« War On Terror (R-USA) | Home | Confronting Evil Face to Face »
Howard Dean Against America
By Matt Margolis | September 27, 2003
Howard Dean was in Boston this week - my city. Preaching his political hate speech to his left wing choir, the former governor of Vermont and abortionist for Planned Parenthood stood in Copley Square blaspheming local history and attacking our Commander-In-Chief, George W. Bush. Fallaciously using references to “patriots” and the Sons of Liberty, Dean mistakenly paralleled his crusade for the White House to the American Revolution.
Dean’s vile and calculated choice of metaphors spoke of the Boston Tea Party, recalling the actions of the Sons of Liberty, who “boarded three ships in Boston Harbor to protest a government more concerned with moneyed interests than its own people.”
Dean has set the stage for his own Liberal Theatre. His choice of words here indicates the direction he is going. This is revisionist history in the making.
He called the Boston Tea Party a “grassroots campaign” - a description often attached to his own quest for the presidency. Here, he is telling his audience “You are my Sons of Liberty - my campaign is the Boston Tea Party.” In Dean’s sick mind, he believes his campaign is going to set this country “on the path to freedom and democracy.”
As usual, Dean, avoiding discussing the issues, focuses directly on making an attack on George W. Bush in the flow of his fairy tale, “a King named George — who had forgotten his own people in favor of special interests — was replaced by a government of, by and for the people.” This is just sad. It’s no mistake that he refers to “a King named George” - it is one of those fortunate coincidences for Dean to make his story have just a smidgen more impact.
But what Dean doesn’t realize (or is just deliberately trying to distort) is that the Sons of Liberty were protesting taxes on tea. The Sons of Liberty today are not the people rallying behind Dean in Copley Square - not even close. Howard Dean’s “Sons of Liberty” are rallying behind a man who stands for higher taxes and big government - the exact opposite ideals of the Sons of Liberty of the American Revolution.
Howard Dean, while governor of Vermont, taxed his constituency far greater than King George III taxed the colonists. The Boston Tea Party was not about “special interests,” it was about taxes. High taxes. Howard Dean has taken history and revised it to suit his political agenda.
Immediately following his reference to the historical protest on high taxes, Dean chose to condemn tax cuts, “We stand here as Americans who are no longer willing to allow the further depletion of our nation’s treasury through tax cuts for this administration’s wealthiest contributors.” How Howard Dean was able to say that with a straight face just amazes me - I guess some people are just really good liars. When it comes to the environment, Howard Dean knows just how to deceive his audience:
“We stand here as Americans who are no longer willing to accept an administration whose handouts to industry are squandering our most precious natural resources and causing irreparable harm to our environment.
Dean, fraudulently perches himself up on the moral high ground here, pointing fingers at Bush - without mentioning specifics - yet during his term as governor of Vermont, his concern for the environment took the backseat for special interests. Annette Smith, director of Vermonters for a Clean Environment said, “EP under Governor Dean meant Expedite Permits, not Environmental Protection.” She references her squabbles with the Dean administration over mining company OMYA’s usage of pesticides on Vermont’s mega-farms; Dean’s “pushing to host a massive gas pipeline, [through the town of Danby] a plan that would have required timber clear-cuts and other dramatic topographical changes.” Smith said, “Dean’s attempt to run for president as an environmentalist is nothing but a fraud. 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.” During his tenure he also pushed the building coal-fired power plants - which was greatly disapproved by environmentalists…
But Howard Dean won’t tell you that.
Dean has a lot of nerve to stand up there and play Mr. Environmentalist and point fingers at Bush.
“We stand here as Americans who are no longer willing to accept the partisan squabbling in Washington by both political parties, while 41 million Americans live without health insurance.
Who is Howard Dean to make any judgment over “partisan squabbling?” Remember his own words back at the debate on September 9th, “We’re all Democrats and we need to beat George Bush in order to have peace in the Middle East.” The key point of this statement: It’s the Democrats versus Bush. That’s all that matters. It’s about party, not policy. It’s about partisanship, not bipartisanship. With a statement like that, are we to expect Dean to work with Democrats and Republicans if (God forbid) he won the presidency? That statement alone shows you the motive of a partisan dictator in the making.
And what about the 41 million people with health insurance? Does the average person understand how this number is misleading? Dave Kopel of Rocky Mountains News reported that the 41 million figure (which came from a Census Bureau report) includes 9 million illegal and legal immigrants. Which brings the number down to 32 million.
The National Bureau of Economic Research did a study (Insurance and the Utilization of Medical Services Among the Self-Employed, Working Paper No w8490)which found that, “the link between insurance and utilization of health care services is not as strong as assumed in the policy debate. For a number of medical care services, the self-employed have the same rates of utilization as wage-earners, despite the fact that they are substantially less likely to be insured.” So, clearly, people still have access to health care.
But Howard Dean won’t tell you that.
The paper also says the self- employed “appear to be able to finance access to health care from sources other than insurance,” and “doing so does not lead to substantial reductions in their ability to consume other goods and services.” Most interesting, the paper says “there is no evidence that children of the self-employed have less access to health care than the children of wage-earners. Hence, the public policy concerns that the relative lack of health insurance among the self-employed substantially reduces utilization of health care services or creates economic hardship appear to be misplaced.”
So, when it comes down to it, Howard Dean is misleading the people about the situation on health care in America. He’s scaring people into believing that they need nationalized health care. One of the only issues he’s really been campaigning on is a fraud!
But Howard Dean won’t tell you that.
“And we stand here as Americans who are no longer willing to accept an administration lying to the American people about the reasons for sending our sons and daughters and brothers and sisters to die in a foreign land.”
If George W. Bush is a liar, than Howard Dean is a liar as well. Bush told us that Iraq had chemical and biological weapons. Howard Dean, in February of this year said, “I believe that Iraq does have chemical and biological weapons.” He also said, “I think that the United Nations makes it clear that Saddam has to disarm, and if he doesn’t, then they will disarm him militarily. I have no problem with supporting a United Nations attack on Iraq, but I want it to be supported by the United Nations.”
The problem was that the United Nation chose not to enforce their own resolutions. George W. Bush chose to enforce it. It seems to me that Dean’s only problem with military action against Iraq was going at it alone - but we did not go alone. We have a coalition of many nations who support the war on terror.
