ARC's 1st Law: As a "progressive" online discussion grows longer, the probability of a nefarious reference to Karl Rove approaches one

Sunday, July 31, 2005

Dean's too crazy for even some Kossacks...

But unfortunately for the Democratic party and the nation, not most of them....

Glenn highlights a Kossack at dKos taking Howard Dean to task for a recent statement:

The president and his right-wing Supreme Court think it is "okay" to have the government take your house if they feel like putting a hotel where your house is.
In azizhp's own words:
There's simply no way that Dean's comments can be spun to make them even remotely defensible. Dean's tendency to shoot his mouth off was endearing to us Deaniacs as a matter of pride during the campaign, but as DNC chair it's been a constant embarrassment.
Which is exactly what I was saying was going to happen when Dean was appointed DNC chair. Lot's of Republicans were happy to hear that Dean was going to be the mouthpiece of the party. I knew it would provide plenty of stupid and indefensible comments which would illustrate how out of the mainstream the Democratic party was moving.

The best though is that poor azizhp has to fight the other Kossacks who don't understand how anyone could think Dean said something wrong, to those that don't care if he was being deceitful.

Some highlights:
The SCOTUS appointed Quacky president in 2000. IMO, that makes them "Bush's Court". And in general they are pretty right wing. That make's them "Bush's Right-Wing Court".

So, as usual, Howard Dean is Right.

And even if I agreed that your nit-picks made Dean's statement a mis-statement, Dean captured the spirit of the argument correctly.

Dean is one of the few people in this country trying to restore America's freedom and democracy. Why don't you save your venom for the Bad Guys?

true about the lefties BUT (4.00 / 2)

This issue has made people mad. The public does not know who the lefties and righties are. In fact a couple of the "lefties" are Republican appointees who interpret the law isn a supposed liberal way. The ruling also basically left the decision to the elected officials who made the eminent domain call...the legal argument being that if you don't agree with them, then you need to vote them out of office. The federal judicial should not interfere in legislative decisions or so they ruled. Anyway, why shouldn't we pick up on a "activist" court decision and spin it our way? That is what the right does all the time. This decision made the public mad. The local government used eminent domain for a commercial use under an economic development scheme. I think it is wrong on the surface but have not read the case law.


Well, here's the thing (2.61 / 13)

I'm 100% behind it. Why? Because it resonates, and I'm perfectly willing to go for a false statement that illustrates a truth.

The GOP is the party of Big Business. Big Business (business in general) is who benefitted from the Kelo case.

So, frankly, I say it's a great line of attack. Screw accuracy -- remind people that now big business can take their homes away to make a shopping mall, and that's A-okay by the GOP.


Do we have universal heathcare yet? (4.00 / 6)

How about full employment? Are we out of Iraq? Is education fully funded and all our kids graduating with the ability to read well enough to be employed in a car factory?

If not, why are you pissing and moaning about a statement Dean made which seems pretty harmless?


It doesn't matter (4.00 / 4)

It doesn't actually matter which justices voted for Kelo and which voted against. All that matters is that the decision is unpopular and Dean is trying to tie that unpopularity to this administration, which did in fact support the decision.

Your Co-Conspirator,
ARC: Brian