Dean on environment. No wonder he sealed his records

[Skwmom]

in Vermont.

A really enlightening read.

<http://www.counterpunch.org/colby02222003.html>

[Skwmom]

1. Kind of reminds me of Bush.

<"Dean's attempts to run for president as an environmentalist is nothing but a fraud," Smith told Wild Matters. "He's destroyed the Agency of Natural Resources, he's refused to meet with environmentalists while constantly meeting with the development community, and he's made the permitting process one, big dysfunctional joke.">

[chimpymustgo]

3. I wish Dean would open his records. It would be a stark contrast.

But, c'est la vie. He's just a politician at the end of the day, Go Edwards. Go Kerry. We can win.

[Capn Sunshine]

6. Oh Sure .

Dean=Bush on the environment. There's no difference.
That's grasping isn't it..........

I don't know whether to feel good that it's over so early or feel sorry for the desperation displayed here.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

18. excuse me but....it's over so early?

Did NH move it's primary up to September? Did I miss something?
Do I sense Deaners want to get the voting and nomination over and done with ASAP so that they won't have to have the glaring and unflattering light of truth shined down upon them and their candidate and their utopian fantasies? Is a little self examination too much to ask?

I know one thing. I truly feel sorry for the willful ignorance displayed here.

[DemBones DemBones]

41. You nailed it. Howard's "kids" (as he calls them) don't want to

examine his record or his statements. They like him, he looks good on TV (and without makeup, they claim), he takes his coat off and rolls up his sleeves to show he's a regular guy -- what more could anyone want?

:eyes:

As for me, I want a candidate whose record and statements are clear. And he has to show all of his record or I'll wonder what's in there that he doesn't want known. Records can be disclosed in such a way that the privacy of those mentioned in them (like closeted gays who wrote to him in support of civil unions) can be preserved. All it takes is a state employee or two armed with black magic markers.

[KaraokeKarlton]

17. What, so the GOP can identify all those homosexuals who wrote to him

telling their stories and asking for him to support civil unions? That would be brilliant. Let's just "out" all those gays still in the closet against their consent.

The only thing in the sealed records are private communications. Every position he took, and executive action he took is a matter of public record.

[dsc]

27. Please link me to where

I can find Edwards' memos to his staff, his staff's memos to him, his correspondence to his constituents, his constituents' correspondence to him. That, AND ONLY THAT, is what Dean has sealed. So again I ask where, oh where, is this info for Kerry and Edwards?

[Cha]

4. Another disingenious Dean basher....oh well...many have gone

before you and with this same article, too!

[Skwmom]

10. Let me get this straight.

It's okay when the Dean groupies post negative articles about other candidates, but you cry foul when someone posts a negative article about Dean.

[FubarFly]

13. You're half right.

Bet you can't guess which half.

[liberalnurse]

16. Don't rationalize your behavior by

pointing your finger at what is not here. You posted flame bait trash. You did it.... I didn't and never have, never will.

You post it and just say "an enlightening read." You don't offer any concerns, questions or ask for clarification from one of us who can offer accurate information.

I'ts really sad... Your no daisy.

[Skwmom]

28. So anything that shows your candidate in a bad light is trash.

I thought Bush followers were willfully ignorant.

[FubarFly]

31. Nope, just you.

[liberalnurse]

33. It takes one to know one.

:bounce: "Can ya hear me now?"

[salin]

77. No offense,

but to the both of you - what a ridiculous interchange. Reading it makes me feel like I should change professions and become a recess monitor - just to survive in GD these days.

[LWolf]

94. I do recess duty every day. Join me!

I rarely hear this one any more. Today's 8-12 year olds, the ones I work with anyway, are more mature.

"It takes one to know one?" :eyes: On an adult discussion board? I'm biting my tongue. I will not post the word that comes to mind.

While I'm trying to teach those kids to engage in real debate, focused on issues, in my elementary school classroom, adult political discussions decay into......I won't say it.

Instead of rushing out on the attack as a defense strategy, when an article like this pops up about my candidate, I like to:

Research and investigate the allegations. Look for evidence.

Consider the implications, and decide if it affects my support of the candidate. If not, then:

Formulate a reasoned, logical response, with evidence to back me up. And a plan for the future. If it surfaces during the primary, you damned well know it will be there in the general election, and you better have a response beyond "it takes one to know one."

A reasoned, logical response, backed with evidence (like his record on the environment), is powerful. An emotional "how dare you criticize the candidate sitting on my altar" response conveys the message that your candidate's support is not based on the issues. People who actually like to vote for candidates based on the issues are put off.

I'm going to browse the thread, looking for that reasoned, logical response. Because I'm interested in the topic. I know there are some great Dean supporters who have probably supplied one.

[CMT]

2. please read the following (Progressive Case for Howard Dean)

A progressive case for Howard Dean--you'll have to scroll down to the section labeled Environment to read about the amazing things which Dean did in Vermont regarding the environment and land preservation.

http://blogs.onenw.org/jon/archives/000701.html

also here is a very detailed speech Dean delivered in San Francisco on his environmental policy--A Hundred Year Plan:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=7383&security=1&news_iv_ctrl=1321

[liberalnurse]

5. Thanks for the cover CMT.

Now we can just let this miserable thread die a peaceful death.

[Skwmom]

7. I read the thread.

Obviously someone is not telling the truth. I'll put my faith in the Vermonters who saw how Dean worked up close versus a student writing an article.

[Skwmom]

8. Also, if Dean had nothing to hide

the records would not be sealed. Isn't that how Bush operates. I've had enough of that.

[CMT]

23. I believe it is common practice

for almost all governors to have their records sealed for a certain number of years.

[Skwmom]

25. But Dean petitioned to get his records sealed for a longer period.

Why? I think Dean should explain why he did this. The actual records would mean alot more than some letters to the editor.

[TLM]

51. The only thing sealed is personal correspondence…

What justification have you for searching those communications? What light would that shine on the environmental policy that is already a matter of public record?


As another poster asked, does any other candidate make their personal communications public?


The fact is you have to cite a 3rd party opinion piece as if it some kind of objective news reporting. It is an opinion piece quoting someone who was expressing their opinion about the nature of Dean’s environmental policy.

However some hit piece spewing an anti-Dean opinion, doesn’t mean much in the face of the results of those environmental policies in Vermont.


http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_record_environment

• Land Acquisition Over 470,000 acres of land conserved through Dean’s leadership as Governor nearly 8% of Vermont. Properties acquired and added to the state’s holdings include important natural areas, significant waterfalls and gorges, critical wildlife habitat areas, key inholdings, access areas, recreation lands and important forestland parcels.
• Storm Water Management Governor Dean pioneered a statewide program establishing permit authority over storm water runoff. Vermont’s Agency of Natural Resources partnered with local authorities in towns and cities to give storm water controls teeth.
• Tough Emissions Standards Governor Dean ordered emission controls Vermont to be more stringent than those required by the Kyoto Protocols. He has worked consistently and closely with the New England states to sue the Midwestern states to reduce coal emissions.
• Lead Role on Mercury As a physician, Governor Dean took a lead role in VT and at the Conference of New England Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers on eliminating mercury within the region within 10 years.
• Thoughtful Development Governor Dean provided real incentives to keep development in downtowns and kept Vermont’s scenic vistas pristine by discouraging development near highway interchanges. Established a Development Cabinet and advanced the use of permitting as a tool to promote sustainable growth.

• Efficiency Vermont Created the Nation’s first “energy efficiency” utility to provide statewide strategies for conserving energy and called for increased use of renewables, farm, municipal, landfill methane generation projects. Efficiency Vermont is a finalist for Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government Innovations in American Government Award.
• Founder of E-Vermont Governor Dean founded E-Vermont, recognized as one of the Top Ten Best Performing Clean Cities Coalitions in the United States. E-Vermont is an effort to explore advanced technology vehicles and electric vehicles.

[liberalnurse]

12. You never had any faith.....You post an old article

from "Counterpunch"....right wing rag shit....

Give me a break! I'll stop now before I tell you what I really think.

[DemBones DemBones]

44. You refer to CounterPunch as "right wing rag shit," which tells me

you are ignorant about CounterPunch. Try reading the articles linked some time before you flame.

[Andromeda]

87. Actually Counterpunch is

an ultra-left wing rag piece of shit.

[jonnyblitz]

54. damn ..where to begin...first of all...Counterpunch is very left wing...

and, if it were a "right wing rag shit" (whatever in hell THAT is), it would be PRAISING Dean if he were anti-environment because,ummm, that is what right-wingers are. yes, it might be best if you stop now.

[KaraokeKarlton]

19. I'm from Vermont

And the Counterpunch article is trash. They use radicals as sources. Dean has a good environmental record. Smith just has her undies in a bunch because she is constantly fighting to keep EVERY business out of Vermont. She protests EVERYTHING and most Vermonters thinks she's nuts. See my other posts on this thread.

[CMT]

21. well you can do what you wish

but Dean did do the things the student activist (he is not just some student but a very accomplished young man)--it is a matter of record that he preserved more land in Vermont than any other governor of the state, or actually, all governors of Vermont combined. Signed tough executive orders on Mercury in water and tougher emmissions laws than those called for in the Kyota Treaty. Second in rankings regarding landfills,ect. Sure he did some things that upset environmentalists, all governors do, because they have to balance certain things, but as a whole he has a fine record. I've also said many times when this issue has come up--Vermont is a highly progressive, left of center state with very educated people who take the environment seriously. If Dean was as bad on the environment as this article indicates they would not have elected him five times as Governor. Vermont is greener than most states and I think the environmental community holds their governor up to higher standards and what would be a great record on the environment in almost any other state is considered barely passing or less by some environmentalists in Vermont.

[Skwmom]

30. If only politicians who protected the environment got elected

we wouldn't have the problems we currently do. The fact that Dean got elected several times does not mean he has a great environmental record.

[clar]

99. Here's a Vermonter

Dean's environmental record is mixed. He supported Act 60, our environmental permitting law, but at times may have helped others skirt it. It is a tough and contraversial law. Noted environmentalist Donatella Meadows, who died last year, also had sharp words for certain aspects of Act 60. Dean's admnistration did not do enough about storm water runoff. On the plus side, Dean fought ferociously for the Champion Land Deal, which includes a large core conservation area, so that scientists and environmentalists can compare, over the long term, an area that is left completely to nature, with areas that are preserved from development but used for recreational and other purposes. The fight around this was ugly. I went to several of the open hearings. In general, Dean fought successfully to preserve a great deal of undeveloped land. He was anti-sprawl, working with preservation groups to maintain Vermont's small town character.

I want to say a couple of words about Michael Colby and Wild Matters. MC, who I've met on several occasions, is a demagogue. He's charming, good looking and intelligent. He's also a raving nut, and a joke to almost all the liberals I know. This is a guy who thought it would be a good thing to vote Bush into office instead of Gore because Bush would mobilize all the enviromental groups.

[DemBones DemBones]

42. Nico Pitney is a college student, not a political analyst, and his

"Progressive Case for Dean" is not an objective analysis but one supporter's opinion.

And Howard's speech about what he says he would do has nothing to do with his actual record in Vermont.

Bet you knew that, too.

[Capn Sunshine]

9. A well-reasoned response to this sleazy hit piece

" The gross inaccuracies of this piece demand a response, especially for people who don’t know Vermont. Clouded by his narrow vision of political purity, the author misses both the remarkable record of Howard Dean’s tenure as governor and his great promise as a presidential candidate. "

"Mr. Colby was a member of a group called “Environmentalists Against Gore” that declared, "Some people say we can't vote for Ralph Nader because that would help put a Republican in the White House, but nature and public health will be better protected even if George Bush wins the election, because the national environmental groups that ignore or excuse Al Gore's double talk may stand up and fight if a Republican makes those same bad decisions."

http://www.rklau.com/dean2004/002208.html

Yeah, THAT's what we need , another guy who's a part of the problem, not the solution.

[Skwmom]

24. I looked at it:

Excerpts:

During his decade in office, Governor Dean helped protect more land from development than all previous governors combined - wasn't he governor for five terms or something. How much total land did he protect compared to the prior governors, how much land is protected vs development? This is a vague statement which disproves nothing.

he administered a “best practices” agriculture plan that preserves land and water quality; -- Stats, how much did the land and water improve, etc? Bush passed a "clean air act" which actually makes the air dirtier. I'm not saying thats the case here but a title of a plan doesn't mean much.

he helped form the nation’s first statewide energy efficiency utility (preventing more than one million tons of greenhouse gas emissions since 2000); and he championed a commuter rail system to lower traffic congestion and pollution while diminishing urban sprawl (in its last report on sprawl, the Sierra Club ranked Vermont as the second best state in America for land use planning). These sound good but are only one part of protecting the environment.

Finally, there seems to be more than one person who has spoken out against Deans environmental record. A more detailed analysis rather than a mere letter to the editor would be nice.

[dsc]

29. The person before him had been governor for five terms as well

(he died in his fifth term). So in maybe 2 less years he conserved way more land.

[Skwmom]

32. In comparision to the last gov

how much land was requested to be developed and how much protected? If there was little development activity during the prior gov's term there might not have been much a need to protect the govt.

[dsc]

34. Oh please

And when I come up with that what will be next? I have no earthly idea but Dean protected more land than all previous governors combined. He also protected more land than his predecessor even though the predecessor served nearly as long. That speaks for itself it seems to me.

[DemBones DemBones]

47. The author of the "rebuttal" completely ignores some facts that

are cited by Colby, such as:

"Remember, when Dean took office there were no Wal-Marts in Vermont; there was no Home Depots; Burlington's downtown was dominated by local stores not the national chains that now rule the roost; there were 36% more small farmers in existence; there were no 100,000-hen mega-farms; and sprawl wasn't a word on the tip of everyone's tongue."

It should be fairly easy to determine whether these are facts or not, with the possible exception of whether literally everyone in Vermont is talking about "sprawl." (Of course, the author was using a figure of speech, but I'll cede this one to Dean just to be sporting. Now you Deanies just need to prove Colby's other assertions are untrue.)

By the way, attacking Colby for his 2000 Nader vote, as Kaufman did in his "rebuttal," is totally irrelevant to any facts about Dean's gubernatorial record on the environment. It's argumentum ad hominem.

Here's something else from Colby to fact check:

"Stephanie Kaplan, a leading environmental lawyer and the former executive officer of Vermont's Environmental Board, <snip> points to the "Environmental Board purge" in the mid-90s that allowed Dean to set the pro-development tone. In 1993, the Board issued an Act 250 permit to C&S Grocers in Brattleboro with conditions that restricted the diesel emissions from its heavy truck traffic. After C&S execs cried foul and threatened to move to New Hampshire, Dean broke gubernatorial precedent by publicly criticizing the Environmental Board for issuing what he called a "non-permit."

The article by Colby goes on to explain that a year later, four members of the Environmental Board, including its chair, were up for reappointment. The Republican majority in the state senate, apparently acting on Dean's "not-so-subtle clues," voted not to reappoint any of the four, making a major change in the board.

"After the post-C&S purge," says Kaplan, "the burden of proof for Act 250 permits switched from being on the applicants -- where it's supposed to be -- to being on the environmentalists. That's why 98% of the permit requests are approved and only 20% ever have hearings."

Plenty of facts and figures there to check. Let's see some Deanies prove any or all of them to be false. I'm open to seeing proof that Dean's being treated unfairly. Are you Deanies open to admitting to yourselves that Dean's environmental record is not very good? He was good on land preservation, a fact that Colby pointed out in the article.

[TLM]

61. This is pretty simple really...

Know that Colby is of the mind that any development is pro-development. It is true, Dean did increase development in Vermont, and lifted their economy out of the crapper. However he also balanced development with good policy. Such as limiting where these chain stores like wal mart and home depot could build... making them build in existing developed areas, rather than adding to sprawl by building out away from local businesses as wal mart does so often.

"Remember, when Dean took office there were no Wal-Marts in Vermont; there was no Home Depots;"

Yeah and there was also a sizable debt and serious economic trouble. You can't grow the economy and halt development at the same time. But people like Colby want no development... this is a person who feels Gore was anti-environment.


" Burlington's downtown was dominated by local stores not the national chains that now rule the roost;"

See how Colby is very careful to try and spin the fact Dean made these chains build downtown, to prevent sprawl... yet in the next line Colby then tries to imply Dean is causing sprawl... rather than preventing it.

"there were 36% more small farmers in existence; there were no 100,000-hen mega-farms;"

The percentage of small farms in the US has been on a solid decline for six decades. That's due to the transition from an agricultural to an industrial and tech based economic system.

And while I know some animal rights folks hate chicken farms... the family living on a budget that can get a chicken for dinner for 3 bucks does. So do the folks who have health care and the kids who weren't molested because taxes from those new business paid for programs that cut the rate of child sexual abuse %70.

" and sprawl wasn't a word on the tip of everyone's tongue."

As in saying, "Wow look how Dean has encouraged business development and economic growth while limiting sprawl."

You'll note that Colby says sprawl "wasn't a word on the tip of everyone's tongue." Not Dean created more sprawl than X or increased sprawl by X percent.


As for that bit about Dean working to get rid of those folks who were chasing businesses out of Vermont and working to block any development at all, he did do that as far as I know. And the fact is that's why Colby has such a biased take on Dean.

[DemBones DemBones]

67. But did the Wal-Marts and Home Depots displace small, locally-

owned businesses and put them out of business? Are there fewer family farmers because of Dean's policies? He had something to do with dairy farms that allegedly put family farms out of business. Are there more huge chicken farms? I understand Colby may prefer no new business but are his facts correct? Did taxes from new businesses actually pay for the child abuse prevention program you brought up? Were those taxes dedicated to that program? If not, it's a bit of a distraction. Great programs, no doubt, if it had those results, but does its existence specifically link to new businesses?

[TLM]

78. One of the main ways that wal mart kills local businesses...

is building away from existing businesses, so people go to walmart and figure that they'll do all their shopping there, rather than make another trip. By making them build near existing business, it helped local business by keeping customers in those business areas.

"owned businesses and put them out of business? Are there fewer family farmers because of Dean's policies? He had something to do with dairy farms that allegedly put family farms out of business."

Dean has a fantastic record on farm policy.


• Increasing the Income of Farmers — Governor Dean helped bring a innovative counter-cyclical support program to Vermont’s dairy farmers. The program added about $60 million to Vermont farmers and about $180 million to Vermont’s agriculture economy overall. The program added more than $10,000 in additional annual income to the average Vermont farm.
• Leadership in the Northeast — The program aided farmers all over New England and New York, not only in Vermont. Dairy Farmers in New York and New England received almost $150 million over the course of the program.
• Expanding Markets for Farmers — Governor Dean created the position of Vermont Dairy Market Specialist in 1994 and initiated exports to Mexico that year.
• Labeling: Protecting Consumers, Rewarding Farmers — Dean implemented the first voluntary rBST labeling law in the nation, which encourages processors to pay premiums for non-rBST milk.

• Lower Taxes for Farmers — Governor Dean’s revamp of the state’s Current-Use program has meant lower property taxes for farmers.
• Disaster Relief for Farmers in Need — Governor Dean authorized payments to farmers who suffered feed loses in the floods of 1998 and 1999 when federal programs proved inadequate.
• Expanding Credit for Farm Improvement — Governor Dean created the Vermont Agricultural Credit Corporation in 1999, providing farmers access to $10 million a year in capital. Nearly 800 Vermont farms have utilized this credit to capitalize farm improvements.
• Land Conservation — Under Governor Dean, Vermont was the first state in the nation to participate in the federal Farms for the Future Program. Dean’s efforts helped saved 333 farms and over 100,000 acres of farmland.

• Expanding Farmers Markets — The number of farmers markets in Vermont increased from 20 in 1992 to 43 in 2000, allowing family farmers to sell their products directly to the public.
• Aiding Organic Farms — Under Governor Dean, Vermont partnered with private organizations for Northeast Organic Faming Association certification allowing the number of organic farms in Vermont to grow from 80 in 1992 to over 200 in 2000.

• Requiring Responsibility from Large Farms — Under Governor Dean, Vermont passed the Large Farm Operations law in 1996 giving the Department of Agriculture the authority to regulate very large farms.
• Protecting Groundwater — Vermont was one of the first states to prohibit the spread of manure on frozen ground in the winter.
• Giving Farmers the Means to Keep Vermont Clean — Governor Dean formed a pollution control team in 1992 to reduce agriculture non-point pollution. The state spent $4.8 million to help farmers construct 1,232 waste management projects on 517 Vermont farms, helping eliminate over 18,000 lbs of phosphorous from Vermont waterways
• Encouraging Conservation — Governor Dean’s Department of Agriculture enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program to reduce pollution in the Lake Champlain Basin.



