Gephardt makes incredibly dumb comment

[Guest Jobber of the Week]

And I haven't even done anything! Jesus, at this rate I'm going to be out of a job in a month.

Whoa, here I thought you worked for the CIA or FBI or even the IRS (heh, heh.)

 

You're a PR wonk? I guess that explains why you hate the media so much though. Either that or I misinterpreted your statement.

[Guest Jobber of the Week]

Oh, please. This went way beyond putting his foot in his mouth. He swallowed his whole damn leg. It wasn't a misquote, it wasn't a slip of the tongue; he stated his position and he said that he supported STATES' RIGHTS on the issue of GUN CONTROL. Are you seriously telling me this clearly stated position is NOT the diametric opposite of the position held by his party, and especially by the extremely liberal wing of the party to whom he has consistently pandered?

 

Why can't each state decide for themselves over and above the federal law what they want or don't want? What the result will be, you won't get more gun control than what you've already got in Wyoming or Montana and Vermont, and you'll get a lot more in California and New Jersey. Fine.

He even reiterated (correctly) the probable results of his policy and he said "Fine" afterwards. I'm sorry, but this is not some sort of hurried, slapdash misrepresentation of his opinion. These are his words. They are clear and unequivocal. You don't need to spin them. Everyone can see that he meant exactly what he said.

The basic thing the "politico-media establishment" is missing with regard to Howard Dean's performance on MTP is that his answers are only a surprise to those that haven't heard them before. Those that haven't researched the man and understand where he's coming from assume that he's a screaming liberal. Wrong. Yesterday was no big surprise for those who have watched almost every speech he's given and heard almost every answer to every question he's been asked. Tim Russert simply packed every negative point into one small hour.

 

Tyler calls Dean unprepared... Hardly. Not only did he give more detailed (and politically riskier) answers than most but he showed a testy side that you don't see from most politicians. A side that shows he knows he's being hit hard and won't take the bait.

 

What the insiders don't get is that to the general public, Dean's performance is simply unexpected.

 

I generally don't take issue with Tim Russert for going after Dean. However I do feel the need to make two comments.

 

I thought it was just a touch disingenuous that Russert first used a quote from a recent Vermont newspaper stating that Dean just recently changed his views on the death penalty as a political maneuver to appeal to voters in South Carolina. Then he turns around and quotes Rev. Kenneth Angell, Bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Burlington Vermont, who also challenged Dean's position on the death penalty way back in 1997. Which is it Tim? 2003 or 1997? Funny how he didn't date the second quote.

 

It also looked to me, as an outsider, that Russert made himself look like a hack by repeatedly asking Dean for the actual size of our military. What does that have to do with anything? Really?

 

The "politico-media establishment" doesn't understand the campaign and those that support it. They don't understand how a candidate can be anti-war, pro-gun, pro-choice, pro-death penalty and pro-gay rights all at the same time and still appeal to all areas of the left. Figure that out then re-watch MTP.

 

I still think Dean needs to announce in the next month what his plans as President would be, because the support is there right now but another month of Bush Bashing and no plans will make it disappear.

 

 

 

I'm still rooting for John Edwards personally, the "Haven't Kicked Myself In The Ass Yet" candidate. =b

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Whoa, here I thought you worked for the CIA or FBI or even the IRS (heh, heh.)

 

You're a PR wonk? I guess that explains why you hate the media so much though. Either that or I misinterpreted your statement.

Three out of four. I'm studying abnormal psychology and behavioural science at Quantico, and I was seconded to the Executive Office from the CIA a couple of years ago. I don't do anything with the IRS, though. There are some depths even I won't sink to.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Those that haven't researched the man and understand where he's coming from assume that he's a screaming liberal.

Very good point. Having researched him following his comments, I find that his views on gun control are completely consistent with his previous policies. Still amazing, and if it gets out to his liberal base, absolutely disastrous. Renders him unelectable on its own, in my opinion. Hell, even some Republicans want federal gun controls.

 

Tyler calls Dean unprepared... Hardly. Not only did he give more detailed (and politically riskier) answers than most but he showed a testy side that you don't see from most politicians. A side that shows he knows he's being hit hard and won't take the bait.

