In the coming years ahead, before Hillary's expected coronation, republicans are doing all they can to expose Hillary for what she is (or what they think she is.) Meanwhile, you don't hear much about her from her own party. What you do hear is Howard Dean. Oh boy, do you hear from Howard Dean.
Looking at the leadership of the DNC, I think, is a good place to start in an attempt to dissect out the different facets of the democratic party. As has been posted in another blog , not all democrats are liberal, and not all republicans are conservative.
Howard Dean's statements, both in the past and present, have identified him as *very* liberal according to some, while others think he's more moderate. Regardless of the "tag" you put on him, the one thing that he is for sure is the leader, the voice, of the democratic party.
I would like to know from any and all readers what your take on Howard Dean is. Should he be the leader of the DNC? What qualities does he have that you think supports or discredits him as the leader? I've heard the line from the conservative media, and it sounds scary; what I haven't heard is what democrats themselves think. Or better yet, what Decatur residents think.
So, what do you think?
About Me
- LincolnRepublican
- Decatur, Illinois, United States
- Just a regular conservative guy in a mostly democrat town. Anyone have any Prozac?
16 comments:
Well, somehow I don't think Howard Dean and Brian Beyers know each other. But thanks for the post.
However,
State democrats have seen some change in the past few months. Flider narrowly escapes getting elected (if it weren't for help from Madigan's war chest.) Several democrats in southern counties were ousted as well, including justice Gordon Maag from the Madison/St. Clair county area.
I think these races spell out something for the Illinois democratic party, and that is "Do something!" (especially with the tort reform issue.) Towing the party line isn't good enough anymore; there needs to be action.
Similarly, Howard Dean recently made statements to the effect of "we could stand here all day and [Bush bash], but what we really need is action." (I paraphrase.) So, my question remains, how effective a leader do people (including our local democrats) think Dr. Dean is going to be in accomplishing this?
TDD:
The statements I made were about trends not numbers. I think the adoption of a suicidal state budget by our overwhelmingly democratic GA has proven the numbers.
My statement was about a little tremble in the democrat's foundation of power. The people of Illinois who elected all these democrats are finding out that some issues where democrats are siding with special interest groups instead of the common good are getting their attention and perhaps getting them to vote some democrats out.
Your statement did lead me to one question, though: if the republican party in Illinois is a minority, shouldn't the minority have "rights" like a filibuster? According to Harry Reid and Ted Kennedy it probably should. My comment is half in jest, mind you. (I'm not sure if our state constitution allows for filibusters or not; I don't recall it ever being used.)
To Decaturite: I'm not sure what you're making reference to with regard to the 12th grade thief thing. Was this on today's show? I missed it.
I would agree that Mr. Byers is a political conservative, for the most part, or at least he plays one on the radio. His cultural liberalism however does take away from his believability on the radio at times. But, he keeps listeners and therefore advertisers and therefore a job.
I think it would be nice if he "toned-down" his show some with respect to the references to sex, excessive alcohol, etc. That's not what most conservatives want to be associated with, to my knowledge. Bill Clinton, yes, but not most conservatives.
Maybe WSOY would let you have a show? Gallagher's getting wierd anyway, you could take his spot. (You know, even Gallagher presents a stark contrast to Byers at times. Some days when 9am hits, it's like, 'Thank God that's over!')
For now
Wait, I forgot. Is this about Howard Dean, Brian Byers or Illinois Republicans. I forgot. Anyway. Dean comes off as a bitter, grumpy, sore looser. Dean's appeal extends only to the most liberal democrats or the most ardent Bush haters. Dean is doing more damage than Terry McCallif (forgot how to spell his name, sorry) ever did. Everytime Dean opens his mouth he says something ...well, stupid.
Hey, TDD and LR, as far as state politics goes, its not a dem or rep issue. It is truly a downstate / upstate issue. We need people who fight for downstate Illinois or you get a budget like this. That gives so much to Cook County and so little to anything south of I-80. (Why Flider voted it is beyond me. What was he thinking? I had some hope for him after the election, but he is back in Gov. Blag. pocket again,) What TDD says is right. Illinois is a Dem state, but dont worry LR. Gov Blag. is doing for the dems what Gov Ryan did for the reps. All Republicans have to do is sit back and watch it happen.
Hey Decaturite, Byers is a blowhard who knows a 50% of whatever is is talking about on any given day. Take it for what is worth. I mean its just a radio show. But as a fellow blogger who is getting a little concerned about you I have to say. "Brother, just let it go" If you keep obsessing about this guy, you will end up in a straight jacket in a padded room. Just food for thought, my brother.
Man,
Ya leave town for a few hours and you come back to this!
