I'd rather have Lieberman than Dean

Their economic policies are the same - GOP Lite. At least Lieberman has a chance in hell of beating Bush, which Dean doesn't. Dean has no constituency, outside of his e-mail list. Dean has no institutional support in the Democratic party - no AFL-CIO, no NAACP, no NOW or Emily's List - nothing but an email list of mostly upper middle class white liberals who like hearing anti-war speeches. Dean gives us pretty anti-war rhetoric he knows perfectly well he'll never be able to back up.

Dean's big shot on the national stage was fronting for NAFTA and corporate trade agreements - the DLC agenda - and now he attacks the DLC, but still supports all of their policies. Now his supporters are desparately trying to distance Dean from his pro-corporate record, but Dean gives them little to go on - just the same tired speech that's been posted a million times, where Dean evades the questions and avoids proposing anything that might hurt his chances to get corporate campaign donations.

But why do Dean supporters put up with it? Aside from the salary, I mean?

Your decision to compare Lieberman to Dean, two of the greatest sources of contention here on DU makes your intent crystal clear

Joe Lieberman is by far the better man, and by far the more electable Democrat.

In what ways can you show that he could get more votes than any of the other canidates. If current polls are any trend he is losing ground.



Also in response to the original post, why is opposing war a bad thing. Using your logic the 1968 democratic canidate should have been the most socialist one not the ones that opposed Vietnam. Iraq is just as big a mistake as Vietnam and that is important to many many people.

Dean can say a lot of things because he'll face no consequences.

Whereas Kerry has EVERYTHING to lose.

Thus Kerry is going to be timid and meak and try not to offend anyone.

Howard Dean is free to speak the truth. Howard Dean is free to go down in flames. Howard Dean is free to take risks that would make John Kerry piss his pants.

Howard Dean in 2004.

That's it...THANK YOU!

even if we disagree. Heck I haven't decided on a candidate.

Just wish folks would stop defaming supporters of other candidates (re: supporters MUST BE PAID OPERATIVES).

Grow up folks, if we are going to win - at somepoint we have to work together.

.

.

I won't support Dean either.

your the Gephardt man.. I forgot you are the one that attacks everyone.

Sorry. ;-) had something to do with your style.

You know, Dean, Kerry, Lieberman ...

Dick's been rolling over and biting the pillow for the Bush Criminal Empire for the entire length of the Fraudministration. 2002, aside from whatever electro-fraud may or may not have occurred, was because Gephardt and the other so called "Democratic leadership" had absolutely zero public opposition to the BCE agenda. I find your ranking of Gephardt alongside Kucinich, Sharpton, and Mosely Braun to be most puzzling. A Repuke lite sellout among the true liberals.

Guess he does have one thing in common with them though - No chance in Hell of winning the Presidential election.

to try and debate your points.....they have been said before. Great you want Lieberman.....So what.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

oh! sorry it just exploded!!! I think you would vote for bush* over ANY candidate? I could be wrong?...but that planet exploding was THEIR armageddon!

I am not usually this militant but that statement is so very STUPID as to be completely usless! :grr: :grr: :grr:

Better Dean or anyone else for that matter than Lieberman/Israel/PNAC/War, etc., or Bush/Israel/PNAC/War, etc.:evilfrown:

.

I'll vote for a Democratic candidate that supports Democracy, like Kucinich or Gephardt, as opposed to the DLC/GOP Lite candidates like Dean, Kerry, and Lieberman.

Thanks anyway for your thoughtful response.

you are totally entitled to your opinion...
but frankly I've given plenty of money to the Dean campaign and been paid exactly none. So quit with the stupid accusations.

I'm at $1,000 now. I'll add more at the next quarter....

I've recruited about 50 followers too!!!!!


Dean 2004


:bounce:

Hmmm, maybe my point about upper middle class white people was spot on.

...
He did spend time with the attendees afterward and answered the questions I offered up. Dean drew a diverse crowd of all ages, races, shapes and sizes. As I said before, if I were one of the eight other dwarfs, I would be scared. (Ok, so only 3 or 4 of the others are serious contenders, but maybe not for long)
http://www.ninedwarfs.com/index.cfm?data=20030725

to get involved with whomever they support...and yet, this is the only kind of post I seem to find here :eyes:

Joe is a GOP ideology free trader whose only sop to labor was re-education programs (which is now worthless since we are sending out the jobs they retrained for now). Dean has said he wouldn't sign any new trade agreements without labor guarantees which is a major shift away from the Clinton years.

Has Dean ever spelled out exactly what those "labor guarantees" guarantee?

I think Al Gore started making noises like that in 2k but I don't think Clinton ever said anything accept "trade creates jobs"

As a non-Dean person, I find his constituency to be made up of people who talk down to you if you can't "see the light" about Dean, who are thin-skinned if you bring up anything about his record, and who condescend to you if you mention other candidates. There are others, of course, but those three groups just seem so dominant among Dean followers.

Dean's got people in a very narrow band fired up. Unfortunately, they're in a band between liberals who reject his rhetoric by choosing to evaluate him on his politics, and the DLC-style centrists who slice and dice focus groups - but who get endorsements.

I think Dean is less electable than Kucinich, and certainly less than Kerry. I don't know about Lieberman, but at least Lieberman is more in synch with his politics and not trying to pass himself off.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

Alan Colmes with way-left policy issues.

Thank you for your noncontribution to the discussion.

All you've ever done is smear Dennis Kucinich, never using any facts, only broad-brush smears.

Your fear of real policies that will benefit real people betrays your tight grip on your own precious entitlements.

Your opinion of Dennis Kucinich is worthless, and made moreso by every unsupportable blast you take at him, your tireless efforts to assassinate his character settling around your credibility like an albatross.

A simple search of the forums on Kucinich and ThorsteinVeblen brings up your faulty logic, disregard for polite policy discussion, and disdain of one particular candidate over and over again.

You demonstrate neither a capacity to understand and fight for strong Democratic principles, nor a willingness to get behind the eventual candidate, because you're too busy having fun assassinating the character of one particular candidate.

You're ultimately doing their work for them, but hey, maybe you already knew that.

People who care about retaking the White House and working together to get the best candidate elected should ignore you and your baiting, taunting, puerile ways.

"A simple search of the forums on Kucinich and ThorsteinVeblen brings up your faulty logic"

I started one thread that questioned Kucinichs' viability as a presidential candidate that contained posts like "I respectfully disagree" and you accuse me of baiting and taunting?

If Kucinich people really want the nomination, they had better grow thicker skins and quickly. Or maybe they would rather be fitted in pink tutus that compliment the ones Kerry supporters are wearing.

Kucinich can't fundraise.
Kerry has to go to DLC big corporations for his funds
Dean out raised both of them in Q2 and is the only candidate *gaining* support.


Dean Raises $7.5 Million in Second Quarter
In the second quarter ending yesterday, 59,000 Americans donated an average of $112 to help boost Governor Howard Dean to the top of the second quarter fundraisers with a total of $7.5 million raised.

Unlike the small, exclusive multi-million dollar fundraisers held in major cities by President Bush over the last week, the Dean campaign saw its numbers surge based on small donations over the Internet—with nearly $3 million raised online in the last week alone. In the second quarter, 45,030 people donated online a total of 51,474 times. The average donation online was $74.14.

“When we said last week during the governor’s announcement that ‘You have the power,’ we had no idea just how much power our supporters had,” said Campaign Manager Joe Trippi. “They are people participating directly in their democracy, and doing whatever they can to help us take our country back—giving $20, $30, or $50. This is People-Powered Howard.”

Second quarter fundraising by the numbers:

Total raised in second quarter: $7,500,000 Total donors (2003 to date): 70,000
Average contribution: $112

First time donors in second quarter: 48,000

Levels of Internet Giving:
Less than $50: 18,422
$50 -- 99: 11,579
$100 -- $249: 11,436
$250 -- $499: 2,379
$500 -- $1,000: 368
$1,000 and up: 129
http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/000584.html

And why should everyone be forced to work in manufacturing jobs?

Those jobs are gone. What does protectionism give us?

I've never heard those questions answered.

Personally I have concerns about the environmental aspects of free trade agreements. But I am not anti-free trade to the extent most DUers are.

Also, I hate to break it to you, but if you want a Democrat to run on a Socialist/Marxist platform, you aren't going to be satisfied.

Gov. Howard Dean's answers to the AFL-CIO candidate questionnaire
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=113600&mesg_id=113600

Gov. Dean's position on free trade (pro-fair trade)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=46131&mesg_id=46131&page=

I will vote for the Dem that is on the final ballot no matter who they are.

I think if either are on the top of the ticket, Bush will probably win decisively.

It's because Dean IS DLC, but has stolen the anti-DLC movement, with some not-even-that-slick rhetoric. Dean supports EVERY economic policy that the DLC has proposed over the last few years. Any hope I had for an anti-DLC movement within the Democratic party, like Kucinich, or even my least favorite but probably more electable Gephardt, is ruined, because the upper middle class white liberals decided that nice pretty anti-war speeches were more important than keeping Americans economically secure.

Then again, that's exactly what the Green party and the socialists and radicals have always said about the Democratic party - it's just another front for corporations, like the Republicans, but socially liberal. I never wanted to believe them, but after seeing the "amazing" Dean campaign, I'm starting to think they were right.

Then there is the issue of Dean's supporters negative personal attacks against the other candidates, and their screaming of "bashing" whenever Dean gets the same treatment.

As I said in my most hated thread, Dean is the Ralph Nader of the upper middle class white liberals - they are willing to throw the entire election away for empty rhetoric. Just like Nader could never win, Dean has barely a chance, and couldn't live up to his anti-war promises anyway.

Period.

nor are Americans interested in allowing US corporations to offshore jobs, which Dean refuses to come out against.

that prove otherwise.


Dean supports making corporations that move off show maintain labor and environmental and safety standards as they would have to in the US.

Dean supports allowing corporations that move offshore, to be unionized.

Dean supports closing the offshore tax dodge loophole that lets corporations move their tax HQ to a mailbox in the islands to avoid taxes.

Dean supports classifying corporations that move their HQ offshore as foreign corporations that can not get government defense contracts.



The reason these jobs move offshore is that is it more profitable to do so... remove the profit from doing so and those jobs stay here.

"Dean supports making corporations that move off show maintain labor and environmental and safety standards as they would have to in the US."

So did Clinton, when the passed NAFTA - rhetoric good, action none. This is the DLC position.

"Dean supports allowing corporations that move offshore, to be unionized."

So does Lieberman, doesn't he?

"Dean supports closing the offshore tax dodge loophole that lets corporations move their tax HQ to a mailbox in the islands to avoid taxes. Dean supports classifying corporations that move their HQ offshore as foreign corporations that can not get government defense contracts."

So do a good many Republicans, and this is called for on freerepublic.com on a regular basis.

Dean supports offshoring jobs, and he is not supporting and international minimum wage, like Gephardt is. Also, Dean is on record as supporting and working for the corporate trade agreements, pardon me if his rhetoric rings a bit hollow to people like me who have heard it a thousand times before.

Gov. Howard Dean's answers to the AFL-CIO candidate questionnaire
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=113600&mesg_id=113600

Massive information dump on Gov. Howard Dean
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=43435&mesg_id=43435&page=

Dean says NAFTA is a good thing. Your sources prove my point. Dean proves my point, both his actions (as a NAFTA cheerleader as Governor) and his rhetoric (supporting free trade, calling it "fair" and promising the same thing the DLC has promised for 10 years)

are New Deal Democrats. They just haven't had anyone with the balls to remind them. And that is what Kucinich is - a New Deal style Democrat - and you can hawk for the DLC all you want, Kucinich is the only Democrat running who sounds like a Democrat.

Care to prove the statement about most Americans being New Deal Democrats?

If being a New Deal Democrat means being for Social Security, Medicare, and the social safety net than I'm a New Deal Democrat.

If it means being a socialist in drag than I'm not a New Deal Democrat and neither was Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

In his seminal work on The New Deal, Arthur Schlessinger convincingly argued that the New Deal was essentially a conservative program in that it conserved capitalism by ridding it of it's excesses.

unlike Kucinich, Kerry, Gephardt, Lieberman or Edwards.

Are you suggesting that Dean has anything to lose by his anti-war speeches? When he loses the primary, or God forbid the general election, he moves back to his Vermont mansion and his millions.

This shows courage how?

of that group.

I do not see the need to purify the party by fire.

I believe Stalin did that every few years - but then that is not the party that I associate myself with.

I'm neither upper middle class nor liberal. I'm from the working class, and my family has worked hard to make it into the mid- to lower middle class. The older I get, the more socialism sounds good to me (democratic socialism, not whatever it was the Soviet Union was doing).

However, I am a Dean supporter and organizer. The people I am finding interested in Dean also do not fit into your category. There are a couple Greens, a few peace activists, quite a few in their thirties with families struggling to make ends meet (none from the upper middle class that I can see), disgruntled Democrats, Democratic faithful... That's just locally. When I went to a Baltmore Meetup, I saw gays, blacks, students, young professionals, retirees...There was a diversity, in other words, of class and age, and, fortunately, there are more African Americans and Hispanics joining as well.

that Gephardt decided he needed to undercut the other Democrats who were working on a different resolution regarding Iraq and then stand shoulder to shoulder with shrub in the Rose Garden to trumpet that betrayal. It's not Dean's fault that Gephardt is missing votes on issues that he's supposed to be championing in his quixotic quest for the presidency. It's not Dean's fault that Nancy Pelosi was able to assemble a majority of the Democratic caucus to vote against Shrub's "wag the dog" misadventure while he was busy undercutting them to make himself look nice and moderate for his presidential bid.
Anyone who says Dean is portraying himself as a "liberal" when isn't is totally missing the point of his appeal...people are willing to compromise on some of their ideals in order to get someone who is willing to make a stand...something that Gephardt has demonstrated a woeful lack of ability for in recent times.

After the fact that the DLC attacked Dean as a far leftist wacko?

Dean is of the same economic mind as Clinton... and hey guess what... that's a damn sight better than what we have in there now.

You may want some socialist empire where no corporations are allowed, but this is America and corporations will always be here.

The key is simply to make it more profitable for them to do the right thing... not to make war on the backbone of our economic structure.

I didnt see his name. Did he join in the last 2 days (the last time I looked?). If not, then he isn't DLC, is it?????????

You are a piece of work!

FYI EVERYONE.....this little brainchild IS a child. 19 years old...... and nothing going on.

I'm not sure and I don't really care enough to find out. Gephardt is in the DLC and he fought NAFTA to the bone, so to say that DLC member automatically implies plutocrat-friendly is not accurate. That having been said I'd like to see the DLC dissolve, but if every DLCer goes with it then we won't have much of a party left.

Ageism is one of the biggest problems withing the Democratic Party.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

lies in their approach to foreign policy. Whereas Lieberman supported the war in Iraq Dean opposed it.

I think also that the premis of your remarks (that Lieberman had a better chance to win than Dean) is wrong. In the South many conservative Democrats didn't like the fact that Lieberman was an orthodox Jew, it was something a lot of people couldn't get behind because they assumed Lieberman would always support Israel. Dean on the other hand, is pro-gun and in the South his plain-spokenness might be more of an asset. And although his wife is Jewish - whatever his religion is doesn't seem to be a factor.

But I'd vote for Lieberman if I had to, I just don't like him very much, but I hate Bush.

and you will have your chance in the Primary. But if the Democratic Party chooses Dean to represent it in the race for the President, will you vote for him?

He's got all the charisma of a slug eating my prize marigolds.

Dean has had a 100% rating from the AFL-CIO since he was first elected as state rep of Vermont. If that makes him DLC to you, then Goddess bless him.

"Their economic policies are the same - GOP Lite."

Really, I've not seen Lieberman saying he wants to list companies that move their tax HQ off shore to avoid taxes, as foreign companies and deny them government and defense contracts. Dean has.

Dean says he will roll back the Bush tax cuts... Lieberman thinks they are just great.


"At least Lieberman has a chance in hell of beating Bush,"

LOL! Yeah and Sharpton is coming over to cook me dinner tonight.


" which Dean doesn't. Dean has no constituency, outside of his e-mail list."

Yeah that must be why he blew past the rest of the pack in donations from individuals. Dean has something like 200,000 people already signed up as volunteers through the web and meetup.

He's now polling at number 1 or tied for number 1 in the first primary states.


"Dean has no institutional support in the Democratic party - no AFL-CIO,"

He won the Wellstone award.



"no NAACP, no NOW or Emily's List - nothing but an email list of mostly upper middle class white liberals who like hearing anti-war speeches."

Why would you make a claim that is so easily proven false by going to meetup.com and looking at the pictures of meetups. There you'll find all ages and races and genders who come from a wide spectrum of political backgrounds from far left to middle right.



"Dean gives us pretty anti-war rhetoric he knows perfectly well he'll never be able to back up."

So he won't be able to get the UN into Iraq and he won't be able to stop stating wars for oil?


"Dean's big shot on the national stage was fronting for NAFTA and corporate trade agreements - the DLC agenda - and now he attacks the DLC, but still supports all of their policies."