"Are there more huge chicken farms?"

I do not think there are more farms, I think the issue is the number of chickens they can produce.


"I understand Colby may prefer no new business but are his facts correct? Did taxes from new businesses actually pay for the child abuse prevention program you brought up? Were those taxes dedicated to that program? If not, it's a bit of a distraction. Great programs, no doubt, if it had those results, but does its existence specifically link to new businesses? "

The program was paid for by tax revenue, which was generated by Dean's economic policy. While it was not specificaly earmarked for that program, it did provide general revenue which allowed for programs like that to be funded.

[DemBones DemBones]

80. Looks good but where are you getting your info? I don't think

deanfor america.com is an unbiased site. I think we can agree that no candidate's site and no opinion piece will be completely unbiased. So, got facts from, say, a Vermont govt site?

[TLM]

86. oops sorry double standard there...

Dean's site is not stating opinions about the results of his policy but stating varifiable facts.

"The number of farmers markets in Vermont increased from 20 in 1992 to 43 in 2000, allowing family farmers to sell their products directly to the public."

Are you claiming these things did not happen?

http://www.anr.state.vt.us/dec/wastediv/csc/Govrpt.htm

Would the Governor's Reports also be biased and made up?

[KaraokeKarlton]

98. What Walmarts and Home Depots?

I think there might be two or three Walmarts in the entire state of Vermont. I would welcome one in my community because the only stores in my town are a couple of gas stations, several antique shops, a couple of specialty shops and a ski shop. I have to drive to New Hampshire to buy clothes and most household items. It would be one thing to criticize these businesses if they actually hurt local businesses, but for the most part, these large stores sell different items than Vermont's existing shops. It might serve you better to learn more about Vermont communities before assuming the people who live here don't want these stores. Just think of all the gas Vermonters would conserve if we didn't have to drive so far to shop. It would be great for our environment. But of course, our very loud and annoying radicals would like you to believe that the rest of us Vermonters share their views. The fact is, we don't. I'm so sick of these radical groups who try to drive every last business and employer out of my state. They come here from other states and try to take over and tell us what we should and shouldn't want. Damn radical lobbyist assholes. I can't believe so many people here listen to their horseshit. What happened to common sense and looking at both sides of the story?

[DemBones DemBones]

72. Also, you said nothing about the Environmental Board. Is it a fact

that "98% of the permit requests (for Act 250 permits) are approved and only 20% ever have hearings" by the Dean-ized Environmental Board? That's not encouraging.

What about the rest of those paragraphs?

I understand that you say Michael Colby has an anti-development bias so I'm not asking about his conclusions but about the facts he includes. If his facts are accurate and his opinions lead him to different conclusions than you (or I) might draw from the same set of facts, he is not lying.

People are going to disagree on policies but if Colby's facts are accurate, we can draw our own conclusion on how Dean's policies worked in Vermont.

[TLM]

83. The board was replaced by the state senate, not Dean.

Though I'm sure Dean did not shed a tear for them, he wasn;t responsable for their being rejected.

"98% of the permit requests (for Act 250 permits) are approved and only 20% ever have hearings"

Colby's piece is the only place I have seen this claim and the claim seems to run contrary the information in the act 250 handbook which lists tons of hearings and pre-hearings that permit seekers have to go through.

http://www.enviro-source.com/vt/vt6d.html



"People are going to disagree on policies but if Colby's facts are accurate, we can draw our own conclusion on how Dean's policies worked in Vermont."

Or you could look at the results in vermont or talk to the folks from vermont... Dean encouraged development at the same time he protected 8% of the total landmass of Vermont from development.

[KaraokeKarlton]

11. Too bad counterpunch cites radical kooks as sources

Smith is not well liked in Vermont. She goes after every business, even the ones that have great environmental records, and tries to sabotage any growth whatsoever. If she wants to live on a commune and survive off her land without any electricity, all the more power to her. But she needs to stop trying to force her lifestyle choice down the throats of Vermonters.

Dean is damn good on the environment. He left his church over a fight for a bike path and the conservation and protection of that land. He's almost obsessive about recycling, protected hundreds of thousands of acres from being clearcut or developed, put forth some of the toughest environmental regulations in the country, mandated car dealers to offer more enviornmentally friendly automobile options, just to name a few. Some of the radicals in Vermont have gotten sore with him because he ALSO has to ensure there are places for non-commune living Vermonters to actually make a living and support their kids. Wow, he's just evil incarnate for working hard to balance protecting the environment AND the ability of Vermonters to house and feed their families. Yep, he deserves 50 lashes with a wet noodle for that one. Better yet, it would probably be wise to just look at other sources and get BOTH sides of the story before forming an opinion. It really saves a lot of time, trouble and aggravation.

If Dean were so horrible on the environment as counterpunch would have you believe, then why, after a dozen years as governor, does Vermont have a consistent reputation of having very tough environmental regulations? Doesn't make much sense, now does it? Let's use our heads, folks.

[Tinoire]

14. Some more info here from From Vermonters for a Clean Environment

Crisis in Agriculture in Vermont
A Special Report about Governor Howard Dean's Agriculture Department
From Vermonters for a Clean Environment, Inc.

March 20, 2002

http://www.vtce.org/deancrisisagvt.html

[Skwmom]

53. My god. Reading this report is really upsetting.

Pesticides and health

After years of frustration dealing with DAFM, Ashley Greene,
who has a background in horticulture, wrote to Governor Dean
in January, 2001: “The grower in this case is using some
chemicals that are recognized carcinogens. Increasingly,
research is showing links between chemical exposure and
disease, and children are most vulnerable to the effects of
chemicals. I am very concerned with the chemical exposure my
two children are getting. Recently I learned of a study in the
Netherlands that has documented mild cognitive dysfunction in
people exposed to pesticides, including problems with numbers,
letters, and speech. Both my children are now receiving
special aid at school for speech difficulties. Is there a
correlation? I don’t know. But it seems that our current
agricultural standards and Department of Agriculture permit
land use practices that are potentially hazardous.”

Downstate, Judy Ferraro, who has a background in science,
printed a 1999 article from CNN, “Study urged of pesticide,
youth violence link.” The article quotes University of
California researcher Robert Hatherill, “A rapidly expanding
body of research shows that heavy metals such as lead and
pesticides decrease mental ability and increase
aggressiveness.” Specifically, the article mentions azinphos
methyl, the pesticide most widely used at her neighboring
orchard. It continued, “Pesticides can damage the brain and
nervous system. Young children are especially susceptible.”
Judy’s youngest son was conceived and born at the orchard
property in 1998, and has had aggressive and violent
behavioral problems since birth.