But Howard Dean won’t tell you that.
“We stand at a critical moment in American history. Either we come together and take action now to restore a politics of participation and a politics of the people, or we allow the Washington insiders and the special interests to continue to make the back room deals that are destroying people’s faith in our government.”
Dean loves to use cliché liberal attacks against Bush. He?ll use terms like “special interests” and leave it at that - all to please his audience, but lacking in any substance.
Howard Dean said, “Democracy itself is at stake in this election.” What is he saying here? By its very nature, an election is the ultimate exercise of democracy. The only thing at stake in this election - from Dean’s perspective - is what party controls the White House. He can doll up the stakes of the election by implying that democracy is somehow suffering unless a Democrat wins the election, but regardless of who wins, democracy has played out. George W. Bush winning in a landslide would be no less an exercise of democracy than Howard Dean winning by one vote. However, the latter would be devastating to America.
Of course, the oldest trick in the book gets pulled here, Dean babbled, “The extreme right wing of the Republican Party has shown nothing but contempt for democracy.”
Yes, of course, “the extreme right wing…” Wasn’t it Howard Dean who claimed he was “to the right of George W. Bush on economic issues?” Trying to follow Dean on his political stands is enough to give someone motion sickness.
“From the impeachment of a sitting President.”
Which is constitutionally legal. Bill Clinton committed perjury. Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist Paper 65 that impeachment is acceptable “for offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust.” Clinton’s actions merited impeachment.
“To the recount in Florida.”
Which the Supreme Court ruled on. Case closed.
“…to opportunistic redistricting efforts in Colorado and Texas,”
What about the Democrats “opportunistic redistricting” of California? Say something about that Howard Dean! Is that “contempt for democracy”? Huh? Huh? Why didn’t you say the Democrats have shown contempt for democracy with their “opportunistic redistricting” of California? Come on Dean! Let me hear you say it! Let us not forget the truth behind redistricting in Texas. Back in 1991, when Democrats controlled the redistricting process in Texas, the Almanac of American Politics called their proposal “the shrewdest gerrymander of the 1990s… The plan carefully constructs Democratic districts with incredibly convoluted lines and packs heavily Republican suburban areas into just a few districts.” While Republicans have strong voting majority in Texas, the Democrats gave themselves a majority of congressional seats for the state. Republican in Texas, have felt “mistreated by the Democrat majority in the redistricting in 1971, 1981 and 1991,” but, as Senator Jeff Wentworth of Texas said, “?run and hide? was not, in our judgment, a legitimate response to our being outvoted by the majority political party at the time.” Texas Democrats have been running and hiding - all because of a redistricting plan that intended to accurately reflect the Republican majority in Texas.
“…and now in the recall effort in California,”
Which is also legal by California law. The state constitution allows the people to recall leaders they are unhappy with. This is not contempt for democracy - this is democracy at work!
“A narrow band of right-wing ideologues have subverted the democratic process whenever they haven’t liked the outcome.”
Forget about the left wing ideologues that have subverted the democratic process when they didn’t like Bush’s judicial nominees. Or the left wing ideologues that fled their state to prevent a quorum to vote on redistricting in Texas. Or the Democrats who fought to throw out the absentee ballots of our military overseas during the 2000 election.
Howard Dean, like most Democrats, think democracy is only democracy when Democrats pick judicial nominees, when Democrats control redistricting, when Democrats win elections. Liberal ideologues like Howard Dean think they are the bastion of truth, and they can’t stand when democracy rejects that truth.
“And making a joke out of our system of checks and balances, this administration has sought to expand the powers of executive privilege to such an extent that they’ve created a presidency that believes it answers to nobody.”
Howard Dean chose not to cite any examples here - however, it seems strange to me he can criticize Bush when he went to Congress to broaden the government’s ability to fight terrorism. Bush has made it possible for government agencies to share information to better combat terrorism. Howard Dean has a problem with this? Just whose side is he on?
“216 years ago this September, our founders laid out their vision and purpose for America in the Preamble to our Constitution. But at every turn, the Bush Administration has turned our Constitution on its head.
“The Constitution seeks to form a perfect union–but this administration has divided us by race, gender, income, religion, and sexual orientation.
Really? Look at George W. Bush’s cabinet, and tell me how he has divided us by race or gender? The most diverse cabinet in history is credited to George W. Bush. Look at his judicial appointees. They included minorities, and women. It was the Democrats who chose to abuse the Constitution and use the filibuster to keep these nominees from a simple up-and-down vote.
It was George W. Bush’s tax cuts that took 10 million low-income families off the tax rolls. However, Democrats, including Howard Dean, keep telling everybody that it was a tax cut “for the rich,” or for the “largest political contributors.”
Just how does Howard Dean think we?ve been divided by the means he claims we have by the Bush administration? Dean supports affirmative action, which divides us by race and gender. Governor Dean said on his website that if elected he?d “create a fairer and simpler system of taxation,” which really means repealing Bush’s tax cuts, and increasing taxes on the wealthy, which divides us by income. Howard Dean is the man set to divide this country.
“The Constitution seeks to establish Justice–but this administration has appointed radical ideologues to the courts.
Howard Dean means to say he appointed a minority conservative, and a woman conservative - the Democrats? worst nightmare. White male conservatives are extremists. Women and minority conservatives are radical ideologues.
Howard Dean doesn’t bring up the most ideologue-infested court in the country. The 9th Circuit, with more than two thirds of Democrat-appointed judges (most of which were appointed by Clinton), is the most overturned court in the country! This is the same court which ruled that Congress violated the Constitution by adding “under God” to the Pledge of Allegiance, and recently had it’s decision on the California recall overturned. The most radical ideological court in the country gets a pass from Howard Dean - yet he criticizes Bush’s judicial nominees - one of them, Miguel Estrada, was unanimously rated “Well Qualified” by the American Bar Association.
“The Constitution seeks to insure Domestic tranquility–but this administration has capitalized on domestic fears of terrorism for political gain.
Is terrorism fake Howard Dean? Have you forgotten about 9-11? Terrorism is very real, and to suggest that we should pretend like it doesn’t exist is irresponsible. The world changed that fateful day two years ago. Dean, you are living proof why we need to constantly be reminded about the gravity of 9-11. A nation on alert is a safer nation than one that turns its head from the reality of terrorism.
