Nuclear Dean

Looking for info. on Governor Dean, I found this information. Is there more out there? - V

Dean Supported Nuclear Dumping That Paul Wellstone Called "Classic.
Environmental Injustice."

In 1998, Howard Dean joined then-governor Bush to support a compact to ship nuclear waste from Vermont and Maine to a "poor, mostly Hispanic town," in Texas. Vermont joined Maine to pay $25 million each to ship low-level nuclear waste to Sierra Blanca, Texas. Wellstone said the area was too close to the Rio Grande and wasn't safe for storage. Wellstone said that cite had been picked because, 'These are people who don't have a lot of clout. This particular site is a classic example of environmental injustice.' Wellstone tried to delay the measure through legislative tactics but it ultimately passed. Sierra Blanca was later determined to be unsafe due to underlying fault lines. 9/2/98]

Dean isn't perfect. I guess I'll have to vote for bush.

But we should know the Governor's record, Bush does.

ANYBODY but BUSH!!!!

is actually a moderate, fiscal conservative!
What the fuck bothers the DLC so much about Dean?

three times even!! :)

green dot to you.

moderate? conservative? shuttling off vermont's nuclear waste to a poor hispanic area in texas?

sweet.

is actually a moderate, fiscal conservative!
What the fuck bothers the DLC so much about Dean?

is actually a moderate, fiscal conservative!
What the fuck bothers the DLC so much about Dean?

to do something like that should be criminal.

... dumping toxic nuclear waste into poor people's backyards!?

Give me a fucking break!

voice on where in Texas the waste would go. It didn't end up going to that site.

Note who these people say picked where the waste would be dumped and the fact it ended up not being dumped there. This took me one search to find with Vermont, Texas, Nuclear waste as my terms

Eight years ago, the Texas Legislature decided that a nuclear waste dump would be built near Sierra Blanca to receive radioactive waste from states as far away as Vermont and Maine. At the same time, a growing activist movement began a campaign against the site, which was located on earthquake-prone ground and could eventually leak radioactive elements into underground aquifers and the nearby Rio Grande, merely 16 miles away.

Link will be supplied on edit

www.sric.org/workbook/features/V24_1.html

I can't vouch for the bonafides of this particular publication but it was one of many saying the same thing. I picked this one due to it seeming to be oriented toward Hispanics.

And when you find the Democratic messiah, let us know.

Anybody's better than Bush . . . keep your eye on the prize, big guy.

And it will be posted on DU first.

Rove and Cheney may be holding him in the undisclosed location.

"Anybody But Bush" is a negative anti-Democratic statement. Gives us people like Bill Clinton.

Instead of "Anybody But Bush" how about we find a Democrat WORTH SUPPORTING

These Clinton Democrats are vile Republicans...... and not wanting to look at our choices will only leave us with Republican-lite yet again. I prefer a DEMOCRAT ( not just any person running as a Democrat, but a real Democrat with Democratic Idealism & Principles )

What you advocate would have us supporting scum simply because he or she isn't Bush. That's a sell-out of values and is a rude suggestion. It's un-American and requires willful ignorance to follow such a thought pattern.

NO THANKS

ANY FDR DEMOCRAT WHO REALLY CARES ABOUT WORKING PEOPLE AND THE POOR over BUSH

Let's debat and vote in the primaries, but when the time comes, close ranks and evict the squatter from the people's White House.

Grist: What about nuclear energy? Vermont gets a third of its electricity from nuclear power. Do you see this as a good long-term solution to greenhouse gases?

Dean: My position has always been that we ought not to have new nuclear plants until we figure out how to dispose of the waste properly. We have a nuclear plant in Vermont and I was never in favor of shutting it down as long as it's safe, but I think storing waste at 110 different sites around the country is a magnet for terrorists. We've got to figure out what we are going to do about a central disposal site for nuclear waste.

Grist: As governor, you supported a plan to store the nation's waste at Yucca Mountain, Nev. Do you still think this is a good solution?

Dean: As governor of Vermont, it was a grand idea because it would get the waste out of Vermont. But now that I'm running for president, I've got to reassess it and see what the science looks like.

Grist: How interesting that your environmental concerns as governor have changed as you started shifting your perspective to a national level. Are there other issues that you've reconsidered now that you have a broader playing field?

Dean: Not off the top of my head.

Grist: On a federal level, you will certainly have to deal with more challenges from special interests than you did at the state level. Vermont doesn't really have a lot of the tough business-versus-environment conflicts that many other states do -- for instance with major industries such as steel production and coal.

Dean: Oh, we have terrible business-versus-environment conflicts. We had a confrontation with the auto industry over the electric-vehicle rule and we won. I realize that some special interests will be difficult to battle on a federal level. They will argue that environmental protections will jeopardize jobs and so forth. There will be tradeoffs. Compromises will have to be negotiated. But sometimes you can actually work things out with special interests without confrontation. It's a matter of being able to sit down with people and get them working together in a constructive way.

Much of it will convincing these industries of what an increasing number of them already know: that environmental strategies are better for business. That they need to adopt emerging technologies that are more efficient and effective and that give them a competitive advantage in the long term. More and more, we're seeing a shift in our industries toward efficient and sophisticated technologies that bring advantages to both the environment and their bottom line.

http://www.gristmagazine.com/maindish/griscom052103.asp

I find his position to be sensible. I always enjoy questions about Dean. Everything I uncover for myself, so far, is encouraging.
Welcome to DU :hi:

You actually found the following exchange "encouraging"? :


Grist: As governor, you supported a plan to store the nation's waste at Yucca Mountain, Nev. Do you still think this is a good solution?

Dean: As governor of Vermont, it was a grand idea because it would get the waste out of Vermont. But now that I'm running for president, I've got to reassess it and see what the science looks like.

My question to the people who say 'Dean accepted this because his duty as Governor was just to get the waste out of Vermont since his responsability was only to Vermont' is, if he becomes our President, where will he send the waste? To Fiji? Haiti?

I find this unconscionable.

I've seen children playing with America's nucleo-medical waste that had been dumped in a heap just any old where after corrupt third-world politicians pocketed the money with the US's full cognizance.

I find this obscene and want no part in it for either me or my country.

Remember that US ship with ship that sailed the seas for 27 months unable to find a country willing to accept America' toxic dump? It was kind of funny at first watching it be turned away everywhere it tried but I wept when the dumped it on the shores of what was once a beautiful beach in my country. Just dumped- not even with a perfunctory burial just for show. Just dumped and unburied for poor children to play with.

http://multinationalmonitor.org/hyper/issues/1992/09/mm0992_03.html
http://www.essentialaction.org/return/article3.html

I cannot accept this. The picture is bigger than Vermont, California, New Mexico, America... When will we step up to our world responsabilities ? Who will take us there? The world does not have the luxury of waiting for America to take tiny little steps while we worry about swing voters and not alienating the same DLC that brought us to this debacle.

The more I read threads like this, the more I realize that I may not be able to vote for anyone but Kucinich.


On edit: Linking to a photo of a child Cheswick took in Haiti because I thought it was beautiful and this little girl's story broke my heart. Cheswick I don't know who you're supporting and hope you won't mind me using your photo but Marie-Ange really is beautiful and I would like people to think of how what we do in America, how we live in America, affects children like this. I'll PM you and ask the mods to edit this if you mind. Thanks

(Photo posted, with a few others, at DU thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=111&topic_id=2631&mesg_id=2631)


May little children like this no longer play on our toxic trash because we think we can dump our waste any old where as long as it's not in OUR back-yard. If it's ours, we should dispose of it on our soil. If we're unwilling to do that, we shouldn't have it.

And he expects Californians to vote for him!

Maybe you better go out there and spend vital money campaigning AGAINST Dean instead of for your candidate.

Remember, after the convention, we have to shore up our ranks, and I'm beginning to wonder if everyone will back Dean if he wins and I am wondering if Dean supporters will be able to transfer their energy to another candidate when that candidate's supporters have called the Dean supporters such vitriolic names.

You might start here. Then you should look at Vermont papers where he had a 70% approval rating and did a lot of positive things besides balance the budget, support national healthcare, and give gays and lesbians a way to protect their children and their assets.

Then you might go to www.deanforamerica.com

http://www.state.vt.us/psd/GovDeanTestimony.PDF

Dean does not win the Hispanic vote, since Dean worked with George W. on a plan to send nuclear waste to a Hispanic community! Has that come up before?

you'll find a greener group who understand the import of environmental racism. They are better equipped to help you.

on the "Hispanic" vote.

1) Latino culture differs from state to state. For example, in 2000, a slight majority of Texas Latinos voted for Bush. In California, a large majority of California Latinos voted for Gore.

2) Latinos, African-Americans, Jews, "fill-in-the-demograpic-group" do not think nor vote as a solid unit.

3) As was stated in an earlier thread, Dean did not make the decision as to WHERE the nuclear waste dump in Texas or Nevada would end up -- that was done on a state level.

were available on Park Avenue or the Hamptons. Chimpy was lobbying for it.

Where do you want to put this nuclear waste???

Dean '04...

I can tell you that Bush & Co. was not being honest with anyone on this matter. He told people that the site was secure and safe and that less then 1,000 people lived within so many miles of the site. All these things were lies and that is why that site never happened.

As for Dean, he needed to get rid of it and Bush said we would take it. He lied to Dean (and others, include all of Texas) concerning the site and Dean believed him.

As governor, it was Dean's responsibility to get rid of this waste. When Bush popped up and told him we have this great site down here (with hundreds of pages of official reports to back it up) just give us some money (which he wanted in order to pay for his tax cuts, sound familiar?) and let us worry about it, Dean agreed to it. Obviously the best solution is not to have nuclear energy at all, but since we do, we have to deal with it, and unfortunately Bush lied and, on this issue, Dean believed him.

One important fact is Dean has called for a lot more renewable energy in the near future. This will help us move away from nuclear energy, prevent stuff like this from happening in the future.

.

;

Environmentalists must have weighed in, and environmental racism was already an issue to many. Maybe he should have taken a road trip to visit the site where it was proposed his state's waste would find its final destination.

Governors and presidents can't say "they didn't know"...the job is all about KNOWING what you need to know BEFORE decisions are made.

is actually a moderate, fiscal conservative!
Why is the DLC so against Dean?

Seems to me YOU'VE responded to this issue in the past...

The reply: I understand what you're saying, but can you really tell me that, as a Governor who was looking for a nuclear waste repository that would take waste from your state, you would disbelieve a commission appointed by the Texas legislature? As a Governor of Vermont, what reason would you have to conduct your own investigation (redundantly) in ANOTHER state?

to check it out? NO environmentalists requested he look into it?

Texas was in charge of choosing the site. The Texas legislature appointed a committee to do this. You think it's reasonable to expect a Governor from a small New England state 2000 miles away to second guess a legally appointed commitee? The bottom line is that the safeguargs worked and, despite the extremely poor judgement of the committee, the site was found to be unfit.

What, exactly , happens to the oil that is drained from your car during an oil change, BLM? Are you sure it's properly disposed of? Do you travel to check up on the suitability of the dump site? I think not. You contract with a garage to change your oil. It's THEIR responsibility to behave responsibly.

OK...you're on message. Wonder why Wellstone got involved when it wasn't even close to being hIS responsibility. hmmmmm.....

well? Do you?

It goes to a truck that takes it a refining plant.

1) It is taken from you car.

2) It is stored in a sealed container

4) Another truck comes and pickes it up

5) It is then brought to a refinery,

6) Than it is processed and resold back to the public

I asked that question before


J4Clark

That's what's SUPPOSED to happen. That's what you believe if you take people at their word.

How do you KNOW that this is what happens, though? You feel that you've done the right thing by not disposing of your old oil irresponsibly...by entrusting it to another person who tells you that they'll dispose of it properly. Have you actually verified that this is what's happening?

Would you perhaps have more of a responsibility to make sure that the oil was being properly processed if the disposal and processing companies were YOUR companies? You've now made the jump from a user of services to one responsible for those services. Different roles, diffrerent responsibilities, corect? As a user, your responsibility is to pay the disposal company. As the disposal company, your responsibility is to process the oil responsibly.

Maine and Vermont had nuclear waste to dispose of. They made an arrangement with Texas to do just that. They trusted that Texas would store the waste properly. Texas was responsible for locating the repository. The Texas legislature appointed a commitee to recommend a site. They recommended Sierra Blanca. As it turns out, the system DOES work, because Sierra Blanca was found to be an unfit site geologically anyway, but it was still solely Texas' decision.

As a Governor of Maine or Vermont, you'd qualify as a "user" in this situation. As Texas, you'd be the "disposal company". By extention, as the President of the United States, Texas (and the other 49 states) would all be under your jurisdiction and you would, therefore, have some degree of responsibility to make sure that the disposal site was adequate.

Dean, as the Governor of Vermont, was a "user". Dean, as the President, would have some responsibility to verify that the "disposal company" was acting responsibly.

THAT'S why it's completely proper to say that thee was nothing wrong with him entering into this agreement with Texas as a Governor, but that, as President, he would be more concerned with the practial details of the site.

I've tried to break this down as simply as possible. It's very easy to say that somebody ELSE should have done more until we look at how WE act as individuals. Unless you're prepared to accept responsibility for everything you touch in life (even if it's not YOU that acts irresponsibly) you can't possibly fault Dean for trying to find a solution to Vermont's nuclear waste problem.

ANY Governor who gives a rat's ass about environmental impact of his decisions would make sure he had the information needed BEFORE he made the decision. Anything else is pure SPIN. To excuse it is irresponsible.

...and expect from them the same care I'd take in MY decision-making. I feel it's hypocritical to expect more from a Governor (or President) than I'd do in their situation.

nice try. I'll give you credit for that.

Personally...I prefer someone who has the wherewithall to figure out every aspect above and beyond what I am able. Maybe that's why I'm supporting Kerry and Kucinich. Maybe that's why I respect some of the others.