George Trickett wrote to Governor Dean in 1997, “I enclose a
letter from my physician which clearly states the seriousness
of my health situation. We have appealed to many state
agencies, but the response has been perfunctory.”

[Rose Siding]

15. Isn't Annette the one

Who wants all her neighbors to go off the electricity grid?

[KaraokeKarlton]

22. Yes, that's her...she's a nutcase

Just because she has a farm and has chosen to live off her land (and she runs her greenhouse on fossil fuels, mind you) she thinks everyone else should do as she does. She is a bona-fide pain in the ass of Vermonters. I don't even think she's a Democrat. I think she's either a Socialist or Communist, and definitely a radical. Most of the "liberal" criticism of Dean coming from Vermont ISN'T coming from the Democratic Party, but the Green Party, Socialists and Communists. Keep that in mind when you see this and do what you can to check the affiliations of the sources. Vermont's "liberals" aren't liberal DEMOCRATS!

[Skwmom]

49. More than just one "communist or socialist" radical questions Dean's

stance on the environment.


<The governor and his staff have begun to reach out to leaders of Vermont "environmental groups," seeking to reassure them of his commitment to their cause, despite their fierce opposition to many aspects of his administration's policy.>

Pollina criticized the Dean Administration for its recent petition asking the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to raise the amount of air pollution that can be released by Vermont industry. And he faulted the governor for failing to fight a House bill that would weaken Act 250, the state's landmark development review law.



<http://rutlandherald.nybor.com/News/Story/5307.html>

[Skwmom]

50. Until today I've only heard Repubs use the "socialist" or communist

label to discredit someone. Sounds like I'm listening to Rush Limbaugh.

[Pastiche423]

52. How do you know

that rush uses those words?

[Skwmom]

55. I tuned into Rush a few times

because I would hear such outlandish comments from some repubs that I went to school with. I listened to it a few times and was stunned that people listend to his lies and distortions and took everything he said at face value.

I used to think that only republicans blindly followed someone, ignoring any facts that would refute what their "leader" was telling them. I've now found out otherwise. It's kinda of scary.

[Pastiche423]

57. Uh huh

[Forkboy]

69. You complain of others ignoring facts?!?!?!

you gotta be kidding me :eyes:

[DemBones DemBones]

63. Maybe she read it at DU? Maybe she read Franken's book

"Rush Limbaugh Is a Big, Fat Liar"?

[Skwmom]

65. I haven't read it yet.

But that's what I'm hinting to my husband that I want for an anniversary gift.

[Pastiche423]

70. She hasn't read it yet

[DemBones DemBones]

73. Trying to insinuate something about her, are you?

[Pastiche423]

76. Nope

Just saying she hasn't read that book.

[KaraokeKarlton]

62. I'm not referring to Democrats that way

I'm telling you that those are the actual party affiliations of the majority of those criticizing Dean that are being cited in articles such as the one you posted. The Socialist and Communist Parties are made up of Socialists and Communists, NOT Democrats. What part of that do you not understand?

[Andromeda]

89. Karaoke, you are right...

The person who started this thread sounds like a Green/Socialist/Communist-liberal instead of a Democrat. I'd be willing to bet that he/she definitely is not a Democrat. People like him/her just soak up radical articles like they were the absolute truth and mostly ignore mainsteam wisdom. It's pretty apparent in the kind of attitude that goes with it---you know, hostile, antagonistic and aggressive.

[TLM]

88. Ummm, you are talking to people in vermont.

I think they know their local wackos better than you do.


I know we have a wacko enviornmental group here in my area that just firebombed a construction site recently.

Would you consider them mainstream democrats?

[KaraokeKarlton]

60. Pollina isn't a Democrat, either

You apparently don't understand the political make up of my state. Let me put it this way...the bulk of the criticism of Dean coming out of Vermont comes from the radical left and the radical right.

[w4rma]

20. Dean and Vermont's Champion lands

…
One of these times occurs toward the end of April, in the brown-tweed-and-blond-wood conference room of an affluent Westside law firm that is hosting Dean at a sandwich lunch for the benefit of the California League of Conservation Voters. About 50 people are sitting around a horseshoe formation of long tables, and Dean stands in the central opening, shirtsleeves rolled up and arms crossed, a halogen spotlight making his forehead shiny, while he holds forth, answering questions cogently and effortlessly for close to an hour. He discusses emissions standards and ethanol and wind farms, and he offers up something that’s absolute catnip to anyone with an interest in how politics are actually done — the forthright, ligament-by-ligament anatomy of a deal, this one involving the recent preservation of Vermont’s Champion lands, an area of 133,000 acres; a “huge” piece, he says proudly, the largest land deal east of the Mississippi.

He and his team used the NRA, he says, to neutralize the most ardent property-rights Republicans in the legislature. They then went to the snowmobilers and explained that although there would be a wilderness area off-limits to them, there would be other areas they could utilize. They used that concession, he goes on, to get the snowmobilers’ help in supporting the exclusion of ATVs: “You can’t compromise with ATVers under any circumstances, they just do too much damage to the land . . .” In other words, Dean says, you assemble the broadest coalition possible and then parcel out something for everybody. “Now, it can’t be everybody, because there’s always those on the extreme edge of the right who want to clear-cut everything, that’s their idea of sustainable timbering . . .” But in general, he says, you work with all the stakeholders, and then if one element of the coalition starts to defect, if the snowmobilers, say, try to link up with the ATVers, which they sometimes threaten to do, “you put the leverage on. You say, ‘If it’s a choice between letting the ATVs in or keeping the snowmobile people out — sorry, we’ll see you later.’ And that brings the snowmobilers back to the table . . .”

Then, somewhere in the middle of this entirely pragmatic discussion, Dean pauses, and he puts his finger on a kind of abstract longing involving a belief that there exist two strands in American politics, the one preoccupied with self-interest and the other a genuine concern for fellow citizens, and a desire for these strands to combine. He says slowly and thoughtfully, “The biggest damage we’ve suffered in the last two years hasn’t been economic, and it hasn’t even been our loss of respect in the eyes of the world. The biggest loss we’ve sustained in this country has been our loss of community . . . It’s not enough for me just to have good schools for my kid, or good health care for my kid. It’s really important for us to provide these things for everybody. That’s been the premise of America. That’s what we have to get back again.”
…
http://www.laweekly.com/ink/03/41/features-wolf.php

[DemBones DemBones]

59. Oh, that's from Jamie Wolf's long article in LA Weekly, the one in

which Dean says (direct quote):

"It's going to be very hard to start late," he says, "and think you're going to do well in Iowa and New Hampshire. It's going to be incredibly hard. I mean, we've already got 39,000 people working for us all around the country ... I really do believe--and I think about this--I want to get this nomination, and if I don't ... these kids are not transferrable. I can't just go out and say, 'Okay, so I didn't win the nomination, so go ahead and vote for the Democrats.' They're not going to suddenly just go away. That's not gonna happen."


