....LMB: "Electable"....

June 29, 2003

Can anyone explain to me why they support Howard Dean as the Democratic candidate for president? To me, it seems his only positive qualities are 1) he was against the Iraq war and 2) he isn't George W. Bush. Apart from that, he seems like a man who looked at all the criticism that liberals have levelled at Republican policy and said "how can I implement 5% of that criticism?"

Maybe I'm missing something, but he seems like an asshole.

Posted by Jake at 11:10 PM | TrackBack (0)
Comments

Well the only reason W is in office is because he was:

1) Not Bill Clinton.
and
2) Not Bill Clinton's VP

So I'd say Dean is comparably electable. He's the only one that isn't a fruit (or I should say, perceived as a fruit) that hasn't spent the last 3 years rolling over for W's legislative agenda. I can't really comment on why a Liberal would support him, But I can understand why a Democrat would.

1) He's not George W. Bush.
2) A SC Justice's spot will be filled in the next term
3) He's an asshole willing to be aggressive. Not a panty-waist whiney crybaby. He speaks a language people can understand.
4) His policies are mainstream enough to win a general election.

Until the pendulum swings so far back to the left that Dennis would have snowball's chance, Dean looks to be the class of a weak field.

As Nader voters discovered, it's not always the best idea to vote for the guy that best represents you. Sometimes you need to support whomever can beat the guy that is most antagonistic towards you.

Posted by: Dan Isaacs at June 30, 2003 08:21 AM

I am (tenatively) very interested in the (possible) candidacy of Gen. Wesley Clark. I saw him on Russert's show a coupla weeks back and was pretty impressed. If he gives up the waffling and decides to run against Bush, I think he could eat him for lunch. But I thought that about Gore, too, so what the fuck do I know? Maybe most Americans really DO want the "second coming" to hurry up. Happy Armageddon!

Posted by: Scott at June 30, 2003 08:37 AM

Once Americans decide to vote their conscience, then Liberals won't be hampered by the "lesser of two evils" argument. As long as corporate campaign contributions corrupt so many candidates, I'm going to vote for those who are the least tainted: Kucinich, McKinney, Nader ....

It is encumbent upon Progressives to remind Democrats and Republicans that neither party really stands for their purported ideals. A vote for the "mainstream" candidates in either party is a a vote for Monsanto, Citigroup, ADM, Occidental Oil (in other words a vote for war, and corporate rights superceding civil and human rights).

Posted by: at June 30, 2003 09:08 AM

Howard Dean is popular because he is an executive officer. Governors are CEOs, who lead with vision, whereas Senators are advisors, who debate for consensus. People want leaders for their president, not philosophers. (This is similar to the #3 point posted at the top of the page.)

Most people underestimate the importance of leadership in forging a candidate's public perception, and how leadership is a SEPARATE CATEGORY from the person's actual views, the consideration being that a leader will always lead in a positive direction, regardless of personal beliefs. This is because people think leaders will ultimately prove themselves to be pragmatic when placed in a difficult situation. True or not, this is how people think.

People also do not appreciate the difference between the executive office of the governor and the legislative office of the Senator, which is why people never understand why legislators always do so abyssmally poorly in presidential races.

Posted by: Name Witheld at June 30, 2003 09:23 AM

I believe Howard Dean is popular because he is an executive officer. Governors are CEOs, who lead with vision, whereas Senators are advisors, who debate for consensus. People want leaders for their president, not philosophers. (This is similar to the #3 point posted at the top of the page.)

Most people underestimate the importance of leadership in forging a candidate's public perception, and how leadership is a SEPARATE CATEGORY from the person's actual views, the consideration being that a leader will always lead in a positive direction, regardless of personal beliefs. This is because people think leaders will ultimately prove themselves to be pragmatic when placed in a difficult situation. True or not, this is how people think.

People also do not appreciate the difference between the executive office of the governor and the legislative office of the Senator, which is why people never understand why legislators always do so abyssmally poorly in presidential races.

Posted by: Name Witheld at June 30, 2003 09:26 AM

"It is encumbent upon Progressives to remind Democrats and Republicans that neither party really stands for their purported ideals. A vote for the "mainstream" candidates in either party is a a vote for Monsanto, Citigroup, ADM, Occidental Oil (in other words a vote for war, and corporate rights superceding civil and human rights.)"

yes yes... that's very nice. but perhaps Bush wouldn't be in office right now if the Nader crowd had thrown in their lot with Gore. sometimes choosing the lesser of two evils is the best you can do in the real world. what would be nice is a system where you can vote for whatever candidate you like, but then cast a second vote that will be counted if your first choice receives less than a certain percentage of the total vote. that way you could still show your support for whichever candidate is really your favorite withouth throwing your vote away entirely. which is what the Nader voters did, no matter how they justify it.

Posted by: holly at June 30, 2003 11:25 AM

Dean is popular precisely because he is willing to look like an asshole. He's a fighter, while everyone else in the field is calibrating their responses so as not to draw too much fire from the VRWC, Dean is refusing to let fear them dictate his actions.

A candidate free from fear is very appealing. The perception that Democrats are weak on defense comes directly from the observation that none of the Dem leaders are willing to stand up and call Bush on all of his lies. If they won't fight HIM, how can they be expected to fight the countries real enemies?

Ultimately, the perception that Bush is strong on defense comes not from his defense policy (which actually sucks), but from the awareness that his is a fighter and people cross him at their peril.

We need the same perception of the Democratic candidate. THAT is what will neutralize the 'weak on defense' issue and turn the election into a refferendum on Bushs (failed) economic policies.

Posted by: Bones at June 30, 2003 02:40 PM

Dean is popular precisely because he is willing to look like an asshole. He's a fighter, while everyone else in the field is calibrating their responses so as not to draw too much fire from the VRWC, Dean is refusing to let fear them dictate his actions.

A candidate free from fear is very appealing. The perception that Democrats are weak on defense comes directly from the observation that none of the Dem leaders are willing to stand up and call Bush on all of his lies. If they won't fight HIM, how can they be expected to fight the countries real enemies?

Ultimately, the perception that Bush is strong on defense comes not from his defense policy (which actually sucks), but from the awareness that his is a fighter and people cross him at their peril.

We need the same perception of the Democratic candidate. THAT is what will neutralize the 'weak on defense' issue and turn the election into a refferendum on Bushs (failed) economic policies.

Posted by: Bones at June 30, 2003 02:41 PM

Dean is popular precisely because he is willing to look like an asshole. He's a fighter, while everyone else in the field is calibrating their responses so as not to draw too much fire from the VRWC, Dean is refusing to let fear them dictate his actions.

A candidate free from fear is very appealing. The perception that Democrats are weak on defense comes directly from the observation that none of the Dem leaders are willing to stand up and call Bush on all of his lies. If they won't fight HIM, how can they be expected to fight the countries real enemies?

Ultimately, the perception that Bush is strong on defense comes not from his defense policy (which actually sucks), but from the awareness that his is a fighter and people cross him at their peril.

We need the same perception of the Democratic candidate. THAT is what will neutralize the 'weak on defense' issue and turn the election into a refferendum on Bushs (failed) economic policies.

Posted by: Bones at June 30, 2003 02:42 PM

I'm not a supporter of the Green Party, but the Democrats did themselves in. Instead of bitching and whining how Nader ruined things, the Dems should get their heads out of their own asses. Sorry, it has to be said. I'm just a bit irritated by the ineffectual liberal opposition to the right wing. From where I stand, the Democrats and liberals are defenders of the status quo as the Republicans and conservatives are.

Posted by: Eric at June 30, 2003 02:52 PM

I apologize...I'm in a surly mood today.

Posted by: Eric at June 30, 2003 02:58 PM

Am i the only one that thinks we need to start over?
fuck electing any of "their" people
right now we need to work to build a new society

Posted by: m at June 30, 2003 03:39 PM

Here is my take on Dean, he's not as liberal as I'd personally like, but he's pro-choice and for universal health care. A little liberalism is better than 4 more years of Bush.

Posted by: Shawn at June 30, 2003 11:21 PM

Here is my take on Dean, he's not as liberal as I'd personally like, but he's pro-choice and for universal health care. A little liberalism is better than 4 more years of Bush.

Posted by: Shawn at June 30, 2003 11:21 PM

Here is my take on Dean, he's not as liberal as I'd personally like, but he's pro-choice and for universal health care. A little liberalism is better than 4 more years of Bush.

Posted by: Shawn at June 30, 2003 11:21 PM

Here is my take on Dean, he's not as liberal as I'd personally like, but he's pro-choice and for universal health care. A little liberalism is better than 4 more years of Bush.

Posted by: Shawn at June 30, 2003 11:24 PM

Here is my take on Dean, he's not as liberal as I'd personally like, but he's pro-choice and for universal health care. A little liberalism is better than 4 more years of Bush.

