Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

How do you explain this away?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Politics/Campaigns Donate to DU
 
JeniB Donating Member (287 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 03:55 PM
Original message
How do you explain this away?
Edited on Mon Sep-22-03 04:24 PM by JeniB
I know this is yet again from the mid 90's, but I don't think someone like this is a good representative for our party. I mean, come on, if Gep ever said anything like this, you guys would be all over it!


Howard Dean on Newt Gingrich
and the Republican Majority

Howard Dean said it was a "healthy thing" that Democrats lost control of Congress, and that the new direction of Congress was "not a bad direction." In January 1995, the month that Newt Gingrich became Speaker, Dean appeared on "This Week with David Brinkley" and was asked about the Republican takeover of Congress. He said he thought it was a "healthy thing":

Gov. HOWARD DEAN: "It is and it's- the reason that I've been unwilling to condemn the change in Congress- I actually think, despite my broad philosophical disagreements with the new Speaker, that the change in Congress is a healthy thing. This government was fossilized and, frankly, the House was the area that it was fossilized in. So now we have an opportunity for historic change, and the question is how far are we going to go?
"...the direction is not a bad direction - decentralization, more block grants, but not total freedom for the states."
Source: This Week with David Brinkley, 1/29/95

Dean said Democrats "deserved to lose" control of Congress in 1994. " his party at both the national and state levels veered too far to the left and lost touch with most of the public. He said the Democrats in Congress deserved the losses they suffered last fall, when Republicans gained control of both the U.S. House and Senate. He also said they have to shoulder some blame for giving Newt Gingrich and his Republicans allies the opportunity to cut critical social programs. Said Dean, "Why Newt Gingrich is in the speaker's chair is because our party was not financially responsible during the '80s, and I make no bones about it."

Source: Montpelier Times-Argus, 12/31/95


Dean said there were "a lot of good things" that came with the change in control of Congress.

"My own view as a Democrat is that there are a lot of good things in this change that went on in Congress...I think a widespread change of this sort is not all bad, even for Democratic Governors."

Source: Dean on VT public television, 12/14/94

Dean offered that the Contract with America had some "good stuff" in it.

"We're going to be in there fighting to make sure the right things get done in the Senate and some of the bad stuff gets put out, and I'll be the first to say there's some good stuff in the Contract. The welfare reform, some of it is very good."

Source: Dean on CNN Late Edition, 4/9/95

edit: spelling
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 03:59 PM
Response to Original message
1. Ha Ha
Edited on Mon Sep-22-03 04:00 PM by sandnsea
Real cute. Let's not forget what Dean really said, that Gingerich was right. Medicare is the worst government program we have.

What Kerry said is that the health plan was not what the American people wanted and he was frustrated that the Democratic leadership was so disconnected from the people that they hadn't figured that out. And welfare reform did end up being a big 'seller', Howard Dean does in fact support it strongly. But as Gingerich began going wild with his plans, Kerry was the first to speak out against him.

He speaks his mind, he's known as an independent person in Congress who doesn't budge when he's made up his mind. Just like he didn't budge when he decided the Iraq situation needed to be resolved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeniB Donating Member (287 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. But the point was...
that Dean sold out his party when he didn't agree with them. Now we are supposed to forget all that and elect him? What will happen when he doesn't like something the dems do when he's President. Will he suddenly get party loyalty then?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. Expressing frustration
Isn't selling out your party. No matter who does it. It's like saying expressing frustration and anger at Bush is being unpatriotic. What matters is the way policies were implemented as a result of the 'shake-up'. Do those policies represent basic Democratic values or not?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeniB Donating Member (287 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. Selling out your party...
is expressing your anger and frustration with "your" party on National TV. It doesn't matter what the issues were, you don't bad mouth your party on TV!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #19
30. Sorry
If that's what you really think, you're entitled. But I don't want to belong to a party whose members are afraid of ever criticizing each other. I would prefer it wasn't the disarray we see right now, but I wouldn't want the kind of Republican mantra that comes out of the right either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polpilot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #19
101. As The New Democratic Leader of The NEW Democratic Party Dean
was explaining the demise and reasons for this to a broader audience. Hiding and capitulating has jaded many to the fact that now it is acceptable and defensible for Demos to emulate Repubs in many ways such as voting for and supporting The Iraqi Sheperd Bombing Resolution.

Dean '04....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #101
103. Dean is the leader of his campaign. Nothing more.
I think you are jumping the gun a bit.

You might want to check the calendar, the first primary is months away:

http://www.politics1.com/calendar.htm

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas_J Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-09-03 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #103
114. Correct:
Edited on Thu Oct-09-03 07:45 PM by Nicholas_J
As the record stands, Dean has opposed his own party, and sided with the Republicans at the state level, taking stances AGAINST democratic party legislation more than ALL of the other candidates have put together.

Dean wielded the veto against democrats, in favor of republican legislation 21 times. As a matter of fact, Dean used the veto more times than any other governor in Vemront history, and blocked democratic legislation through the threat of veto continually.

Dean rarely opposed anything Vermont Republicans sought.

The New Democratic Party, if Dean becomes its leader, will so closely resemble the Republican Party, that the U.S. might as well become a one party state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Andromeda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 01:54 AM
Response to Reply #9
95. Dean wasn't selling his party out.
Criticizing your party isn't "selling it out." If more people had been paying attention to what was happening in '94 the Democrats would probably still be in control. They had been in control for so long they got careless and the voters punished them for it. Things had gotten stagnant and the right-wing propaganda machine was going full blast against Clinton and the Democrats did absolutely nothing to fight it. They had grown complacent and tried to ignore it thinking it would go away and look what happened. The Contract (on)) with America was basically a blueprint for change that went awry because Gingrich misrepresented it and Dean had no idea at the time how Gingrich would abuse it. Gingrich was a meglomaniac and we all know what happened to him. His greed for power and his corruptness caught up with him.

Dean is an honest man and if anything he is too trusting. He wants to do the right thing for everybody. Your attempt to demean him by taking his quote out of context is abysmal. Why don't you just let Gephardt's "superiority" over the other candidates be discovered by the people and if he's deserving, he'll be elected. If he isn't, then so be it. Gephardt's misuse of this "information" is also appalling because the only thing it does is make him look desparate.

Don't make such a mountain out this innocuous Dean statement made over 8 years ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas_J Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #1
105. What I find most funny
Is that Kerry wrote the legislation allowing Dean to expand medicaid in Vermont, and is TOTALLY reponsible for what Dean was able to do for providing Health Care insurance for "EVERY CHILD IN VERMONT" . Dy Dynsaur is funded by federal dollars created through the Kennedy Hatch Act of 1996, WHich started out as Kennedy/Kerry, and was so popular that Republicans could not oppose it, but needed to make it bt-partisan to REDUCE the amount of funding to the states that Kerry put into his version. (Kerry increased the ratio so that the federal government would cover 75 percent of the cost, Hatch worked it down to the same ration as medicaid, 60 percent)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:02 PM
Response to Original message
2. All true - locked in Dem Chairmen in the house made change impossible
A better solution would have been to reform House Rules. And I believe was "too" ok with the election results - I understand looking on the bright side - but he failed to look on the down side as being all that bad - guess he thought Clinton would allow welfare reform - and stop all else - and indeed he did.

Todays situation - with everything controlled by the right wing is a disaster for the non-rich.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
3. They will say it is 'ancient history' or 'Dean-bashing'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RogueTrooper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Well,it is kind of old
and it is kind of bashing Dean. What else would we say?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. I haven't changed my mind about Medicare since the 90's - has Dean?
Edited on Mon Sep-22-03 04:23 PM by Feanorcurufinwe
Umm, this is 2003, are the 90's really irrelevant or that far in the past?

