Tom&#39;s Journal

We will see how wise it was to have Dean as the DNC Chair. I know the republicans are doing a happy dance over this, since they feel that Dean will make going to the center very difficult for the Democrats. I kinda agree. Still scarier is that Jackson thinks Dean is too far to the left, wow!

From:

You didn't read Jesse's article. He actually doesn't think Dean is too far to the left, he's just defining the MORAL center.

The republicans are doing the happy dance because they are scared, and they know they have to hide that they are scared. The best thing for the Republicans is when the Dems play into their hand and move to the right. The worst thing for Republicans is when we move to the left.

From:

Absolutely!

From:

As I said we will see. I know many republicans and the idea that they are scared of Dean is just plan silly. I have never understood how embraceing the politics of 10% of the population will allow a group to win over at least 51% of the population. In truth the democrat that scares republicans is H. Clinton. Why? Because she just may be able to sell herself as a moderate. Dean just can not.

I remember in the election my repubican friends hopeing Dean would win the Democratic nomination. They were kinda disappointed when he lost it. But I think it is very likely you don't have many republican friends nor do you often talk with republicans so I think it is highly unlikely you know what the republicans are thinking... other then what the democratic left tells you they are thinking.

From:

quietann.livejournal.com

The very odd thing about this is that overall Dean is quite the moderate. He's more toward the "socially liberal, fiscally conservative" ideal that libertarians talk about. Yes, some of his most fervent supporters are very much to the left, but he himself is not.

Now the trick is to convince the rest of the world.

From:

likethewatch.livejournal.com

On the subject of Jackson's article, I stopped reading when he claimed that half of African American children grow up among broken sidewalks. WTF? It's hard to find someone who'll claim to stand for something other than what's right, which is all he's campaigning for in this article. That's a hollow call.

From:

airshipjones.livejournal.com

So, does this make all the time working for the Dean campaign feel worthwhile?

From:

Let me ask you this:

If Ralph Reed became chair of the RNC would the democrats be dancing in the street safe in the knowledge that people are going to leave the republican party? No, it would confirm what they already know about the Republicans: the party has been lost to the extremists. The Dems would be scared. The Republicans are scared too... they just tell their troops to act happy so that nobody knows.

The only people calling Howard a extremist are the Republicans, because they know that will hurt him. If the Republicans had just spent 30 years making the word "tall" a bad thing then they would have called him "tall". The truth is that Dean is more conservative than Clinton... he just doesn't back down from a fight like Gore or Kerry. That's what scared the Republicans.

Why is being for the war in Afganistan and against the war in Iraq considered "liberal"? Why is ballancing the Vermont budget, cutting taxes, and creating a "rainy-day fund" and giving healthcare to all children under age 18 in the same year considered "liberal"?

From:

qwrrty.livejournal.com

Dean becoming DNC chair is the best political news I have had since the Massachusetts SJC ruled in favor of equal marriage rights.

From:

Absolutely!

(though, not until you mentioned it!)

From:

Which part did you disagree with? That it's 50% or that he was only talking about A-A children and not all children?

From:

Maybe I shouldn't say this but... I am disturbed when people use the words "Nazi" or "fascist" casually. Those words used to have specific political meaning, before Rush Limbaugh started aiming them at people like me ("feminazi," "environazi"). Now people on the left are doing the same thing. One problem with vacating a word of meaning is that, when something with that meaning comes along, you can't name it any more -- the word has morphed into something else.

The current issue of the American Conservative has a thoughtful article discussing what the author sees as a rising celebration in this country of power, violence, and the authority of the state -- i.e., fascism. We need to be able to see, and speak, the real differences between people like Terry McAulliffe and fascists.

http://www.amconmag.com/2005_02_14/article.html

From:

rainbear.livejournal.com

I know a number of Dems who refer to Dean as an extremist. This topic came up just this past Wednesday night, actually--I mentioned that "It looks like Dean's getting the DNC chair.." "Oh, you think this is a *good* thing?" "You think it isn't?" "He's a bit too left for most of America, don't you think?" "What, you're still hung up on the 'I Have A Scream' speech, aren't you?" "Well...."

And yes, *I* know the Scream speech was because Dean shot himself in his ass by mentioning how he wanted to break up the Big Media Conglomerates. But most of America *doesn't* know this. And so that is the impression they will always have of him. Right or wrong as it may be. :-/

From:

"The only people calling Howard a extremist are the Republicans..."

I wish that were true. I see that meme in personal conversations, in the magazines I read, even on LJ. People believe it's true because they have heard it so much.

And the idea rings true, I think, because Dean is passionate. He genuinely cares, emotionally cares, about the consequences of policies. That's scary not just to Republicans, but also to Democrats and independents who feel insecure and defensive about what's going on in this country, and want to keep an emotional distance from their feelings. Dean's public persona is not about emotional distance -- it's about passion and enthusiasm.

