Jackson Free Press

An interesting piece about Howard Dean and his foreign-policy ideas by John Tirman of the Social Science Research Council:

"Dean's speech, along with his signature opposition to the invasion and occupation of Iraq, revealed him as the best Democratic alternative to Bush, while sustaining his bona fides as a progressive."
...
"In his speech, he emphasized three policy positions that are bound to become the pillars of his own foreign-policy agenda during the campaign. First, the cardinal threat to American security is terrorism, and that Bush has done far too little to protect Americans and much of it, clumsily. Among such threats, Dean pointed to weapons of mass destruction in the hands of terrorists several times in the course of his speech. The second critique points the damage to the alliances and multilateral cooperation due to Bush administration's emphasis on unilateralism. Third is addressing social and economic calamities – HIV/AIDS and global poverty – that also give rise to the conditions of desperation and political violence."
...
"The flag-waving of Dick Gephardt, Joe Lieberman, and John Kerry after Saddam's surrender is a lesson in myopia. The armed resistance to U.S. occupation will continue, and is even likely to diminish. But it is not as daunting a prospect as the longer-term prospects for Iraq, which remains on track to become a state with intense communal rivalries dominated by anti-American Shi'ite clerics. And it does not change the fact that there were always alternatives to invasion. "
...
"The war was based on false premises, and it has been costly in innumerable ways, not least in managing the central challenge of Islamic militancy. None of this changed with Saddam's capture. Dean's position on Iraq has been right from the start, and is likely to be seen as such months or years down the road."
...
"There is no doubt about the candidate himself, who remains a man of loose tongue but surprisingly good instincts on many global issues. Iraq is his calling card, but he has made many heartening statements about the Middle East, trade fairness, and human rights, to name three pivotal issues. Unlike Clinton or Jimmy Carter, who were highly intelligent but lacked confidence in their own foreign-policy acumen, Dean conveys an aura of command that may take him beyond the Washington consensus to daring initiatives and action. There is the rub for progressives, of course – more faith in a person than a philosophy – but it is, at least, a decently plausible hope in hard times."

Previous Comments

ID

136835

Comment

I think the Orson Scott Card op-ed fromthe WSJ should be referenced here also, see: http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110004435 Also of interest is a current WSJ op-ed by FOUAD AJAMI. "In the hours that followed the dictator's capture, and in the shadow of that image of him meekly undergoing a medical examination, the legend spread, in Ramallah and Cairo, and as far away as the Muslim suburbs of France, that it was all a trick, that the man had been drugged, that it had all been an American hoax. The very same Arabs who had averted their gaze from the despot's mass graves were now quick to take offense that he had been exposed to public humiliation. This is the quintessential "shame culture," and we had snatched from that crowd a cherished legend. But we should not give up on the project we have staked out for ourselves: The quest for a decent political order that would take Iraq beyond its cruel history, and would demonstrate that despotism is not something "written"--maktoob--or fated, for the Arabs." read it all at: http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110004446 I have been busy w/ a getting proposal ready that could bring 500 new jobs, avg salary $50k, to Mississippi - w/ any luck I can post details later for you people who might be interested on what is now a work in progress. No guarantees - but what in life is guaranteed?