And, it's been said thousands of times here but it is worth repeating:

IT IS NOT BASHING SOMEONE TO QUOTE THEM!

lol

On edit: What else could you say? Well, a reasonable, intelligent reply would be "I don't agree with what Dean said, but I still support him because ___________" or "I think Dean was right because ____________"

Obviously I am not the one to fill in those blanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeniB Donating Member (287 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. It' s not bashing. It's information sharing.
I'm sorry if it's bad, but that's exactly the stuff that people should know about their candidate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RogueTrooper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #11
16. "information sharing"
You posting an attack piece from the Geppie campaign. You are a well known Geppiebot. "Information Sharing"!!! Would you like some Victory Gin to wash down your doublespeak?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #16
27. Because it is not flattering to Dean it's not information?
The only valid information is information that makes Dean look good?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeniB Donating Member (287 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #27
33. Thanks for the help!
If I had said that it would be bashing. Funny, I never thought of myself that way before I got on DU. :crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeniB Donating Member (287 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #16
28. I don't try to hide my candidate.
He's on my avatar for God's sake! If you had this info on Gep you'd use it in a heartbeat and rightly so. No one should side with the Repubs over the Dems on tv.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mairead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:11 PM
Response to Reply #16
35. What's the matter with you--is 'bashing' a synonym for 'criticism' to you?
Dean said it, didn't he? Unless you can impeach the source, be a grown-up: own up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-11-03 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #35
117. Why is it bashing to use Dean's own words?
Anyone who thinks Dean's own words and actions are unflattering to Dean should take it up with the source, himself...Dean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ModerateMiddle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-11-03 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #16
123. Ah, the old "attack the messenger" technique
Very good. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ModerateMiddle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-11-03 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #5
122. why is "Quoting Dean" considered "Bashing Dean"?
Why can't he just explain his old positions, instead of demonizing people for pointing them out?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RogueTrooper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:09 PM
Response to Original message
4. Do you have any material
that is more current than 8-9 years ago. I think your post has more to do with Gep's dir electoral position than anything Howard Dean said nearly a decade ago.

So, how did you man find the Rose Garden?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeniB Donating Member (287 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #4
13. I have never said you don't have the right to not like or
understand the Rose Garden thing and I don't think selling out on your party on national TV is good whenever you do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RogueTrooper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. I don't think selling out your party
on national tv makes you a wise choice to take on George W. Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ModerateMiddle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-11-03 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #4
124. ah, the old "diversion" technique
Very good :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
genius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:14 PM
Response to Original message
6. I've seen Dean compared to Gingrich before
The Dean people don't even know what their guy stands for and they don't want to. If he fired a machine gun in a nursery full of babies, they would still support the guy and accuse anyone reporting the incident of bashing. There's no point in even pointing out anything the guy has said or done in response to posts by the Dean people. They won't read it. The only benefit from the truth is that the undecided are quickly learning that he is not the kind of guy they want.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. Quite right.
I always think it is funny when supporters of ANY candidate here at DU forget that the purpose of these political postings is to sway undecideds. Who are rarely convinced by someone saying "my mind's made up so don't confuse me with facts".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RogueTrooper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #6
48. No,we know where Dean stands
Why are people incapable of understanding this. We are not stupid. We have researched our candidate and we know what he stands for. This constant patronizing attitude from other campaigns, who presume to think we do not have the wit to understand our own campaing, grates. To quote Dennis Helloooooo!*

We are perfectly capable of thinking for ourselves. Howard Dean's record in health care provision is the best of any of the candidates. Vermont, testimonials included, is there for all to see and hear. Comparing Dean to Gingrich? Somethings do not dignify a response. This is not the first time this particular smear has been posted and, no doubt, it will not be the last. But don't expect us to waste our time treating this rubbish. We have an election to win and an bum to throw in jail.


* Here is a better quote from Dennis.

Representative Kucinich highlighted the difference between his position and that of Dick Gephardt on the pre-emptive war in Iraq. Specifically, he said, I just want to say that when you were standing there in the Rose Garden with the president and you were giving him advice, I wish that you would have told him no, because as our Democratic leader, your position helped to inform mightily the direction of the war.

http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/001455.html




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemBones DemBones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #48
52. You spent a lot of time explaining why you refuse to waste your time

defending a Democratic governor (Dean) saying the "Republican Revolution" led by Newt Gingrich was a good thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RogueTrooper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #52
57. He did not say it was a good thing
he said we deserved to loose. And we did. If memory serves, and it is a long time ago, the Democrats in congress did not go out of their way to support President Clinton. They were not fiscally responsible and they suffered at the ballot box because of that. There poor record of support for President Clinton probably did not go unnoticed either.I wish it were otherwise but tales of the left being their own worst enemy are, unfortunatly, hardly rare in recent political history.

Did Dean think that this would knock some much needed common sense in the Federal Democrats? I imagine that is what he meant. To say that Dean supported Gingrich is just plain shitty politics. Which is pretty much what you would expect from Dick, I suppose.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goodhue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-11-03 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #57
121. healthy thing
He said 94 loss was a "healthy thing." You state he didn't say it was a good thing. Perhaps healthy things aren't good, they are just good for you? I guess I just disagree about this. I think that the gingrich revolution and contract on america were not healthy for the nation or for the democratic party.

94 was not long ago in my estimation. It was a bleak year. Cobain died and the right wing triumphed. The magic of the 90 wellstone victory and the hope of 92 were dashed. And there were a lot of folks in the party stating the the DLC was right and that the democratic party would need to moderate its tone or sink. Dean was one of those who staked out that position. That has since become conventional wisdom and it is wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ModerateMiddle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-11-03 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #57
125. "tales of the left being their own worst enemy"
You mean like Dean whacking "all of the Washington Dems"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #48
68. So YOU support deregulating electricity like Dean does?
THAT'S what helped sell you on Dean?

You liked the way he refused to meet with the Firefighter's Union about legislation important to them in Vermont? And even AFTER 9-11, when he never bothered to meet with them about security and the role of first responders?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-11-03 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #48
120. LOL! "We've researched our candidate and we know what he stands for"
Right. By reading everything on the blogforAmerica. :eyes:
Better diversify your reading list.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #6
77. Extremely massive information dump on Gov. Howard Dean, M.D. (v2.0)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

The Dean people know *exactly* what our guy stands for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas_J Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-09-03 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #6
115. Lets look at some more about what Dean is hiding:
Edited on Thu Oct-09-03 09:00 PM by Nicholas_J
Here is an interesting one:


Office of the Vermont Secretary of State
Vermont State Archives
Veto Message: Governor Dean
1994 (S.101)
An act relating to pharmaceutical services and health insurance.
STATE OF VERMONT
Executive Department.
Montpelier, Vt., June 13, 1994

The text of the communication from His Excellency, the Governor, whereby he vetoed and returned unsigned Senate Bill No. 101 to the Senate is as follows:

Robert H. Gibson, Secretary of the Senate
Vermont General Assembly
State House
Montpelier, VT 05602

Dear Bob:

I am herewith returning unsigned and without my approval and in the time permitted by the Constitution, S.101, a bill relating to pharmaceutical services and health insurance.

I have supported health care reforms aimed at controlling health care cost and improving health quality of Vermonters, but I do not believe that this bill furthers those goals. The bill would have a negative effect on the health care market and Vermont consumers. I believe that insurance costs will rise as a result of this bill. At a time when we are seeking to lower the cost of health insurance, this bill would undermine the gains we have made.

