The text of this debate with Richard Pearle in Portland Oregon is naturally going to be overshadowed by the REAL story: some bonehead flinging his shoe at Richard Pearle, but please watch this video and listen to Howard Dean say things like, “Iraq was the low hanging fruit on the tree. Why not Iran or North Korea? Bush is doing nothing about them, in his fifth year in office. When are we going to start doing things about the real problems?”
Am I to assume that Dean wants war with Iran and North Korea because they are the bigger problem, because as far as I know, diplomacy is worth shit in these two powderkegs. What’s the other option? Or is this a long term plan of tough talk, so that, if the Dem wins the white house in 2008 they can have a war lined up and ready?
Why not? They’re not called the “war party” for nothing, you know. A quick look at the donations of war profiteers like Washington Group Int. should reveal that they like Democrats too. The guy who “ran” for base commander, er, I mean president obviously had no problem advocating, or voting, for war. Despite the occasional rhetorical flourish, the Democrats are not our friends, anymore than republicans care about the legions of poor health-insuranceless christians who voted for them in record numbers.
How can you assume that by [quote]When are we going to start doing things about the real problems?" [/quote] Dean was suggesting war? When I do things about my problems (i.e. high cost of vegetables in Taipei, excessive dog waste in my alley, pollution, crazy girlfriend, etc.), that doesn’t imply I hop into an Apache and go crazy (tho I definitely would have some fun with a personal Apache).
Dean is probably pointing out that the Bush administration, while taking a strong, direct stance against Baghdad, has really not made any strong stands against Iran or North Korea. No one is sure what stance our country is taking to counter these very real threats.
A few elected Democrats are against this war-- Kucinich, Dean, Byrd, a handful of others. I believe Barbara Lee was the only Congressperson to vote against the war in Afghanistan.
Here is the Defense Industry’s records of giving to both major U.S. parties since 1990, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. (Explore this site, it’s full of all kinds of fascinating info.)
Granted, the industry does favor the Repuglicans (60-40), but they clearly aren’t afraid of helping Demo-craps get power.
Clinton attacked Kosovo, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan, Sudan, what places am I missing?.. Not that I’d call D.L.C. golden boy Clinton a liberal, but I bet a lot of folks here would.
There has been some interesting Conservative opposition to this war. It’s important to remember that many of the “Neo-cons” are simply liberal hawks.
[quote=“s.b.”] It’s important to remember that many of the “Neo-cons” are simply liberal hawks.[/quote]s.b. -
Rules are that anyone who uses the term ‘necon’ has to buy everyone at the bar a drink.
[quote=“TainanCowboy”][quote=“s.b.”] It’s important to remember that many of the “Neo-cons” are simply liberal hawks.[/quote]s.b. -
Rules are that anyone who uses the term ‘necon’ has to buy everyone at the bar a drink.
Having said that, I agree with the sentence.[/quote]
I agree too. Its the Democratic Party that changed after the 60s. Dean Acheson, Paul Nitze – these were Democrats that had balls.
And if Ike were still around, I might be a Republican. Methinks you may be taking some GOP rhetoric too seriously, although Mississippi Democrats do now supposedly let blacks vote… This Democratic Party was almost totally complicit in getting us into Operation Quagmire II, not to mention the love of force in the Clinton administration, or Madelyn (sp?) Albright’s membership in the Carlyle group. After all, Robert Byrd does not a party make.
But, don’t even get me started on spineless Democrats. Rhetoric aside, the current trend in the Democratic Party (as illustrated by the DLC) seems to be racing Republicans to the right, especially on economic issues. Some say Dean’s DNC job is to counter this trend–which I doubt. I think they are just hoping to keep “liberal” voters from waking up to the reality of a party working against it’s supposed ideals. I really have a hard time imagining Dean would be any more against sending poor kids to die in Halliburton wars than any of the rest of them. Although, I also agree with sbmoor262004 that Dean’s quote above doesn’t necessarily lead to that conclusion. (To be fair, I imagine a Dean Democrat might let other companies bid on the contracts for the spoils.)
Tainan Cowboy: I’d happily buy you a drink, if I could figure out where the hell a bar is… :wanker:
alas…I am in that fabled city known as Tainan. Home of Taiwan culture and civility. Known far and wide for its beautiful women, strong and honest men, above average children and tasty snack food.
If you venture to this southwestern coastal paradise, do give me notice. I am on excellent terms with several purveyors of spirits and fare.
How can you assume that by [quote]When are we going to start doing things about the real problems?" [/quote] Dean was suggesting war? When I do things about my problems (i.e. high cost of vegetables in Taipei, excessive dog waste in my alley, pollution, crazy girlfriend, etc.), that doesn’t imply I hop into an Apache and go crazy (tho I definitely would have some fun with a personal Apache).