Author

Fielding

Date

2003-12-18T01:22:02-06:00

ID

136836

Comment

I think we've all seen that Card op-ed by now. It's the Republican post of the week. ;-D Needless to say, I respect Card's opinion, but I think he's painting the growing non-emotional opposition to the Bush administration with a very wide brush. But, even as I disagree with his broad strokes (nouveau-neo-con Christopher Hitchens also comes to mind), I think it's great that he's a Democrat and is willing to buck his partisanship. I, on the other hand, am not a Democrat and have no personal feelings one way or another toward Bush as a person (I don't know him), but am very afraid of where he is leading the country based not on a a "dishonest vitriolic hate campaign," but on disturbing facts and revelations about his presidency. You don't have to look very far, or be on the troll beat, to see those problems. I find myself agreeing more these days, at least about Bush and his Iraqi war, with conservative columnist Charley Reese, who wrote on Dec. 12: "Americans' loyalty is owed to the Constitution, not to any particular politician or political party. Every American has a duty to oppose any politician who violates the Constitution or shows disdain for it. That includes federal judges." "My beef with the president is not with George Bush, the man. He seems like an affable and decent chap. My beef is with his policies and with his administration's apparently rock-solid determination to never tell the truth to the American people. His chief adviser, Karl Rove, seemed to have launched the 2004 re-election campaign the day after inauguration in 2001. Consequently, everything the president does and says seems guided by that goal." _____ Fielding wrote: I have been busy w/ a getting proposal ready that could bring 500 new jobs, avg salary $50k, to Mississippi - w/ any luck I can post details later for you people who might be interested on what is now a work in progress. No guarantees - but what in life is guaranteed? That sounds wonderful, Fielding. I just read the CL's editorial for tomorrow, and was thinking about this jobs problem and how we need to come together to solve it, which I'm sure no expert on how to do. I look forward to hearing about your suggestions, including any specific story ideas you might suggest to me in e-mail. G'night.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2003-12-18T01:53:05-06:00

ID

136837

Comment

"(Former Secretary of State) Albright was in the Fox News studio's green room waiting to appear on an evening program when she made the remark. "She said, 'Do you suppose that the Bush administration has Usama bin Laden hidden away somewhere and will bring him out before the election?'" said Fox News analyst and Roll Call executive editor Mort Kondracke. "She was not smiling." Two makeup artists who prep the guests before their appearances also reported that Albright did not ask her question in a joking manner. " sad - I hope she was kidding on this one

Author

Fielding

Date

2003-12-18T02:01:07-06:00

ID

136838

Comment

sad - I hope she was kidding on this one Maybe it's just me, but I suspect if she meant it, a woman with her connections would be talking to someone other than FOX analysts about her suspicions. ;-D It seems a bit of a stretch to qualify as a smoking gun of some sort, especially since she's not exactly running for office, or holding one. Personally, I never liked her, although she had her moments. This remark notwithstanding, I am glad to hear that the words "Osama bin Laden" are back on the front page of the news now that Hussein has been caught. The U.S., and our media, needs to stay very focused on the man that we have proof beyond a shadow of a doubt has committed great acts of terrorism against this country. Now, I suspect, the pressure will be on for the administration to do that as it should have been all along. G'night again. :-D

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2003-12-18T02:07:30-06:00

ID

136839

Comment

I too have seen that opinion piece from Card, and it doesn't really do much for me. From what I can tell, both sides are using the war to further partisan agendas, and it's disheartening, to say the least. The other thing I'm growing weary of, is being told that we "won the war" in both Iraq and Afghanistan. It seems to me that "winning the war" only gets us, or any country, part of the way. Force is easy. We have the largest military in the world - of course we win when we're pitted against smaller countries with fewer resources. That has never been the issue. The issues are what happens in the next year, in the next 5 years, and in the next 10 years. That's the hard part, and the part that the people who say 'we've won' seem to want to avoid talking about. Yes, the Taliban is gone - that's good. But, has the country been re-built? Why are children still being killed by US guns? Where's the country headed? Same for Iraq - Saddam's gone, now what? This is not over, and I'm tired of people telling me that it is. And (still on the Card piece), I don't perceive Dean as taking an anti-war pose in order to win the democratic election. But maybe Mr. Card has some data to support that notion. Like Donna, I'm thoroughly enjoying Charley Reese lately. Actually, I love to read him even when I disagree, just because I like his style.

Author

kate

Date

2003-12-18T12:11:04-06:00

ID

136840

Comment

Card wrote: Instead, their platforms range from Howard Dean's "Bush is the devil" Did Dean really say this quote, or is Card planting a bit of wild hyperbole here to make his point? What's weird about this column to me is, like wildly partisan columns on "both" sides, he's not going to convince anyone who doesn't already agree with him. This seems written in the Ann Coulter style of opinion-writing designed to get the faithful frothing at the mouth (while hoping there are enough faithful that you don't look like an ass later for writing such extreme crap). I think it's great that he calls media outlets like Reuters out on specious use of numbers about Vietnam casualties, if that's what they're doing, but then he tarnishes his credibility on that analysis by making the illogical jump to arguing that, presumably, all Bush critics are engaging in a "vitriolic hate campaign." Er, maybe a lot of Americans don't like that he's leading us into a place where much of the world hates us, not to mention the long list of Bush policies that many people consider very un-American. Trying to argue that his critics think he's "evil" strikes me as a red herring; that's such a subjective label that it is virtually meaningless, despite the fact that we can all agree that certain acts are unquestionably "evil" (like the 9-11 attacks). We should be focused on policies, not labels. The most telling point to me if that Card tries to say that Dean is anti-war because it'll get him the nomination. If Mr. Card hadn't noticed, that hasn't been considered the safest route among many staunch Democrats over the past several months. Now that it's looking like it may pay off, as more Americans start looking closer at this war, Card argues that Dean being "anti-war" is simply a "posture." That's laughable. He writes: "Think what it will mean if we elect a Democratic candidate who has committed himself to an antiwar posture in order to get his party's nomination." That is some posture. To my thinking, this column really insults the intelligence of the American people who know that part of the point of being American is the freedom to criticize, and vote out when necessary, our leaders.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2003-12-18T12:31:27-06:00

ID

136841

Comment

The way I read it, Card was using some hyperbole in his "Bush is the devil" thing. But, I could be wrong.

Author

kate

Date

2003-12-18T12:40:43-06:00

ID

136842

Comment

Many voters that I spoken have become dismayed, and disgusted, by all this conspiracy talk by the Democrats. It appears that Democratic Party consultants are also worried about the fallout. "Joe Cerell, a Democratic campaign consultant who has worked in every presidential campaign since 1956, said the comments - even if in jest - do not help the party. "You'd better know what you're talking about, you'd better have some evidence, or it's counterproductive," Mr. Cerell said. "The more outrageous the comments are, the greater the chance that it's going to turn into a headline."" "Donna Brazile, who ran Al Gore's presidential campaign in 2000, said the comments of Mrs. Albright and Mr. Dean and Mr. McDermott have "no place in our dialogue on this very serious issue. I think most Americans have some lingering doubts about what happened on September 11, but until the commission and Congress completes its investigation, I think it best if people hold these views to themselves. But because we don't yet have a nominee, it's all out in the open."" http://www.washtimes.com/national/20031217-115113-2173r.htm

Author

RanchHuevos

Date

2003-12-18T14:37:40-06:00

ID

136843

Comment

I wasn't sure where to add this, but it's a very interesting commentary on Kerry and his war stance, told through the experience of a pro-Vietnam War veteran who is Kerry's peer. If you're a "Tales of the City" fan, you've gotta' read this article. http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2003/12/14/tale_of_two_soldiers/

Author

Nia

Date

2003-12-18T16:38:06-06:00

ID

136844

Comment

"Conspiracy" has become one of those words that is so over-used that it means nothing these days. Extremes on whatever end always accuse the other side of "conspiracy" to deflect their own side's weaknesses. And inevitably, it is thrown out there to cover for a much more important conversation that needs to happen. I would be as shocked as the most avid Bush supporter if someone proved that he knew the 9-11 attacks were coming as they did; the question here is competency, ability to hire and manage the right people, seeking out and telling the truth, and smart decision-making, and it always has been. Let the conspiracy theorists drown each other out.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2003-12-18T17:11:48-06:00

ID

136845

Comment

Nia, my mind is blown. Maupin actually met Richard Nixon!? Who knew!? The conspiracy angle on Osama is, well, tragic. It was stupid of Allbright to say something like that. Of course, the commentary by Kissinger in that article ("There's something about president Bush that blows the Democrats' minds") are nearly as tragic. "Democrats" don't subscribe to that theory. Gaa. Too both sides. Or, as I heard someone say, "Oy, humbug."

Author

kate

Date

2003-12-18T17:32:19-06:00

ID

136846

Comment

Even better (or worse), Kate, Maupin was a "Nixon pro-war flunky"! Given what we now know about Ronald Reagan's use of the Iran hostage situation for his election propaganda, I don't think it's so odd what Albright said. And although I'm no huge fan of hers (she made us look stupid and uncaring in the Balkans), I do have a fair amount of respect for her. It takes a lot of guts to go back to college after being a wife and mother for twenty years, never having had a job, and then going on to become Secretary of State.