There is good reason that many employers, including the State of Vermont, have developed managed-care pharmacy plans. These plans keep costs down, and ensure proper utilization of prescription drugs. It is totally inappropriate for the state to tell the private sector that it cannot adopt what we have demonstrated to be an effective cost-containment policy. It is even more inappropriate for the state to exempt itself from the burdens of this bill. Moreover, because self-funded employer plans covered by ERISA will be exempt from the provisions of this bill, the burden created by the bill will fall unduly on small employers, who form the backbone of the Vermont economy. This would exacerbate the cost-shifting that is fundamental to solving this problem in our health care system.

This bill has been represented as offering Vermonters "Choice". I believe it will actually restrict choice. In other areas of our economy, Vermonters have a choice between paying a little more for the convenience of a local market, or saving a few dollars by going out of their way to a large retailer. Under this bill, a consumer who is willing to accept some inconvenience will no longer be able to gain a price advantage.

Because it places an undue burden on Vermonters and Vermont businesses, I am vetoing S.101.

http://vermont-archives.org/governance/Vetoes/1994DeanS...

As noted during the current campaign, one of the most prevalent causes of the high cost of prescription drugs is due to the managed care and particularly the way the pharmaceutical companies have "pharmacy benefit managers", in the private sector, who because they process hundred of thousands of claims, get rebates and other incentives on prescription that are passed on to the health care providers, but are not passed on to the consumer. In 2002, these kickbacks alone amounted to over 16 billion dollars, which were pure profit due to the health care providers recieving discounts that were not passed onto the consumers.

Deans veto simply gave more power to insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies to keep gouging consumers.

Dean was paying back one of his major sources of campaign comntributions for his runs for governor.

Maine on the other hand passed legislation requiring that such savings be passed on.

Here is more about that piece of information:


Abstract A comparison of the Vermont and Maine cases of attempting to control pharmaceutical prices in the year 2000 shows that the Maine legislators were more successful in challenging pharmaceutical industry political power. This comparison shows that challenging the industry was aided by (1) mobilizing public support through grassroots organizations, (2) including independent pharmacists in negotiations over the legislation, and (3) developing state purchasing power leverage....



On 10 February, S 300 passed out of both the Health and Welfare and the Finance Committee unanimously. On the same day, Dean said he could not support price regulation unless other New England states enacted similar bills and that Vermont could not afford to defend itself in court if the industry sued the state over price controls (Sneyd 2000). On 25 February, the bill went to the senate floor. Republicans tried to delete price control provisions from the bill; they failed by a vote of 14-15. They spent six or seven hours asking questions about S 300. At the end, the bill passed (25-4), with most Republicans who had voted to delete price controls then voting for the bill...

After it was clear that S 300 was blocked, Governor Dean announced that he would not veto it. His "support" was too late. Had he acted earlier in the legislative session, he could have used legislative items sought by the blue dogs in bargaining with them on the prescription drug price bill. By the time the governor indicated his support, there was little left with which to bargain. His support also came too late for the independent pharmacists. Had his support come earlier, he might have helped persuade independent pharmacy owners that the bill would not reduce their revenues.

Senator Shumlin tried unsuccessfully to salvage price controls. He incorporated a number of compromises into S 300. One of his compromises was to set retail prices rather than wholesale prices as a way around the commerce clause problem. Another was to offer a multiyear waiting period in which nonregulatory approaches to lowering prescription drug prices could be tried first. His effort ended in failure on the last day of the session. The adjournment of the Vermont legislature, scheduled for 15 May, was held up until the wee hours of 16 May. Despite this delay, Senator Shumlin received no strong proposal on pharmaceutical prices from the governor. Shumlin decided that it was not worth it to let through a prescription drug bill without strong provisions on prices. The legislature adjourned without acting on prescription drug prices.

The waiver that Governor Dean had proposed as an alternative to S 300 was granted in October 2000. In January 2001, the state began signing up seniors under the waiver. The pharmaceutical industry challenged the waiver in federal court. That June, the court overturned the waiver, and the program was discontinued.


http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache:EsWqHA-Se0cJ:www.m...




The New Democratic Party, if Dean becomes its leader, will so closely resemble the Republican Party, that the U.S. might as well become a one party state.

Deans behavior as governor was pretty unscrupulously in favor of large businesses, and he found all sorts of clever ways to block any attempt to control the profits of both the health care industry and pharmaceutical companies in Vermont. Vermont was ripe for the plucking once Dean became governor.

A Vermont Case indicates exactly what influenced Deans veto of legislation designed to get prescription drug prices under control in Vermont:

Reports also described allegations that Governor Dean vetoed a pharmacy bill after collecting $ 6,000 in campaign contributions from drug companies. n10 State Treasurer Paul W. Ruse was "criticized <*16> for financing his campaign with contributions from Wall Street firms with which the state does business." n11 Another article stated that "Ruse even appeared in a magazine advertisement for an investment firm." n12...




The influence of out-of-state donations: "Outside money is one of Howard Dean's specialties. Of the $ 312,290 the governor raised for his 1996 election, 65 percent came from out-of-state contributors: labor unions, Washington lawyer-lobbyists, the health care industry, to name a few of the special interests." n13 For the 1994 election "Dean, for example, received more money from major pharmaceutical manufacturers during the reporting period ($ 11,000) thin he did from people and companies located in Burlington ($ 10,460)." n14 One editorial said, "it's no mystery why out-of-state contributors pumped hundreds of thousands of dollars into Vermont campaigns. ... They're trying to buy influence. But the cost is public trust." n15

http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:TpIKA9f7OhEJ:www.b...

Or as a pdf:

http://www.brookingsinstitution.org/dybdocroot/gs/cf/he...


And more:

The proof, he argues, is that the wealthy are getting the short end of the stick. "Don't tell me that people with money are getting their way," says the Indiana-based litigator. "They are paying the highest tax in history, and the money is going to bureaucrats, people on welfare, in transfer payment from people with money to people without."


ven in nice little Vermont, with a population the size of Washington, D.C., lawmakers receive largesse not only from local businesses and individuals, but from such national corporations and trade organizations as R.J. Reynolds, Philip Morris, Monsanto, Parke-Davis, Anheuser-Busch, the National Association of Chain Drug Stores, and the American Insurance Association. In the 1994 race, Dean received more contributions just from pharmaceutical interests than the Republican challenger David Kelley collected in total.

http://www.prospect.org/print/V11/21/allen-t.html

It is easy to see who bought Howard Dean his five terms as governor.

It is also easy to determine Dean motivation for not wanting to make changes to the existing Health Care system in the United States. And why he made National Health Care suh an important issue so early on.

With over health care running well over a trillion dollars a year in the U.S., and with Deans attitude and past behavior of letting the private sector call the shots, adn his current statements about him not being your guy if you want major changes in the Health Care System in America, and with his ties to the health care and pharmaceutical industries, A Dean presidency will simply be trading Halliburton and Bechtel for Pfizer and Blue Cross.

They will be skimming from the government coffers as well as being allowed to increase the out of pocket expenses from the consumers, given Deans statements about either reducing or freezing the medicare budget.

This is code for cutting benefits and raising out of pocket expenses.



Clinton was making major progress in getting his progressively responsible fiscal policies pushed through, as well as his socially liberal legislation pushed through until Gingrich and the "Contract with America" was started. Gingrich his cabal were the turning point in Washington Politics and to even suggest that anything he was doing was in any way positive was largely responsible for setting up the conditions that led to the Republicans being able to attempt to impeach Clinton, leading to the ability of Bush, Rove and Company to strategically change local politics to the degree that allowed the election to be stolen in Florida.