Agreed.

 

What the insiders don't get is that to the general public, Dean's performance is simply unexpected.

Again, very much agreed. I was shocked. Shocked. I still am. It may be admirable for him to stick to his guns (so to speak) but it makes him so much dead weight in the primaries, never mind the election itself.

 

The "politico-media establishment" doesn't understand the campaign and those that support it. They don't understand how a candidate can be anti-war, pro-gun, pro-choice, pro-death penalty and pro-gay rights all at the same time and still appeal to all areas of the left.

Neither do I. I agree with 3 and a half out of those 5 stances but there's no way in hell he's going to build any kind of broad voter support with that set. Sadly, the man hasn't got a chance - and I say "sadly" in part because even though I like him a bit more now, I still want him to explain how the hell he justifies trashing Article VI of the Constitution so cavalierly. Also, it would be nice to know why he wants to abandon a missile shield with North Korea acting more lunatic than usual these days. Plus his idiotic stance on Medicare and and tax cuts, but I suppose those are standard Democratic planks, and he has to snag the party faithful somehow after his wild swerve on gun control.

 

I'm still rooting for John Edwards personally, the "Haven't Kicked Myself In The Ass Yet" candidate. =b

a/k/a the "Some Name Recognition Within The Living Room" candidate...

[Guest JMA]

Like I've said before, I'll settle for anyone who's not a nationalist or religious fundamentalist. '04 will actually be my first time voting (I turned 18 last March).

[Guest Tyler McClelland]

There were issues on which he seemed rather unprepared, especially his fiscal policy (on which he seemed kinda flustered; he says he wants a balanced budget, but couldn't tell where the money was going to come from... and not Social Security or Defense, either) and a stray comment that made it appear he was PRO-war.

 

I know he's pro-gun and pro-penalty; I've known that since the beginning. But, there were still answers that took up the majority of the time (i.e. again, fiscal policy) that he seemed kinda stumped about.

[Guest Spicy McHaggis]

It appears he can speak, at least.

I hate that attitude.

[Guest Tyler McClelland]

I'm sorry.

[Guest Jobber of the Week]

Neither do I. I agree with 3 and a half out of those 5 stances but there's no way in hell he's going to build any kind of broad voter support with that set. Sadly, the man hasn't got a chance - and I say "sadly" in part because even though I like him a bit more now, I still want him to explain how the hell he justifies trashing Article VI of the Constitution so cavalierly. Also, it would be nice to know why he wants to abandon a missile shield with North Korea acting more lunatic than usual these days. Plus his idiotic stance on Medicare and and tax cuts, but I suppose those are standard Democratic planks, and he has to snag the party faithful somehow after his wild swerve on gun control.

Well calling it a missle "shield" is just a touch generous. But that's another discussion for another day.

 

Nothing idiotic about his stance on the tax cuts. The most recent tax cuts means $2400 more per year in our pocket, and some don't want it. Because they don't want to saddle their kids with the debt. Until they cut spending to match the revenue then there is no real tax cut. It's just a low interest loan. Not to mention the immediate problem of state and local governments raising taxes to make up their shortages.

 

I can tell you exactly how he can build broad voter support if he wins the primary. Most any Democratic candidate will get most of the (far-left) votes that went to Nader in 2000. Dean very much appeals to moderate/center-left Democrats. That just leaves independents and DLC-type Democrats. Dean's track record in Vermont is very DLC friendly (even Clinton said so). The things that liberals don't like (death penalty and guns) actually appeal to independent voters. Not to mention the high ranking the NRA gave to Dean as Governor of Vermont (their highest ranking). Doesn't exactly neutralize the gun-nuts but most certainly will weaken any attacks they might levy against him.

[Guest Vyce]

Gephardt Worries Bush Will Overturn Sodomy Ruling

(2003-06-26) -- Rep. Dick Gephardt, D-MO, said today he worries that President Bush will use an executive order to overturn the Supreme Court's ruling in the Lawrence v. Texas case.

 

"With a stroke of the pen, Mr. Bush could make homosexual sodomy illegal again," said Rep. Gephardt. "We must pass legislation this month to prevent the willy-nilly use of executive orders to reverse Supreme Court decisions."