Author

Nia

Date

2003-12-18T18:13:06-06:00

ID

136847

Comment

I don't think it's odd for the suspicious among us to be wondering about what's really going on. It's human nature. However, I don't think the former secretary of state should be voicing conspiracy theories to anyone connected with the media, unless she's got some supporting data, somewhere. Something other than, "it's happened before, and I wouldn't put it past him/them."

Author

kate

Date

2003-12-18T18:37:23-06:00

ID

136848

Comment

True, it was irresponsible of her to make that kind of a comment in front of camera-ready folks.

Author

Nia

Date

2003-12-18T18:45:58-06:00

ID

136849

Comment

Clearly it was irresponsible, but I guess I'm not seeing the smoking gun there. The Wash Times, predictably, is presenting it as if she's dropping a dramatic bombshell, but it sounds like she made a dumb off-the-cuff comment and the FOX crowd started screaming, "conspiracy theorist!", just in time for the damage-control cycle on the 9-11 report. See, don't listen to that report; they're all just a bunch of damn conspiracy nuts! (Yes, y'all can accuse me all you want of believing that FOX is a conspiracy of dunces. ) Speaking of, regardless of your political persuasion (OK, not if you're hard right; you'll hate it), I have to highly recommend LISTENING TO, not just reading, Al Franken's "Lying Liars" book (or whatever it's actually called). It is so damned funny; it's like listening to comedic radio theater. We listened to it on our big-ass trip up east at Thanksgiving. And on that topic, have y'all seen the little dust-up between Matt Drudge and Bill O'Reilly because Drudge, this time, apparently caught O'Reilly in another of his little white fibs, this time about his book sales: "FOXNEWS's top-rated host Bill O'Reilly recently claimed that he is "running against Hillary for most copies of nonfiction books sold this year!" But numbers obtained by the DRUDGE REPORT show a dramatically different sales scene for 2003. NIELSEN, the same company that ranks O'Reilly #1 on Cable TV, currently places O'Reilly at #6 for the year on the nonfiction charts -- trailing rival Al Franken by nearly 30%! " O'Reilly responded: "I mean you can't believe a word Matt Drudge says," O'Reilly told the cameras. "Now you've got the Matt Drudges of the world and these other people, Michael Moore and all of these crazies, all right, no responsibility... that is a threat to democracy, I think." O'Reilly warned: "They'll just spin it and twist it and take it out of proportion every which way." http://www.drudgereport.com/mattbc.htm Of course, the South Beach Diet is beating the crap out of all of 'em. ;-D

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2003-12-18T18:54:02-06:00

ID

136850

Comment

I don't like Albright, never did. She was asleep at the wheel while 8000 died a day in Rwanda. I'm with Kate, her comments were better left unsaid. But what do you expect. Albright was more inept than Cyrus Vance, if that's possible. Now, over at the JFP, they seem to love her: "Looks like our favorite sassy sister Madeleine Albright, the grand dame of American diplomacy, has gone over to the dark side, returned trumphant, and in the process put a bee in the bonnet of the cerveaux petits at Faux News." check it out.

Author

JuliusLourdes

Date

2003-12-19T01:30:38-06:00

ID

136851

Comment

Julius, I'm not with you. The link you posted goes to nothing related to Jackson Free Press, or your Freak Press, and I'm not sure why you're trying to muddy the discussion here. Like Nia, I have alot of respect for Allbright, and what she's accomplished. Like Donna, I don't see much of a 'smoking gun' in this case. It was a stupid comment, to make anywhere near anyone in the media, especially the folks at Fox News.

Author

kate

Date

2003-12-19T15:54:59-06:00

ID

136852

Comment

Don't mind Julius Lourdes, Kate. He's the new JFP marketing guy, and he gets a little obsessed. ;-D

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2003-12-19T16:48:45-06:00

ID

136853

Comment

Hey Ladd - Thanks for the spoof of Hot Licks & Rhetoric. Since you posted that phony link, inbounds from this page have made up 31% of my traffic! Rock on... G

Author

ClarionLedgerRules

Date

2003-12-23T01:09:49-06:00