The lead on that Post article is so silly. When President Bush quotes FDR on X, is he "trying to draw him into a dispute about X"?
Many people never thought Howard Dean would get to this level. He's now on at least equal footing with anyone in the race. People are listening to him. That's the biggest hurdle he faced. Now that people are listening, it's just up to him (and the staff) to make them believe and to turn it into votes.
I have confidence.
I think the fact that Marhsall, from the Progressive Policy Institute (kind of a misnomer given their centrist positions, but I guess it sounds better than "The Centrist Policy Institute") is worried about Dean, since its trying to create a "conventional wisdom" that Dean's stance of the war has now killed him.
What was that nonsense about "Blair Democrats"? What's next? Putin Republicans?
I agree, vander Heuvel has some interesting points about what could be done with the military budget. Unfortunately, that is not going to happen for Dean. At least not now. The Bush tax cut is more red meat to get money for universal health care and the like.
I find the right's worship of the military frightening and sad, but I realize that now is not the time to cut the military budget, especially since we have to build and secure Iraq up.
Of course politically speaking cutting the budget maybe political suicide because it'd kill a presidential candidate. This is of course because of the Right's militarism (it's so funny there love the military when half of them have never served). This is the point that I really thought was interesting about what vander Huevel had to say: By not even considering touching the military budget is to admit that the Right has a distinct edge over the Left. It's "me too" politics.
Hey Bri, do you post on The Atlantic?
Hey WVUDem, I'm graduated from WVU in 2000! Go Mountaineers!
Alright! Another Mountaineer for Dean!
Gotta love Clinton in that Post article. Disowns a worthy statement when it appears too controversial, then goes out of his way to praise Don Rumsfeld.
I'm feeling very positive Dean vibes...I wish it were Saturday night already.
i wonder how much pulling out of saudi arabia will offset the costs of rebuilding iraq? anyone know where to get numbers for this? it would be interesting to know how much we spend on our saudi and kuwaiti bases (expect a pullout from kuwait as well now that iraq's secured), and to compare it to the projected costs of the iraq deal.
Interesting article, although I believe that advocating a slashing of the military budget post 9/11 is politically foolish. This is not to say that I don't think it's a good idea, however this will not play well in areas of middle America and the southeastern coastal states - a stretch of America that Dean needs. I've always found it interesting that the Republicans who constantly advocate a position that you can't just throw money at programs to improve them (education, health care) seem to be willing to toss billions at the military industrial complex. And, We have the most powerful military in the world - maybe if you throw enough money at something, you CAN make it a showcase. In any case - advocating a drastic slashing of the military budget at this time is too politically risky and could possibly kill our candidate. I think Dean is smart enough not to follow this route.
I think Dean is not looking at the politics of slashing the military right now. I don't, and I might be guilty of being naive, think it entirely his nature to look at the political consequences. I don't think he believes it as necessary. Not when you have a giant tax cut which with only half of it rolled back would fund a lot of things that are being strangled because of it.
I think we're all on the same page here in thinking that the last thing Dean needs to do is start talking about cutting the military. It's one thing to stop funding foolish programs behind the scenes once you're president, but it's entirely another to run for president in the middle of hostilities saying, "I'm going to take away the military's fancy weapons!"
Like I said - interesting ideas, but not for the Dean campaign. Instead, I just think it's great that people are looking to Dean as the one to put new ideas forward. It's not like vanden Heuvel--who I have nothing but massive respect for--is putting this out as an open letter to the Democratic candidates. It's just Dean. She clearly sees him as a man who can get things done, which is an outstanding endorsement on its own.
Yeah, Scott's right. I can't remember all the places I've seen some variation on "this might be something Howard Dean should bring up." It's amazing, really. Even people that have no preference in the Dem. nomination, or even prefer someone else, are looking to the good Dr./Gov. for something new, some voice telling truth. It's inspiring, really. And about as secure a foundation for a campaign you could ask for.
NS, nope, I don't post on the Atlantic. Why do you ask?
