Richardson is Finally Stepping Up

As you may know from this blog, I was once a supporter of Howard Dean for President. And while they are very different, I sensed some of the same qualities in Bill Richardson. Enough so to make me support his campaign.

Around May of 2003, Howard Dean changed. Up to that point, he had been a reserved, yet consistent critic of the Bush administration and his "enablers" in the Democratic Party. At a rally during the spring of '03, Dean became visibly aggressive. The "angry liberal" the press loved and conservatives despised, emerged that day. His campaign skyrocketed. It was a critical moment in U.S. political history. Today, Bill Richardson had what could be his moment.

At the "Take Back America" conference, Bill Richardson "laid in" to his Democratic opponents for their political calculation and pandering. He made a zero residual troops pledge for Iraq, something he's been saying for months, but which noone seemed to hear. The only other "serious" candidate saying similar things has been John Edwards (he's my second choice). Gov. Richardson even called Edwards to the carpet over his support of the "legislation" congress passed last month.

I had hairs standing up on the back of my neck after hearing the Governor's empassioned statements. For the first time in four years, I felt like I had picked the right guy. Only time will tell if I'm right.

What is up with John Edwards?

This is not the same guy who ran in 2004. I'm not sure what to make of it. I'm glad you admit that you were wrong, but color me skeptical. You railed against Howard Dean in 2004 and now are trying to court the same voters. That's one heck of a conversion. Be genuine. You either have bad judgement, or you are a con man, which worked well for Bill Clinton, but if you think we want to go through that again, you're crazy.

Oh, and sorry about your wife.

9/11 Investigation and Gay Marriage...Again

First things first...

Get over 9/11! I'm speaking to my fellow Democrats, liberals, ABB people, and radical moderates. You know who is responsible for 9/11? Radical right-wing Muslims with nothing better to do on a weekday. Was the Bush administration at fault? Probably,...but so were the previous 42 administrations.

We Americans, with our Jesus-lovin', money-makin', mold-the-world-in-our-image attitudes have been taunting would-be terrorists for centuries. Until recently, terrorist attacks were primarily regional activities, much like civil war or revolution. Europe is still fairly unfamiliar with foreign-based terror. The recent attacks in Spain are a rare exception, but of all Western civilizations, their religious zeal and contempt for Islam is second only to our own.

Stop pointing fingers at George Bush and company with regards to 9/11. They were simply continuing policies laid out for decades previous to their arrival. It is hard to imagine that such an attack could have been accurately predicted or avoided. Instead, focus on the Bush administrations post-9/11 actions. They successfully alienated a unified world, failed to capture Bin Laden, and led an unjustifiable invasion of Iraq for political gain. Bravo!

Now onto the familiar topic of gay marriage...

Liberals Unite! (but not right now)

Two important things are happening this year: The destruction of the Bush administration and the election of a Democratic President.

The first event must precede the second, but in order to do that, we need as many people/organizations going after G.W. as possible. So before you send your hard-earned money to John Kerry or the DNC, consider other organizations like Democracy for America or MoveOn.org. Do a google search and find a group of people who most closely follow your political philosophy and give donations to them. Republicans and conservatives have been doing this for decades, and we are just now playing catch up.

Consider the effect on the average undecided voter watching multiple television ads sponsored by different groups as opposed to the effect of one group or person sending a barrage of political messages to that individual's TV screen. I believe we will be more effective on the whole with this method. Continue to give to the candidate and the party, but reserve your more substantial contributions for your favorite groups. You will be much happier with your investment in the long run.

As a side note, I work for neither "Democracy for America" or "MoveOn.org" in any official capacity, although I do support both whole-heartedly.

Cheer Up Kerry! Why the Long Face?

Even though I once considered myself a John-Kerry-sorta-guy, I became a true believer in the kind of change that was the emblem of the Howard Dean campaign. Between media driven "Kerry frenzy" and less-than-polished performances by Dean himself, Sen. Kerry looks poised (at least at the current moment) to take the Democratic nomination. But before Theresa breaks out the Dom Perignon a word of warning: regardless of the nominee, beating George Bush will be exceedingly difficult. Here are some reasons...

1. Economic Growth--Even though "W" had very little to do with it, the business cycle favors him in a big way.


2. Money--Howard Dean gave us some hope in this area, but John Kerry can only mortgage his assets so many times. George Bush has and will continue to have an advantage in this area.


3. Iraq--Yet another achilles heel for John Kerry. The vote for authorization (for the Iraq invasion) was created for political cover. It looks like Bush might get one more chance to use it. Howard Dean has a different, less popular opinion, but at least it is different.


4. The Gore-Dukakis Combo--Howard Dean is a McGovern-Clinton type candidate: passionate, progressive, and innovative. John Kerry is boring, aloof, and liberal.

The nomination is not wrapped up as far as delegate counts, but that is little comfort. The media, not the average American, will decide who is newsworthy and electable. Our only hope as Democrats (should Kerry prevail) is that when the media is done flirting with the Senator they will not go back to loving Mr. Bush. After all, they had a love affair with Gov. Dean just a few weeks ago. Happy Valentines Day!

The Stars and Bars

Howard Dean is a man that shoots from the hip. He also tends to get shot in the ass. Let's clear up this whole "confederate flags on pickup trucks" issue.

First of all, they exist. I've seen them. In Kentucky, in Alabama, in Georgia, and in every southern state I've been to. Secondly, not all people who venerate the "stars and bars" are racists--no matter what Al Sharpton thinks. Thirdly, Howard Dean is dead on the money (even if he openned an old wound with his comments).

We need voters. These guys and gals are voters. We Dean supporters in the South are not going to concede a single vote in this election. Howard knows that, and that is why he said what he said. He is convinced, and he may be right, that social conservatives in the south have been voting with Republicans because they have been told it's in their best interest when it is obviously not.

Your kids are going to be taught about sex in school...Blacks and Hispanics will take your jobs...Abortion on demand will be the law...They're coming for your guns...The military will suffer...Your taxes will go up...We'll lose our sovereignty as a nation...They hate God...Gay marriage will destroy society...Government will just get bigger and more intrusive...

...All because you vote for a Democrat!

Howard Dean has hit on a nerve. Sure he's gonna hurt some feelings. Black people hate the Confederate flag because it represents the South's defense of slavery. Southerners hate being called out on an issue that is so close to their hearts--especially by a Yankee. But to ignore the issue and pretend it will go away is more irresponsible than taking a little political flak. It was Dean's willingness to concede the issue to his critics that got me upset, but certainly not enough to quit supporting him.

On a related note, John Edwards needs to spend more time in the South if he thinks that this statement offends a majority of Southerners. To borrow his attitude: "We don't need people like John Edwards telling the rest of the world what we Southerners think. Who died and made you President of the Southeast?" Bite me, John!

Kucinich's Blues

Representative Dennis Kucinich is feeling a little slighted, and he may have a good reason. Howard Dean is airing an ad in New Hampshire that, among other things, criticizes his Democratic opponents' support for the Iraq resolution in 2002. Kucinich feels that it is an unfair characterization of his position. So?

Half of New Hampshire doesn't know who the hell you are anyway. You haven't made any headway in the polls because of your all-or-none attitude about every issue. You haven't got the chance of a two-legged cat in a dog pound to get the Democratic nomination for President. AND you look funny (cheap shot), and your name sounds like something coming out of the mouth of somebody sneezing.

I wouldn't doubt that the person who wrote the ad (improvised?) forgot you were still running! These three "special" candidates have raised less money than Jenna Bush, and they have fewer supporters combined than people who saw "Gigli." Perhaps they should reconsider their "professional" goals. I happen to think all three of them have great ideas. I would even consider supporting Carol Mosley-Braun if I thought she had a real chance at beating George Bush, but it is past time for these well-meaning individuals to exit gracefully.

Why Are You Still Here?

Not YOU!

Can somebody tell me why we still have 10 presidential candidates for the Democratic nomination? I have to say I love all of these guys, but they're really "stopping up" the debates and the press coverage.

Carol, we love you, but do us a favor and leave! It looks like the "men's only" sign might just have to stay on the White House for another four years. Nice try, though.

Dennis, we...well, we..., please go away! Your great mind and liberal fervor would be wasted in the White House. Stay where you are or run for a Senate seat. That could be good fun!?!

Al, Al, Al, Al. Mind if I call you Al? You are a spark, a ray of light in an otherwise "dark" field of candidates (if you'll excuse the irony). Perhaps you could be a speech writer for the eventual Democratic candidate. We can't afford to lose you altogether, but I'm afraid you're taking up too much time.

Bob, I don't think there's anything wrong with a VP candidacy. Maybe you don't either, but there you are. Every time I turn on the television, there you are. As one of the most likeable politicians in the country, you have managed to acheive one of the lowest likeability ratings in the group. Whether or not you have any money, you should bow out gracefully before you make a fool of yourself and ruin it for this ticket: Dean/Graham 2004!

Just think. If these four got out now, the remaining "debates" could potentially give up to 16 or 17 minutes of speaking time per candidate. Maybe we could move beyond one minute answers. After all, liberals and left-leaning moderates (and Joe) need more time to explain themselves than G.W. does. We normally don't see the world in black-and-white like he does. We can rarely give a "yes" or "no" answer to any question, yet with the field of candidates at 10, we have very little choice. For those of you who support one of these four candidates, it may be time for a little reality check. There are two things you can't survive a political contest without in this country: Money and voters. These four have little of either. They all have contributed so much to the process and have brought many issues to the forefront that might otherwise have been ignored, but I'm afraid it's time to say "goodbye."

Don't you even think about it, Hillary!

Visitor # 2000

As of today, my site has logged 2000 visits in just a little over three months in existence. That is roughly 10 times the number of visits my previous (now defunct) site received in 2 years. Big kudos to the Dean campaign for allowing an "angry white man" a link on their blog page, and big thanks to those of you who tune in day after day to see what I might have to say. It has been a wonderful outlet for me, and I hope to continue this effort into the indefinite future. Please feel free to e-mail me with questions, comments, or topic ideas. I really enjoy reading them, and I almost always answer--just ask some of the visitors.

So again, I ask you to log on, visit often, and most importantly, get off your ass and VOTE in every election! I want my country back!

The New York (Economic) Debate

Wow, what a show! I thought Dean was going to blow a gasket, and who could blame him. Almost every candidate on the stage was gunning for him. This should prove once and for all the formidable frontrunner that Dean has become. Now, I give you the traditional rundown of the debate.

10. Gen. Wesley Clark--Why didn't you just send a taped statement to the effect: "I'm not sure what I believe in or stand for, but I'll get back with you in a few weeks." We could have saved 6 minutes for more delicious Gephardt/Dean banter. Welcome to the "party!"

9. Dick Gephardt--For sinking to the lowest level yet. Howard Dean is not a "Gingrich" Republican, although the comparison could help him with the inaccurate "liberal" label.

8. Joe Lieberman--We just can't get enough of that Jewish wit and charm combined with a no-holds barred New England attitude...Oops, sorry I was watching a Woody Allen film just before the debate, my mistake.

7. John Kerry--For someone who WAS a frontrunner, your not acting very comfortable on stage. Perhaps you need a viagra?

6. Dennis Kucinich--I admire your moxie, but when are you going to start running for President instead of Wisconsin Governor?

5. Carol Moseley Braun--Easily the most classy person ever to run for President. You need a lot more passion and intensity if you want to get anywhere in this race.

4. Al Sharpton--I think they forgot you a couple of times, but that's nothing new. Your shifty, but your awfully funny.

3. Bob Graham--The most improved performance of the debate series. I saw passion and potential. Your setting yourself up as a terrific VP candidate should you lose the nomination.

2. Howard Dean--Aside from a few brief flashes, you controlled yourself very well in the face of attack. The way you deflected policy "flip-flops" was ingenious and unassailable. This is why we love you.

1. John Edwards--For reminding us to keep our eyes on the prize. You are positioning yourself as a potentially dangerous challenge for the other nine candidates. Thanks for not boring us with the whole "my father worked in a mill" spiel, by the way.