AS one goes through the public portions of Deans record as governor and then links it to Vermont Case law, one can only shudder at what is indicated is likely to be the embarassing portions of his record as Governor in Vermont that Dean WANTED sealed for 20 years, which given his current age, is stating that he wanted his secrets sealed for the rest of his life.

Even with the ten years, Dean can keep hidden anything he wishes for two presidential terms if elected.

Dena more than anyone else, has had try to explain more about the way his past statements and decisions greatly differ from what crap he is trying to shovel as a presidential candidate. He has had more to explain about his past than all of the other candidates put together.

Something is rotten in the state of Vermont.

And the smell comes from several hundred cubic yards of sealed documents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Egnever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
7. I dont have a problem with that at all
I agree with him. Just as I agree its time for another shakeup.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Which part do you agree with?
Medicare is a bad program, it is good when Democrats lose elections, or do you agree with both those sentiments?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Egnever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #10
22. I agree with both
medicare is horibly ineficient and needs to be reworked. When dems stop reflecting the will of the people they need to loose elections. I dont agree with having senators for life just because they have a D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #22
25. So, should I vote for the Republican
Edited on Mon Sep-22-03 04:59 PM by Feanorcurufinwe
challenger next time because Baucus is so lame?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Egnever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. If thats your only choice
And his positions are better then yes you should
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #26
34. Do you know what parties do? Have you ever heard of the word 'caucus'?
Edited on Mon Sep-22-03 05:11 PM by Feanorcurufinwe
Do you have any idea at all how our government works? A vote for any Republican for Congress is a vote for Bush and his agenda.


And if you can find any Republican in Montana whose positions are better than Baucus' -- let's convince him to become a Democrat and run for Burns' seat!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Egnever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #34
49. I know that part of the problem with america right now
Is the willingness off the both parties to adhere to the party line no matter what the subject is and it is creating a deadlock in american politics. Its long over due for both parties to be thrown from power and america to be brought back to a true representative government.

Your coment on minesota reps versus reps in other parts of the country goes a long way to pointing out that problem. Party line is different all across america people have different leanings depending on where you are the idea that either of the two parties can represent the whole country along party lines is rediculous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #49
53. You clearly have a lot to learn about politics in this country.
Let's continue this discussion in 4 years when you'll be able to see how things work with a Democratic president and a Republican House and a (hopefully)a Democratic Senate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Egnever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #53
59. Grats on the condesention!
Yes lets wait and see what hapens in 4 years. Cause we dont have any examples of it in the past.

Yet again you prove to be not worth responding to. Get in your last word. This conversation is obviously over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #59
61. You seem to think parties don't matter.
I said let's wait four years because you don't seem to have learned the lessons of the past. I don't know you, I don't know how old you are, how long you have been following politics, or how much you know about the way Congress works. I am only able to judge based on what you've said here.

Parties DO matter, and like it or not we have a two-party system.

"Yet again you prove to be not worth responding to." If you think I'm not worth responding to, skip the insults and just don't respond.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:37 PM
Response to Original message
15. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #15
60. Exactly why are you calling JeniB a liar instead of defending Dean?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acerbic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #60
64. Kerry has admitted to torching babies in Vietnam
"It was reported that in a recent speech John Kerry confessed to killing babies with a flamethrower during raids on villages in Vietnam. Kerry expressed deep remorse and..."

Source: The Daily Dispatch, 03/09/94

Go on, defend Kerry now and don't you dare call me a liar... :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #64
70. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
acerbic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 08:34 PM
Response to Reply #70
74. Just like the first post in this thread, I posted a quote from an article
...and named the newspaper and date it was published. You seem to be just desperately rambling something when you can't deny The Truth. :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #74
81. Are you saying that is an accurate quote? Are you staking your reputation
on that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acerbic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 11:26 PM
Response to Reply #81
83. You can't defend Kerry's torching of babies,
so you just try to cast doubt on whether the quote is accurate or not. Ok.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #83
86. I'm not 'casting doubt' - I'm asking - are you saying it is accurate?
Edited on Tue Sep-23-03 12:03 AM by Feanorcurufinwe
Just where is this newspaper you quote - "The Daily Dispatch" published?

You quoted it, and since we all know you would never lie, it must exist, or at least have existed in 1994.

So tell us about it. Do you actually have a copy of the newspaper for 3/9/94? Or did you get this from a microfiche record or something? Or did you get this quote second hand from some other source? What source was that?

I mean, since you would never, ever lie, you should be able to answer these questions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acerbic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #86
87. It looks pretty clear that you can only try to attack the messenger
...but you can't dispute the message.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 12:05 AM
Response to Reply #87
88. I'm not disputing, nor attacking, I'm asking again
Where is this newspaper published?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acerbic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 12:19 AM
Response to Reply #88
89. Look it up...
The name of the newspaper and the date is right there. Can't you do any of your own research?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 12:29 AM
Response to Reply #89
90. Except it is a fictional newspaper that doesn't exist,
Edited on Tue Sep-23-03 12:53 AM by Feanorcurufinwe
so there is no way to look it up.

Unlike the sources Gephardt used and JeniB referenced. This Week with David Brinkley. The Montpelier Times-Argus. Vermont public television. CNN Late Edition.

These are all real news sources. We all know about them. And if we wanted to we could do the research and verify whether or not they are accurate. And we all know that the Dean campaign, like any campaign that is hit with negative advertising, has double and triple checked all these quotes for accuracy and if they were innacurate they would have said so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acerbic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 01:27 AM
Response to Reply #90
92. The Daily Dispatch fictional?
Silly...

http://www.hendersondispatch.com /

And if we wanted to we could do the research and verify whether or not they are accurate.

...and it has been done and you Dean haters have been told several times (see e.g. post #65) what Dean was actually talking about in those "quotes" manufactured by Gephard's crew in the best gutter freeper style by picking a word here, another one there and adding a whole lot of ellipsis, but your kind just keeps stubbornly and obsessively spamming the same shit over and over again. :crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 01:49 AM
Response to Reply #92
93. OK , we are making some progress here.
So you are saying that you accurately quoted this Henderson newspaper from 3/09/94.

And now we will have something verifiable with which to judge your credibility.

Because you are either telling the truth, or you are not.

Only Dean can do both at once.

_____________________________


"picking a word here, another one there and adding a whole lot of ellipsis" ??

here's from the webpage your fellow traveller dsc referenced:

On the day the charge was made, Stephanopoulos was riding around with Dean for the This Week segment.

And before Dean had any chance to prepare responses in advance, George hit him hard, throwing documents at him while the cameras were rolling.

Unlike the NAFTA bickering, Dean didnt complain at all (despite this being true gotcha politics).

He took the questions in stride and answered forthrightly:

DEAN: Of course I support Medicare. That's ridiculous. I certainly have been very angry at Medicare over their bureaucratic stuff.

They're really difficult bureaucratically to deal with.

(Note: This is backed up in what Gephardt quotes from.

In the 8/3/93 AP story with the ominous title Liberal Doctor Is Conservative on Health Care Reform, Dean followed his worst things comment with:

My father was in the hospital last year and he still can't get his bills straightened out because nobody who knows anything will talk to him at Medicare. It's just a pathetic bureaucracy.)

STEPHANOPOULOS: (Gephardt) also says that in 1995, you specifically supported the 270 billion dollars or so in tax cuts that were called for by Newt Gingrich --

DEAN: I think that's very unlikely.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Here's the documentAnd it's pretty clear that you said you would accept a seven- to ten-percent cut in the rate of growth of Medicare, which is --

DEAN: Oh, a cutting the rate of growth is much different --

STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, except that the cut in growth rate in 1995 came to 270 billion dollars.

