Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (502932)	12/3/2003 1:50:13 PM
From: JakeStraw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Dean needs polish... and to learn to keep his foot out of his mouth.

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (502932)	12/3/2003 2:02:35 PM
From: Hope Praytochange	Respond to of 769667

Edwards Lets Staff Heads Do the Talking By Howard Kurtz Wednesday, December 3, 2003; Page A05 Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) is suddenly taking aim at his fellow southerner and presidential rival Wesley K. Clark, citing criticism of the retired general by former military leaders. Well, not Edwards himself. Publicly, at least, Edwards mainly sticks to his line from last month's Iowa debate: "People are tired of listening to politicians yell at each other." But that's why candidates have staffs, and Edwards's aides are taking issue with a new Clark ad that says the Arkansan "fought for better schools" and, given his military background, "will make an extraordinary American president." Jennifer Palmieri, Edwards's spokeswoman, said, "General Clark's ad is begging the question: What kind of leader will he be? Military leaders he has worked with, and who know him best, seem to have a lot of concern about his ability to lead and be a good president." What's more, she said, "he hasn't laid down any sort of education policy." Clark communications chief Matt Bennett said his candidate tried to improve schools for 44,000 military children under his command and will roll out an education policy beginning today. Bennett chided Edwards for relying on unspecified criticism of Clark by retired Gen. Henry H. "Hugh" Shelton, a friend and adviser to the senator. "It's a bit rich for the Edwards camp -- when one of their own campaign team has made an unsubstantiated, slanderous charge against Clark -- now to be pointing to that," he said. "They're hearing footsteps in South Carolina, big-time. When campaigns get nervous, they start taking cheap shots." The Edwards team is still miffed at Clark for stepping on the senator's official campaign announcement by leaking word of his own candidacy that day. A recent poll showed Clark edging Edwards for the lead in the Feb. 3 South Carolina Democratic primary. Edwards is hardly the only candidate to leave sharp jabs to his staff. In pushing a health care plan in New Hampshire on Monday, Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (Conn.) declined to criticize Howard Dean's more expensive proposal, saying they were both "in the same ballpark." Meanwhile, Lieberman's staff issued a statement in his name excoriating Dean for sealing government records from his tenure as Vermont governor. "Howard Dean likes to present himself as a straight talker," Lieberman-on-paper said. "But he took an extra long walk from straight talk when he sealed his records as governor and recalled his letters from state agencies just to avoid potential political embarrassment." Democrats Reach Out -- in Spanish The New Democrat Network, which promotes centrist candidates, will begin running two Spanish-language TV ads today in two battleground states, Florida and Nevada. One spot echoes Democrats' complaints that the Bush administration has shortchanged its signature education program, No Child Left Behind. "He promised us he would invest $18 billion for the poorest schools," the announcer says, according to a translation provided by the group. "But now he wants to spend billions less." The second spot features a man imagining his community getting a makeover. "The Democrats have always been our best friends," the ad says. "With them, the progress of our community is secured." The group is spending "hundreds of thousands" of dollars to run the ads on three Spanish-language networks in Orlando and Las Vegas over the next 2 1/2 weeks, said its president, Simon Rosenberg.

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (502932)	12/3/2003 2:04:08 PM
From: Hope Praytochange	Respond to of 769667

Meanwhile, Lieberman's staff issued a statement in his name excoriating Dean for sealing government records from his tenure as Vermont governor. "Howard Dean likes to present himself as a straight talker," Lieberman-on-paper said. "But he took an extra long walk from straight talk when he sealed his records as governor and recalled his letters from state agencies just to avoid potential political embarrassment." washingtonpost.com

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (502932)	12/3/2003 2:49:43 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