“The Constitution seeks to provide for the Common Defense–but this administration has underfunded homeland security and done nothing to protect our ports and harbors.
How can Howard Dean judge this? What can he compare it to? The fact is, any idiot can say “You?re underfunding homeland security,” to further their own political agenda. It’s just a meaningless claim. It’s an attempt to distract the people from the fact that we?ve gone two years without another attack on our home soil - which is quite amazing. On September 11, 2001, I doubt most people believed we wouldn’t be attacked again in that much time. The Democrats have chosen to take homeland security and criticize it the only way they know how: claiming it’s underfunded. It’s something they can say that sounds good to their constituency that they cannot substantiate.
“The Constitution seeks to promote the general welfare–but this administration has cut funding for child care and education.
According to the National Center for Policy Analysis, the actual number of families requesting child care assistance has actually dropped in recent years, yet funding has been relatively level. This allows states to already allocate more money to child care, which ultimately has given states the ability to provide “ample child care assistance with the current funding levels.”
But Howard Dean won’t tell you that.
“The Constitution seeks to secure the blessings of liberty for posterity–but this administration has shackled our children and grand children with the largest deficit in the history of our nation through reckless tax cuts.
Howard Dean will be his own worst enemy in the end. The Office of Management and Budget said in it’s Mid-Session Review that the deficits were not caused by tax cuts, but by economic slowdown that began in 2000 - during President Clinton’s presidency. In fact, it also said that without the tax relief, the economy would have been worse.
But Howard Dean won’t tell you that.
“Americans who today aren’t even old enough to vote will be the ones who will bear the full cost.
Americans who today aren’t even old enough to vote will be able to get an abortion without parental consent if Howard Dean gets elected.
“The ideal of democracy is more powerful than money; yet today our democracy is threatened by a flood of special interest money pouring into our nation’s capital.
“Our founders understood that threat. James Madison and Thomas Jefferson spoke of the fear that economic power would one day seize political power.
“That fear has been realized with the Bush administration.
How dare you Howard Dean! How dare you try and blemish the names of Madison and Jefferson, who sought to create a limited government. A limited government! Not a government that would tax its people into poverty to pay for “national health care.”
“Under the Bush Administration, the largest corporations and the wealthiest individuals benefit from tax-cuts that are bankrupting the states and starving Social Security, Medicare, and our public schools.
“These tax cuts reward the largest political contributors at the expense of today’s middle class, whose property taxes are skyrocketing.
Wait a minute here… Howard Dean was governor of a state with one of the highest tax burdens in the entire country! Under his watch! Businesses fled Vermont, farming suffered, and manufacturing jobs vanished. Bush’s tax cuts have benefits tax payers of all income levels - repealing them only stands to hurt them.
But Howard Dean won’t tell you that.
The Washington Times reported back in August that Vermont’s budget exploded under Governor Dean from “$662 million in 1991 to $1.8 billion last year. Between 1997 and last year, inflation and population growth combined totaled 18.1 percent, but spending rose 51.7 percent.” The article also mentions his fiscal performance, as rated by the Cato Institute, which “gave him a grade of B from 1994 to 1996. By 2000, his grade had plunged to a D.”
It’s also hypocritical of Dean to blame Bush for skyrocketing property taxes, when back in 1997, he raised property taxes in wealthy communities.
John McClaughry, president of the Ethan Allen Institute, said, “the state tax burden is undoubtedly higher because of the property tax increases, and during his years, he constantly increased tax rates on virtually everything.”
But Howard Dean won’t tell you that.
Howard Dean went on to talk about special interests in Washington. Babbling on and on about special interest money, and its influence on policy, saying, “It is a government of, by and for the special interests.”
On of the most well known (and controversial) acts of Governor Howard Dean was catering to special interests! The influence of the homosexual rights lobby, which lead to Dean signing a bill legalizing homosexual “marriage” in Vermont was practically the issue that brought Dean out of obscurity and turned the ignition on his presidential campaign. Special interests made Howard Dean’s candidacy.
Howard Dean can talk the talk, but he doesn’t walk the walk.
Howard Dean catered to special interests as governor of Vermont. The logging industry, mining industry… Dean often sided with big business and industries - pushing development - in contrast with the local environmentalists!
But Howard Dean won’t tell you that.
Dean’s latest target is the Patriot Act. Regurgitating the distorted rhetoric of the ACLU, he makes the typical leftists case against the Patriot Act, once again refusing to cite specific examples of abuses of the Patriot Act, and rolling out feel good statements about what a “patriot act” is, “A neighbor lends a hand to a friend in need that is a Patriot Act. A mother struggles for her children’s future that is a patriot act.” This is a sorry attempt of aligning his agenda with the values of various target constituencies he hopes to curry favor with.
“We believe that together we can create a force strong enough to change history and take back our country.
No, Howard Dean, together, America will keep you out of office.
Together, America will keep you from repealing Bush’s tax cuts, which has begun to bring our economy out of the Clintonian recession.
Together, America will keep you from expanding government beyond our wildest imaginations, causing the Founding Fathers to roll over in their graves.
Together, America will keep you from letting children get abortions without notifying their parents.
Together, America will keep you from raising taxes to astronomical levels to pay for your “national health care”.
Together, America will keep you from scaling back the war on terror, leaving our national vulnerable to future terrorist attacks.
Together, America will keep you from weakening our military.
Together, America will keep you from appointing left wing judges further radicalizing our court system.
Together, America will keep you from catering to the homosexual lobby, which seeks to sexualize our society and children under the guise of “tolerance”.
Together, America will keep you from pushing Israel to accommodate the demands of Palestinians who want only to kill them.
Together, America will keep you from becoming President, because you are not worthy of the position, your far left views seek only to dismantle our democracy, and hurt America.
Patriots fought for their independence from a tyrannical government in order to create a more perfect union, one of small government. These patriots believed that our rights were bestowed by God, not by bureaucracy or the Democratic Party. Howard Dean is not worthy of the history of Boston, which he has so shamelessly denigrated.
Topics: The Right Idea |
Related Posts:
September 27th, 2003 at 1:50 pm
Howard Dean, Son of Liberty?