If you look at Dean's policy stances, however, he's quite moderate. He fits the "fiscally conservative, socially progressive" model quite well. And he isn't even *that* socially progressive. He endorsed civil unions because the VT Supreme Court forced the state to choose between civil unions and same-sex marriages, and he chose the more conservative option.

So I don't think Dean's politics are those of 10% of the population. He and Jim Wallis (the progressive evangelical author of "God's Politics) would agree on a lot of points. You won't find many pairs of people who agree on everything, of course, but that's not what we need to work together. And I, like Jim Wallis, think there are a lot of people out there -- some of them devout Christians -- who are looking for a politics of caring, solidarity, and peace-making.

If Dean and Wallis and their like continue to pull in people who were previously alienated from politics, things are going to change.

From:

I find myself thinking of Robert Reich's comment:

"Nonvoters know you can't change a corrupt system by being polite. The only way to speak truth to power is with the moral fervor of a true reformer."

("Reason," p. 200)

From:

cos

"going to the center" the way you seem to mean it, would be downright stupid. It has been failing the Democrats for a long time - the failure only masked for a while by Clinton's personal popularity. If you don't count Clinton, the Democrats have been losing power in every election since 1994, and the last three of those elections have happened with no Clinton and the results are pretty obvious. The more the Democrats try to move to the "center", the more they lose their soul, the more the Republicans move further right, the more the whole country's politics go to the right, and the less reason people see to vote for Democrats. Or as Dean and others have said, in a contest between a Republican and Republican, people will vote for the real Republican every time. The way to win is not to try to become more like them, it's to show people what you really stand for and why it's worth voting for. That's what the Democrats have been running scared from doing, and it's what Dean excels at doing.

To put it more simply: The purpose of a political party isn't to get elected, it's to promote their vision of what should be, to make something happen. If a party keeps trying to change itself to be more and more electable, people won't see what it stands for. It may get elected sometimes, but it will cede the power of making change to the other side. And it will lose whether it gets elected or not.

Democrats don't need to win the election, they need to win the argument - that will lead to getting elected. What the Democrats have been doing is ceding the argument, hoping to get elected in an environment where more and more people are convinced by the other side. That's a losing strategy no matter how well they succeed at it. It misses the point of politics. Dean understands that.

On a left-right spectrum, Dean isn't particularly far to the left or the middle, he's actually all over the map. He wants health care coverage for every single person in the country, he wants states' rights on gun control and got endorsed by the NRA in every election he ran in Vermont, he supports the death penalty in a limited set of cases but wants the system reformed to reduce conviction disparities and protect the innocent, he used to be on the board of northern new england Planned Parenthood, he was hard-nosed with the state budget and got into spats with the liberal side of his party when he refused to spend on things they wanted, he preserved more land than any governor in Vermont history, and promoted renewable energy... where exactly do you fit him on a left-right spectrum? It's just the wrong way to look at it.

Dean isn't about moving to the left or moving to the center, he's about making change, standing for a vision and really standing up for it, trying to show people a better way and getting them to vote for that and then making it happen, rather than trying to guess what they'll want and figuring out what to say and do to get their votes. Many people don't get it. Many Republicans are genuinely happy about Dean's election because they don't get it either. Dean is about winning the argument.

From:

holzman.livejournal.com

Jesse Jackson endorses marriage discrimination.

Until he deals with the beam in his eye, no one should give him any credibility when he points out the mote in his brothers'.

From:

Amen.

From:

Can you use that without using code like "marriage discimination"?

He supports same-sex marriage, if that's what you're talking about.

From:

holzman.livejournal.com

He supports same-sex marriage, if that's what you're talking about.

Could you cite that? The last I heard, "Jackson reiterated his support for the heterosexual definition of marriage, saying, "In my culture, marriage is a man-woman relationship."

From:

The trouble is you are thinking that "all children under age 18" "a raining day fund" are conservative concepts. Truth be told they are not. Nearly all social and religious issues Dean is extremely liberal. The health care for all children is again pushing state sponcered health care which is also a very liberal concept. The "Rain Day" fund is also a very liberal concept.. Republicans would say give us our money back. The against the war in Iraq is also a liberal stand. About the only area I see were he can clam a conservative stand is the War in Afganistan and A balanced Budget.

You see wiht his stance on homosexuality he will loose all the traditional marriage people and in recent event we have noticed these people represent at least 50-80% of the population depending on what area of the country you are talking about. His health care idea will loose the capitalist element of the comunity.

As for the "troops" being told anything... I want to tell you the secret weapon of the republican party. They listen and record. Dean have the records of Deans speeches and comments. They play them back when he tries to "be moderate". Thusly the proof is Dean's own words, Deans own votes, Deans own actions. Nothing need be made up for anyone.

As one of these "troops" I can honestly say Dean never scared me at all. I luaghed for a good hour after hearing he was taking the lead in the Democratic party. As for it the leaders of the republicans party are "Scared" of him... well there is no evidance of that. But you are welcome to think they are.

From: