Dean’s Dim Team

[rexbo 104]

Dean’s Dim Team

These guys might be in charge of our foreign policy?

DEAN'S TEAM

Benjamin R. Barber is the Kekst Professor of Civil Society at the University of Maryland, author of Jihad Vs. McWorld, and an informal adviser to former President Bill Clinton.

Barber's extensive public commentary also bristles with comments that will probably strike voters as unusual. He insists that "the global spread of markets and democracy is a principal, aggravating cause of group hatred and ethnic violence throughout the non-Western world." He contends that "democracy always fails when it is imposed from the outside." (Ahem, Japan, Germany, and South Korea.)

"When the president first announced after 9/11 that he intended to hold responsible any states that harbored terrorists, I was deeply worried," Barber said in a speech to the Carnegie Council. "The notion that you can hold responsible for terrorist acts states that may harbor them is in its simplest form a category mistake."

***

Morton H. Halperin is the very definition of a Democratic-party foreign-policy veteran. He quit his job on the National Security Council staff to protest the 1970 U.S. invasion of Cambodia, and spent the following decades criticizing the Vietnam War, advocating deep cuts in nuclear weapons and opposing covert military operations abroad.

Also during his confirmation hearing, Halperin denied ever suggesting that he supported giving the U.N. control over U.S. military assets. But Sen. John McCain quickly found a Halperin article from the summer 1993 edition of Foreign Policy: "The United States should explicitly surrender the right to intervene unilaterally in the internal affairs of other countries by overt military means or by covert operations. Such self-restraint would bar interventions like those in Grenada and Panama, unless the United States first gained the explicit consent of the international community acting through the Security Council or a regional organization."

After a lengthy and nasty series of confirmation hearings, Halperin withdrew his nomination.

[Tiger Al 0]

Everyone is beginning to fear the Dean!!! Come on November!!!

[rexbo 104]

Everyone is beginning to fear the Dean!!! Come on November!!!

You actually want these nut cases running our foreign policy?????

If you get your way, the strong, free, democratic supporting American we all know and love will be gone. France, Germany, Russia and their dictator loving foreign ministers will have their way with the World; a black cloud of Islamic terrorists will run free while their leaders enslave the Middle East; all hope for billions to live in freedom and democracy squashed by the UN.

[Tigermike 3,057]

Everyone is beginning to fear the Dean!!! Come on November!!!

You actually want these nut cases running our foreign policy?????

If you get your way, the strong, free, democratic supporting American we all know and love will be gone. France, Germany, Russia and their dictator loving foreign ministers will have their way with the World; a black cloud of Islamic terrorists will run free while their leaders enslave the Middle East; all hope for billions to live in freedom and democracy squashed by the UN.

But that will be all right because, they hate Bush!

[Tiger Al 0]

I can SMELL the fear!!! I also can't wait for the presidential debates. Dean, or whoever, is going to annihilate Dubya!!! That is, if he's man enough to engage in a debate!!! Rove may not let because he won't be able to use a teleprompter and might actually have to answer a REAL question. Hee hee hee!!!

[rexbo 104]

I can SMELL the fear!!! I also can't wait for the presidential debates. Dean, or whoever, is going to annihilate Dubya!!! That is, if he's man enough to engage in a debate!!! Rove may not let because he won't be able to use a teleprompter and might actually have to answer a REAL question. Hee hee hee!!!

All Bush has to keep repeating in the debates is that he did not and will not EVER ask the UN for permission to do anything. Real patriotic, freedom-loving Amercians would never vote for someone that believes we need permission from the UN to defend ourselves.

If the majority of Americans will vote for a man who believes the USA needs to ask the UN for permission for anything, than we might as well start negotiating with France and Germany to join the EU, and let them become caretakers of the former United States of America...

[Tiger Al 0]

I can SMELL the fear!!! I also can't wait for the presidential debates. Dean, or whoever, is going to annihilate Dubya!!! That is, if he's man enough to engage in a debate!!! Rove may not let because he won't be able to use a teleprompter and might actually have to answer a REAL question. Hee hee hee!!!

All Bush has to keep repeating in the debates is that he did not and will not EVER ask the UN for permission to do anything. Real patriotic, freedom-loving Amercians would never vote for someone that believes we need permission from the UN to defend ourselves.

If the majority of Americans will vote for a man who believes the USA needs to ask the UN for permission for anything, than we might as well start negotiating with France and Germany to join the EU, and let them become caretakers of the former United States of America...

And if America had ever been under attack from Iraq I'd be right there with you. But, that turned out not to be the case.

[rexbo 104]

And if America had ever been under attack from Iraq I'd be right there with you. But, that turned out not to be the case.

I call timeout, this from the guy that said he would have supported a pre-emptive attack on Afghanistan and Osama before 9-11??? We were not under attack by the Taliban before 9-11, and the UN would have NEVER given us permission to do something about them BEFORE 9-11.

Also, Dean would NEVER had done anything about the Taliban before 9-11, and would have waited for their permission after 9-11 (if he even did anything). That is the point, and the scariest thing about the man.

[Tiger Al 0]

And if America had ever been under attack from Iraq I'd be right there with you. But, that turned out not to be the case.

I call timeout, this from the guy that said he would have supported a pre-emptive attack on Afghanistan and Osama before 9-11??? We were not under attack by the Taliban before 9-11, and the UN would have NEVER given us permission to do something about them BEFORE 9-11.

Also, Dean would NEVER had done anything about the Taliban before 9-11, and would have waited for their permission after 9-11 (if he even did anything). That is the point, and the scariest thing about the man.

We had determined that al Qaeda was responsible for the attack on the USS Cole and others. It would've been a hard sell but if the evidence was there it should then be done. It took 9/11 for Bush to take action against the Taliban. He wasn't launching attacks right out of the gate. Before 9/11, sending ground troops into Afghanistan wouldn't have been popular for Clinton or Bush and would've been done only after much debate. Debate wasn't necessary after 9/11.

[CarolinaTiger 0]

why do you think 'W' will fail miserably in a debate?

didn't he more than hold his own vs. Gore the intellectual policy wonk?

**the answer is yes**

for someone as dumb as "W"... he's managed to defeat an incumbent governor (very shrewd, IMO) ann richards and a very much acclaimed wonk who had the advantage of being an incumbent of sorts who had been given a great economy ya da ya da ya da.

keep underestimating him...i think he likes that.

ct

[Tiger Al 0]

why do you think 'W' will fail miserably in a debate?

didn't he more than hold his own vs. Gore the intellectual policy wonk?

**the answer is yes**

for someone as dumb as "W"... he's managed to defeat an incumbent governor (very shrewd, IMO) ann richards and a very much acclaimed wonk who had the advantage of being an incumbent of sorts who had been given a great economy ya da ya da ya da.

keep underestimating him...i think he likes that.

ct

It wasn't the debates that did Gore in so much as it was his lack of fire especially against media attacks and lies, i.e. internet invention, love story, etc. He was made out to be dishonest and never really responded. Plus, he comes across as rather stoic and Bush came across as a regular dude.

Why do I think Dean, or whoever, will eat him up in a debate? Just like I said, he will have to defend much of what's happened during his administration (Patriot, Iraq, Medicare, Secrecy, Tax cuts to boost employment, on and on) and he won't have a pre-planned speech to read from and he'll have to answer more probing questions than the media has been willing or able to ask.

Underestimating Dubya isn't the danger. As you said, he likes it because he doesn't know any better. Karl Rove is the one you don't want to underestimate.

[DKW 86 7,447]

why do you think 'W' will fail miserably in a debate?

didn't he more than hold his own vs. Gore the intellectual policy wonk?

**the answer is yes**

for someone as dumb as "W"... he's managed to defeat an incumbent governor (very shrewd, IMO) ann richards and a very much acclaimed wonk who had the advantage of being an incumbent of sorts who had been given a great economy ya da  ya da ya da.

keep underestimating him...i think he likes that.

ct

It wasn't the debates that did Gore in so much as it was his lack of fire especially against media attacks and lies, i.e. internet invention, love story, etc. He was made out to be dishonest and never really responded. Plus, he comes across as rather stoic and Bush came across as a regular dude.

Why do I think Dean, or whoever, will eat him up in a debate? Just like I said, he will have to defend much of what's happened during his administration (Patriot, Iraq, Medicare, Secrecy, Tax cuts to boost employment, on and on) and he won't have a pre-planned speech to read from and he'll have to answer more probing questions than the media has been willing or able to ask.

Underestimating Dubya isn't the danger. As you said, he likes it because he doesn't know any better. Karl Rove is the one you don't want to underestimate.

TA, you are too smart for this.

Gore was supposed to chew up and spit out Bush. He went 0-2-1 in three debates. It killed him because the Dems kind of lost faith in the guy that couldnt take on Bush and win.

As for the "lies" about Gore's record. Gore's record was bad enough. The flip flop on abortion, The flip flop on Tobacco, The dead sister story, The Internet claim, Slum Lord AlGore did himself and a percieved good economy into a loss. His aides had memo after memo on his exaggerations of his record.

Changing the campaign managers in midstream was not good idea either. Showed he could not even run a campaign on his own.

[CarolinaTiger 0]

i agree...anyone paying even the least bit of attention knew that the experts expected gore to cream W in the debates...i remember being afraid for bush.

yet, it didn't happen that way.

as for bush having to defend himself on the points you cite, i think he'll be fine there.

do you really want to include the economy/jobs in your laundry list of 'bush failures'? by debate time, W is gonna be able to say, "we've finally corrected the economy from the disasterous recession left us by the previous administration"...

[MDM4AU 336]

Everyone is beginning to fear the Dean!!! Come on November!!!

I think the fear is from the dims..uh, Dems. You know, the massive posts of negative articles regardless of how credible the source may or may not be, "Bush Knew" everytime their mouths open, everything from a republican is a "lie" over and over, the in-fighting in the party, the wild claims that Saddams capture was set up for the media through negotiations with, of all people, THE KURDS? (Are yo nuts?)