I have to echo what Bri says. Friends of mine that are more politically active, praise the Dean campaign for being a place that listens to what volunteers suggest and responds accordingly.
Whoppi Goldberg spoke about Dean's ability to answer on some questions that he hadn't thought out his position and was willing to work it out with people.
Dean is a candidate with ears to hear what people are saying, brains to figure if it makes sense or not, and backbone enough to speak out about what makes sense, even if its not a popular opinion.
Can there be any surprise that anyone who has listened to him seriously is so excited about his campaign?
If Dean is ever asked by7 Bush about this comment in the general election campaign he should say that military power is dependent on economic propserity and if you keep running things we'll have neither.
The PPI ought to be embracing Dean for his centrist stance on guns and fiscal conservatism. Lately, the PPI/DLC seems to be more about having a "centrist image" than being a true centrist as it was when Clinton ran it.
In order for the DLC to back you, you have to be part of it, regardless of your stands on the issues. You would think Dean's record would be embraced by the DLC. It isn't. Why? Because the DLC has decided that the defining issue in 2004 will be national security. They see Kerry filing that niche so they will probably back him, even though Dean's positions are more in line with traditional DLC thinking. And, like the DLC, watch for the NRA to abandon Dean over one issue (whichever one they pick) so they can give all their backing to Bush in 2004. In a contest where the NRA should stay neutral, they'll find something to abandon Dean over.
Just to see how far we have gone to the right in this country follow this time line.
Howard Dean accompanied his father to the 1964 Republican convention as Dean's father was a delegate for Nelson Rockefeller(SP?) This was the convention that the new conservative movement was born with Barry Goldwater.
Rockefeller was shunned by the conservatives who grabbed the control of the party that year.
Rockefeller was made in the mold of a fiscal conservative but a social liberal. It's easy to see where Howard Dean's early influences came from.
Fast forward to 2003. Howard Dean, really is much like the 1964 Republican, Nelson Rockefeller, yet he is cast by the RNC, as an ultra liberal. Using that kind of logic(this is beyond the republican form of logic, this is real ) the conservative republicans have moved into the realm of FASCISM.
I'd like to see Wesley Clark chime in on the issue. He's really the only Democrat that could dare suggest cutting military spending.
I would like to see The Dean Campaign seriously thinking of tapping old General Clark (former commander of NATO forces in Europe) to fill out the ticket.
My mother, a lifelong Democrat, LOVED Nelson Rockefeller when he was governor of NY. I will have to remind her that is where Dean's ideas originate from.
Thursday, May 22nd will be the last full working day before the Memorial Day Weekend, and it's a good time to send a real message of support for our military. (We all know how much work gets done on the Friday before a holiday 
Please help to remind people that while publicly declaring their great love for the troops, the budget being submitted this year by the White House will have disastrous consequences for veterans and military families.
I'd ask you to urge people to call their representatives that Thursday, to request that full funding for the VA be a top legislative priority. To ask legislators to maintain school funding for the children of families who live on base. To keep retirement promises made to veterans of former wars. And to act to correct the shameful fact that many military families require private charity when their service members are called to duty, or if they lose their lives.
There's more background here at my site. To The Barricades and Seeing The Forest have also posted on the subject.
The media is in love with our veterans when they go out to fight our enemies, but can't be bothered to notice when a backroom deal cuts them out of needed help. Can't muster any outrage that the Red Cross feels it must pitch in to help the families of deployed troops. It's great that people will help out, but why is our national level praise greater than our financial commitment? Why must our military personnel subsist on salaries that leave their families virtually destitute and in need of charity? If this treatment represents respect and support for our troops, they hardly need any enemies.
If you object to the way our military personnel and veterans are treated, and would like to do one better than sending $20 to the local VA hospital, call your representatives on May 22nd.
Capitol Switchboard: (202) 224-3121
For local numbers, you can look them up at Congress.org. You can always call local offices when the main DC numbers are busy.
Bri: There's a Dean supporter posting on The Atlantic under the name Bri. Thought perhaps it was you.