Thanks Sponge for staying on topic, even though none of the rest (including me) did.
When I look at Howard Dean, I see a frustrated doctor from the old school who is still looking to fill that God complex, only no one wants to listen. So, he yells louder. He was actually good at it (filling the Bush-bashing role) for a while, but then Kerry stole his thunder. So now they made him head of the DNC. I don't really understand it, to tell you the truth. Maybe it was the safest place for him, I don't know.
Okay, now I've baited someone, I know. Anyone with any opinions on Howard Dean (aka NOT Brian Byers or Illinois politicians)?
He is exactly the man I like to see leading the Party of NO. The more extreme the Dr. Dean leadership, the more obvious to logical humans that there really could be a solid place in the Republican Party for them. Not an angry place, but a thoughtful, logical future for America and liberty.
Howard Dean, has been at best, extremely quirky. He does seem to be the most anti-Bush among leading democrats and the most anti-republican. Perhaps his role as head of the democratic party is simply a marketing ploy; to get other democrats, regardless of the degree of liberalism, to become likewise more anti-republican. And, as VP pointed out, there's no discussion of ideas, no offerings of new thoughts (rarely), just anti-Bush/anti-republican jargon.
Leaving him as leader of the democratic party could go either way for the democrats. If the majority of swing voters adopt his rhetoric then he will have served his purpose. The more informed the voters are in all aspects of politics, the more they will better decipher the rhetoric and conclude that Dean's liberalistic view of America is not what is right for America. Exposing Dean and liberalism for what they are should be the focus of the GOP if they wish to take advantage of Dean's eccentric style.
Not one democrat contributed to the discussion on Howard Dean, not one!
Very interesting! Perhaps they do think he's not the right man for DNC leadership. Given recent quotes from Biden and John Edwards, I'd say there is division in the ranks.
How can the Libs defend him and admit that they are "Liberals?"
With rare exception, to the left, the term Liberal is considered a slur. I consider it descriptive, and wouldn't consider that "Conservative" is a slur either.
Definition of a moderate...
A "moderate" is someone who just can't make up their mind, or a liberal in disguise.
(Note to TDD, I made this opinionated definition up, and I have no attribution to link to for Decaturite)
The Democrat Party has a hobbled together coalition of special interests that are dependent on government. Without control of the government, they lose control of the special interests.
More government or less? Can the biggest difference between Left and Right really can boil down to this question.?
Hey You Dems! Get over to Tuscany's next week. For $20.00 you can hear Bob Flider's Smoke and Mirror Show, where he attempts to convince you that all the money he accepted from the Chicago Machine didn't buy his loyalty to them. He'll take your 20 bucks and try to convince you that he's done something this year for downstate other than voting with the Chicago Dems to bail out the CTA and fund the Chicago teacher's pension...who knows, if you come up with enough money for him, you might be able to buy him away from Chicago.
More proof that Howard Dean may not last as DNC leader. Check out this article from the La Times
The one thing about this article that I thought was the most interesting was the comment made by Rep. Harold Ford of Tennessee, when he states, "We really don't have a message right now," with respect to what Democrats should be saying since their election losses in November.
'WE REALLY DON'T HAVE A MESSAGE RIGHT NOW.'
VP, does this sound familiar to you at all?
It sure does, LR. It is easier for them to voice a partisan "no" to anything from the right than it is to come up with something else or even to work with the majority to make the proposal more to their liking. Perhaps they see some way this will help them. I don't.
Harold Ford, Zell Miller, and some others get it that the Democrat Party leadership is leading their supporters toward an idea free zone. Gov. Blago should suggest to the rest of them that they do a self administered mental and testicular veracity test.
Good Day!
Let's just say this up front: it is outrageously funny that Republicans are trying to label Democrats as intolerant and full of hate. That's a good one! Thanks!
I keep seeing on all the leftist blogs about republicans being filled with "hate and intolerance."
What specific examples does anyone have of hate coming from the republican party? Just because someone doesn't agree with the democrats doesn't mean they are filled with hate and intolerance; it means we have a difference of opinion!
Intolerance? Let's see: According to Howard Dean we are a party of white Christians, but our Sec of State is a black woman; Colin Powell was black wasn't he? Not to mention several judicial nominees are from minority groups. President Bush has never spoken out against any religious group simply because of their religion. Where are these lies coming from?
Hate? Where? I see statements of belief, I see people offering opinions, I even see people debating on issues, but that doesn't qualify as hate. There's a big difference here, and liberal democrats are blurring the line between differences in opinion and "hate" in order to make it convenient for the masses to "hate" the republicans!
PLEASE...that spin doesn't work here..
Post a Comment