So, it's a good article when a Dean supporter posts something from it, but when I post Dean's own words from the same article, I'm attacked for being negative about Dean. "Oh, he said he won't run against the Democratic nominee, he's said he's ABB" were the nicer replies I got. Yes, but he also said the above -- which is the real Howard?

How come you guys don't have a problem with Howard saying he can't tell his "kids" to "go ahead and vote for the Democrats" when someone else becomes the nominee? It's bullshit to talk about "the Movement" and how people can't be told what to do. Of course people can be told what to do! Howard says send money and you do it, don't you? Howard can tell his "kids" how very important it is for them to vote for the nominee. Considering the great admiration for him, I think he can convince most of his supporters to vote for the Democrat. He can't guarantee anything but he can sure as hell make a decent effort to get out the vote.

Sorry, I think it's damned important for people to realize that Dean has a serious problem controlling his mouth. He's so voluble and (apparently) unfocused that he can't even remember what he's said. In Vermont, reporters learned to tape him so they could play his words back to him when he denied saying something.

[TLM]

90. You are really reaching.... trying so hard.

And just not quite making that molehill as big as you wish it was.

"How come you guys don't have a problem with Howard saying he can't tell his "kids" to "go ahead and vote for the Democrats" when someone else becomes the nominee? It's bullshit to talk about "the Movement" and how people can't be told what to do. Of course people can be told what to do! Howard says send money and you do it, don't you? "

If Dean does not get the nomination, his supporters are going to pick who they are going to pick. WHat Dean is talking about is the fact his supporters are made up of so many different political views, from hardcore greens to moderate republicans, that if he does not get the nod... the supporters are not going to all just go block vote for someone. Some will go dem, some will go green, some may go republican, and others might not vote at all.

But you bashers want so bad for it to be a case of Dean saying if he can't get the nomination, then none of his supporters will vote dem, which is clearly not what he said.

But hey, keep on bashing. Maybe if you bash Dean with enough of this garbage, Kucinich will suddenly become electable.

[RetroLounge]

26. A really enlightening read

Yes, your desperation post is very enlightening.

So have you anything positive to post about YOUR candidate, or are you just one to drop flame bait and then respond to your own flamebait?

Please. Enlighten us...

[Skwmom]

35. I read the confessions of an ex Deanie today

It was a great read. I'll post it if I can find the link. He really is right on target.

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[salin]

38. I would take what you say on this topic on face value

that you read the item and it concerned you re: environment, if you responded thoughtfully to the Vermonter who responded on this thread to his(her) first hand experience as a Vermonter under Gov Dean and the environment.

Absent discussion with a real vermonter - while claiming that you are interested in what a vermonter says about his environmental record, suggests that perhaps it is more that you resonated with a message that fit your preconceived notions rather than you were seriously interested in discussions and insights from those with first hand experience.

[Skwmom]

56. How do I now he is a Vermonter?

Plus he's only one person. The way the Deanies blindly support Dean w/out question does not give me alot of confidence in their assertions. I think I've read enough through links tonight to see that yes Dean does have a problem with the environment.

Dean calls the other candidates Bush lite but after looking at more and more of his record I really wonder where he gets off making this assertion. It's dishonest and I can't stand phonies. Dean used Wellstones "I'm from the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party" to infer he was a liberal. Wellstone was one hell of a guy and Dean co-opting that line is like Bush co-opting the "leave no child behind" from the child advocacy group.

In an article I read the other day a Vermonter called him a "Rockefeller Republican." The other candidates should have slammed Dean for that bushlite statement.

[salin]

64. No offense, but it appears

that you might have the same bias as the "deanies" but in the opposite direction. You seem to be quick to dismiss some items and quick to grab onto others.

I fully recognize that some of the Dean fans are a bit exuberant (and thus not objective) for their candidate - and that this can be quite off-putting to others (I find this symptom present in each of the camps, btw.) The sad thing is when folks get so irritated that they act as blindly in grabbing (selectively) items that are critical while dismissing potentially positive (by claiming - its just a "deanie promotion piece"). Niether approach does much for trying to get a more full picture.

Dean also attracted the blind criticism for the "bushlite" comment. But it seems that he lost as much as he gained by doing so - given that many democrats have been using that term for a number of democrats who have become more likely to vote as traditional republicans used to (pro-business, moderate on the environment - re: proenvironment unless the measure hurst business, etc.) As an observer it seems that that particular statement did more to polarize groups at DU - and lead to some less than objective reads of the record (in both pro and anti quarters) - than anything else.

[DemBones DemBones]

84. Yes, the polarization is unfortunate and I wish we could have

actual discussions. Some of the articles ciritical of Dean may be unfair but I don't see much point in discussing articles posted here from Dean's site, either. The best articles about any candidate include positive and negative info. Actually, Colby did credit Dean for land preservation but he evidently feels that Dean's other actions overshadow that. Maybe that's too harsh but the all-glowing articles that Dean supporters post are too easy on him. Balanced articles would be nice. People not over-reacting to any criticism would be nice, too. Maybe we'll reach that stage eventually.

[salin]

93. I agree - neither side here

(and often) on threads is 'discussing' items and information. Happens to frequently. I do believe, however, that a thread starter can set the tone of the thread - and if it gets hijacked by knee-jerkers - if the thread originator skips the bait (re section of the thread) and reengages in discussions (there are always folks on nearly anythread who work to rise above the childish tone that can devolve) - then to other readers - and those more likely to participate, it is easy to read the thread as a serious discussions with some obnoxious hijackers.

Unfortunately it is easy to a) start the thread with an intended flaming post; or b) even when trying to start a real discussion - take the bait of the flamers from the other side. I have much more patience with the former threads than the latter. And while this topics warrents discussion - the originator didn't set a tone of...

Way too frequent at DU- and very unfortunate.

[Skwmom]

96. I agree.

My original post could have been worded alot better. I shouldn't have been so flippant. I'll take your advice into consideration in any future thread which I start.

[salin]

100. Thanks - I really do think

that we can have informative discussions in which we all grow to have a greater understanding - and more nuanced level of either support or detraction (from which ever perspective starts from).

I appreciate your receptiveness to this thought. Here's to discourse over flamewars! :D

[Skwmom]

95. It would be great if we could have "honest" intellectual debates

over the candidates on this board so that people could make an informed decision but I don't see that happening. (Take note that in the one article I clipped from I did include pro-Dean comments I just stated it still did not give me enough facts to reach a conclusion.)

However, I confess -- the way I feel right now is "Anybody but Dean"

WHY:
1. I do believe that he's the one Rove wants based on a. the reading of various opinions (both con and pro for this assertion) b. The way the push for Dean is being carried out reminds me of how Bush conducted his campaign in 2000 (which leads me to believe that the Repubs are playing an active role in pushing Dean to the front of the pack). I'd bet money that the Repubs are funneling money to Dean via the internet donation system. In addition, the way in which his followers swoop down like locusts to trash other candidates while trouncing on anyone who would dare raise a question about Dean reminds me of how the Repubs work (there are also numerous other things I've noticed but I don't have the time now to list all of them). The Repubs are an extremely organized group with a take no prisoners attitude. I read an article yesterday where an author raised similar concerns. If I can find it again, I'll add the link. Based on reading of another thread this morning , some Deanies seem to be asserting that I’m a paid Rove operative bent on destroying Dean . Their already trying to figure out how to silence any voice that would dare question Saint Dean. It’s really kind of scary when you think about it.


2. The "hypocrisy of the many of the Deanies." I've seen them crucify candidates for changing a stance while fanatically refusing to even rationally discuss the fact that Dean has done the same thing. They paint Dean as being some kind of saint who would never sell out his principles or tell a lie (though it really goes beyond that it's hard to find the words to describe it). They also try to misleadingly trash other candidates.

3. The "hypocrisy" of Dean himself. Dean called the other candidates Bushlite and co-opted Wellstone's phrase I'm from the Democratic Wing of the Democratic party. The more I read about Dean the more I'm amazed that he can make these assertions with a straight face. I realize from a pragmatic standpoint that a politician needs to paint himself as liberal to win the primary and then move to the center in the general election but the manner in which Dean is perpetuating the myth that he is a liberal is a real turn off.

In considering the Dean electability issue I thought of this last point. On one hand Dean could be viewed as a non-liberal (though it pisses me off how the Repubs have turned liberal into a dirty word) who might have a chance in the general election. On the other hand, I think Deal will have one hell of a hard time backtracking on this liberal image he's done so much to create. Bush has tons of money and he will use Dean's own soundbites and assertions to crucify him in the general election. Plus, in trying to move to the center some of the Dean groupies might get their first real actual look at their candidate and be pretty damned discouraged with what they see (especially the young volunteers). Deanies have trashed other candidates for considering the political fall-out of their actions when deciding what actions to take (i.e., what vote to make). I wonder if these same fanatics are going to be as forgiving when they find out Saint Dean has been playing the same game all along (an in one hell of a hypocritical manner).

[salin]

101. While I have reservations about each candidate

I personally find getting overly invested either in a love-fest or a hate-fest rather unproductive. Most important to me is a) ending the Bush era (and if possible having it be done so resoundingly that the same cabal can't slime back up in 4 to 8 years); and b) stemming the rightward lurching in so many areas of public policy. Some candidates will do better on a) and others with b). In the end, however, whoever gains the nomination the love fests and the hatefests (and each candidate has them, and I have seen many of the behaviors and concerns that you raised leveled against various candidates) will harm the cause of a).

There is no "saviour" out there. No human candidate can be our "salvation". A president can put things back a bit - but so much damage will have happened in four years that it will be like humpty-dumpty. Those expecting a candidate to be able to put the egg fully back together will be disappointed and quickly disillusioned.

Folks would be wiser to take a play book from the GOP in the eighties. They had a lock on the presidency, no chance at the house, and the senate kept slipping in and out of their fingers. They worked to change majorities in statehouses, control redistricting and take congress.

We would do best to be prepared to take care of Bush first, but not to expect the new president to be able to "solve everything". We have to come up with new strategies to take back local and state politics which will enable us to repel the achievements of the far right in congress.

In short we need short term and long term strategies.

For all of your dislike for Dean, here is what impresses me - and what other candidates, if they are going to have a shot at Bush will have to learn.

Dean did not invent the cause of going for small donations as a means to compete (Brown did that in 1992 with an 800 number). He did not invent using the internet to raise money (McCain did that in 2000). His folks have figured out how to harness internet activism beyond fundraising and turn it into developing statewide networks and infrastructure - that reaches folks who may not be connected to the internet.

Why is this significant?

In the past, campaigns have to raise a certain amount of limited dollars and put statewide (costly - though mostly volunteer) campaigns in place in the two opening contests, and then (due to limited dollars) strategically invest in a handful of the next round of primaries. That has meant writing some off (eg candidate A may not have the appeal in the south as s/he has in the rust belt - so invest in two key rust belt states) and investing in a few others. Lack of showing in the key invested states and the candidacy is over (re: Tsongas in 1992). Surprise showing in one of the uninvested states and the money starts rolling in, because of the gained momentum - this can save a campaign that is predicted to fold - and catapult said candidate to front runner status after a few more primaries.

The thing is - the republicans from top to bottom have increased their ability to outfund raise democrats. That leaves two alternatives to democrats. One is to go after some of the corporate money (Clinton was good at this - but by now with three branches in GOP control this becomes a steeper and steeper hill to climb), this is in part what has led the DLC to become powerful - their strategies (re: influence in campaigns) are geared towards attracting centrist corporate dollars. In my opinion, we saw in 2002 that this hogtied some candidates regarding what issues they could raise which seemed to impact the races where there was little room to vary campaign themes. The other option is to create a completely different game plan and change the entire rules of the game. The first part (the money) as I said before was pioneered by Brown and McCain. But going further - and creating statewide low-cost organizations - folks who put in the time to go door to door and can combat on a local level the impact of slanted campaign ads and pushpolls - that is where the new battle ground, in my opinion, will be. Dean's folks have turned this meet-up thing, into an organizing tool. He is taking a national strategy rather than a pick and choose, because they have harnessed organizing that is much more lower cost and more reliant on energized volunteers.

Any candidate who will have a chance against Bush will need to learn from the Dean campaign - and out do the Dean campaign. Because Dean has set a rather high bar on that front - if any candidate out does them - they will be far better prepared to harness this organizing for the general election. That is a good thing.

But again - that is the short term issue.

There are media issues that need to be attended to over the long haul (one can not downplay the impact of incessant rightwing influences over the airwaves that have changed the public's sentiments on views of economics {supply side and deregulation have sometimes already demonstrated disasters, but while both were viewed with skepticism 20 years ago - even by republicans - they are accepted as universal truths today - even by democrats}.

There is the issue of state control of legislatures and taking control of congress.

Those things will have to happen - over the long haul - in order for the country to be moved onto a different track. The president alone can not do this.

One could say that without such a strategy, after Clinton won (and he initially made more liberal noises than he did after key defeats after losing Congress), that congress was lost, and that the best any democratic president could do under those circumstances was to thwart rightwing efforts and attempt to modify righwing agenda items (with the assist of public sentiment swayed by rightwing media) that had so much speed (ex "wellfare reform). That is no way to be able to alter the direction of long term policies in this country.

Thus - we have to think short and long term. We have to be willing to see the virtues of various candidates because we don't know who will win -ane for the short-term we HAVE to get the presidency back. We have to be realistic in recognizing that campaigns HAVE to change - not on issues but on how campaigns are waged, the republicans have the advantage under the current 'rules of the game'. So far, Dean's campaign has taken this route and found surprising success. Clark's initial momentum suggests that his movement/supporters have learned from Dean and are working to develop similar strategies. There isn't much evidence that the others are able to harness this in the same way - but the primaries have not yet begun, there is still time.

