I'm savoring the delicious irony that in the land of free speech, as the most vociferous advocate for Howard Dean on SI, I've been censored off the Dean thread. Go figure.
Re: Message 19652255
Sylvester, Dean has faltered in the past three weeks or so.
Respectfully, that is utter nonsense. What happened is that Doctor Dean was bold enough to say on Chris Matthew's Harball show that Dean would work to end the media consolidation that has been destroying the multiple independent voices that are necessary for a working democracy in the U.S.
The very next day, the 'long knives' came out, and a vast smear campaign began against Doctor Dean who is now being punished for committing the truth. It's a vicious attack by the entrenched and greedy media who are willfully distorting the news, and apparently swaying your opinion. Are you feeling the least bit manipulated by this sleazy chicanery by the media?
***
A President has to work under enormous pressures and now when he has come under pressure, he has yet to show he can do so.
Again, are your impressions too much controlled by the media war against Howard Dean? "yet to show he can do so??" I don't think so. What I'm seeing is a vicious onslaught by the greedheads like Murdock, Immelt, Eisner and Redstone who are attacking Dean and flooding the media with vilifications of someone who would limit their greedy gross-out attitudes toward controlling your mind with propaganda and disinformation. The enemy of the people is the media, working in a criminal cabal with the Bushies. Not Howard Dean.
***
It is a foregone conclusion that the Repubs will make 9/11 an issue and Gen. Clark is best suited to take on that debated across the table with GWB.
It is also a fact that Doctor Dean got a couple days worth of coverage on his statement that 9/11 probably could have been prevented by the Bushies had they been paying attention to the intelligence community. This obvious attack on the Bushies' credibility is the right course to take. What Wes Clark is tellin us, in contrast, doesn't get to the truth, but is rather more intended to continue to consolidate power into the hands of police/military interests which is exactly the wrong direction for this nation to be going in.
***
He has been consistent with the war in Iraq right from his days as CNN commentator.
Respectfully, I disagree. Today, Wes Clark says he's opposed the war from the git go. That's a distortion of the facts. Before the war, last January and February, I watched Clark's commentary on CNN. I was extremely disappointed by his remarks. He refused to oppose an attack on Iraq, and spent all his time kibbitzing about how to go about attacking the Hussein regime. He never, ever said it was a moral mistake to attack. He never said we shouldn't go in. He never said that we were going in for the sake of Empire, Oil and Israel.
All he did was suggest, timidly, that it might be better if there were a larger coalition of the willing.
That's hardly a strong case for Clark's prescience or honesty.
****
They are talking about him being the VP candidate with Dean. Maybe it will end up being the other way about after Feb. 3rd.
Clark is the sweetheart of the DLC and the media. The Military-Industrial Complex's Immelt Hour, aka "Meet The Press" gave Wes Clark carte blanche today in order to attempt to upstage the Democratic candidates' debate.
Clark stated 'for the record', that he is unwilling to become anyone's VP choice. The likelihood that if Clark is the eventual nominee, that he would select Howard Dean as his #2 is absolutely nil. There's too much hatred of Doctor Dean among the corrupt elements of the "inside the Beltway" Democratic Establishment. |