Matt Margolis thinks not, and proceeds to dissect Dean. Did I say “dissect”? Sorry - he vivisects Dean. With a chainsaw….
September 27th, 2003 at 3:57 pm
Matt can’t you ever make one good post? Take a history class, the founding fathers protestes Taxation without representation. This is 1st grade shit man get a clue.
September 27th, 2003 at 4:11 pm
If you weren’t so damn stupid, you’d know they protested high taxes on daily good they used. The colonists revolted against taxation without representation because the taxes were so high…
Get a clue, UY, and think outside of your first grade education.
September 27th, 2003 at 5:17 pm
High it was like half a pence. They protested because they did’nt feel a reason to pay taxes to a government they had no say in.
September 27th, 2003 at 6:13 pm
Matt ignore the troll as usual you nailed it again - Um Yeah is a obvious product of a Teacher’s Union education
September 27th, 2003 at 9:01 pm
“High it was like half a pence.”
So, of course at the time half a pence was worth exactly what it is now, right? Same exact purchasing power, right?
September 27th, 2003 at 10:44 pm
It wasnt that high of a tax and the tax was to pay for the costs of the French and Indian War etc., It was the principal of the thing and til any of you actually read a histoty book you can go pound sand.
September 27th, 2003 at 11:31 pm
Um Dumm- are you trying to argue that taxes had nothing to do with the Boston tea party, or are you just trying to throw out the whole post over what, in the grand scheme of things, is a minor nuance?
September 27th, 2003 at 11:37 pm
You know what’s sad? Of the entire post, UY is focusing on one comment referencing the taxation of the colonists. We can sit here going back playing historian, but that’s not going to get anywhere, because UY is still thinking like a first grader.
I’ve checked several sources, and all make reference not simply to “taxes” - but to “high taxes” certain taxes met a lot of resistance, such as the Stamp Act, and others met with less, like the Sugar Act. So, while taxation without representation certainly had very much to with the colonists seeking indpendence, it was the severity of the taxes which highly contributed to the angering of colonists.
And I’m done with this issue. It’s pathetic that of all things, this is what is being debated.
September 28th, 2003 at 1:49 am
Doc et al. The rest is a joke Blah Blah Dean sucks Blah Bah Clenis Blah Blah Election 2000 Blah Blah not working link Blah Blah I will tell you exavcly what people dead for 200 years stood for exactly Blah Blah Studies from Astro-Turf Societies that have somewhat impressive names but are shills Blah Blah Ten Soldiers somehow count more than a few thousand disenfranchised Blah Blah I have no understanding of history and im going to lamely try to tie our forefathers to the freeper fundie fascists who want to starve the government. Blah Blah.
September 28th, 2003 at 1:54 am
http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0108225.html
http://www.ctbw.com/jones.htm
http://school.newsweek.com/extras/nhd2.php
No mention of high taxes it was the principal of it.
September 28th, 2003 at 9:08 am
Um Yeah, look closely at your last link:
Britain began taking measures to revise old taxes into new ones that were more profitable to the British treasury.
Raising taxes.
Enough of this already. You can spend all the time you want on Google looking for references to the Revolution don’t specifically say high taxes, but that doesn’t change the fact that of all things in this post you choose to argue - it’s something not about Howard Dean and his hypocrisies.
This issue about the taxation of the colonist has gotten old.
September 28th, 2003 at 10:39 am
Dean has changed some of hist thoughts on issues in roughly eight years. Bush is a lying sack of crap. Sorry but you lose.
September 28th, 2003 at 12:44 pm
Deconstructing the Deanie-Bopper
And boy oh boy does Matt Margolis ever do a fine job of THAT! After Matt is done (and it…
September 28th, 2003 at 12:59 pm
The Deanie Propeller changes his views from day to fucking day, Dumb Yeah, depending on where he’s speaking on any given day.
And your point?
I don’t give a flying fuck about his views, because he’s a lying sack of shit, but I care a great deal about his actions, and they don’t exactly speak highly of him.
September 28th, 2003 at 1:26 pm
Good work Matt! Even the trolls are struggling with this one. “It was the principal [SIC] of it”!? Hardly. The colonists were upset out of PRINCIPLE, but only because they were being taxed differently (read: unfairly higher) than the other citizens of the british empire. Most colonists at the time wanted to remain subjects of King George, even after the war had started — and it’s likely the Sons of Liberty would have been much less feisty had they just been treated fairly by the British Government. No, the reason the Sons of Liberty dumped tea was not that it had a tax on it that they had had no say in, but that it had an unfair tax on it that they had had no say in, one which the crown would have never dreamed of imposing on citizens at home. This was not just insulting but intolerable. Some historians now may try and simplify and idealize this event as some display of solely patriotic fervor, but the truth is the drinking classes were tired of a government imposing higher and more ridiculous taxes on them which was not given back to them from the government, but rather redistributed across the sea to people whom the government deemed more deserving of the money. Come to think of it, that sounds awfully familiar — welfare state anyone?
September 28th, 2003 at 1:45 pm
Nice to see another “Um & Run”. Take three words out of a couple of hundred, twist them around, wrap a few misspellings around that, declare victory and leave.
Oh, and project your hate into somewhere it does not appear.
Asswit.
September 28th, 2003 at 2:30 pm
This is 1st grade shit man get a clue.
Then it looks like I know a helluva lot more than your first grade teacher did, Shitcliffe. The Boston Tea Party was a direct response to increased taxes on tea.
In other words, dumb fuck, we’re right and you’re wrong.
Again.
Gawd, it sucks to be you, shithead. (snicker)
September 28th, 2003 at 4:22 pm
Great article, please keep it up!
September 28th, 2003 at 6:33 pm
In order:
w/r/t the environment: Dean has received multiple Sierra Club endorsements and plaudits. Now, this is a conservative blog, so I imagine that the Earth First!ers are not considered credible in general — except when they support your point, at which time they become unimpeachable.
Dean can talk about the uninsured, because unlike your boy, he’s actually done something about it. Unlike the rest of the country, Vermont does not have vast quantites of uninsured children, since Dean found a way to make sure they got health care without breaking the bank.
Dean thought that Saddam had WMDs because the Administration told us that the intelligence suggested that Saddam had WMDs. Dean made the mistake of believing a damn word Bush said, and he’s learned, as have we all.
Dean has stated on multiple occasions that he believes that Bush is, in essence, a goddamn hack who sells this country’s wealth to the highest political bidder. Democracy is about something higher than that. That is what is at stake here.
Dean’s point regarding Republican actions was made well — “subverted the democratic process.” Took actions which were legal within the process but were counter to the ideals of democracy and free government.
As for the Presidency: “That’s the interesting thing about being the president. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don’t feel like I owe anybody an explanation.” - George W. Bush
Are you really contending that Bush has not sought to appoint to the court right-wing judges?
And Dean didn’t say that terrorism did not happen; he said that your boy cynically exploited the deaths of three thousand Americans to push an entirely unrelated domestic agenda. Nice attempt to dodge the question.
I can’t check up on your National Center link, because it 404’s on me.
The OMB said that the deficit was not caused by the tax decrease. The OMB also said that the deficit would be $100 billion this year. The OMB doesn’t know how to find its ass with both hands and a flashlight.
You’re damn right that kids will be able to get abortions without the consent of the fathers who rape them under Howard Dean. You got a problem with that?
The absurd notion that going back to the tax structure which characterized the Clinton boom years constitutes taxing this country into poverty is so outrageous that you should be ashamed to even print such tripe.
The average state tax burden in this country is 9.7%. Vermont’s, the twelfth-highest by some measures, is 10.1%. The twelfth-lowest is South Carolina, at 9.0%. What’s most important, though, is that Vermont does not spend differently from other states — instead, the lesser-taxed states simply borrow against their childrens’ futures, rather than pay for the services their citizens demand. In other words, Vermont is easily the most fiscally responsible state in the union.
So, to sum up:
You’re misusing statistics to misrepresent the Governor’s record, using ad hominem attacks to prevent having to talk about Bush’s record, and combining these two to produce a patchwork quilt of lies to cover up your lack of support for your positions.
September 28th, 2003 at 8:11 pm
That said, you do make one excellent point. If you are an antigay bigot, you should not vote for Howard Dean. The bigot vote rightfully belongs to George W. Bush.
September 28th, 2003 at 8:46 pm
Contrarian sounds like a Dean Seminar poster.
Otherwise, great post!
September 28th, 2003 at 9:21 pm
Sheesh, Contrarian, that’s the worst load of tripe I’ve read in a long time, even from a DeanBot.
But let’s just take one little bit of it, shall we?
…because, as we all know, every minor who ever got pregnant did so as a result of her dad raping her, right?
Oh wait, they didn’t? Not even the one that the Deanie Propeller used for his Made-For-TeeVee talking point? You know, the 12-year-old?
You mean, he LIED?
Oh dear.
And the rest of your spew is just as bad, including the
The laws, no matter how stupid you may think that they are, were passed by representatives duly elected by We the People in a democratic process.
This, by definition, makes the use of said laws perfectly democratic.
But I forget: It’s only democracy when the DemoRATs agree with it, right?
G-d, you’re such a twit.
I would’ve never imagined that when I prayed before the 2000 election for G-d to please make my enemies more stupid than wet pebbles, that He’d grant me my wish to THAT extent.
September 28th, 2003 at 9:30 pm
Matt linked his sources, please do the same.
actually, he did something about it, but if you look at the direction it is going, the costs of the program are increasing, and would likely continue to do so. Granted, there was a surplus initially, but that is evaporating.
yes, it suggested. the war was never predicated on finding WMD definitively. Because of Husseins actions we had not way of knowing for sure whether or not he did. Now we know. Saddam could have avoided war by simply allowing inspectors into the country, and not playing all the shell games he did. It is because of Husseins actions that we went to war.
Such as what? The electoral college? That was put into place to protect the less populated areas from being ignored, and to insure that smaller states were not ignored. That is an ad hominem attack against Bush, you made.
Interesting Bush quote….it might mean something if you provided the context.
okay….don’t know what that is in reference to, but what do you expect? Right-wing, maybe. But isn’t filibustering the nomination process far more subversive to the system of checks and balances?
such as the homeland security office? How is that unrelated to terror?
I have a problem with him deciding that it would be better to first provide the service, and eliminating evidence, than calling the authorities first, and then worrying about damage control. (btw, under those circumstances, I can understand getting an abortion). I just think he better call in the law, who are the experts on figuring out who perpetrated the crime, than assume it was the father, because that is out of his field of expertise. God forbid he is wrong, and it turns out it was really the uncle, but the evidence is now gone.
Brainchild, economic policies have a lag phase. America was on a crash course for a recession because of the economic environment during the Clinton years. the larger the economic model, the longer the lag.
Link? The only number you site is that taxes are higher in VT than in 3/4ths of the rest of America. This does not imply fiscal responsibility.
September 28th, 2003 at 10:26 pm
Contrarian,
Please enlighten me.
Name one “anti-gay” piece of legislation, speech, etc that GWB supported.
September 28th, 2003 at 10:29 pm
Doc Matt linked to astro turf societies that are slightly less trustworthy then Newsmax.
September 28th, 2003 at 10:31 pm
UY,
I guess I must’ve took American History during the Dark Ages according to you.
With tax loving assholes like you, we’d still be a British colony today, had you been alive then.
Again, please feel free to contribute 70% or more of your income to the government. After all, they know best, ay?
September 28th, 2003 at 10:41 pm
As fun as it is to debate history with people whos education does not extend beyonf the 3rd grade (yes you Flatula) the Brits repealed all the taxes except for the stamp and tea then all the trouble broke out. And ms heather you seem to think Shrubs Tax cuts are going to benefit you in anyway, all thats going to happen is the states are going to get less funding and raise the local taxes. Any less taxes I have to pay will go right back out as tuitions increase and meanwhile we get a national debt my grandkids will be paying. You are American hating freaks.
September 28th, 2003 at 10:52 pm
Name one “anti-gay” piece of legislation, speech, etc that GWB supported.
One word for you: inclusive.
Like I said, if you’re an antigay bigot like the owner of this blog, you’ve got a clear choice in 2004.
September 28th, 2003 at 10:59 pm
UY–according to the Laffer curves, a decrease in tax rates directly leads to increased (federal) revenue.
Case in point, the 1980s.
What about the defecits during that era? Well, the Dems controlled congress for one; and two we also had to spend a lot on defense to beat the USSR in the Cold War.
(and more on the Laffer Curve from Bruce Bartlett and
September 28th, 2003 at 11:28 pm
Supply side is crap. Sorry.
September 28th, 2003 at 11:53 pm
Contrarian, your comments made against the owner of this blog are not appreciated. It has been decided that you can no longer post on this blog.
September 29th, 2003 at 12:53 am
UY–back that claim up with facts
September 29th, 2003 at 2:15 am
“you’ve got a clear choice in 2004. “
there is not a chance in hell that Dean will become President in your lifetime or even the next one for that matter - get use to the fact that Bush will be President again and there isn’t a damn thing you can do about it but whine
Howard “Deer in the headlights” Dean gives new meaning to the words “flip-flop
September 29th, 2003 at 2:41 am
Matt interesting is it not that the Dean crowd can only spew blather in an attempt to bolster their positions? Case in point - I posted to the Howard Dean site several weeks back using a email account from Yahoo that maybe, just maybe received 10 emails a week on it - 3 days after the post I was signed up for 17 Efax accounts - countless porn sites, dating sites - maxed out the Yahoo email in 3 short days - this is a perfect indication just how fanatical the leftist are - I just went and checked again they have managed to max it out again - these folks make professional spammers look like inept children
September 29th, 2003 at 3:05 am
Um Yeah- at least he posted some, which is more than can be said for contrarian.
September 29th, 2003 at 5:39 am
So Dean balanced taxes while he was Governor of Vermont. During the 90s when all the others states were balancing the books and running a surplus. Ok so he can do what other governors can do. (Heck even Gray Davis mananged to do that in California during the late 90s.) That does not make him a fiscal conservative. After all the states took the Fed induced bubble economy and ran with the surpluses never thinking about tomorrow.
Hell even you Um Whatever could have balanced a state budget during the 90s even after including all your “but I caaaaaaare about everyone except for those evil rat bastard republicans. Let’s all sing, ‘I’d like to teach the world to sing.’ Everyone who makes more than I do is by definition richer than I so they need to give 100% of the difference to the state. Nah forget that everyone just needs to give all their money to the State because We know what’s best.”
September 29th, 2003 at 9:49 am
You are American hating freaks. (posted by Um Yeah)
LOL!!!!!
Like I said UY, let’s see if you return your tax refund check next year!
BTW-what deli do you work for? Is it in the Big Apple?
September 29th, 2003 at 10:58 am
Conservatives are being beaten like red-headed stepchildren in debates with lucid lefties like yourself.
Wait… We’re not. My bad.
September 29th, 2003 at 1:23 pm
Vero, I’ve had my share of problems with liberals who disagree with me so much they resort to such juvenile methods of harassment. I’ve come to take it as a compliment - because it obviously proves that a) they know we are right and can’t stand it, b) we have the moral high ground, and c) they’re threatened by what we put out there - because it’s true, and it doesn’t mesh with their distorted beliefs.
September 29th, 2003 at 2:19 pm
Apparently supply side may be working:
Second Quarter GDP Revised up (from 3.1% to 3.3%)
and Consumer Spending jumps 0.8%
September 29th, 2003 at 2:43 pm
But Jaws, don’t you remember, an improving economy under a Republican President doesn’t speak for itself, and trolls like Um Yeah know more than economists when they say “the economy isn’t really improving.”
September 29th, 2003 at 4:06 pm
Matt–
How soon I forget these things.
I was just so excited to hear good news for America.
Though there is a need for more job creation, and hopefully that’ll happen sooner rather than later.
With demand up, there should be a need for more labor, but I guess we’re just too damn efficient these days.
September 29th, 2003 at 8:17 pm
As fun as it is to debate history with people whos education does not extend beyonf the 3rd grade (yes you Flatula)
“Beyonf”? This is a word? “Beyonf”?
Your claim that you’re supposedly more intelligent than I am might hold more water if you’d LEARN TO SPELL, DUMBASS!!!
the Brits repealed all the taxes except for the stamp and tea then all the trouble broke out.
Oh, but Shitcliffe - you were saying it was the “taxation without representation” causing all the trouble. Very first post in this thread, in fact.
So make up your mind, moron. Which is it? Or maybe it’s you that needs to take that history class, hm…? (snicker)
September 29th, 2003 at 9:55 pm
“With that said, don’t forget that differing opinions are welcome, and friendly debate is encouraged.” — Matt
“If you weren’t so damn stupid…” — also Matt
Nice hypocrisy!
September 29th, 2003 at 10:22 pm
It was both Flatula, they repealed all but one and there was still no representation thats when all the trouble started. Spats never made it past 1st grade.
September 29th, 2003 at 11:05 pm
At least he knows where to put his commas and apostrophes.
Look at your post again, DY, and see who needs remedial grade school education.
September 29th, 2003 at 11:49 pm
Bryant,
As the owner of this blog, I have been the target of many personal attacks, plenty from Um Yeah himself. He is lucky he’s still allowed to post comments here at all considering his behavior towards me and others. Therefore, as the owner, if I want to make mention of his lack of intelligence, that is my right.
It’s not hypocrisy when I am the ruling entity of ths blog.
September 29th, 2003 at 11:59 pm
Bryant–
Not happy?
Get your own blog.
It’s protected speech.
September 30th, 2003 at 8:12 am
Damn. And they say it’s the liberals who hide behind their “rights.”
Helpful reading comprehension tip: I never said it wasn’t Matt’s right to say whatever he wants; of course it is. It’s his blog. If he wants to put on the Administrator hat and use passive voice while banning people — I can just see the Grand Council intoning “it has been decided” in unison — he can do it.
But it’s hypocritical to ask your commenters to engage in friendly debate when you’re calling them damn stupid. If Um Yeah is a problem for you, and you really want friendly debate, don’t sink the level of your own discourse.
I know, I know. That would require restraint. Life is hard.
September 30th, 2003 at 8:34 am
As I previously mentioned, Um Yeah’s behavior has merited his being banned from my blog - however, I have not done so. I have made past attempts to keep his tone down towards me and others, but he has not. Therefore, the choices presented to me were a) ban him, or b) let him stay until he goes too far while in meantime treat him the way he treats others.
It’s not hypocrisy to allow yourself to be a punching bag to commenters. - especially on your own blog.
September 30th, 2003 at 9:18 am
Also–
If you’ve been reading Um Yeah’s comments for a while now, you notice he can’t make a statement without an insult to someone or something. (”Matt’s a liar”, “Shrubya”, etc)
He pretty much asks for it, in my humble opinion.
September 30th, 2003 at 9:53 am
Not my fault MATT COULDNT OUTWIT A RETARDED BRICK.
September 30th, 2003 at 10:03 am
From Matt’s Bio:
Yep UY,
But I guess being a deli-boy trumps all of that.
September 30th, 2003 at 10:44 am
Ms. Heather,
You are in the Boston area? I always thought you were down south. I grew up in the Boston suburbs - I know what you and Matt are up against.
Gotta cheer for the Red Sox. If for no other reason, the abject misery a Sox victory would have for all Yankees fans.
Um Yeah: A brick is an inanimate object. They cannot be retarded. You on the other hand, have mastered that.
Matt, Take the computers off the short bus!
September 30th, 2003 at 12:37 pm
ms heather you might have noticed I havent repsonded to your last umpteenth post. I’m 19 I work part-time at a job that pays well above mininum wage has healthcare and even a little grant money. Im in the Criminal Justice program hoping to get into Law School.
Matt why do you pretend the Admin is another person its not like you fool anyone.
September 30th, 2003 at 1:02 pm
There is no intent to fool anyone. The “Administrator” could be me, or someone else I have given the power and authority to delete posts, censor posts, or to warn a commenter of unacceptable behavior.
So, while it can be me sometimes, it can also be someone else. So, get over it. If I’ve offended your delicate sense of being, then feel free to move about the internet and not come back to my site… simple as that.
September 30th, 2003 at 2:29 pm
sometimes i like to hack in to Matt’s blog and delete posts. I got the password through mental telepathy that all twins have. Matt sends me telepathic messages to delete posts when the boss is near him so I can do it discreetly.
I am the master of the universe.
September 30th, 2003 at 5:38 pm
RR–
I copied and pasted a portion of Matt’s bio to show our young friend that Matt is MORE than qualified to “outwit a retarded brick” I wish I had such credentials!!!!!
Yes, I’m a southern girl. Boston? Haven’t made it that far up north yet.
September 30th, 2003 at 5:40 pm
UY-
Do you work for Blimpie?
I hope you won’t have to write an essay to get into law school. But you probably will-writing legal briefs and all.
All kidding aside, I have NO problem with your job at this point in your life. I worked in my Dad’s fast food restaurant while in college.
October 5th, 2003 at 7:29 am
HOWARD DEAN IS WORSE THAN ASHCROFT and the PATRIOT ACT
Dean recently has strongly criticized the Patriot Act and Ashcroft. Dean’s record reveals that his policy in Vermont was to appoint judges that would ignore “legal technicalities” (i.e. the Bill of Rights). He publicly stated this policy in a 1997 Vermont Press Bureau interview. His record shows that he appointed anti-civil-rights judges. Dean increased prison funding 150% during his tenure in Vermont. Dean called for “a re-evaluation of the importance of some of our specific civil liberties” post 9-11. Dean will say anything to gather votes, regardless of his record and what his true feelings are concerning an issue.
Dean’s closest friend and favorite appointee, Vermont Attorney General William Sorrell, is currently fighting vigorously in the federal courts to allow Vermont to close courthouses to the press and citizens for any reason without hearing, court findings, trial or Due Process in direct contravention of First Amendment requirements concerning closure of courtrooms. According to Sorrell, simply criticizing the government or reporting on court corruption can justify banishment for life from Vermont courthouses. Dean and Sorrell’s courthouse secrecy policy can be invoked with unfettered discretion by a single government employee based upon the way one looks, the way one thinks, one’s political views or any other arbitrary standard without opportunity for the banished persons to challenge the sanction consistent with Due Process. This is civil rights in Vermont after Dean finished his appointments.
Dean’s covert implementation of a Vermont Patriot Act in the 1990s by simply appointing anti-Bill-of-Rights judges and placing Sorrell in the Attorney General’s office is far worse than any piece of federal legislation now in place. Unlike legislation, Dean’s covert Vermont Patriot Act can not be repealed or modified and it oppresses Vermonters to this day. Whatever one’s opinion of the Patriot Act, it was at least done in public view. Dean chose to oppress the people of Vermont and subvert the Bill of Rights in secrecy behind closed doors via appointments. He now claims to be a civil liberties champion.
Dean’s criticism of Ashcroft is a sham and directly contradicts his record in Vermont. His conduct in Vermont was far worse than any allegations he directs at Ashcroft.
– Scott Huminski
Supportive links embedded below.
http://hawaii.indymedia.org/news/2003/09/3802.php
October 10th, 2003 at 6:42 pm
FYI, Vero, I went to private school, where the teachers were not unionized, and I agree with Um Yeah most of the time.
October 10th, 2003 at 7:05 pm
Laura, agreeing with Um Yeah isn’t something to be proud of.
October 20th, 2003 at 5:21 pm
If nothing else, Dean has brought back hundreds of thousands of people into the political system again.
That is what is important. The people must participate in their own governance and I think that anyone that fails to see that simply doesn’t “get it”.
Oh, and Scott Huminski is a bitter loser that got into some legal problems in Vermont and became an annoyance there to some local judges after some petty case; he is now on a personal vendetta against Dean.
October 20th, 2003 at 10:59 pm
So, Dean has brought back hundreds of thousands of far left ideologues in the political system again. This is not something to be proud of Gro.
It’s sad Gro, the only thing that really separates Dean from the other candidates is his ignorant anti-Bush attacks. It takes real ideas to be a be a President.
Dean can go back to Planned Parenthood and kill babies if that’s what makes him feel like a man, but never in my lifetime shall he ever be President of the United States.
