Profile
Search
Register
Log in
Dean's speech from last night
View previous topic | View next topic >

Post new topic Reply to topic
Strange Famous Forum > Social stuff. Political stuff. KNOWMORE

Author Message
Dee



Joined: 19 Jul 2002
Posts: 7872
 Reply with quote  

Carter didn't run on a liberal platform.

By todays standards, perhaps he did.

But at the time, he was running as a moderate.
Post Thu Jan 22, 2004 4:25 am
 View user's profile Send private message
rlorg



Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 474
 Reply with quote  

my mistake.

I should not have said Carter did not run as a moderate, because that was incorrect. You're right. He did. He was not a moderate, in my opinion, even by the standards of the the day, but he did run a moderate campaign. My mistake.

But to get back to the original discussion, Dean's as middle of the road as they come!

He's not running a liberal or progessive campaign. He's got that image because of his anti-war stance, but on almost all issues he's center-left and on a few, like gun control, he's center-right. He was my governer. He's no progressive. We have a real progessive party here, that actually wins elections, and Dean was at odds with them for most of his administration here.
Post Thu Jan 22, 2004 5:12 am
 View user's profile Send private message
shambhala



Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 6297
Location: the barber of hard truths
well now  Reply with quote  

some of you are exposing that you've done little research into your claims

a lot more than just ben stein claimed that speech was dean's undoing....and who the fuck cares anyway, that was my observation.....it doesn't take much to destroy a political candidate, one sound byte and goodbye.....

and clark was fired for taking on the military establishment and challenging them to apply force for purely humanitarian reasons.....the pentagon claimed it could not be done.....and clark and madeline albright probably saved hundreds of thousands of ethnic albanians from being killed.....because he was so successful he lost his job

how's that for tension between the executive and military?
Post Thu Jan 22, 2004 9:23 am
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Soul Khansenses



Joined: 12 Aug 2002
Posts: 2110
Re: well now  Reply with quote  

shambhala wrote:
some of you are exposing that you've done little research into your claims

a lot more than just ben stein claimed that speech was dean's undoing....and who the fuck cares anyway, that was my observation.....it doesn't take much to destroy a political candidate, one sound byte and goodbye.....

and clark was fired for taking on the military establishment and challenging them to apply force for purely humanitarian reasons.....the pentagon claimed it could not be done.....and clark and madeline albright probably saved hundreds of thousands of ethnic albanians from being killed.....because he was so successful he lost his job

how's that for tension between the executive and military?


I didn't say that Ben Stein was the only person who called the speech Dean's undoing, but really, looking at the biggest naysayers, you find pretty shoddy company. Dean's single gaffe (though it would be less of a gaffe without the media's exaggeration of it) could ruin him, but considering that it wasn't the sort that showed him as ideologically unsound, incompetent, or ethically decrepit, it's chances of doing so aren't especially high. By no means did it help him. I never said that it did.

I am well aware of Wesley Clark's record, but I would really prefer someone more remote from the military historically than him. Is that unfair to him as a man? Somewhat. However, I'm really cautious about someone immersed in military culture at the real top of the military chain of command. Call it paranoia, but I really fear respectful predispositions and acquiescence in government. Positioning figures of differing civil service backgrounds in the government can help stave off the emergence of these elements.
Post Thu Jan 22, 2004 10:23 am
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
The Dude Abides



Joined: 25 Aug 2003
Posts: 334
Location: Miami, Fl
 Reply with quote  

Today on howard stern they played it with the music from the exorcist and it was great.
Post Thu Jan 22, 2004 11:55 am
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
Soul Khansenses



Joined: 12 Aug 2002
Posts: 2110
 Reply with quote  

The Dude Abides wrote:
Today on howard stern they played it with the music from the exorcist and it was great.


If you play it over "Takeover" it's the jam.
Post Thu Jan 22, 2004 11:57 am
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
Dee



Joined: 19 Jul 2002
Posts: 7872
 Reply with quote  

rlorg wrote:
my mistake.

I should not have said Carter did not run as a moderate, because that was incorrect. You're right. He did. He was not a moderate, in my opinion, even by the standards of the the day, but he did run a moderate campaign. My mistake.

But to get back to the original discussion, Dean's as middle of the road as they come!

He's not running a liberal or progessive campaign. He's got that image because of his anti-war stance, but on almost all issues he's center-left and on a few, like gun control, he's center-right. He was my governer. He's no progressive. We have a real progessive party here, that actually wins elections, and Dean was at odds with them for most of his administration here.



I disagree. I think he's running from a very liberal perspective - very anti-war, primarily - and although he is a moderate democrat, he has energized the grassroots/activist support of his party!
Post Thu Jan 22, 2004 12:05 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
rlorg



Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 474
 Reply with quote  

He's not anti-war.

He's said so many times that he's against this particular war but he wouldn't have hesitated to use military force in Afganistan, or in Iraq the first time around or in a number of other instances.

All his positions, from health care to AIDS funding to education, are all Clintonesque middle of the road.

Of the viable candidates, the only one with a mildly progessive agenda is Edwards.
Post Sat Jan 24, 2004 12:54 am
 View user's profile Send private message
rlorg



Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 474
Re: well now  Reply with quote  

shambhala wrote:
some of you are exposing that you've done little research into your claims

a lot more than just ben stein claimed that speech was dean's undoing....and who the fuck cares anyway, that was my observation.....it doesn't take much to destroy a political candidate, one sound byte and goodbye.....

and clark was fired for taking on the military establishment and challenging them to apply force for purely humanitarian reasons.....the pentagon claimed it could not be done.....and clark and madeline albright probably saved hundreds of thousands of ethnic albanians from being killed.....because he was so successful he lost his job

how's that for tension between the executive and military?


That's the one reason I really really like Clark.
There are some times when we NEED to use our military might, where we can do an incredible amount of good if we do.

Rwanda and the Balkans were two of those times, and in both we failed miserable. We hindered, along with a whole host of European countries, the UN troops in Rwanda to the point where if they had tried to do anything at all they would have been massacred themselves.

And the only good we did in the Balkans came directly from Clark and Albright.
Post Sat Jan 24, 2004 1:13 am
 View user's profile Send private message
Dee



Joined: 19 Jul 2002
Posts: 7872
 Reply with quote  

rlorg wrote:
He's not anti-war.

He's said so many times that he's against this particular war but he wouldn't have hesitated to use military force in Afganistan, or in Iraq the first time around or in a number of other instances.

All his positions, from health care to AIDS funding to education, are all Clintonesque middle of the road.

Of the viable candidates, the only one with a mildly progessive agenda is Edwards.


I'm drunk so this won't be the most effective argument but no, you are wrong.
Edwards is more moderate than most of the candidates.
Dean is anti-IRAQI war which is to what I referred.
booyha.
Post Sat Jan 24, 2004 2:27 am
 View user's profile Send private message

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
All times are GMT - 6 Hours.
The time now is Tue Jul 29, 2014 2:41 am
  Display posts from previous:      


Powered by phpBB: © 2001 phpBB Group
Template created by The Fathom
Based on template of Nick Mahon