But, I say again, this can only be viewed as a small step along the way. We have to work on shifting public dialogue. We have to work on balance in the media. And we have to be in a position to take control of legislative agendas. Who ever becomes president can help on these fronts - but they will not be able to achieve these things. That takes US.

The bickering, and looking for Rove behind each candidate, the vilification of the DLC (I think they are losing their influence, btw), will not move us forward. Indeed it seems to keep us stuck in the old campaign structure that focuses only on how policies are spun and manipulative soundbite ads. As we saw with Gore (who won) we will LOSE that kind of campaign regardless of the candidate. Heck Bush will probably double the fundraising that he had race against Gore. We have to get to the twentyfirst century campaign - before the GOP figures out that they, too, will have to adjust to be able to win in this new type of more democratic (at the people instead of the top) campaign.

[Skwmom]

58. There were "real" Vermonters quoted in the different sources

sited on this link.

[Skwmom]

66. What type of "deep" thoughtful comment was I supposed to make

to this statement?

<And the Counterpunch article is trash. They use radicals as sources. Dean has a good environmental record. Smith just has her undies in a bunch because she is constantly fighting to keep EVERY business out of Vermont. She protests EVERYTHING and most Vermonters thinks she's nuts. See my other posts on this thread.> Later on in the thread people start painting her as a communist or socialist. I'd go to the freeper board if I wanted to read those kind of senseless arguments.

[salin]

71. ah... but to the casual reader

both those statements - and your reactions - look pretty equal. And yes, both types might fit in at a site such as that to which you refer.

[Upfront]

36. Yawn

[Adjoran]

39. Oh, please

There are a lot of legitimate questions to be answered by Dean, as well as all the other candidates. This is baloney, though.

I'm uncommitted, and wonder about Dean's Middle East policy, and his positions on entitlement reforms. But you can find purists who will criticize anyone's record on any issue. This appears to be griping from the most ardent environmentalists, people who, as noted above, went for Nader over Gore.

[John_H]

40. Bwaaaaaaaahaaaaaaaa! Chimpy is toast no matter what !

nt

[Evanstondem]

43. Now there's an objective website...not

They're almost as loose with the facts as a Bush PR flack.

[DemBones DemBones]

45. Got any FACTS to back up that assertion?

If so, let's see them.

[salin]

46. I can't speak to the previous posters assertions

and I have more than once almost asked about this source on the board (but won't when it is being actively used to avoid the assertion that one is trying to taint an argument), but I will say - for whatever my opinion is (or isn't) worth, that I have always found Counterpunch a bit hyperbolic and not always so well sourced. If I find an item of interest there - I look for other sources before passing it along (I am fairly particular before I pass info on. For example am more likely to pass Parry's ConsortiumNews pieces which tend to be very well documented/sourced.) I can't say that the site is left or right - it strikes me, when I have read it, as almost chaotic - or contrarian (as in coming from different, almost random seeming directions). But it really could just be me - as I said I have often wondered about other folks impessions of it as a source. I can't put my finger on it - but to me something strikes me as a bit off. But I haven't followed and read it very closely, and haven't gone digging around to verify or dispell my sense/read of it.

[DemBones DemBones]

81. To me, it seems very left wing but you know what they say about

going far enough left or far enough right until they merge? However, I can't think of anything I've ever read there that seemed RW to me. In opinion pieces, there's bound to be bias, sometimes slight, sometimes huge, so I try to sort out the facts from the opinion. They publish a lot of good writing and a lot of it deals with news stories I've read elsewhere.

Sometimes they publish articles that don't say much, IMO, such as one against Dean a month or so ago. (I don't buy into everything said against Dean, believe it or not!) That one, and this one, are, I think, not written by people who write regularly for publication and it shows. But if the facts are correct, it has some value.

CounterPunch runs Robert Fisk's articles all the time and I think he's a reliable reporter.

[haymaker]

48. Yeah, that's the ticket, Dean is Bush, that'll

turn those Deanie supporters over to our side.

Of course, your side being Bush.

Same old shit.

[Dr Fate]

68. Bush's record is better??? Let's stop the DEM bashing folks...

I dont even support Dean as my 1st choice- I just oppose all the vitriol in the candidate bashing...

...Lets pull for DEMS, and try to highlight the good things that each of the candidates bring to the debate..

[salin]

75. but bashing is such a fun sport - or so it seems.

The difference between criticism (which is, imo, legitimate) and bash is the level of discourse which occurs (or doesn't by the initiator) when information that is contrary to the initial post is posted. Is it questioning ... eg even if I dont agree with all - do I ask probing or "gotcha" questions... Is there an attempt to dialogue with those who disagree... or is it an angy tirade that just gets more angry (or if it doesn't get more angry, it just reads that way). This is a pattern that is getting far to common on DU - and against many candidates. Never seems to have much effect (there tend to be two choruses that are the primary choirs, and a third group of chanters challenging the form of the discussion (both sides) that act as a group in a far off peanut gallery that are pretty much dismissed, either through verbal dismissal - or silence.

I have yet to see any thread that follows this dynamic in which the type of thoughtful discussions that sometimes persuades minds happens. Just seems to serve to solidify opposing sides and build further intergroup hostility.

My first war is on bushco.

My second battle is against these diversionary threads - which are certainly heartfelt and (we hope) sincere in their origins - that devolve into reaction based yelling matches rather than discursive interchanges - and thus accomplish nothing but heightening in-fighting.

[Must_B_Free]

74. ARRRRRRGGGGHHHH!

God dam. I fucking knew it!

This was my gut feeling about Howard Dean, but I figured if everyone else was making so much hoo hah, I must be missing something.

I think we're easily snow jobbed by some hand hired astroturf.

No wonder the repukes picked Dean early. He'll play ball.

[DemBones DemBones]

79. I'm afraid you could be right. What I hope is that Dean is really a

decent enough guy who has problems with words falling out of his mouth and some problem areas in his record. What I fear is that he's being used and promoted by RWers.

My gut feeling about him is not good and I keep finding bits of info that add up to big concerns.

I could keep quiet about it and not have all the Dean supporters pissed off at me. But if I'm right, I think I have a responsibility to draw attention to the flaws I see in Dean.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

82. Counterpunch Can Kiss My Democratic Ass

These morons have slammed every Democrat with a remote chance of beating Shrub.

DTH

[Andromeda]

85. I believe you are here...

to do nothing but stir up trouble. There is absolutely no purpose to what you post except to antagonize Dean supporters and to try to elicit negative responses out of us. You seem to get your jollies out of doing this and I hope you get kicked off the board for flame baiting.

[Skwmom]

97. The purpose of my post was to get people to actually take a critical look

at Deans record rather than taking everything at face value. In addition, I don't think Dean supporters need any encouragment to post negative responses.

[stickdog]

91. It's not easy being so Green that you think Bush is better than Gore. (NT)

[JNelson6563]

92. good one

the sad part is how many jump on that ship. Let's eat our own! We are, afterall, Democrats.

No wonder we're on the outside looking in.

Julie