October 25th, 2003 at 5:56 pm
Some people bitch and moan because we didn’t finish this war in .02 seconds, and others bitch and moan because they’re offended by the fact that some of us are sick of the socialist shit coming from the Democratic Party. As for me, I bitch and moan because there aren’t any true conservatives leading this nation anymore. Bush? A sincere man, in my opinion. A decent president who will lead us to victory over terrorism, albeit not anytime soon. Clinton? That fucker gutted the military, the CIA, and the FBI when he was in office. Following Clinton’s attacks on our national security (Los Alomos, anyone?) came Sept. 11. CLINTON SUCKS, AND OUGHT TO BE BROUGHT UP ON CHARGES OF TREASON.
October 25th, 2003 at 5:59 pm
Oh yeah, and Howard the Coward ought to abort his bid for the Presidency before he embarrasses himself any further.
October 26th, 2003 at 3:06 pm
I cringe at the thought of Howard Dean being Commander-In-Chief and being in charge of the War on Terror…
God help us if that ever become so.
November 5th, 2003 at 12:25 pm
Robert Byrd would be a GREAT VP to Dean. Both pro-KKK, and the Associated Press is telling us to vote for Dean, so this should really fly well with the leftist morons
November 8th, 2003 at 7:52 pm
I don’t agree. I think that since Howard Dean has the largest grassroots following in United States political history, his followers have indeed begun a revolt against Bush. Makes sense to me.
November 8th, 2003 at 9:29 pm
Howard Dean has the largest grassroots following in United States political history…
uh, where is this fact found? I’ve never heard this before.
December 13th, 2003 at 12:06 pm
On July 4th of 2003, President Bush was scheduled to appear at the opening ceremonies for the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia. At the very last moment the appearance was cancelled, ostensibly due to scheduling conflicts with a campaign stop at a factory in Ohio, but really because Bush would have been booed off the stage. A Democratic primary candidate named Howard Dean who was then just emerging onto the national scene showed up in Philadelphia that day and reaped the publicity Bush would have gotten. Attending the dedication of a building that commemorates the document upon which this country is founded in the city this country started on this country’s birthday is something a president ought to do. Karl Rove will only allow Bush to speak in front of presecreened groups of supporters or soldiers in uniform. The bottom line is Dean acted presidential and Bush did not.
That incident put me on notice of Dean and now I am a volunteer for Philly4Dean. FWIW, I have posted this story in other sites on the Web, and so far defense and justification of Bush’s actions have consisted of 1)You are gay 2)You are a poopyhead and 3) You are a gay poopyhead.
December 13th, 2003 at 3:51 pm
It still amazes me how Deanites TOTALLY ignore the skeletons in his closet..
You know that’s not true. You may not have cheered him, perhaps, being a Deanite, you’d even boo… but more people support the President than support Howard Dean.
December 15th, 2003 at 7:27 pm
No, Bush would have been booed off the stage. Bush’s approval rating in Philadelphia stands at 19%. Our political hack of a mayor won reelection solely because he managed to spin a bug found in his office as an attempt by the Bush administration to hijack the mayoral election. A pro-gay fiscal conservative named Sam Katz ran against the mayor and his campaign was sunk by guys in suits and George Bush masks at political rallies yelling “I’m voting for Sam Katz!”. Protestors were salivating at the chance to rip Bush a new one.
Why couldn’t Bush accomodate a few slings and arrows in order to celebrate our Constitution? Face it, he chickened out.
December 16th, 2003 at 1:08 am
please… i know you’d like to believe what you’re saying.. but get serious…
December 16th, 2003 at 8:53 am
Tell you what, you come down here and rally the large number of Bush supporters around the City of Brotherly Love. Then hold a rally of your own at the Constitution Center and invite Bush. He will come and speak of this wonderful document and raise millions of dollars (just remember to bring out those $2000 checks to get him to come). Then you will prove me wrong.
Truth is, you have nothing, but rather than admit that Karl Rove won’t allow Bush to speak to hostile crowds, you claim I made the whole thing up.
December 16th, 2003 at 11:39 am
the real truth is this: all you have is your opinion. and your opinion means very little to me.
December 16th, 2003 at 12:07 pm
Bush only speaks to prescreened groups of supporters and soldiers in uniform. He chickened out of speaking at the National Constitution Center on July 4th. Instead he went to a campaign stop at an Ohio factory where thousands of protestors were shunted off to the side so Bush could speak to a much smaller group of prescreened supporters and members of the media. Just last month Bush chickened out of addressing the Parliament of our biggest ally and and had to be shuffled away from anywhere from 70,000 to 200,000 protestors. He won’t give a press conference unless hand-picked reporters ask prescreened questions. That’s the facts, not my opinion.
Now explain to me why Bush responded (at a March press conference) to a question about what went wrong with attempts to get the UN on board with the PNAC’s war with “That wasn’t in the script.”
January 13th, 2004 at 4:39 pm
quoting Matt: “the real truth is this: all you have is your opinion. and your opinion means very little to me.”
most of the things said on this blog are opinion, matt. either that or name calling (which you chose to participate in). it’s pathetic and boring, not to mention, low.
i have a great idea…i’ll say something reeking of sarcasm, and someone will respond by criticizing my spelling. then i can call them a name like ’shit for brains’ and then we can discuss our countries future with phrases like ‘you haven’t passed 3rd grade,’ or ‘you suck.’
i thought this was about our opinions about Howard Dean as president. so far the only person who presented good arguments opposing Matt’s article was Contrarian (which i’d like to stress were very good arguments…good job, Contrarian), who subsequently was banned from this blog. Um Yeah, who seems to have very little to say but insults (making it easy to pick on him) was not banned because of Matt Margolis’s ‘incredible compassion’, even though he said much worse things than Contrarian. Does this make sense to anyone else?
My only comment about the actual content of this blog is this: politicians do lie and cheat. this is a given because of the nature of power. maybe not all of them, but how can we tell which one’s? the only thing i have to go on is what Dean says himself. maybe he’s lying, i don’t really know, but he speaks of a compassion for the people who can’t speak for themselves. he talks about using the power of the government to care for all people of this country, not just the taxpayers.
i ask everyone to stop being selfish. i would gladly give up 1/10th of my paycheck or maybe even more, if it meant that everyone in this country were being taken care of.
all of you who have so much time to bitch and moan can surely spare that for people who spend every waking hour trying to make money enough to pay for healthcare for their families and to pay for a modest education for their children (or even just food and shelter).
forget about your own ego’s for a bit and think of other’s. those who can’t even afford a computer as to participate in such pointless dialogues.