DEAN: I've got to find outbut I fully subscribe to the notion which is to reduce the Medicare growth rate to ten percent or less, I'm sure I said that.

STEPHANOPOULOS: That's what Newt Gingrich was calling for in 1995.

MR. DEAN: Well, then, Newt Gingrich probably also called for a strong America and I believe in that, too.

http://www.liberaloasis.com/archives/091403.htm#091603


So here is Dean again confirming that that was indeed his position - not a creative case of selective editing. Well, I suppose you will accus e me of making this up...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #93
108. If you are accusing me of cutting and pasting here
I was following a well established rule (it has been in effect for over two years at least) that people post only three paragraphs and a link which is what I did. If you count the paragraphs in my post you will see I followed that rule. In addition I was talking about the quote of Medicare being the worst ever government program and that it was a terrible beaurcracy. I don't dispute that he wanted the program's growth slowed as the Daily Howler points out so did Clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #108
110. No, I didn't mean to imply that at all.
I just mentioned your name for credibility since the other poster was making the argument that the quotes were 'fabricated'.

I have the utmost respect for you and I appreciate your input on DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 01:49 AM
Response to Reply #92
94. n/t
Edited on Tue Sep-23-03 01:51 AM by Feanorcurufinwe
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-11-03 03:43 AM
Response to Reply #92
116. R.I.P. acerbic
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #64
80. Everyone can read your post for themselves. They don't need my analysis
to figure out whether or not you are telling the truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KaraokeKarlton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:49 PM
Response to Original message
18. Dean led the nation in welfare reform
Thanks to a waiver he got from Clinton he was able to do some wonderful things. Instead of continuing to have welfare be a trap that holds people down, Dean turned it into a program that is very supportive of people, actually addresses barriers and helps people overcome them and helps people become independent and self sufficient. I know this from first hand experience. When I first came to Vermont it was the old system. I kept trying to get off assistance but I had all kinds of barriers...childcare, transportation to name a couple. Everytime I tried to get on my feet, my car would break down or my babysitter would quit and I'd end up right back on assistance. It was a Godsend when the system changed! The state helped pay for car repairs and temporary transportation and provided subsidized child care through centers people in my situation never used to be able to afford. Welfare reform is NOT bad if it's done like Dean did it. I'm happy to say that after just a few months under the new system I have been able to stay off assistance and do quite well for myself and my family.

Don't just assume that Dean supports something the Republicans have done simply because he wants to see people harmed. He just sees potential in making things work better. Changes can allow that in many cases...and just because Republicans don't choose to take advantage of that kind of potential doesn't mean Dean wouldn't.

Snipped quotes are very misleading. I suspect he had much more to say that was left out from Gepfarts anti-Dean webpage. Hopefully someone from the Dean campaign will go get the full text of all those quotes so they can set the record straight and end the misleading crap Gepfart is spreading around.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. How about we assume Dean means what he says when he speaks?

Oh, I see the problem with that -- we'd have to assume he really means all the contradictory things he's said at different times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KaraokeKarlton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #21
32. How about using FULL statements instead of little snips that mislead?
Oops, I forgot! If Dean detractors actually quoted Dean in full context they wouldn't have anything to criticize him over, would they?

Could I have some cheese and crackers with that whine?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeniB Donating Member (287 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #32
36. Because full statements take up too much space.
I gave you the sources. If you think it was taken out of context go find it and prove it. That's not my job. That would be the job of his supporters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #36
38. because full statements take up too much space?????
what a lameo answer. That has got to be one of the most ridiculously rationalizing replies I have ever heard in my entire life. And BTW you are supposed to provide links so we don't have to spend hours googling due to "full statements taking up too much space"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KaraokeKarlton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #36
39. So you're okay with Gephardt lying by only making partial quotes?
And you're complaining about Dean supporters being blind to what you consider to be Dean's faults? Mmmmkay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeniB Donating Member (287 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #39
44. Not posting the full article is not lying!
There are enough quotes in the post to not take anything out of context. Just admit he said those things and that you're fine with it and that will be the end.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #44
46. I have checked exactly one of your previous quotes
the one about Medicare and it was taken completely out of context. Sorry you don't provide context here and don't claim you do. I won't call it lying but it isn't fully honest either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #46
54. Let's hear the context you say exonerates the quote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #54
65. Here you go
http://www.liberaloasis.com/archives/091403.htm#091603

In the 8/3/93 AP story with the ominous title Liberal Doctor Is Conservative on Health Care Reform, Dean followed his worst things comment with:

My father was in the hospital last year and he still can't get his bills straightened out because nobody who knows anything will talk to him at Medicare. It's just a pathetic bureaucracy.)

Just as I said it was. Gephardt cut and paste here and he knows it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #65
69. You haven't provided any context, just another 2 sentence quote.
And the link you provide doesn't have any context either.

However, to address the 2 sentences.
My father was in the hospital last year and he still can't get his bills straightened out because nobody who knows anything will talk to him at Medicare. It's just a pathetic bureaucracy.

Dean is saying his father "can't get his bills straightened out".

Well boo hoo. It doesn't seem so terrible compared to 1/3 of seniors having no access to health care at all. That's what's so good about Medicare - it provides health care to millions of seniors who wouldn't be able to afford it otherwise. Somehow I doubt Dean's father fits into that category. Are the rules sometimes Byzantine or the bureaucracy hard to deal with? Perhaps, but no system is perfect. I think Gephardt's campaign manager is exactly right to say "Medicare isn't one of the worst federal programs ever. It's one of the Democratic Party's greatest accomplishments."

Here's another quote that Gephardt references.

"Medicare is the best argument I know why the federal government should never be allowed to run a national health care system."
(Dean in Medical Economics, 2/22/93)


Of course I don't have any additional context because I don't have any copies of the 2/22/93 edition of Medical Economics laying around. But the gist seems the same. He is more concerned with the problems of Medicare than he is proud of it's successes. And it is just the kind of argument we hear from the other side of the aisle all the time. I personally think just the opposite of what Dean said. I think Medicare has been a fantastic success and it is the best argument I know of why the government SHOULD run a national health care system. Now you could wait ten years, and pull that last sentence I wrote out of this post, quote it with no context, and it will still mean the exact same thing it does here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 08:23 PM
Response to Reply #69
73. yeah no context so you just assume
well we all know how that goes. I provided context you asked for. Tough shit if you don't like it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #73
85. Umm we seem to have some confusion about what the word 'context' means
(emphasis added)
1. the parts of a discourse that surround a word or passage and can throw light on its meaning
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&v...


You have provided a link, which states:

In the 8/3/93 AP story with the ominous title Liberal Doctor Is Conservative on Health Care Reform, Dean followed his worst things comment with:

My father was in the hospital last year and he still can't get his bills straightened out because nobody who knows anything will talk to him at Medicare. It's just a pathetic bureaucracy.)
http://www.liberaloasis.com/archives/091403.htm#091603


We don't actually see the quote 'in context'. In fact, we don't actually even see the quote! Only the two words 'worst things' -- whereas the original quote is:

" one of the worst things that ever happened a bureaucratic disaster You'd destroy the health care system in this country if you had Medicare for everybody."

So no we don't really have the full context of the quote. We don't know the sentence that came before it or the sentence that came before that. The writer of the webpage provided two additional sentences which he says "follows" the 'worst things' comment. Does it follow directly after? Or were there some additional intervening sentences? What was the sentence after that?

