Twitter

BlogAds

Recent Comments

Label Cloud

Pay no attention to the people behind the curtain

Powered By Blogger

Tuesday, August 12, 2003


Unsolicited Campaign Advice
for Howard Dean and others

On the California Recall
Howard Dean can't endorse Cruz Bustamante. In fact, only Joe Lieberman can endorse Cruz Bustamante, as Bustamante had already endorsed Joe Lieberman. Gray Davis is already out supporting John Kerry. That leaves Dean and six other candidates without the option of endorsing a Democrat, since the other Democrat who may have had a shot--John Garamendi--bowed out after Bustamante got in.

No Democrat--Dean included--should be endorsing Independent Ariana Huffington or Green Peter Camejo. They may end up being spoilers, leaving Bustamante with fewer votes than Independent (but very, very Republican) Peter Uberoth or Republican (but very, very Austrian) Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Of course, that all depends on what the vote count is on the top half of the ballot, which asks whether or not the recall should happen in the first place.

All nine Democratic candidates came out at the AFL-CIO forum this past week to aver that the recall was a bad idea and to support the embattled Davis. And on "Larry King Live" Dean made it clear that he saw the recall as an attempt by Republicans to subvert the will of the people: "[T]his is another attempt to overturn an election that was a legitimate election by the right wing," he said.

And that's a point that needs to be hammered home: The GOP is, right now, working furiously to destroy the very fabric from which this nation was woven. What we see in California, Texas, Colorado, and Georgia right now are more extensions of what we saw in Florida in 2000. The GOP got away with it there (thank you, Mr. Scalia), and now they feel they have license to do it everywhere. It must stop, and our Democrats need to make that clear.

So Howard Dean needs to spend time in California this month, encouraging "No" votes on the recall. He should probably be there for the September Meetup, and maybe even the October Meetup, too. But he needs to bring to bear all the resources of his committed troops to turning back Republican runs at destroying the democratic process.

On Gay Marriage
Speaking of Dean's appearance on "Larry King Live", my wife and I watched it, and at one point we both stared at the screen in disbelief. It was this exchange:
KING: On your own state level, if it were a referendum, would you vote for gay marriage?

DEAN: If what were--we don't have a referendum in my state, and we have civil unions, and we deliberately chose civil unions, because we didn't think marriage was necessary in order to give equal rights to all people. [. . .]

KING: So you would be opposed to a gay marriage?

DEAN: If other states want to do it, that's their business. We didn't choose to do that in our state.

KING: And you personally would oppose it?

DEAN: I don't know, I never thought about that very much, because we didn't do it in our state for that reason.
"I never thought about that"! Oh, please! I say respectfully, that's a crock. How can you be Howard Dean and not have given thought to the idea of gay marriage?

At any rate, there are two ways Dean--or anyone else for that matter--can answer this question, I think.
Q: Do you personally oppose or support gay marriage?

A: Well, what I personally think is not important. I am not elected to do what I personally support--I'm elected to do what's best for the American people, which, frankly, may not even be what the American people personally support.
That's a weak answer, yes, but it gets around the question a heck of a lot better than "I never thought about it." But this one's better:
Q: Do you personally oppose or support gay marriage?

A: If two of my gay friends were getting married, I'd offer the Rose Garden for them to do it in. I can't look my friends in the eye and tell them that their love is wrong, that their commitment to each other is invalid. I just can't. And if their church or their state is willing to marry them, I want it to be as perfect and beautiful for them as the day I married my wife was for me."
On the Second Anniversary of September 11
September 11 cannot be politicized. What I mean by that is not that it's impossible to do it, but that we must not let it happen.

To that end, September 11, 2003, needs to be a day off from campaigning. Clear the schedule, completely. Then on September 12, and going for the next two weeks, at least, hold a series of town hall meetings or speeches in which you ask the question: "Do you feel safer now that you did two years ago?"

Dean answers this question all the time. Since long before I started following him, he was labasting the administration for inadequately funding first-responders and port security, to name two things.

The 9/11 Commission Report made clear that this administration does not take threats of terrorism seriously. The quagmire in Iraq proves it: Saddam Hussein had absolutely nothing to do with al Qaeda and 9/11, yet we are now up to our armpits over there, leaving us fully unprepared to handle any other threats should they arise. I don't know how on earth anyone--in the administration or not--thinks we could possibly be eyeing Iran or North Korea for attacks when we don't even have enough troops to adequately hold and defend the two countries--Afghanistan and Iraq--that we currently occupy!

On the Economy
I won't belabor this point, since long-time readers know how I stand on this, but the 2004 election is ours to win or lose on the economy.

We must not cede security and foreign policy, of course; even though it's a losing battle we need to remind the people that they are not in any way safer under Republican rule than under Democrats (see just above).

But we need to hammer home how horrible the economy is, as it looks like even a recovery will be a jobless one. That makes the Whopper the only president since they started keeping track to have a net loss of jobs on his watch.

Kos pointed this out last week, but for those of you who don't read him, first of all, you should read him, and second of all, realize this: Gray Davis is being recalled in California because he couldn't manage the economy: Rescuecalifornia.com says:
Under Gray Davis, California went from a surplus to a record $34.8 Billion deficit [. . .]. When companies go bankrupt, the CEO takes the blame. In covering up deficits and cooking the books in Enron-type accounting, Gray Davis has brought the state to bankruptcy.
Just plug the Whopper's name in there, and let it simmer for a while. That's how we win 2004.

No comments: