SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (25645)1/22/2004 12:44:38 AM
From: LindyBill  Respond to of 793765
 
The kinder, gentler, Dean. With wife, on 20/20. Sounds like 92. I would like it better if it was over a bimbo.

January 22, 2004
Dean's Campaign Alters Approach After Iowa Loss
By ADAM NAGOURNEY and JODI WILGOREN

MANCHESTER, N.H., Jan. 21 — Senior aides to Howard Dean took several steps on Wednesday to overhaul his candidacy, including softening the tone of his speeches and eliminating high-voltage campaign rallies in favor of dignified appearances where he would present himself as a mature ex-governor with a command of health care and the economy.

The moves came as senior advisers expressed concern in interviews that Dr. Dean's candidacy was imperiled after a third-place finish in Iowa and a roaring, raucous concession speech that many opponents have held up as evidence that Dr. Dean is unfit to be president.

The advisers said they had concluded that the portrayal of Dr. Dean as a candidate unhinged would make it impossible, at least for now, to run advertisements attacking their opponents here, a significant restriction for any candidate in a tough race. Dr. Dean and his wife, Judith, have also agreed to do their first joint television interview, which will appear Thursday night on ABC's "Prime Time."

Evidence of a new Dr. Dean was on display Wednesday morning in Manchester, where the candidate, speaking softly and haltingly, highlighted his proposed overhaul of the campaign finance system, in what aides described as their first effort to change the subject of the campaign discourse.

The new steps were mapped out in a series of meetings that continued Wednesday in Burlington, Vt., where the governor went to recover from a cold that left him hoarse and looking beleaguered.

"I don't buy into the notion that somebody did it to us, but somehow we got caught in the mutually assured destruction of a harsh, negative, vitriolic campaign that created very negative images of Howard at the very time that he needed to humanize himself," said Steven Grossman, the chairman of the campaign and a former Democratic national chairman, as he began a seven-hour round-trip drive from his home in Boston for the meeting in Vermont.

Representative Frank Pallone Jr. of New Jersey said that in a conference call with members of Congress and Dr. Dean's staff on Tuesday night, he said Dr. Dean "has to get away from the negative attacks."

"He has to be positive, talk about the future, don't talk about others," Mr. Pallone said. "Don't even defend yourself against attacks by others."

Dr. Dean's advisers said they had been deluged with advice from all the camps that make up the unusual alliance of the Dean campaign — from their young Web-based supporters to senior members of Congress to his growing legion of paid consultants — about what their candidate should do. Several advisers said they were increasingly concerned that he could face a loss in the New Hampshire primary on Tuesday that could be devastating.

"I told him to be a minipresident; not to be so hot, to tone it down," said one of his most prominent supporters, who did not want to be identified as sharing his private advice to Dr. Dean. "I said, `In the future, if you want to stir up the crowd, have somebody else do it for you.' "

Representative Robert Menendez of New Jersey said he had told Dean aides that Dr. Dean "needs to do more of the uplifting, motivational, substantial vision of where he would take America."

"Put him in the type of circumstance where he is not just pumping the crowd, but is engaged in a conversation with the electorate that reflects his intellect and concern for people," Mr. Menendez said.

Dr. Dean's aides said they were taking that advice, and said that would become increasingly clear over the next day. Late Wednesday night his aides noted that despite the disparaging publicity from the loss in Iowa and his exuberant postcaucus performance, Dr. Dean had raised $590,000 in contributions since Monday.

The retooling of the Dean campaign reflects the dramatic turn in fortunes for this candidate, and just six days before the vote in New Hampshire, a contest that just two weeks ago Dr. Dean seemed positioned to win overwhelmingly. Instead, a series of polls have shown his support dropping, putting him in a tight contest with Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts.

On Thursday, aides said, Dr. Dean plans to take his campaign finance proposal a step further by calling for a $250 limit on contributions to an individual candidate, down from the current $2,000. The proposal is timed to come on the day that the Democratic presidential candidates are meeting in a televised debate which Dr. Dean's advisers view as critical to turning around his fortunes.

Dr. Dean went so far as to first schedule, and then postpone, campaigning door-to-door in Newport, about 60 miles northwest of here, in the first bit of retail politicking he would have done in months. Aides said that over the next few days, he would put aside the noisy rallies that have become associated with his candidacy for town-hall-style meetings, and visits to schools and hospitals, all intended to highlight his work as governor of Vermont.

At the same time, an aide said, Dr. Dean will stop talking about the process of his campaign — in other words, his success at using the Internet to recruit supporters — and more about the issues that polls said New Hampshire voters were interested in. Aides said that in effect they were trying to reclaim the spirit of the Dean candidacy that allowed him to dominate this state just three months ago.

"He connected with people here when he was himself; three or for months ago, he drove Kerry from the state," an aide said. "What the guy has to do to win is go back to that and be the doctor-governor who stands up for what he believes in and achieves results."

The change in tactics comes at a time of both gloom and defiance among many of Dr. Dean's supporters, some of whom said he had been unfairly pilloried for his concession speech. "They're writing his obituary and stuff, but I remember when McCain beat Bush in New Hampshire last time, everybody said Bush was dead," said Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa. "Check his address now."

Dr. Dean's advisers said they viewed the debate here on Thursday as a potential turning-point that might allow New Hampshire voters to take a second look at their candidate, and thus move the campaign discussion away from the way Dr. Dean ended his campaign in Iowa.

Saying they were confident of a successful showing by Dr. Dean at the debate, his advisers said they were pouring money and personnel into New Hampshire to make certain they won. In doing so, they are taking advantage of a decision not to participate in the campaign finance system, freeing him from the spending limits. Mr. Kerry is the only other Democrat bypassing the system.

"We're throwing it all into New Hampshire right now," said Paul Maslin, who is Dr. Dean's pollster.

On television here, Dr. Dean's main advertisements show him smiling and surrounded by children and an elderly couple.

The heavy emphasis on that advertisement comes at a time when some Democrats close to the campaign question the use of a commercial in the final days of the race in Iowa that showed Dr. Dean alone on the screen, rather than with people, in a way that might rebut the image of the candidate as a loner.

As Dr. Dean took a break at his home, his aides met in Burlington to plot out some of the steps. "I don't make a seven-hour round trip when I don't have to," Mr. Grossman said.

"This is a business in which you either grow or die," he said. "Howard has got to grow out of the Iowa experience in a way in which he connects with people on their basic, human, guttural needs."

Mr. Maslin said he hoped New Hampshire would change the story line. But, he said, he was not certain what would happen.

"I'm not sure there's any magic here," Mr. Maslin said. "All us smart people here can say is, Do this, or do that. It's all overrated. It all comes down to him."

Michael Janofsky contributed from Washington for this article.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company



To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (25645)1/22/2004 7:32:00 AM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793765
 
I will mentally file some of this under "Things I didn't know about Israel."

Volkh:[David Bernstein, 1/21/2004 09:09:59 PM]
Emigration from Israel: Easily missed in this story haaretzdaily.com about emigration from Israel is that most of the 68,000 immigrants from the former Soviet Union who have since left Israel were individuals not registered as Jews. This means that they were not Jewish according to Jewish law, which requires Jewish matrilineal descent. Israeli authorities will not register an individual as a Jew unless the Orthodox rabbinate OKs it based on the rabbinate's understanding of Jewish law.

The emigration of so many "non-Jewish" immigrants is not surprising. Many of these individuals have Jewish ancestors, often on the father's side (which was considered more relevant in Soviet society), and consider themselves to be Jews. Yet, for example, they cannot get married to a Jew in Israel because the Orthodox rabbinate controls marriage, nor can they get buried in a Jewish cemetery.

Formal conversion would be an option, but from everything I've read, the Orthodox rabbinate in Israel has intentionally made it very difficult for individuals who seek to do so to formally convert. I attribute this to (1) traditional Jewish reluctance to seek or encourage converts; (2) ethnocentrism, which is very prevalent among the ultra-Orthodox (and, to a lesser extent, Israelis more generally), though completely against Jewish law and tradition; and (3) a belief that most "Russian" converts will vote for non-Orthodox parties, reducing Orthodox political strength. I think the last explanation is the strongest, because the Orthodox establishment has been noticeably lax about approving the (dubious in a variety of ways) Jewish bona fides of Ethiopian immigrants who are much more likely to sympathize with the Orthodox view of matters such as separation of religion and state.

It would be easy enough of the rabbinate to be lenient with potential "Russian" converts. After all, the "Russian" immigrants will all be fulfilling the great mitzvah (commandment) of living in the land of Israel, they have thrown in their lot with the Jewish people, and, simply by virtue of living in Israel, they will be more observant of Jewish law than most Jews in the rest of the world, eating mainly or solely kosher food, observing Jewish holidays, not working on Shabbat, etc.

Besides, the whole matrilineal descent standard is (and here I'm going to offend some of our observant Jewish readers) a crock that should be abolished. While the Orthodox like to pretend that all of Jewish law was given to Moses at Sinai, it's obvious that matrilineal descent is a relatively recent innovation, as a quick reading of the Bible makes it clear that the norm in biblical times amongst the children of Israel was a patrilineal descent standard. Why the change occurred is not 100% clear, but is likely a result of the traumas of exile, when many Jewish women were raped, and a patrilineal descent rule would have been a disaster. To the extent the "we always know who the mother is" rule could still carry weight, modern DNA testing allows us to know who the father is, too. There is no reason to keep the matrilineal descent rule except that it's existed for almost 2,000 years; given that the patrilineal descent rule existed for almost as long, why not just call it a tossup and allow either matrilineal or patrilineal descent, combined with a demonstrated practical link to the Jewish people, to determine Jewishness? (The Reform and Reconstructionist movements in the U.S. have already done this; the Conservative movement hasn't, for fear of losing its "halachic" (Jewish law) bona fides. But if the Conservatives can't bring themselves to abolish a rule as tenuous and dumb as matrilineal descent, than the movement is basically useless as a modern, liberal halachic movement anyway). volokh.com