But as I said, we do have two more lines of context with which we can get a better understanding of what he meant.

So I talked about that. Dean is talking about the bureaucracy of Medicare and how his father couldn't "get his bills straightened out".

I personally think bureaucratic snafus and billing problems are inconsequential compared to the accomplishment of providing health care for millions of seniors. Dean feels differently. Or at least that is what I get out of the limited context we have.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KaraokeKarlton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #44
50. Nope, I need to see the FULL quote
Gepfart is competing against Dean and has much to gain by leaving important pieces out. Until Gepfart produces the entire quotes it's my opinion that his bashes are bogus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Andromeda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 02:01 AM
Response to Reply #36
96. If you're going to bring it up...
you'd better have a way to BACK it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #32
40. You still haven't addressed the core issue
of party loyalty. Is this the man we want leading our party?

You can make whatever disparaging remarks you want about me, but it still doesn't change what Dean said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KaraokeKarlton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #40
51. But we don't really know what Dean said because only bits and pieces
are being used. And Dean is the only one I trust so clearly he is definitely the one I want representing me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #51
72. Actually, we do know what Dean said.
You are just able to convince yourself that the words mean something different that what they appear to mean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #72
76. No we know what Gephardt
who has a history of lying about candidates in 88 says Dean said. Sorry that ain't good enough. I know he lied about Simon as I was around back then.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-18-03 10:45 PM
Response to Reply #76
134. What Dean said, as usual in politics, isn't as bad as Gephardt
Edited on Sat Oct-18-03 10:46 PM by Feanorcurufinwe
makes it sound, or as good as Dean tries to portray it:

Dean had harsh words for what he called the "radical right wing" in Congress, primarily members of the House, and Gingrich's Contract With America.

However, he applauded the efforts of Senate Budget Committee chairman Pete Domemici, R-Nev., who presented his own balanced budget plan last week.

Dean said he disagreed with some of the details of Domenici's plan. But he said Domenici's was a serious proposal that did not include tax cuts and recognized the need to put a permanent end to federal budget deficits.

Dean also said he could defend Domenici's approach to reducing Medicare costs. He said he supported more managed care for Medicare recipients and requiring some Medicare recipients to pay a greater share of the cost of their medical services.

"I fully subscribe to the notion that we should reduce the Medicare growth rate from 10 percent to 7 percent, or less if possible," Dean said.

The Vermont governor has been an outspoken critic of the Contract With America, which he continued to describe Wednesday as the "Contract On America."
(http://12.32.36.99/TimesArgus.pdf Note to Times-Argus: if you object to my making this pdf available I will immediately remove it.


So Dean's outrage could be genuine at being compared to Gingrich. However, Gingrich was in favor of the Domenici plan, as Gephardt said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
catforclark2004 Donating Member (208 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-04-03 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #32
112. Here you go: From the Free Republic
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeniB Donating Member (287 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #18
24. My gripe is not about the substance of his complaint.
It's that he bashed his party on national TV. It's just not right! People keep saying on here that we shouldn't be bashing each others candidate and here their candidate bashed the whole party on national TV! Why is that ok?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KaraokeKarlton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #24
37. Dean says what he thinks, always has
That's part of what I like about him. I don't always agree with him, but I ALWAYS know what he thinks and where he stands. On top of that, the man has great long term vision. And in just about every case where I disagreed with him, he turned out to be right and things worked out for the better. I'd much rather have an honest, forthright president who occassionally irritated me and made things better than one who pussy foots around people trying too hard not to offend and does nothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemBones DemBones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #37
56. In other words, it's acceptable when Dean bashes Dems but

Dems must never criticize or question Dean. :eyes: :eyes: :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KaraokeKarlton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #56
62. Dean has criticized the recent behavior of some candidates
like their shitty votes. On the occassions where he was wrong, he apologized. He hasn't personally attacked or bashed any of the candidates. He hasn't spun anything to be misleading. The attacks on him have been far different than anything he's said about the others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babzilla Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #24
63. to paraphrase Sharpton
sometimes the donkey needs to be slapped
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nazgul35 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:54 PM
Response to Original message
20. gee....
If Gep had put this much effort into the 2002 election and fighting the Bush hunta maybe i'd consider voting for him....

by the way...your sig that quotes Gephardt....I saw Kerry use the same line on CSPAN about a month and a half ago......so who siad it first?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. Is this meant to be a defense of Dean? All you did was attack Gephardt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nazgul35 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #23
75. so....
what's your point?

As far as defending Dean...this issue has been rehashed over and over and over again...the same shit recycled...after Dean supporters have repeatedly responded to these statements...the medicare statement was made by Dean after his father tried to get some bills paid and he was concerned with how bureaucratic the system was....

But that doesn't matter, cause we never respond to the "points rasied" over some of the most inane points...I got to say, if this is the level of critism Dean has to face from the democrats, than it shouldn't be too hard to convince voters to support him when I start canvasing next weekend....every weekend....registering voters.....

So keep your little debating club discussing issues that most dems won't even know about....

:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #75
104. You may think most Dems don't care about Medicare
but you are very, very wrong about that. It is indeed one of the greatest accomplishments of the Democratic party in the last 50 years, and our unwavering support of Medicare and Social Security is one of our best selling points. Seniors are also probably the age group with the highest level of voter turnout.

So by all means, minimize the importance of this issue. lol
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeniB Donating Member (287 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #20
29. Harry Truman
But Gep said it way back in early summer and I was there, so I quoted him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-03-03 10:16 PM
Response to Reply #20
111. Harry Truman. Gephardt was quoting him.
But I don't believe he coined the phrase. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:07 PM
Response to Original message
31. Maybe you don't remember some of the problems Congress had
in some respects they did deserve to lose. They refused to do dick about CFR. They refused to curtail any of their myriad priviledges. We had, in an area which has something like 5 Congressmen, not one, not two, but three different Congressmen who bounced over 200 checks each. Many members of Congress became arrogant and fat. I wish that they would have learned their lesson short of losing control of Congress but frankly they did contribute more than a little to their defeat. I know many pundits like to blame Clinton for this but they killed his health care plan, they would do CFR, and they gutted his stimulus program. I would like to see the whole quotes given Gephardt's very poor record. I have tracked down one whole quote and it was all but a lie (his Medicaid quote was in regards to his father and his difficulty getting reimbursed). But to some extent Democrats in Congress brought his mess on their own heads.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeniB Donating Member (287 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #31
41. May be true.
But I don't think someone who wants to run for president on that party's ticket should go on TV trashing the party. I'm sure the repubs did that just fine on their own. Seriously, would you go on TV bashing any kind of Dem for anything? (I mean short of committing murder where he was positively identified as the murderer)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #41
42. If our party doesn't do the right thing
loses due to not doing the right thing, which is at least arguably what happened in 94, then yes you do tell the party what the problem is. A little short of three and a half years ago my family told me some unpleasent truth in regards to me and booze. I am pretty damn glad they did. Loving someone or something doesn't mean being a sycophant (sp).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeniB Donating Member (287 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #42
47. Yes, you should tell the party.
But telling them on national TV after losing to the Repubs is giving credit and ammunition to the Repubs. After that they probably thought he was going to convert!

And congrats on having the courage and will to kick the booze, and double congrats on having a great family!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #47
66. thanks
It has been an adventure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #31
43. So we should've thrown Gep out on his ass
Edited on Mon Sep-22-03 05:23 PM by Feanorcurufinwe
along with the rest of the Democratic leadership of the time.

However, no matter how you slice it, if you really are a Democrat, it is not good for the Democrats to lose.

As was typing that, it occured to me how ridiculous it is that I actually have to make that point to other Democrats. It's like being on a baseball team where the first and second basemen think the team 'deserves to lose'. I don't think we will see that team in the World Series any time soon. And I sure wouldn't be selecting that first baseman as team captain a few years later.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #43
45. He didn't say it was good they lost
He said they deserved to lose and said why. Those are different things. I have watch the Bengals lose games they deserved to lose time and again that doesn't mean I am glad they lost.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #45
58. See my post above.
You, as a fan, can believe the team 'deserved to lose' without hurting anything. But that is not a good attitude for a team member -- certainly not for a team leader -- to have. It is a recipe for failure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bread_and_roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 05:52 PM
Response to Original message
55. The "reform" that medicare needed
then, as now, is Universal Health Insurance...something Dean is not supporting. And please don't tell me about incremental reform. There are people all over this country who have worked hard for years to protect the coverage that now exists (and which is continually under attack) and to expand it...and the result of all that hard work is that we have more uninsured and higher health costs than ever before. And we will, as long as politicians are determined to protect the insurance industry's profits.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whirlygigspin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 07:07 PM
Response to Reply #55
67. please remember to fall in line
with the winner after the primaries.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bread_and_roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 08:11 PM
Response to Reply #67
71. I have never
"fallen in line" and don't intend to start now, thank you. I will act according to my own analysis of what best forwards a more progressive agenda. And I can't even imagine what talk about "falling in line" at this early date means. If we are not to examine the merits of the candidates positions now, when are we to do so?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knaveree Donating Member (19 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:35 PM
Response to Original message
78. Ya know, even as a Kerry supporter
(though Dean is my number two)... this kind of old quote stuff really is pointless. The point is: what does he think NOW.

And even if you don't buy that, his point that the Democrats had become disconnected and ineffective was right. The kinds of grassroots work that Dean and his supporters are now doing was what the part should have been doing in 94. They could have capitalized on the momentum of Clinton's 92 victory and made historic gains.

Instead they pissed it all away and made Gingrich a hero.

Now we're trying to fix all that.

It's about time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrFunkenstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 10:50 PM
Response to Reply #78
79. I Have To Agree
If I really feel an issue will affect a candidate's future Presidency, I will consider it a legitimate issue. But I don't see much value in picking through the trashbins for damning scraps.

Although you could say that this proves that Dean is a centrist that could get along with a Republican Congress, I'm not sure if I'd make that argument.

Perhaps you might suggest that Dean has a history of putting his foot in his mouth, that might affect his ability as chief diplomat for the country. That might be more convincing, but I don't see much here to work with beyond being another brick in the wall.

All in all it's just another brick in the wall.

Hey, teacher, leave those kids alone!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #78
82. Yes, what does he think NOW? has he repudiated these statements?
Edited on Mon Sep-22-03 11:19 PM by Feanorcurufinwe
Has he changed his mind?

I still feel the same way about Medicare, Social Security, and the 'Contract with America' as I did in the 90's. Maybe Dean has changed his mind, maybe he feels differently now.

Or maybe he just spoke his feelings more truthfully back then because he wasn't running for President yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indigo32 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-22-03 11:28 PM
Response to Reply #82
84. And maybe he changed his mind?
and maybe he hasn't. We either trust what the man is saying NOW or we don't. Obviously you don't... so be it. I do, and YOU certainly aren't going to be the one to convince me otherwise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 01:04 AM
Response to Reply #84
91. I'm not trying to convince you of anything.
I just assume that all the supporters of any candidate are going to support that candidate till the candidate drops out.

There are plenty of people whose minds are not made up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indigo32 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #91
99. But you don't even make it clear
whom you are SUPPORTING. Though if I remember correctly that would be Kucinich. And you act like Deans supporters are brainwashed.
We have 10 good candidates. Why set out to destroy one... instead of selling these undecideds on your guy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #99
102. It's no secret
that I support Kerry. I became a fan of Kerry's when I was a CSPAN junkie in the early 90's. I am a died-in-the-wool Dem who always votes the straight ticket and volunteers with the county Dem committee. I don't just want to beat Bush -- I want us to have the best candidate possible. Someone with the coattails to help us win back the Senate (and who knows? the House?).

I'm not out to 'destroy' anyone - but I do like to debate. JeniB started a thread based on some quotes the Gephardt's opposition researchers dug up. Those quotes are valid subjects of debate and that's all I've done.

As far as my personal opinion of Dean -- I was awfully interested when I first heard of the buzz he was creating -- but as I've learned more about him I've become a lot less enthusiastic. He is an effective campaigner who I believe would beat Bush, but there are five candidates who I think definately would and Dean is my last choice of those.

For the record, I think:

Sharpton, Mosely-Braun, Gephardt, Lieberman -- would lose
Kucinich -- might win
Clark, Dean, Edwards, Graham, Kerry -- would win
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indigo32 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #102
107. I never questioned your credentials as a Dem
I hope you're not questioning mine...though I don't think you are. Thing is... I'm not out doing or posting "opposition research" on anybody but Bush... I just don't understand that mentality. I know you didn't post THIS ONE but you are sure all over it. I'm SURE in all of Kerry's service there ARE things I could dig up. It goes without saying. They are all human. Of course I want the best candidate too. We ALL do I hope. I just think discussing where they stand on the issues is a more productive way of deciding.

BTW Geppie is pretty close to Bush is current Polling. Though they didn't even bother with Kucinich or Graham or Edwards that I saw. It's a damn shame really. Graham especially is eminently qualified for the job.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #107
109. If you know of something about any candidate
including Kerry, that could be considered a negative, that we haven't heard of, I would encourage you to post it. These are the primaries and the only way we can choose the best candidate to go up against Bush is by learning everything, good or bad, about the ten folks running.

And I would go farther and say, please do try to dig up anything you can that could be used to attack any of our candidates. Whatever there is will be found by the Republicans anyway so we might as well practice our counter arguments now.

PS -- I didn't think you were questioning my creds, but I wanted to get them out there anyway :-) . I'm certainly not questioning yours or anybody's. I make the blanket assumption that we are all Dems here at DU and we all want to do anything we can to elect a Democratic President and Congress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PAMod Donating Member (651 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 08:57 AM
Response to Original message
97. Hey, at least Rove can't use this one!
Geez, JeniB, please just tell me that you will support Howard Dean if he is the nominee of the Democratic Party.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #97
98. We will all be supporting the nominee, I hope,
but that is a mighty big if, you are talking about. Maybe we should have a primary or two first.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PAMod Donating Member (651 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #98
100. Yea, I hope so too
It just sounds a bit inplausible for some of the attackers around here to say some of the crap they're saying about a candidate - knowing that they may have to support this guy later on.

Let's let the primaries play out, all the while pointing out the record of & positions by the various candidates that are good/bad/ugly. We don't want a coronation, but a hard-fought victory.

At the same time, can we please stop saying that someone is selling out the party or is a war criminal, draft dodger, whatever...

Ugh.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deutsey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-23-03 12:41 PM
Response to Original message
106. Democrats had become fossilized and they did deserve to lose
You win the presidency, the Senate, and the House and then bungle the '94 election? Decades of fossilization had finally taken its toll on them and the shock of losing has made many, but not enough, Dems less complacent.

