Democrats & Liberals: Archives

I look forward to seeing him viciously flail about while his own party competitors tear him to shreds. If he survives that, the Republicans will surely unleash their worst assault on him. The only way he’ll be able to survive that is if he can gain critical support from the media, which I just don’t see happening (probably my cynical nature, but I think the deregulation by the FCC means a favor is due to Georgey-boy).

He’s a good candidate, but better men have been shredded by the razor teeth of politics.

I am reminded of the Catholic who could not possibly win and the media and opposition who opposed putting the pope in the Whitehouse. JFK, unknown outside of the north-eastern corridor, became president nonetheless because of TV charisma, oration based on principles which struck a chord with the public — and a whole lot of money.

Dean has as good a chance as any Democratic candidate at this point in the primaries. Whether he can unseat President Bush will depend a lot on President Bush. His spinning machine is working harder than ever, but, his numbers keep fading.

And vocal opposition from around the world is getting louder and making inroads into American media. In the last few days NPR, a host of weblogs, CNN and CBS have all carried Mandela’s harsh criticism of the Bush military machine in search of oil, for example.

I believe the American people are waking to the notion that one party government is not in their best interest, too much power for one party to wield in favor of its extremist support base. I see, at this point, another extremely close race in 2004 for the presidency and perhaps the Senate.

Michael Barone says Dean’s snobbery is his greatest weakness, but it’s not one that necessarily makes it hard for him to win the nomination, just the election. See my post on of the subject.

Day by Day has a nifty cartoon today that explains exactly how I feel about Howard Dean.

http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/cartoons/07-08-2003.gif

I was having trouble putting my finger on exactly why I liked Dean. Now I know.

That’s a great cartoon.

Democrats don’t need Michael Barone’s opinions concerning whom we should nominate or what we should think…unless Mr. Bennett is willing to let E.J. Dionne pick Republican nominees.

>http://www.antiwar.com/justin/justincol.html
>

http://toughenough.org/huminski.html

“Dean’s Constitutional Hang-up” — this one is good
http://www.counterpunch.org/frank08122003.html

“Is Dean a Criminal Too?”
http://seattle.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=31720&group=webcast

In a 1997 Vt News Bureau interview, Dean admitted his desire to appoint
judges willing to subvert the bill of rights. Now the fallout from Dean’s
appointments are before the US 2nd Circuit at Foley Square, NYC in two
outrageous cases. Docket #s 03-7036, 02-6150, 02-6199, 02-6201 One case is
being prosecuted by Washington, DC first amendment attorney Robert
Corn-Revere against two of Dean’s judges for their banishment of a Vermont
“citizen-reporter” for life from all state courthouses because he criticized
one of Dean’s judicial appointees. The other case features Dean’s judges
violating Double Jeopardy, First Amendment, State law and the State
constitution. See Docket No. 99-445 (Vt. Dec. 13, 2000), aff’g, Docket No.
167-1-99 WmCr (Windham D. Ct. Aug. 30, 1999) Both cases have been briefed
before the Manhattan Court awaiting oral argument. Also filing a brief in
federal court against Dean’s appointees is the Thomas Jefferson Center For
The Protection of Freedom of Expression.

Below are links regarding Dean’s voicing his problem with the Bill of
Rights. He constantly complains about “legal technicalities” (i.e. the Bill
of Rights) as he did in the June 22 meet the press interview.

http://www.thomhartmann.com/government.shtml

http://www.txtriangle.com/archive/1049/coverstory.htm

A link to a story regarding the courthouse banishment case.
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org//news.aspx?id=5354
or.
http://www.freedomforum.org/templates/document.asp?documentID=13300

A commentary on Dean’s subversion of the public defender system.

http://www.talkleft.com/archives/003681.html#003681

Dean’s statement on “re-evaluation” of our “civil liberties”.

http://rutlandherald.nybor.com/News/Story/33681.html

Criminal sentences doubled during Dean’s tenure as a result of his
appointments. I wonder how many of those serving these inflated sentences
were also subjugated to constitutional deprivations at the hands of Dean’s
Judicial appointees leading to their convictions? How many of those serving
inflated sentences were prejudiced by Deans’ subversion of the public
defender system mandated by the 6th amendment?

In the Meet the Press interview with Dean while discussing the death
penalty he stated,

“So I just-life without parole, which we have which I actually got passed
when I was lieutenant governor- the problem with life without parole is that
people get out for reasons that have nothing to do with justice. We had a
case where a guy who was a rapist, a serial sex offender, was convicted,
then was let out on what I would think and believe was a technicality, a new
trial was ordered and the victim wouldn’t come back and go through the
second trial. “

http://www.msnbc.com/news/912159.asp?cp1=1

Now, according to Dean, the Bill of Rights (ie. legal technicalities) has
“nothing to do with justice”. In the above quote, is he saying that if
someone was unconstitutionally convicted it is better that the government
kill them before they can point out the constitutional problems with their
conviction?

A further commentary on Dean’s death penalty stand.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A1
907-2003Jul2¬Found=true

and, noting the “anti-due-process” Dean message,

http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/930194.asp?0si=-&cp1=1#BODY

See 1994 Yale Law School commencement discussing the danger of our leaders
dismissing the “provisions of the Bill of Rights as mere technicalities.”.

http://www.schr.org/reports/docs/Yale%2094.pdf

Scott Huminski
Cary, NC

One of these things is not like the other:
Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Howard Dean, Al Gore
One of them has integrity and a willingness to stand by his beliefs and convictions. Which one is it?
Not Clinton, he sold out this country on more than one occassion. Lost Bin Hiding, Sent undersupplied and Undermanned troops to Somalia and Bosnia where we had no interest, and oh yeah that whole perjury thing.
Definately Not Dean. Any man who can ridicule a President and finger point at the administration over homeland security when he couldnt keep 1 nuclear plant safe from faux terrorists as a Gov. obviously has no clue as to what it is to be competant even though he tries to pawn himself of on “mainstream” america as just that.
And Unless Gore really did invent the internet and somehow it was body snatchers who continued the unconstitutional recounts after Bush won Florida 10 + times.
So that leaves us With George W. Bush. A true President of these United States who has returned the dignity to an office devoid of it for 8 years.
Dean please get nominated that way I can continue to laugh at you as I watch the democratic party be highjacked by the radical left.