Dean is "clever" but in a way that isn't honest and cannot hold together in the long run.

I believe that MOST of our problems with those in elected office comes from expecting them to be better than us. They're no different. The sooner we realize that, the sooner we'll be able to truly change things.

As Dean says, "YOU have the power."

But, someone who is a helluva lot smarter than me? Hell yah!

btw...If Dean was so intent on the people of Vermont having the power and the say over their government decisions, why did he keep the progressive Dems there at arm's length while aligning with the GOP more often than not? Didn't the progressive Dem represent the power of the people?

I think that I'm relatively intelligent. I'm not looking for somebody "a helluva lot smarter than me". I'm looking for a candidate that speaks to my issues. For me, Dean does that. I'm not expecting my candidate to be Superman and Ghandi and Jesus rolled into one. I judge his past actions by what I would have done in the same situation. I expect a Governor to do what's best for his state. I expect a President to do what's best for the country. They're not always mutually exclusive, but they ARE different foci; rightfully so, I believe.

I hear a lot of carping in some circles about Dean pushing the "progressives" in Vermont to the side. My view is this: Dean is not idealogy-oriented, he's issue-oriented. Simply because he's a Democrat does not mean that he should pander to the far left of the party to the exclusion of common sense. Any resolution to an issue should be dealt with in a manner that makes the most practical sense, whether that resolution be considered "conservative" or "liberal". Example: There's a good arguement for the position that single-payer health care is better for Americans than an extention on Medicare and FEHBP. Dean takes the pragmatic approach by not taking on the private insurance companies at this early stage, but making sure that every American has access to health care. Once that is accomplished, and the safety net is in place, he's willing to look at the issue. To some, this constitutes an overly conservative stance, a pandering to big business. For others, it makes perfect sense.

I'm not opposing you on the issues. Sure, we think differently, but we both have our own set of priorities. I am taking issue with the philosophy that you seem to have that implies that if a Democrat (even one who bills himself as a centrist) rejects many of the ideas of the more left-leaning segment of the party, he is a "bad Democrat".

the progressive Dems said he kept them at arm's left while ALIGNING with the Republicans. That's not listening to what they have to say. And Cheryl Rivers was a Dem in a LEADERSHIP position in Vermont, so her word should be taken into account and not dismissed as some "disgruntled" hippe type.

btw...I trust my imtellect and talent for comprehension. I just recognize when someone is smarter than me...and that ain't Dean. He's just more sneaky clever.

"the progressive Dems said he kept them at arm's left while ALIGNING with the Republicans"

Might somebody who feels they're not getting their agenda accomplished feel that the person responsible for that is "aligning" with their political opponents? Certainly.

Does that mean that a Democratic Governor ignored the fact that he was a Democrat and actually DID "align" himself with Republicans to the exclusion of moderate Dems? Certainly not.

Dean is a centrist (I find myself saying this a lot lately). The fact that he wouldn't follow the agenda of the left wing does NOT make him a Republican.

to accuse others of being "Bushlite" when he has a far more extensive record of compromising with the rightwing, even though he was in a pretty progressive state?

Oh, I know the answer...he was being a politician looking for liberal $$$$$$ and support, so he coopted Nader's rhetoric to bash the other Dems.

Gov. Dean is a centrist Democrat. Did he do everything that progressive Dems in Vermont wanted him to? No. Is he an environmentalist to the EXCLUSION of financial security? No. Is he pro-gun control to the EXCLUSION of common sense? No.

Howard Dean is a pragmatist. That's actually what makes him so atractive as a candidate to me and to most of the people I've spoken to. I realize that there are people who want somebody who's more of an idealist. That's fine. To say, however, that Gov. Dean is "practically a Republican" or to say that he's somehow being dishonest because he's a centrist doesn't hold water. Want to know where he stands on an issue? Check his speeches or his website. As he says, you might not agree with him, but you'll at least know where he stands.

Howard Dean does NOT seem to be your candidate of choice. That's great. Why spend so much energy attacking him, though? I don't agree 100% with some of Gov. Dean's positions, but he seems to me to be the one candidate that can actually implement his plans BECAUSE they're NOT ultra-liberal. It's just an opinion, and we all have them.

For the last time, show me when Gov. Dean called ANY candidate "Bush-lite". He has always said "We can't beat Bush by being Bush-lite". WHY are some of the Kerr people SO upset by this? Do you see the Dean people going off about Graham's "I'm from the ELECTABLE wing of the Democratic Party" statement? Graham WAS singling Dean out by using a variation of a quote that Dean uses. Dean's "Bush-lite" comments don't attack any candidate individually, they are a simple statement that the way to win is to hold up a different agenda.

Dean started saying it last January and even recently said Kerry wasn't going to win by being Bushlite OR Deanlite. Clearly he mocked him, and Dean's supporters show up and heckle Kerry as "Bushlite" so there IS a theme here projected by the Dean campaign, and if Dean can't take responsibility for it, then that shows his character.

"Bush-lite" is NOT the same as CALLING them "Bush-lite". Gov. Dean has recognized the contributions that Kerry has made, he just disagrees with him on a few of his critical issues.

You can't hold Dean responsible for any action a supporter might make. If this board was willing to base their support of Kerry on the posts that one of his supporters here makes attacking another candidate, Kerry wouldn't stand a chance here. However, we (or at least I) don't. I realize that a supporter may occasionally be slightly overzealous and actually tarnish their preferred candidate's image. It's not the candidate's fault.

Are you going to chastise Graham for his "electable wing of the Democratic Party" comment, or is all of your criticism reserved for Dean?

to make sound decisions on that type of issue and its regulation, though. What do you do?.

.

I think that is like saying, why should the President care what another nation does to its' own people, it is in another country, it is not his responsibility. "Let us just get the cheapest TV's and Nike shoes we can. Who cares if it is done by 8 year-old boys and girls being paid 8 cents and hour. I think this is what is wrong with the world. In terms of your argument as where oil goes, is not a strong one. I vote for people that control those laws. So I do check on it, just not directly. We hire someone to it for us so to speak.

J4Clark

Tell me how tha arguement is "scary".

did Kerry go to Iraq before he voted for the war resolution... or did he take Bush* and Co's word for it?




Dave (AmyStrange.com)
http://www.SeattleActivist.org/MyLifeStory.html
DU (slang/ folklore) Glossary (Dictionary): http://DUG.SeattleActivist.org/
Index of WMD Articles: http://WMD.SeattleActivist.org/

Here are some excellent resources and timelines of quotes and interviews and newspaper article quotes documenting the different things Bush and Co did and said for the last two plus years concerning the war in Iraq and WMDs (and other fun things) from the Howard Dean Website---even if you're not a Dean Fan, these are still excellent resources:

The Bush Administration And WMDs: Then And Now:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=bush_wmd_summary

Niger-Uranium Timeline:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=niger_timeline

Bush and WMD: Assumptions vs. Reality:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/DocServer/TikTok_-_Bush_-_Iraq_-_Side_by_Side.pdf?docID=781

The Bush Administration and WMD: What did they know and when did they know it?:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/DocServer/TikTok_-_Administration_-_Iraq_Deception.pdf?docID=762

Come on, he was the governor of Vermont, he's got better things to do than take a taxpayer funded 2,000 mile trip to visit a dump site in Texas.

I mean, do you check out the landfill where your garbage goes?

check out Dean's travel schedule in 2001 and 2002. He is not adverse to travel. Besides...it was part of his duty. If he's making decisions that effect his state and the lives of others, it damn well is his responsibility. Wellstone checked it out and it wasn't even part of his duties as a senator from Minnesota AT ALL!

did Kerry visit Iraq before he voted for the war resolution?






Dave (AmyStrange.com)
http://www.SeattleActivist.org/MyLifeStory.html
DU (slang/ folklore) Glossary (Dictionary): http://DUG.SeattleActivist.org/
Index of WMD Articles: http://WMD.SeattleActivist.org/

Here are some excellent resources and timelines of quotes and interviews and newspaper article quotes documenting the different things Bush and Co did and said for the last two plus years concerning the war in Iraq and WMDs (and other fun things) from the Howard Dean Website---even if you're not a Dean Fan, these are still excellent resources:

The Bush Administration And WMDs: Then And Now:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=bush_wmd_summary

Niger-Uranium Timeline:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=niger_timeline

Bush and WMD: Assumptions vs. Reality:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/DocServer/TikTok_-_Bush_-_Iraq_-_Side_by_Side.pdf?docID=781

The Bush Administration and WMD: What did they know and when did they know it?:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/DocServer/TikTok_-_Administration_-_Iraq_Deception.pdf?docID=762

Do you have a clue what's happened in Iraq for three decades and why Clinton wanted Saddam gone in 98? Why Dems wanted Saddam gone in 89?

Do you KNOW why Dean was FOR invading Iraq as per Biden-Lugar bill.

I think this board has alot of posters who cannot explain what happened in the world prior to the election theft in 2000, and some before the Iraq resolution.

did Kerry go to Iraq before the War Resolution. I'm going to assume he didn't, so why should Dean have had to go to Texas?

By the way, my state Rep (Jim McDermott) went to Iraq and he voted against the war resolution,



Dave (AmyStrange.com)
http://www.SeattleActivist.org/MyLifeStory.html
DU (slang/ folklore) Glossary (Dictionary): http://DUG.SeattleActivist.org/
Index of WMD Articles: http://WMD.SeattleActivist.org/

Here are some excellent resources and timelines of quotes and interviews and newspaper article quotes documenting the different things Bush and Co did and said for the last two plus years concerning the war in Iraq and WMDs (and other fun things) from the Howard Dean Website---even if you're not a Dean Fan, these are still excellent resources:

The Bush Administration And WMDs: Then And Now:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=bush_wmd_summary

Niger-Uranium Timeline:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=niger_timeline

Bush and WMD: Assumptions vs. Reality:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/DocServer/TikTok_-_Bush_-_Iraq_-_Side_by_Side.pdf?docID=781

The Bush Administration and WMD: What did they know and when did they know it?:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/DocServer/TikTok_-_Administration_-_Iraq_Deception.pdf?docID=762

Nobody expects that he should have personally gone there. But he had lots of people on the payroll whose job it was to take such trips and make such assessments.

and it's great to get a confirmation from somebody who was actually involved.

"As for Dean, he needed to get rid of it and Bush said we would take it. He lied to Dean (and others, include all of Texas) concerning the site and Dean believed him."

Funny, Bush said the same thing on Iraq. If Dean can't even look on in an almanac to check out what he is told or send a staffer in for something as serious as this, I am concered about it.


J4Clark

made the initial decision on political grounds.It was the NIMBY principle, because it was away from Dallas and Austin and they had contractors who were supposed to make big bucks from this , contractors who kept contributing MONEY to legislators and judges.

And Texas kept fighting the people who lived there through the courts. Farmers and ranchers and small business people were having potlucks charging admission to raise money to fight this in the courts.And the people finally won. But it wasn't on environmental grounds that this was changed. It was political, they made such a big STINK all over the nation that the corruption of the legislators and judges came out.

Sierra Blanca county had already been stuck with a nation-wide sewage disposal facility.Dried sewage was shipped by boxcar from places as far away as New York. At first it was welcomed because they thought it would give some people living there some jobs, but the private company brought in people to work the facility. THEN it was discovered that there was a lot of heavy metal in the sewage and it might contaminate the ground water.

Fool me once,,,er,,,you know.

Environmental injustice on a massive scale.

Can you tell me Dean wasn't aware of any of this? It was a nation-wide SCANDAL!!

As someone who grew up in industrial New Jersey, I know first hand the effects of NIMBY and environmental racism. My hometown is an environmental nightmare because more affluent areas didn't want to stop and re-think their way to responsible waste management.

Sending waste, especially radioactive waste, to Mexican-American cities in the Southwest is not my idea of having a grand vision of things.

Neither is shipping nuclear materials over thousands and thousands of miles of railroad.

Dean working with Bush to dump nuclear waste on poor hispanics goes nicely with

Dean's A rating by the NRA ( The Brady Campaign actually sent out emails asking their supporters to reject Howard Dean ). Howard Dean and George W. Bush are the only 2 candidates to receive an A rating by the NRA

Dean's pro death penalty stance and quote that killing an innocent person on death row is worth stopping a criminal from getting out and killing an innocent person

Dean's support for NAFTA, calling it a big benefit to Vermont, ( never mind that the statistics show Dean's state of 600,000 lost 60,000+ jobs to NAFTA )

Dean's killing of a medical marijuana bill as Governor of Vermont. He's the only candidate that can put killing a medical marijuana bill on his resume

THIS IS WHY DEAN SUPPORTERS GO NUTS WHEN YOU START LOOKING UP DEAN'S RECORD. Howard Dean is a pathetic candidate, and it is a joke that anybody with the credentials mentioned dare call himself a Democrat, much less run as one.

People will find out. There's lots of time. He's dead once people find out the truth about him. I liked Dean for about a week, until I started looking at his his lousy record. He's a Republican in Democrat's clothing and I will never support such a candidate and tarnish myself. NO THANKS

And FULLY investigate his record, instead of listening to one-sided soundbites from supporters of other candidates.

There's a carbon copy of your misinformed post on almost every page of the DU archives - your tactic has been well worn by most Dean bashers here, and as frustrating as it may be to you, there are not many that buy it. You're not bringing anything new to the discussion that has not be debunked a thousand times in this forum.

And yes, we are going nuts... FOR DEAN!!!

Joe Hill.

A-freaking-men. I agree Dean is a lousy candidate and that the real reason he is gaining support is simply because few really know his record and his stands. He WAS Governor of a very Liberal state and advocated national health care.

He was a doctor and a new, fresh face and even I was interested in him at the beginning.

However, the more I hear, the worse it gets. Sure, if its him versus Bush I’d vote for Dean, but I don’t want this man on the ticket.

I believe the vacuum that is most people’s perception of what Dean is about allows us to project our paradigm of the “perfect candidate.” Before we knew Dean’s crummy record and stands, we could just daydream about what a Dean presidency would do.

He is far from a “darling of the Left.” Dean is taking advantage of this mis-guided perception that he is a solid Liberal. Dean won’t mind taking the votes from the left while placating most of what the right stands for.

The same people who chastise John Kerry for something like the Skull and Bones while ignoring or justifying these type of transgression as it pertains to Dean show me the Dean supporters are not being objective. There is no comparison in relevance to the SandB Club with actual public policy that exploits.

At the heart of the matter is Dean has a bizzarro stand on the death penalty, is against all forms of federal gun legislation (true to his snakeskin bullshit he is AGAINST federal laws, but says he would not do anything about them at this point.) His environmental record is starting to look pretty bleak as well and this is one area Bush is horrendous.

I believe Dennis Kucinich is the ideal candidate, John Kerry is the pragmatic candidate and John Edwards is the sleeper candidate. No one else interests me.

It's nice to hear from a DEMOCRAT who doesn't jump on the band wagon and cover up their candidates flaws. I too was for Howard Dean....But I worked and discovered that his record is PATHETIC and I will not support another Republican in Democrats clothing. The Republocrats are so interested in "Anybody But Bush" they are forgetting that we should support a candidate whose record indicates Democratic Idealism and Principles. Howard Dean isn't close

He was a doctor and a new, fresh face and even I was interested in him at the beginning.

Me too! I saw his initial MTP interview and was very impressed. I had taped it, because I knew that this was the guy who had signed the civil unions bill (first in the nation!) and that he wanted to be president. I was very interested. His response that day to Russert that he did it because it was the right thing to do impressed me and I spoke highly of him for some time. I was also one of the original Meetup folks for Dean.

However, the more I hear, the worse it gets. Sure, if its him versus Bush I’d vote for Dean, but I don’t want this man on the ticket.

This is where I am at as well. When Kerry announced in December last year, I was very impressed with him as well. I really like his vision for America. And when Dean started his mean and nasty routine with Kerry I was very disappointed. Ok, so he's the long shot candidate, and he had to get his name in the news, and this was working. But then I started listening more and more to his anger AT THE DEMS! I think he spoke (and continues to speak) to the frustration that many Dems and other liberals felt about the lack of a sure response to the right-wing neo-conservative steam roller.

Dems, at their core, are just different than these people. The Delays and Roves. Dems are by nature more tolerant, and they debate endlessly nuances of policy and philosophy. These new types are soul-less. They don't care what they have to do to get what they want (power). It does take a while to learn how to deal with that. And is the best way to deal with it to be like them? Isn't that what Dean is advocating? Be as mean? Is that what we want to be?

What we don't want to be is losers any more, but we have to recognize what happened to the country after 9/11. As Kerry said, the President could have asked anything of our citizens and gotten a monumental response - volunteering, donating, service - anything. Instead, W. asked us to "go shopping".

I believe the vacuum that is most people’s perception of what Dean is about allows us to project our paradigm of the “perfect candidate.” Before we knew Dean’s crummy record and stands, we could just daydream about what a Dean presidency would do.

He is far from a “darling of the Left.” Dean is taking advantage of this mis-guided perception that he is a solid Liberal. Dean won’t mind taking the votes from the left while placating most of what the right stands for.

Someone said it best the other day. They said something along the lines of "It doesn't matter what Dean says or does. To his followers, it was the right thing to do."

These people want the "anti-Bush" so bad, they are going to support someone with a very limited vision for this country in order to get it.

Bush rode to power as the "anti-Clinton" and he too had a very limited agenda. Cut taxes. The solution to everything was to cut taxes. Until 9/11 when he added "Bomb Iraq".

There are lots of folks in the Dean camp who say that Dean's stance on the war was principled opposition, and that he is right to take Kerry (and the others) to task for their votes.

Today I believe that Dean's stand on the Iraq fiasco was nothing more than political opportunism. Maybe the war was "popular" but there was a HUGE groundswell of opposition, and these people were either already activist, or were getting their feet wet as activists against the war for the first time. Those are the people who are supporting Dean's campaign, and they were energized against the war and remain energized for Dean because his anger resonates with them.

I don't WANT an angry President who is so focused on a very few governing principles that he hasn't the mental flexibility to incorporate conflicting postions into a policy that can reach out to everyone.

I frankly don't much care if Dean could win. I don't want him as President. If he is the nominee, I will vote for him in order to depose the Boy King, but I won't be happy about it.

He got an A rating because Vermont has such a low homicide rate they don't need gun laws. He supports the current federal laws and would like to close the gun show loophole. That alone will put him on the NRA's shit list.

He's not for executing innocent people, and he supports reforming the way death row sentances are carried out.

Dean supports NAFTA but wants to include use it as leverage to increase the standard of living in other third world countries instead of exploiting them.

Dean will support medical marijuana if the FDA approves it. That way it will be legal in all 50 states. And Kucinich voted for a resolution condemning medical mj.

Dean supporters "go nuts" because they keep running across dishonest shit like this from supporters of other candidates.

well since a few the Dean Dung have showed up to do what they always do...screan LIAR when you find out truths about their awful candidate...I'll start posting articles and quotes...so they can call...in this case THE BRADY CAMPAIGN a bunch of liars.

_______________________________


FOR BACKWARD THINKING ON GUN POLICIES, DEAN IS WRONG FOR THE WHITE HOUSE

Americans who care about responsible gun policies should reject the former Vermont Governor.


Washington DC - Howard Dean is running for President. He believes that gun laws should be at the state level, not the federal level.

Perhaps Dean will have success in convincing criminals to promise not to carry their guns across state lines, and convincing gun traffickers not to buy or sell them across state lines. Governor, guns cross state borders. Maybe it's you who should stay at the state level.

Former Vermont Governor Dean says he's from the "Democrat wing of the Democratic party." As far as gun safety advocates are concerned, give us a Democrat from some other wing of the Democratic party, please.

"Governor Dean is wrong for America on gun policy," said Michael Barnes, President of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence United with the Million Mom March. "It makes no more sense to leave gun policy up to each individual state than it would to let each state set separate environmental standards. Guns cross state lines as easily as pollution. We're going to make sure that Americans who support our cause know he's wrong on these issues."

"Hey, Howard: We don't need a pro-NRA president. We've already got one," said Mary Leigh Blek, President Emeritus of the Million Mom March. "Americans who care about getting guns off our streets need to know there is virtually no difference between Governor Dean and President Bush."

Dean's state-by-state approach to gun crime won't work. Every day, gun traffickers take advantage of states with the weakest laws to get guns. Those guns are then sold on the black market in cities and states with strong gun laws. The only way to crack down on illegal gun sales is with strong federal gun laws that apply to all states.

You can ask two former New Jersey Police officers, David Lemongello and Ken McGuire. Their law enforcement careers ended when a criminal shot them during a stakeout. And how did that gun get to New Jersey? It was bought from an irresponsible dealer in West Virginia.