My two cents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-09-03 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #106
113. So what does it take to energize them?
This is not an election in which we can afford to be complacent. I think the most important thing is to appeal to the undecideds, family, friends, whoever is uninvolved or unlikely to vote. They need to have the facts put before them and drive them to the polls, if necessary, to get out the vote. My two cents. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-11-03 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #106
118. He said they were TOO far left. That was horseshit....and coming
from someone who spent 11 years pulling the Democratic party to the RIGHT. Something many here complain about when it comes from any other Democrat EXCEPT Dean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-11-03 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
119. The same way you explain this away, I guess:
http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/960385.asp

MR. RUSSERT: But theres a lot of discussion in the 90s about you trying to cast off some of the orthodoxy of the Democratic Party, being described as a New Democrat. What caught a lot of peoples attention was the 1994 election, when the Republicans won both houses of Congress, Newt Gingrich became speaker of the House, and this is what you told the Boston Herald: Sen. John F. Kerry broke from Democratic Party ranks, saying he was delighted by the GOP election purge and laying the blame on the doorstep of President Clinton and arrogant House leaders. ...I want this change. Im delighted with seeing an institutional shakeup because I think we need one, Kerry said in a Herald interview. The Democrats have articulated in the last two years a very poor agenda. Its hard for me to believe that some of these guys could have been as either arrogant or obtuse as to not know where the American people were coming from. Kerry deliberately set himself apart from Kennedy...He said Kennedy and Clintons insistence on pushing health care reform was a major cause of the Democratic Partys problems at the polls. When told his calls for change did not match Kennedys re-election rhetoric, Kerry smiled and said: Im amazed people didnt pick up on it.

MR. RUSSERT: You were clearly separating yourself from Clinton and from Kennedy on the issue of health care...

SEN. KERRY: I was upset, Tim.

MR. RUSSERT: ...and delighted by Newt Gingrich?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-18-03 04:42 PM
Response to Reply #119
126. WOW!
That is disturbing! :o
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemDogs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-18-03 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #119
127. Statements by Dean AND Kerry disturbing
IMHO, both are disturbing. It doesn't make Dean's less disturbing, though, if that was what you meant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-18-03 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #127
128. Funny how RiF quotes Russert's question, but not Kerry's answer.

SEN. KERRY: I was upset, Tim.
MR. RUSSERT: ...and delighted by Newt Gingrich?
SEN. KERRY: No, I was upset at what had happened in 1994. And if you recall, many of us were pressing for campaign finance reform. We wanted to achieve campaign finance reform while we had both houses and the presidency. I, in fact, visited with President Clinton at the time with Bill Bradley and Senator Joe Biden. That agenda we didnt get. On health care, I did not sign on to President Clintons plan. I had a different approach. I thought we should have done something less complicated. We had a compromise which Bill Bradley, Senator Chafee, Senator Dole, a group were working on. Now, you know, it didnt work either. Sometimes in politics and in life you take a different course from whats expected of you. Thats leadership. I expressed a point of view of frustration and anger at the time. President Clinton, amazingly, turned around, did a number of extraordinary things, you know, came back from the 1994and, you know, if you look at what Newt Gingrich said in his speech and then look at what he did, they were two different things. I was reacting to where, you know, there was a great deal of frustration in Washington. I do believe since then I stood up and fought almost everything Newt Gingrich did because he proved that rhetoric and actions are two different things.
http://www.msnbc.com/news/960385.asp


Contrast this with Dean response when confronted with his past statements:

STEPHANOPOULOS: (Gephardt) also says that in 1995, you specifically supported the 270 billion dollars or so in tax cuts that were called for by Newt Gingrich --

DEAN: I think that's very unlikely.

Ready to deny.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Here's the document

Busted!
And it's pretty clear that you said you would accept a seven- to ten-percent cut in the rate of growth of Medicare, which is --

DEAN: Oh, a cutting the rate of growth is much different --

STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, except that the cut in growth rate in 1995 came to 270 billion dollars.

DEAN: I've got to find outbut I fully subscribe to the notion which is to reduce the Medicare growth rate to ten percent or less, I'm sure I said that.

STEPHANOPOULOS: That's what Newt Gingrich was calling for in 1995.
http://www.liberaloasis.com/archives/091403.htm#091603




GEPHARDT: Howard and I just have a basic disagreement. He said in, I think, 1993 that Medicare was the worst federal program ever. He said that it was the worst thing that ever happened.

He also supported, at our darkest hour--when I was leading the fight against Newt Gingrich and the Contract With America, he was shutting the government down--Howard, you were agreeing with the very plan that Newt Gingrich wanted to pass, which was a $270 billion cut in Medicare.

Now, you've been saying for many months that you're the head of the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party. I think you're just winging it.

This is not the view of Democrats, in my view.

This program has been under attack from the Republicans since the beginning. And we need a candidate against George Bush that can take the fight to him on it, not someone who agreed with the Gingrich Republicans.

WILLIAMS: Governor Dean?

DEAN: That is flat-out false, and I'm ashamed that you would compare me with Newt Gingrich. Nobody up here deserves to be compared to Newt Gingrich.

(APPLAUSE)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A433-2003...

Another denial. Why deny, instead of explain?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-18-03 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #128
129. Easy to spin later by saying "I was upset."
The pertinent quote is:

1994(Boston Herald)

Sen. John F. Kerry broke from Democratic Party ranks, saying he was delighted by the GOP election purge and laying the blame on the doorstep of President Clinton and arrogant House leaders. ...I want this change. Im delighted with seeing an institutional shakeup because I think we need one, Kerry said in a Herald interview.



The 2003 answer is nothing but spin.


"I was upset." lol.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-18-03 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #129
131. No matter how thin you slice the quote
the fact is that while Kerry tried to explain his previous statement, Dean tried to deny his. One is an honest attempt to explain a past mistake, the other is...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-18-03 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #131
132. "No matter how you slice this post"
the fact is that they both said the same thing. Deal with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-18-03 09:03 PM
Response to Reply #128
130. Thanks for the full explanation, Feanorcurufinwe!
This does tend to put things in perspective. :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-18-03 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #130
133. Agree. RiF's was decidedly less than full
or "full of it" to be honest. Dean's consistency on issues is close to non-existent when compared to Kerry's long, long, long record.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-21-03 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #133
136. From what I've heard and read, I agree with you
Kerry is a candidate I feel I could support. Dean, I'm not so sure about. His stance on the issues isn't as well-known as those who have served in Congress, like Kerry, Gephardt, Kucinich, Moseley Braun and Edwards. :shrug: Oops! Forgot Lieberman! LOL! :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FubarFly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-18-03 10:51 PM
Response to Original message
135. Why would I explain that away?
Personally, Dean's comments from 1995 don't bother me in the slightest. In fact, I am encouraged that Dean is not a blindly loyal partisan. He had the courage to speak out for what he believed in even then. His perspective as a doctor should've have been valued more by Democrats at the time. It's a shame it wasn't. Too bad they didn't learn their from their mistakes. Thanks for posting yet another fine example of Dean's exceptional leadership qualities. I'm glad to know that when the issue is important enough, Dean is capable of choosing country ahead of party.

--

"Why Newt Gingrich is in the speaker's chair is because our party was not financially responsible during the '80s, and I make no bones about it."

As well he shouldn't. Because of visionary Democrats like Howard Dean, the Democratic Party is now becoming the Party of fiscal responsibility. Bill Clinton understood the value of a balanced budget, and right from the beginning, so did Howard Dean.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-01-03 01:31 AM
Response to Reply #135
137. We need to have a balanced budget
The horrors of this administration will haunt us for years to come. I will vote for anyone who can deliver this and several candidates have included this as a part of their platform. Bush* sure didn't. :-(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Sep 01st 2014, 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Politics/Campaigns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC