: Rebuilding and Moving Forward http://www.deandefense.org/
Dean Defense Forces will be slowly evolving over the next month into a much stronger outfit. Check out our blog at http://www.deandefense.org/ to find out how to respond to questions about Dean.
Or join our listserv by emailing us at ddf -at- deandefense.org, subject line 'SUBSCRIBE' to get Action Alerts making sure the voice of Dean supporters is heard.
Or join our listserv by emailing us at ddf -at- deandefense.org, subject line 'SUBSCRIBE' to get Action Alerts making sure the voice of Dean supporters is heard.
Daily Howler on Dean's media coverage http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh070303.shtml
Bob Somerby's Daily Howler website is a fantastic resource for cutting through the hypocrisy of the Pundit Class. His piece on the way Dean has been treated in the media is a great example of how he cuts right through the morass. To make his point, Somerby draws a distinction using Cohen's piece on Dean's death penalty stance as an example of how coverage should be:
Meanwhile, Cohen presents an original view! You haven’t seen thirty-five other pundits say precisely the same thing this week. By the standards of contemporary punditry, therefore, this is a startling piece of work. You may or may not agree with Cohen. But if this were the way our elections were covered, THE DAILY HOWLER wouldn’t exist. Neither, of course, would the Bush White House.
Because this is certainly not the way Campaign 2000 was covered. As ombudsman E. R. Shipp wrote in the Washington Post, the press corps essentially “typecast” that race, creating a mindless, hackneyed “drama” in which each candidate was “assigned a role” (see THE DAILY HOWLER, 3/7/00). Once the various roles were assigned, facts were persistently rearranged to fit the corps’ preferred scripts. “As a result of this approach,” Shipp wrote, “some candidates are whipping boys; others seem to get a free pass.” Sadly, that is how the press covered Campaign 2000. And, to judge by the coverage of Dean’s recent session, they’re ready to do it again.
Familiar figures are hard at work, banging out pleasing new scripts. For example, the morning after Dean’s appearance, Katharine Seelye got busy spinning in the New York Times. According to Seelye, Dean had “equivocated,” “sidestepped” and “guessed” his way through the Meet the Press performance. Most strikingly, Seelye pretended that Dean had “sidestepped” issues where he actually gave quite detailed replies. But readers would have no way to know that. Readers weren’t told what Dean had said, only what Seelye thought of his answers. This was “reporting” at its worst—the same type of crabbed “reporting” Seelye presented throughout Campaign 2000. In August 2000, the Financial Times nailed the Times spinner, saying she was “hostile to the [Gore] campaign, doing little to hide [her] contempt for the candidate.” It’s bad, bad news for American politics if Seelye is out there again.
critique of Dean's death penalty stance http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1907-2003Jul2.html
Richard Cohen finds fault with Dean's infamous MTP appearance - but does so in a substantive way, without focusing on the inane issue of whether 7% error in the number of troops is "egregiously wrong". Cohen writes:
It's a pleasure to see someone disagree with Dean for actual reasons, not foolish ones. Of course, his sound motivations doesn't mean he is wrong - it's obvious that Dean is not saying that we should execute people as a preventive measure even when they haven't committed a execution-worthy crime. However, Dean definitely did a poor job of making that distinction in the interview.
Dean once opposed the death penalty, citing "two reasons. One you might have the wrong guy, and, two, the state is like a parent" -- it ought to set an example. He also said, "I truly don't believe it's a deterrent." That's three reasons, but never mind. Then, on account of two horrific crimes, Dean's thinking underwent an evolution. "I came to realize because of the Polly Klaas case and because of similar other cases that sometimes the state inadvertently has a hand in killing innocent people because they let people out [of prison] who ought never to have been let out."
Granted, that was the case with Klaas, the 12-year-old California girl who was abducted, sexually attacked and murdered back in 1993. Her killer, Richard Allen Davis, had a long criminal record and was out on parole when he committed the crime. But none of his previous crimes were for death penalty offenses. Dean could argue that Davis should never have been free and deserved to die because of what he did to Klaas, but not for anything he did before. Davis didn't slip the noose. There was no noose for what he had done.
... Going on about felons getting out of jail and then killing, say, "15- and 12-year-old girls," he added, "That is every bit as heinous as putting to death someone who didn't commit the crime."
In all my years writing about the death penalty, I have never heard any politician admit that he would countenance the death of an innocent person in order to ensure that the guilty die. Dean is maybe the first to acknowledge the unacknowledgeable. For that, I suppose, he ought to be congratulated. But by equating the murder of one individual by another with the murder of an innocent person by the government -- the unpreventable with the preventable -- he has casually trashed several hundred years of legal safeguards.
It's a pleasure to see someone disagree with Dean for actual reasons, not foolish ones. Of course, his sound motivations doesn't mean he is wrong - it's obvious that Dean is not saying that we should execute people as a preventive measure even when they haven't committed a execution-worthy crime. However, Dean definitely did a poor job of making that distinction in the interview.
NPR: Dean's online success http://publicbroadcasting.net/wnyc/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=516983
Listen to NPR's (from VT Public Radio) report on the Dean Campaign and online fundraising. You can also read the story here.