Though the Brady Campaign/Million Mom March has not endorsed a candidate, the gun safety group has decided to oppose Dean publicly, and plans to be aggressive in opposing Dean throughout the Democratic primaries. An email alert will go out to all Brady members nationwide today, educating them about Dean's wrongheaded view of gun safety policy, and advocates of reasonable gun safety laws will be encouraged to attend Governor Dean's campaign appearances and tell supporters about his extreme views on gun issues.

"Electing Howard Dean President would not be a step forward towards making our children and our communities safer from gun violence," Barnes said. "We intend to make sure Americans know that."

As the nation's largest national, non-partisan, grassroots organization leading the fight to prevent gun violence, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence united with the Million Mom March is dedicated to creating an America free from gun violence, where all Americans are safe at home, at school, at work, and in their communities.



# # #

As the nation's largest national, non-partisan, grassroots organization leading the fight to prevent gun violence, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence united with the Million Mom March is dedicated to creating an America free from gun violence, where all Americans are safe at home, at school, at work, and in their communities.

Once again, the rabid anti-Dean faction (all 6 or 8 of them) need to take the debate off-topic when anybody dares to post support for Dean. Joe, you have an absolute right to your opinion, but if you really want to discuss this issue, start a thread.

"Dean Dung" is one I haven't heard. Did you think of it all by yourself?

actually YOURS changed the topic to calling posts about Howard Dean LIES.

Now I'm going to post a couple of articles about Howard Dean and or idiotic Howard Dean quotes here everyday

...because I don't take being called a LIAR to nicely

...and hence the Dean Dung reference.

I know...it's ok for yours to call names like LIAR, but don't fight back. Been there, done that, know the lack of ethics and character Dean supporters practice...fine...I don't care.

Studied up on Dean. He's a jerk and now I'll be posting articles and Dean quotes to back up my position...since I'm compelled to..being called a LIAR and all.

Dean Dung...your tactics stink, thus the name

...that would convey more of a personal attack than I intend. I AM, however, really interested in how you'll respond to the following:

1) You post a gun-control issue in a thread about Dean and Sierra Blanca. How is this NOT an off-topic post?

2) Please provide a quote where I called posts about Howard Dean "LIES".

3) You're obviously entitled to express an opinion here. I just suggested that you do it within the framework of the thread. There have been "Dean and the Brady Bill" threads posted here. It seems appropriate to either to post to one of them or start your own post.

4) As to "being called a LIAR", methinks thou dost protest too much. I haven't seen anybody here call you a liar.

5) "Dean Dung" is still a sophomoric label. Surely you're capable of better, being able to work a computer and all...

Hey,

that wasn't too rude. Your 3rd grade level sarcasm was almost humorous.

Dean Dung is my response to you and yours for blocking information about Howard Dean from getting out so that people capable of free thinking can form an educated opinion. Dean's Dung does a masterful job of stopping all truths about the mighty Dean from reaching the public...for example by doing what yours did to my first post on this thread. It's wrong. It's sickening, and your tactics are puke.

Figure if it's ok for Dean's Dung to carry on as the propaganda ministry to conceal the facts of Der Fuher Dean..then maybe it's ok for you to get a dose of your own methods.

I'll keep posting articles about and quotes by your god so that maybe people will get a chance to find the truth on your god...and because I don't like bullies...like the Dean Dung groupies

So Dean's Dung doesn't attack any posts about your god. They don't call people liars for daring to posts truths about your god...Really ?

What's this.................



"And FULLY investigate his record, instead of listening to one-sided soundbites from supporters of other candidates.

There's a carbon copy of your misinformed post on almost every page of the DU archives - your tactic has been well worn by most Dean bashers here, and as frustrating as it may be to you, there are not many that buy it. You're not bringing anything new to the discussion that has not be debunked a thousand times in this forum.

And yes, we are going nuts... FOR DEAN!!!"



So this is an acceptable response to you. This isn't a cowardly, dishonest way of calling someone a liar, of accusing them of absolute dishonesty in fact. I'm gonna tell you what...THAT'S ALL YOU PEOPLE DO. When one posts Howard Dean's insane death penalty quote yours don't address it...you attack the person who posted the quote. It's a disingenuous, dishonest attempt to derail any honest conversation about your gods magnitude of flaws. It happens every time. I've never seen such a dishonest tactic in use by so many of the same group. Attacking people for bringing up faulty positions and direct quotes is pathetic. After closely reviewing the career of Howard Dean he is nothing more than a fraud, a corporate shill with multiple extreme right wing twists ( gun control, death penalty, corporate access, calling people on welfare lazy, etc. etc. etc. )....and it seems many of his fanatical followers are as dishonest as the god himself.

Associated Press, 10/25/98 13:32


Dean: No radioactive waste site in Vermont

MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) - Efforts will continue to find a site in Texas to ship Vermont's low-level radioactive waste, despite the rejection of one location by a state panel there, Gov. Howard Dean says.


Dean rejected calls by some anti-nuclear activists that Vermont should take care of its own waste, storing it above-ground at the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant in Vernont.

"We have much too much moisture in the ground and too much rain," Dean said. "This is not a big issue. Texas has the responsibility to site this (nuclear waste dump) and they will."

Vermont's low-level radioactive waste comes mainly from Vermont Yankee, and consists of materials other than the more highly radioactive spent fuel rods the plant generates. A small part of the state's waste comes from medical facilities.

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

_________________________


SENATOR PAUL WELLSTONE OPPOSES NUCLEAR WASTE DUMPING AT SIERRA BLANCA IN TEXAS




Senator Wellstone speaks out against the low-level radioactive dumping in Texas. The government contaminated much of Nevada with nuclear testing and now they are going to store radioactive waste in Yucca Mountain northwest of Las Vegas, NV until the end of time. Texans need to keep this from happening at Sierra Blanca. Other states need to take notice, they would like for you to have tons of nuclear waste too.




Statement of Senator Paul Wellstone
Press Conference on Sierra Blanca and S. 270
February 5, 1998

Good morning. The discussion we want to launch this morning is urgent and long overdue. In the coming days or weeks, the Senate will be considering a bill (S. 270) that would result in the dumping of low-level radioactive waste in a small, poor, majority Latino community in rural West Texas. We want to stop that from happening -- not only in Sierra Blanca, but in poor minority communities all over this country.


The best way to do that is to make sure the story of Sierra Blanca gets told. It's an incredible story. After I'm through speaking, we're going to hear from some of the people who've been telling that story for several years. Father Solis, the parish priest for Sierra Blanca and Hudspeth County, can tell you of the anger and anguish of his parishioners. Senator Corella (Co-ray-yuh) and Deputy Torres, two of several Mexican representatives of the border region visiting Washington this week, will tell you that this nuclear dump poses environmental hazards on both sides of the border. We'll also hear from Congressmen Doggett, Rodriguez, and Reyes, who have been fighting in the House of Representatives on behalf of the people of Sierra Blanca. And Dr. Judy Johnsrud of the Sierra Club is here to tell you that local residents have good reason to be concerned.

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

Call Senator Paul Wellstone


You can call any of Senator Wellstone's offices to register your opinion or get information about current legislation.


Washington, D.C.: (202) 224-5641
Saint Paul: (612) 645-0323
Virginia: (218) 741-1074
Willmar: (320) 231-0001


Senator Wellstone also has a toll-free number set up for his constituents to use:
1-800-642-6041.


For the hearing impaired, Senator Wellstone has a TDD in his Washington, D.C. office:
(202) 224-4754.

Going on about felons getting out of jail and then killing....



"That is every bit as heinous as putting to death someone who didn't commit the crime." HOWARD DEAN


Government sponsored execution of the innocent to ensure the guilty never go free.

But wait unbelievably it's been said before, by another Republocrat.....

"I think that any honest and candid supporter of the death penalty has to acknowledge that that support comes in spite of the fact that there will inevitably be some mistakes. And that's a harsh concession to make, but I think it's the only honest concession to make." AL GORE

Meet Howard Dean
The Man from Vermont is Not Green (He's Not Even a Liberal)
by MICHAEL COLBY


For Vermonters who have seen Howard Dean up close and personal for the last eleven years as our governor, there's something darkly comical about watching the national media refer to him as the "liberal" in the race for the Democratic nomination for president. With few exceptions in the 11-plus years he held the state's top job, Dean was a conservative Democrat at best. And many in Vermont, particularly environmentalists, see Dean as just another Republican in Democrat's clothing.


As the son of a wealthy Long Island family (his father was a prominent Wall Street insider), Dean's used to having his golden path well greased. After dutifully attending Yale and then medical school, Dean looked for a state to launch both a private medical practice and a political career. He chose Vermont as much for its beauty as its lenient mood toward carpet bagging politicians, thus joining Brooklynite Bernie Sanders as a born again Vermonter.


Dean became Vermont's accidental governor in 1991 after Governor Richard Snelling died of a heart attack while swimming in his pool. Dean, the lieutenant governor at the time, took the state's political reins and immediately followed through with his promise not to offend the Snelling Republicans who occupied the executive branch. And Dean carried on with his right-leaning centrism for the next eleven, long years.

With his sights now set on the White House, the Dean team has been doing its best over the last year to polish up a mediocre gubernatorial record. They're also trying to position Dean as "the liberal" in the Democratic field so as to grab the much-coveted early primary voters.

And nowhere are the tall tales of Dean's liberalism more off the mark than when the Dean team begins to gush about his environmental record.

"EP under Governor Dean meant Expedite Permits, not Environmental Protection," proclaims Annette Smith, the director of Vermonters for a Clean Environment.

Smith is no stranger to Dean's environmental record, having tangled with the Dean administration on everything from the OMYA Corporation's mining to pesticide usage on Vermont's mega-farms. When Smith learned that Dean was holding a press conference at the Burlington Community Boathouse last week to celebrate his eco-legacy, she fired off emails to Vermont environmentalist calling for a protest of the event and wondering if they were "going to let Governor Dean ride out on his white horse of environmental leadership?"

It was Smith who stumbled onto Dean's official gubernatorial web site a couple of years ago and found a bucolic photo of her home town of Danby being featured with this caption: "Time stands still hereyou might even forget when it's time to go home." Ironically, the location depicted in the photo was the same spot Dean was pushing to host a massive gas pipeline, a plan that would have required timber clear-cuts and other dramatic topographical changes. The Dean team removed the photo within a couple of weeks, but not before Smith made hay with his apparent hypocrisy.


"Dean's attempts to run for president as an environmentalist is nothing but a fraud," Smith told Wild Matters. "He's destroyed the Agency of Natural Resources, he's refused to meet with environmentalists while constantly meeting with the development community, and he's made the permitting process one, big dysfunctional joke."

Those are not the words you'd expect to hear from an environmentalist if all you relied on for your news was the mainstream press. The Burlington Free Press, for example, has spent considerable space putting one coat of varnish after another on Dean's tenure, including a rather smarmy salute to his eco-record. The word from those quarters is that Dean is the environment's friend and he's done nothing but anger the business community by slowing development and stymieing growth.

Dean's record, however, shows just the opposite. Remember, when Dean took office there were no Wal-Marts in Vermont; there was no Home Depots; Burlington's downtown was dominated by local stores not the national chains that now rule the roost; there were 36% more small farmers in existence; there were no 100,000-hen mega-farms; and sprawl wasn't a word on the tip of everyone's tongue.

Interestingly, Dean told the Free Press last week that he wished the rest of "the country were more like Vermont." But it certainly seems Dean has been doing his best to make Vermont more like the rest of the country.

Stephanie Kaplan, a leading environmental lawyer and the former executive officer of Vermont's Environmental Board, has seen the regulatory process under Dean become so slanted against environmentalists and concerned citizens that she hardly thinks its worth putting up a fight anymore.

"Under Dean the Act 250 process (Vermont's primary development review law) and the Agency of Natural Resources (ANR) have lost their way," contends Kaplan. "Dean created the myth that environmental laws hurt the economy and set the tone to allow Act 250 and the ANR to simply be permit mills for developers."

Kaplan points to the "Environmental Board purge" in the mid-90s that allowed Dean to set the pro-development tone. In 1993, the Board issued an Act 250 permit to C&S Grocers in Brattleboro with conditions that restricted the diesel emissions from its heavy truck traffic. After C&S execs cried foul and threatened to move to New Hampshire, Dean broke gubernatorial precedent by publicly criticizing the Environmental Board for issuing what he called a "non-permit."


A year after receiving their public rebuke from Dean, four of the Environmental Board members ­ including the chair ­ were up for reappointment. With the not-so-subtle clues from Dean that he didn't approve of the Board's political direction, the Republican majority in the state senate shot down each and every one of their appointments, thus dramatically changing both the structure and climate of the Board.


"After the post-C&S purge," says Kaplan, "the burden of proof for Act 250 permits switched from being on the applicants -- where it's supposed to be -- to being on the environmentalists. That's why 98% of the permit requests are approved and only 20% ever have hearings."


There is, however, one issue that Dean deserves credit for: his peripatetic efforts in land conservation. During his tenure, Dean has overseen the public preservation of over one million acres of Vermont land, most notably the former Champion Corporation lands in the Northeast Kingdom.

"But these special parcels seem to be the only land Dean cares about," says Kaplan. "The rest has been fair game for over development."

As Dean goes national he may be able to fool an Iowan or two with his eco-record, but Vermonters have seen enough to know that being green isn't easy for Dean. And he's far from being a liberal.

Michael Colby is the editor of the national monthly, Wild Matters He can be reached at mcolby@wildmatters.org.

welfare recipients.......

"don't have any self-esteem. If they did, they'd be
working"


as he reduced benefits for single mothers on welfare in Vermont

'As Vermont’s Governor, Dean supported getting nuclear waste out of his state into safer storage sites. The 1998 proposal of using Sierra Blanca, Texas as a repository was part of a compact, supported by Texas, Maine and Vermont, passed by Congress, and signed by President Clinton. As President, Dean would work towards a non-political solution to the nuclear waste storage issue based on science and safety.'

Old news... next.

...non-political solution to the nuclear waste storage issue based on science and safety

...is to find the safest and best solution to the problem based on sound science as opposed to a political solution of putting it wherever we can that's politically convenient. Do you feel it's better to not use science when storing nuclear waste? Seems pretty logical to me.

Me?

I love science. I wished every decision was based on it. HOWEVER, just babbling the words, "Sound Science" doesn't mean diddly shitz to me.

Listen to Gale Norton, Tom Delay, Helen Chenowith, Scott McInnes, and the other host of right-wing scoundrels who use the word, "Sound Science."

The implication is science is NOT sound if it is sponsored by a non-right wing group.

Of course, while I still don't like Dean I hardly think he is in the pool of dogshit with DeLay and those types, BUT...Dean is foolish if he thinks this won't get politicized.

Whatever a Dean administration trots out grounded in "sound science" will be met by whatever opposing forces exist advancing their own agenda based in "sound science."

At that point Dean will have to use political muscle/capital to advance environmental initiatives that may not be popular than the corporate interests and power brokers who stand to profit handsomely from one environmental malfeasance after another.

Put it this way, I am very knowledgeable about certain sceinces (Biology, Mammalogy, Ecology, Genetics) as my profession requires it not to mention the degree hanging on my wall .. What I have found is that true “Sound Science” only exists insofar the ruling elite wishes it to. Too often science and industrial profits conflict with each other.

The real dilemma for Dean isn’t what kind of science he will find (it is my contention that if he honestly believes in sound science then our world would become a cleaner, better place for having a President Dean). My real issue for Dean is, does he live it? Does he truly want to fight for that issue (environment), because at some point he will have to tactfully critique the American culture of unbridled materialism, consumerism that make up our throw-away economy.

I don’t believe Dean is ready for that kind of fight.

...that he doesn't like nuclear because of the waste problem. While the ideal might be to ban and clean it all up over night that won't get accomplished for some of the reasons you've stated as well as other reasons. You can phase it out gradually by reducing reliance and creating more economical alternatives. In the meantime you have to rely on scientists as opposed to the Norton's and Delay's for the problems of storage and transport. That probably would encompass scientists from both the industrial and environmental sides but since Dean used the word "safe" one would suspect that would take precedence towards the solution. Dean is a fighter and so I wouldn't be surprised if at some time he pissed off both environmentalists and industrialists.

It's like healthcare, Dean said the best plan would be if you could start from scratch and start over. However, if one was to try starting over the obstacles (some being the elite powers) would bury it and the people would end up with nothing. So you use the existing structure with a plan that can be passed giving the most healthcare coverage as possible. Once that's passed you having a beginning that you can expand on.

It's baby steps, but if you want a candidate that promises everything then Dean's not probably not the right one for you. He's more the pragmatic choice.

With the Bush tax cuts. Every time someone asks where the revenues are going to come from, he answers the tax cuts. Massive health care restructuring - tax cuts. Massive energy restructuring - tax cuts. Rebuilding schools and highways - um, higher taxes. And so forth.

I would respect him more if he was honest and said it would cost us up front, but we would get repaid in the long run.

...we'd go back to the Clinton era of taxation. I believe the figure he gave for healthcare was 88 billion, 10 billion more than Kerry's plan but covered more people. I think that's being more honest then promising to replace the 2.7 million jobs lost during the Bush administration within 500 days of taking office.

Are we sure that he CAN'T pay for these things using only that money?

(I seriously don't know. His numbers look O.K. to me, but I'm open to new data.)

because they were his major donors. Better get your excuses in order. Kerry is coming after him in the fall.

selected by Dean in the VP slot.

Dean '04

....whew....

Thanks, that was almost as funny as when I read some deaniac say after Dean gave a foreign policy speech: "Ok, Kerry, get your paper and pencil and start copying!"

If nothing else the Dean Kool Aid types are good for entertainment!

Dean '04

Keep dreaming. Don't wake up. Life is too harsh for dreamers.

you said,

The real dilemma for Dean isn’t what kind of science he will find (it is my contention that if he honestly believes in sound science then our world would become a cleaner, better place for having a President Dean). My real issue for Dean is, does he live it? Does he truly want to fight for that issue (environment), because at some point he will have to tactfully critique the American culture of unbridled materialism, consumerism that make up our throw-away economy.

I don’t believe Dean is ready for that kind of fight.

For Dean it would be a fight. Dean reminds me of a bull in a china shop.

But for someone without that chip on his shoulder, it would be "leadership". Finesse.

Not a word I would use in conjunction with the good doc.

Deanites must be disco people, with all the twisting and turning....

IGNORE THE FACT THAT HOWARD DEAN PUSHED TO HAVE VERMONT'S NUCLEAR WASTE DUMPED ON POOR HISPANICS IN TEXAS..that's ok cause you like Dean....what an honest person

in the backyards of poor Latino neighborhoods. 26 MILLION of Vermont taxpayers' dollars paid to Texas. What a scam.

:nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

:nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

:nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

:nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

:nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

"This vote was on whether to override the state of Nevada’s veto and approve the Yucca Mountain nuclear dump (S.J.R. 34), despite broad-based opposition from environmental and public interest organizations.

The Department of Energy’s recommendation of the Yucca Mountain site has been plagued by compromised research and numerous safety issues. Far from solving the nuclear waste problem, sending waste to Yucca Mountain would require tens of thousands of radioactive shipments through communities in 44 states."


Kerry voted, as usual, with Public Citizen.

Kerry's vote on the Sierra Blanco compact. I would assume he voted against it but other then Wellstone, I didn't see any large objections in Congress.

but you are right that Wellstone carried the vast majority of the fight against the plan on both environmental justice (no one in the area wanted it) and safety (the area had been found to be geologically unstable).

the vote:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=105&session=2&vote=00255

my entire "ignore" list. I want to thank all the obsessive Dean bashers for showing up in this one thread. Makes it so convenenient to rebuild that list. :evilgrin:

Dean would make a lousy steward of the environment. Anyone who cares for the environment should work against his candidacy.

Why do I get the feeling that Bush will be returning that favor with interest in about 18 months?

before he voted on the War resolution?

I didn't think so...

!!!!!

"Recently, Bernie championed in Congress the dumping of Vermont's nuclear waste near Sierra Blanca, Texas, a low income border community with a mostly Latino population that is overwhelmingly opposed to the dump project. Environmental racism and classism seem not to bother him."



http://www.tao.ca/writing/archives/video/0104.html

I lived in Texas at the time and did what I could to help oppose the Sierra Blanca site. As his usual MO, Shrub lied to people all over the place to convince them that the site would be secure. The Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission APPROVED of the site completely, and they had scientists saying that this site would be safe and secure.

AND BERNIE SANDERS SUPPORTED IT!!!!!!! Bernie Sanders, of all people. No matter how many times I called and harassed his office, no matter how many pleas we made to him, he continued to support it.

No one is perfect on everything. And to the Kerry supporters- I would think you of all people would understand how it feels when your candidate is lied to by Shrub. :-)

Just wondering?