Posted by: Shawn at June 30, 2003 11:24 PM

yeah... i'd love to start over. i think the whole 2 party system is crap. but in the meantime, i think we all need to throw our support behind whoever offers us the greatest chance of getting Bush out of office. like Shawn pointed out, 4 years of a little liberalism is better than 4 more years of Bush.

Posted by: holly at July 1, 2003 05:40 AM

You are definitely missing something. It boggles my mind that people can be stridently anti-Bush and yet settle for Lieberman or Gephardt.

Dean may or may not be the greatest thing since sliced bread, but he is definitely the first Democratic candidate who is willing to speak the truth about the larger realities of America. Even Kerry, who slowly but surely is starting to call Bush out on his extremist agenda, seems so focus-group driven. He may decry Bush's court appointments but he doesn't appear to taake it personallly the way Dean does.

Listen, I do not want to live in a country in which cronyism runs rampant, environmental and health protections are ignored, civil rights are stripped away, the history of Jim Crow is rewritten by Southern revisionists to have been a fantasy created by politically correct liberals, etc. If it takes an asshole to prevent that then so be it.

Posted by: space at July 1, 2003 06:18 AM

I agree that a fighter is what we need. I cannot blame the timid democrats who hope to get elected AGAIN running scared, just look at the media bias, and note the story in today's Salon from Eric Boelhert on "Goofus Al and Gallant George".

All of the people who don't understand that this is a dirty, no good, political fight from the GOP who are not playing by the rules are just kidding themselves.

So yes, I like Dean. I think he can win, and I will donate money, time and effort to help him. otherwise, America as we know it is over.

Posted by: Anybody But Bush at July 1, 2003 09:12 PM

jamie ghsfd gslfhvgb

Posted by: at July 5, 2003 02:52 PM

"he is definitely the first Democratic candidate who is willing to speak the truth about the larger realities of America"

who are you kidding?

Besides even if sometimes Dean "speaks" the truth he has nothing in his platform to back up those words. His so called "Universal" healthcare plan ISN'T Universal. His so called stance against the war ISN'T one that shows any actual deads to that effect and DOESN't show any plans for the future in that regard. Carl Rove has publicly stated that the Republicans would "love" to run against Dean..... why's that...

Republicans aren't stupid enough to think they have a shot in hell of actually WINNING the election; regardless of who they are runnng against (unless stealing works again). They want to make sure the new president is one who will NOT CHANGE MUCH so when they get back in there the infrastructure of fascism is still firmly in place. Republicans love Dean and smear boldface lies on Kucinich at every turn because he's the only one they're really afraid off. He's the only one with a track record of standing up to them.

I've often heard people say that Kucinich is just promising the world and can't deliver on those promises like a "typical" politician.... What these people don't understand is that with Dennis they aren't just promises.... He's ALREADY working on these "promises". He's ALREADY got viable plans to achieve his "promises" and he's ALREADY DOING it, making them happen.

They will only become unfulfilled promises if the people of our once great country settle for the Republican choice for the Democratic Nominee.

Posted by: FluxRostrum at September 21, 2003 08:05 AM

"he is definitely the first Democratic candidate who is willing to speak the truth about the larger realities of America"

who are you kidding?

Besides even if sometimes Dean "speaks" the truth he has nothing in his platform to back up those words. His so called "Universal" healthcare plan ISN'T Universal. His so called stance against the war ISN'T one that shows any actual deads to that effect and DOESN't show any plans for the future in that regard. Carl Rove has publicly stated that the Republicans would "love" to run against Dean..... why's that...

Republicans aren't stupid enough to think they have a shot in hell of actually WINNING the election; regardless of who they are runnng against (unless stealing works again). They want to make sure the new president is one who will NOT CHANGE MUCH so when they get back in there the infrastructure of fascism is still firmly in place. Republicans love Dean and smear boldface lies on Kucinich at every turn because he's the only one they're really afraid off. He's the only one with a track record of standing up to them.

I've often heard people say that Kucinich is just promising the world and can't deliver on those promises like a "typical" politician.... What these people don't understand is that with Dennis they aren't just promises.... He's ALREADY working on these "promises". He's ALREADY got viable plans to achieve his "promises" and he's ALREADY DOING it, making them happen.

They will only become unfulfilled promises if the people of our once great country settle for the Republican choice for the Democratic Nominee.

Posted by: FluxRostrum at September 21, 2003 08:23 AM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?