OK, maybe he IS serious, but I find him laughable. He panders better than Clinton. Consider, for example, his "position" on Iraq: First, Mr. Dean agreed with President Bush that Saddam needed to be disarmed but never explained how to verifiably achieve that goal without threatening force. In other words, Mr. Dean did not really support containment. He did not say we could live with the status quo. He too wanted to ensure that Saddam complied with U.N. demands, yet offered no practical sticks -- or carrots -- to accomplish that objective. For example, in a major foreign policy address at Drake University on Feb. 17 this year, Gov. Dean stated that "Saddam Hussein must disarm. This is not a debate, this is a given." But in the same speech he described a military operation to overthrow Saddam as "the wrong war at the wrong time." Just how one could have expected Saddam to verifiably disarm in the face of such rhetoric is unclear. The former governor did not assert that Saddam already was effectively disarmed or that we could live with the status quo. Nor did he argue that inspections should be given more time before resorting to war. Rather, he categorically opposed the threat of force even as he insisted that the U.S. did need to ensure Saddam's disarmament. This position does not hold water. But enough about the past. Mr. Dean's second main problem is even more serious because it concerns what to do about Iraq now. Here he is trying to have it both ways. He insists at times that we need to remain in Iraq and succeed. Then he changes tune abruptly, advocating U.S. troop withdrawals and opposing further expenditures of American money to complete the job there. The first position is clearly designed to appeal to the left-leaning part of the Democratic base, the second to the general electorate. Mr. Dean is making both arguments simultaneously, and they are completely contradictory. Consider the record. On Sept. 26 this year, in a statement calling for the resignations of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, Mr. Dean stated that "we are in Iraq now, and we cannot afford to fail." On Oct. 9, in the Democratic debate in Phoenix, he said, "Now that we're there, we can't pull out responsibly." In these comments, Mr. Dean was realistically recognizing the strategic importance of succeeding in Iraq even if he had himself opposed getting involved there. He was also recognizing the political need to appeal to the mainstream American voter who knows we cannot cut and run in this crucial part of the world. But there is another side to Mr. Dean -- the one who must tap into the anger of the Democratic left against all things Bush and against the war in Iraq in particular. In the Sept. 4 debate in Albuquerque, N.M., for example, Mr. Dean stated: "We need more troops. They're going to be foreign troops, as they should have been in the first place, not American troops. Ours need to come home." This was nothing short of a prescription for ending the mission and declaring failure. Worst of all is the new Dean television ad in Iowa. In that spot, he chastises Dick Gephardt for supporting President Bush's Iraq policy, and then concludes, "I opposed the war in Iraq. And I'm against spending another $87 billion there." Mr. Dean does not say he opposed the specifics of the administration's supplemental appropriation, which would be a partially defensible position held by several other Democratic candidates. Rather, he categorically opposes an expense of that magnitude in ads running right now in the Hawkeye State. Unfortunately for the country and for the soundness of Mr. Dean's argument, there is no way to stabilize Iraq and protect U.S. security interests in the region without an expenditure in that ballpark. online.wsj.com As for your statement that "Dean looks like the kind of guy who'll meet you face on in an ally and try to kick your ass", is a guy with anger management issues really the kind of guy you want as president? Oh, and is that what you call an "informed", "according to the issues" basis for voting? You and AS should get together - you're both so enthralled with the machismo of your candidates. Frankly, I think most Americans prefer a president with a consistent vision, not pandering, convoluted "positions" that change by the day (sometimes mid-sentence), and a macho image.

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (502932)	12/3/2003 3:00:40 PM
From: Hope Praytochange	Respond to of 769667

Meathead going negative on Wes Clark? Salon's Tim Grieve reports on the Hollywood fundraising battle and the role of Dean supporter Rob Reiner: "Robin Williams, Helen Hunt, Rene Russo, Glenn Close, Susan Sarandon, Paul Newman and a host of other Hollywood types have given money to Dean. And while Clark is picking up endorsements and contributions quickly, Reiner ascribes a certain 'flavor of the week' quality to his Hollywood support. Some of the people who 'jumped on the Clark bandwagon,' he says, have done so 'without doing their due diligence first.' He points in particular to Norman Lear, the legendary television producer who founded People for the American Way. Lear initially backed Dean -- he gave $2,000 to his campaign in April -- then jumped ship when Clark officially entered the race in September. "Lear is a fierce defender of First Amendment rights, and in Clark he appeared to have found a useful ally -- a soldier whose sharp critiques of the Iraq War have undercut any notion that you can't be a patriot and a protester at the same time. But Reiner said that Lear ought to feel -- and is feeling -- some concern after Clark said last month that he would support a constitutional amendment banning the burning of the American flag. " 'I know Norman is upset about that, and he's going to talk to Clark about it,' Reiner said. "It's like if [pro-choice advocate] Kate Michelman supported a candidate and then found out he was pro-life. This is Norman's big issue, First Amendment rights and freedom of speech and all that.' "Attempts to reach Lear were unsuccessful. A source close to him said that he was 'disappointed' by Clark's endorsement of the flag-burning amendment but will not withdraw his support over the issue."