No he doesn't... he has said many times he wants to reform NAFTA and attach labor and safety and pollution rules.


" Now his supporters are desparately trying to distance Dean from his pro-corporate record, but Dean gives them little to go on - just the same tired speech that's been posted a million times, where Dean evades the questions and avoids proposing anything that might hurt his chances to get corporate campaign donations."

So proposing to close tax loopholes, to make businesses that move over seas still adhere to the standards of labor, safety, and pollution they have to meet in the US... is doing nothing?


"But why do Dean supporters put up with it? Aside from the salary, I mean?"

Why do we put up with what... Dean bashers who make crap up?

Even if your critique of Dean is correct, which I am not sure of. As a left-winger, I would say that the fact that the Democratic party's candidate would be willing to lie to the left to win the election is a step up from Lieberman's practice of scapegoating the left.

Lieberman is no leader and would lose the election. Talk about boooooring! http://go.everwars.com/play2.x?p=74156

right? Or was it that you were a GREEN?

I am getting your flame bait mixed up....... What week is this?

**the only thing consistent in your nominee support threads is dogging Dean. Can we expect a thread next week that goes: I would vote for Bush before I would vote for Dean**

Whocounts, I remember some of the nicest posts by you, and we even shared some fun PMs about just life and that sort of thing. And I really thought you were above dirty propoganda games. I am very disappointed......

Now I am wondering.....was anything you shared even true? Are you just a little old curmudgeon dude doing your part for a candidate that you haven't even declared you support?????? Instead of WHO COUNTS THE VOTE, I ask......WHO ARE YOU?

Everytime they out themselves...just add them to IGNORE. People say...oh but we need to counter their lies. I suggest that we do not have to counter their lies. But that's only if we all work together to make their game null and void.

They are diverting attention from OUR CAUSE. It's Rovian. And it isnt going to help us.

Imagine a thread that contains ONLY a pack of lies and propoganda. It will stand out like a sore thumb and most anyone who doesn't have them on ignore (like a lurker or new visitor) will see it for it is.

But this constant engaging in these mind-numbing 'debates' actually gives some credence to their lies and disinformation. So no matter how many times you say "X is not DLC" it won't matter because the liars have diluted our message.

So, this is a call for all of us SERIOUS posters with honest intentions here to put these jokers on IGNORE. Just like I am about to do.....which will make this thread disappear for me (since the orig poster is going on my ignore list).

Thank you.

been scrolling down.

And I've noticed this for some time now.

I think the best thing is to just "ignore".

tells me all I need to know.

If Dean was for the war and some other stuff then I would maybe support Lieberman.

I really hadn't had you pegged as a counter-productive flame baiter. Hmm. Ah well, what's another disappointment at DU, eh?

Julie

Hey WhoCounts. I know you're a union man and Gephardt fan like myself, but let's take it down a notch. I respect your opinion, but I think we can do more good by focusing on Gephardt's pro-worker record and constantly re-stating why we believe candidates like Gephardt and Kucincih are best for the exploited working class in this country. Seriously, the end goal is the same get Bush and Chao out. Those two are doing all they can to burst unions and ship our jobs and the jobs of our friends at loved ones overseas to the lowest bidder.

Lieberman is a free trader to the nth degree. If President I fear most of these candidates, except Dick and Kucinich, would sign either CAFTA or FTAA. I really only however believe Lieberman would do it without batting an eye. He's backed every free trade and fast track agreement since getting elected. Dean, however, has only been a Governor and besides coming out for NAFTA. He doesn't sound as bad as some of the others. His campaign rhetoric on trade gives me hope. Plus, if he gets the nomination I know unions will do good work for the guy at the grassroots level. After that he won't forget us!

Who knows if Dean can envolve economically well I will definely like him more. Hes already on the right path for social issues, is a good fighter, but he needs to get better on economic issues then I will really like him I like him now but I still would probably prefer Kerry to him.

Lieberman puts you to sleep.

Where do you disagree with Dean on his campaigning style and/or his issues? I can't argue with mere emotions, but if you have a substantive beef, I'd be happy to address it.

Lieberman - holy roller republican sympathizer

or

Dean - a 'doctor' that voted to keep locking up medical marijuana patients


Both are pro- drug war which is anti-civil liberties.

Of course, we'd lose all 50 states, too. We can disagree with a candidate on several issues and still support them. Politically, Dean is already going to get a lot of shit down south for supporting civil unions.

They'd win.

Especially if they told the truth about the devastation that it causes.

Hmm? Or do you have merely an intuition combined with wishful thinking?

according to several polls

Besides, no rational human being, once informed, would support the war on drugs. It makes the drugs more dangerous. It certainly doesn't keep people from using drugs.

The drug war affects education because it drains necessary resources for the counter-productive war on drugs.

The drug war tramples civil liberties giving way to no-knock raids and police brutality based on shaky warrants.

The drug war is racist in its design and enforcement.

The drug war causes disrespect for law, since we have a moral obligation to disobey an unjust law.

The drug war destroys our economy by wasting scarce resources in a futile attempt to legislate appetites.

The drug war endangers children by ensuring that the markets for drugs have zero regulation and recruit children to sell and mule drugs.

The drug war makes ALL of us more likely to be victims of crime, especially from addicts who steal to pay for the artificially inflated prices for their drugs.

Ending the drug war will provide the necessary revenue to fix our schools, our infrastructure, and bail out the budgets of the states.

The drug war affects most all the issues that Democrats hold dear, opposing it is a no brainer for an informed, honest Democrat.

Supporting it is a republican concept, born of Nixon, continued by the Bushes and the republican-lite Clinton.

Anyway since there seems to be some confusion over Deans stance on medicinal marijuana I thought you folks might to see a post made by the Doc himself in answer to an 18 year olds query on the subject.

"Jeremy(from previous thread). I'm impressed that an 18 year old would spend time on a political blog site. Here is a short summary of my drug policy. 1) drug abuse ought to be treated as a public health problem not a judicial problem. I do not favor legalization because we already have enough problems with the two drugs that are legal, alcohol and tobacco. I also believe that if people are dealing heroin to kids or shooting people that jail is more than appropriate. But if your "crime", is being a substance abuser you belong in rehab, not jail. 2)I will order the FDA to study marijuana to see what medicinal effects it may have. I do not think marijuana should have a process different than every other drug to evaluate whether or not it has medical value. Based on the studies I have read, my guess is that the FDA may find that is useful in patients with HIV/Aids, and various forms of cancer, but not for such things as treating glaucoma, where there are other drugs available, and where the risks outway the benefits. I';m on the way back from New York, so i got to read alot of the blogging that went on today. You folks are terrific!! Thank you for an incredible day, and an incredible quarter. Howard Dean

Posted by howard dean at July 1, 2003 12:42 AM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1784&mesg_id=1784&page=

Massive information dump on Gov. Howard Dean
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=43435&mesg_id=43435&page=

not the USA

He's using the same old 'wait for the FDA' line that the Republicans use.

If he really believes the risks of cannabis use outweigh even coffee drinking, he is sorely mistaken.

Medical Marijuana Patients to Sue Ashcroft, Federal Government

OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA -- In a historic lawsuit to be filed in the U.S. District Court in Oakland Oct. 9, two seriously ill medical marijuana patients charge the federal government, Drug Enforcement Administration chief Asa Hutchinson, and Attorney General John Ashcroft with violating the Fifth, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution in their ongoing attacks on medical cannabis patients and providers. The Justice Department has insisted that the federal Controlled Substances Act bars any medical use of marijuana.
...
http://www.mpp.org/releases/nr100802.html

However, if there is no polling data supporting this among **registered voters**, it may be stupid politically in national elections.

Put aside the enthusiasm and think about this calmly.

guarantees support for ending the drug war.

We have to counter the lies that have been told by the right-wing drug warriors.

you look at

Kerry

Edwards

Gephardt

or

Graham

They have a better chance of beating Bush.

It's not Lieberman's positions that bother me as much as it his presentation that does.

He is a singularly uninspiring leader.

Dean has a far better chance of beating bush than does Lieberman. And that is the only factor I look at.

As far as electability I think all the Dems have liabilities and assets. Some have more liabilities than assets and vice versa. My electability scale.

1) Kerry

2) Edwards

3) Graham

4) Gephardt

5a) Lieberman

5b) Dean

6 Carol Mosely Braun

7 Dennis Kucinich

8 Al Sharpton

he has a much better chance then Lieberman in beating Bush. His stance on the Iraq war is far better than Lieberman's as well.

That's damning with faint praise

and in key states like NH, Iowa, California, Arizona, ect is from his e-mail list. That doesn't make sence just like this thread. it is meant to just flame bait, and I bit.

__"Tellin' It Like It Is!"__