Lying Media Bastards is both a radio show and website. The show airs Mondays 2-4pm PST on KillRadio.org, and couples excellent music with angry news commentary. And the website, well, you're looking at it.

Both projects focus on our media-marinated world, political lies, corporate tyranny, and the folks fighting the good fight against these monsters.

All brought to you by Jake Sexton, The Most Beloved Man in America ģ.


contact: jake+at+lyingmediabastards.com

Media News

November 16, 2004

Tales of Media Woe

Senate May Ram Copyright Bill- one of the most depressing stories of the day that didn't involve death or bombs. It's the music and movie industries' wet dream. It criminalizes peer-to-peer software makers, allows the government to file civil lawsuits on behalf of these media industries, and eliminates fair use. Fair use is the idea that I can use a snippet of a copyrighted work for educational, political, or satirical purposes, without getting permission from the copyright-holder first.

And most tellingly, the bill legalizes technology that would automatically skip over "obejctionable content" (i.e. sex and violence) in a DVD, but bans devices that would automatically skip over commericals. This is a blatant, blatant, blatant gift to the movie industry. Fuck the movie industry, fuck the music industry, fuck the Senate.

Music industry aims to send in radio cops- the recording industry says that you're not allowed to record songs off the radio, be it real radio or internet radio. And now they're working on preventing you from recording songs off internet radio through a mixture of law and technological repression (although I imagine their techno-fixes will get hacked pretty quickly).

The shocking truth about the FCC: Censorship by the tyranny of the few- blogger Jeff Jarvis discovers that the recent $1.2 million FCC fine against a sex scene in Fox's "Married By America" TV show was not levied because hundreds of people wrote the FCC and complained. It was not because 159 people wrote in and complained (which is the FCC's current rationale). No, thanks to Jarvis' FOIA request, we find that only 23 people (of the show's several million viewers) wrote in and complained. On top of that, he finds that 21 of those letters were just copy-and-paste email jobs that some people attached their names to. Jarvis then spins this a bit by saying that "only 3" people actually wrote letters to the FCC, which is misleading but technically true. So somewhere between 3 and 23 angry people can determine what you can't see on television. Good to know.

Reuters Union Considers Striking Over Layoffs- will a strike by such a major newswire service impact the rest of the world's media?

Pentagon Starts Work On War Internet- the US military is talking about the creation of a global, wireless, satellite-aided computer network for use in battle. I think I saw a movie about this once...

Conservative host returns to the air after week suspension for using racial slur- Houston radio talk show host (and somtime Rush Limbaugh substitute) Mark Belling referred to Mexican-Americans as "wetbacks" on his show. He was suspended for a couple of weeks, and then submitted a written apology for the racial slur to a local newspaper. But he seems to be using the slur and its surrounding controversy to boost his conservative cred with his listeners.

Stay Tuned for Nudes- Cleveland TV news anchor Sharon Reed aired a story about artist Spencer Tunick, who uses large numbers of naked volunteers in his installations and photographs. The news report will be unique in that it will not blur or black-out the usual naughty bits. The story will air late at night, when it's allegedly okay with the FCC if you broadcast "indecent" material. The author of this article doesn't seem to notice that Reed first claims that this report is a publicity stunt, but then claims it's a protest against FCC repression. I'd like to think it's the latter, but I'm not that much of a sucker.

Posted by Jake at 04:02 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
More Media News

Jake Jake Jake

 

Fake "Ha-Ha" News

News

 

Quotes

"8:45? And here I am yapping away like it's 8:35!"
-Ned Flanders

More Quotes

Media News

 

Obligatory Blog Links

 

Snapshots

Mission: Mongolia

Jake's first attempt at homemade Mongolican barbecue:

Failure.

What went right: correctly guessing several key seasonings- lemon, ginger, soy, garlic, chili.

What went wrong: still missing some ingredients, and possibly had one wrong, rice vinegar. Way too much lemon and chili.

Result: not entirely edible.

Plan for future: try to get people at Great Khan's restaurant to tell me what's in the damn sauce.

More Snapshots

Columnists Of Note

 

References

Sonic Resistance

 

Dead Trees

 

Heavy Rotation

Archives

 

Squiggles of Insight

SubvertWare

Credits

Design and Layout by Mark McLaughlin and Quang Tang
LMB Logo by Quang Tang

Alt "One Hell of a Leader" logo largely stolen from Obey Giant.
All other material by Jake Sexton (unless otherwise cited)

hosted by nice dream