portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary global

environment | government | political theory

The Problems with Howard Dean

I had to really dig to find some of these stories that were formerly listed on google, and now are completely gone. Even the search on Commondreams no longer lists the major anti-Dean stories - I had to go search imcs just to find one that someone reposted. That sort of thing alarms me, when sites are actively trying to lose all negative mention of someone.

Is Dean really worth all this just because he's pro-gay rights?? He's not an environmentalist (brought big box places to beautiful Vermont), he's against medical marijuana (a doctor!), he only decided to be against the war in Iraq when it became clear that the others he was up against would support it (so he could distinguish himself), he is a self-described pro-AIPAC Zionist, and he believes the Palestinian violence is not due to the occupation but to 'terrorism itself.'

Wake up Dean supporters! Switch to Green or vote Kucinich. Dean will sell us all out in a heartbeat. He only appears 'liberal' because Vermont voters forced him to be. Take a look at some of these stories, and decide for yourself.
Published on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 by CommonDreams.org
Howard Dean: Hawk in Dove's Clothing?
by Stephen Zunes

". . . when it came to Israel and Palestine - the former Vermont governor declared that, while the United States should become more engaged, he did not have any fundamental objections with President George W. Bush's policies. Dean called for an end to Palestinian violence against Israeli civilians, but he did not call for a cessation of Israeli violence against Palestinian civilians. Similarly, there was no call for an end of the Israeli occupation, for Israeli compliance with UN Security Council resolutions, or a withdrawal from Israel's illegal settlements in the occupied territories or even a freeze on the construction of new settlements."

"When asked by the Jewish newspaper Forward late last year as to whether he supported APN's perspective, Governor Dean replied 'No, my view is closer to AIPAC's view.'"

Published on Monday, April 14, 2003 by CommonDreams.org
As Baghdad Falls Howard Dean Folds Back into the National Security Establishment
by Charles Knight

"In effect this supposedly 'anti-war' Democrat has announced his support for a policy in which Washington will decide which countries are allowed to have nuclear weapons and will reserve for itself the right to forcefully disarm those who do not voluntarily disarm by U.S. dictate. In this crucial regard Dean's position is in close accordance with the Bush doctrine of coercive disarmament and preventive war."

Tuesday, June 10, 2003
Presidential Hopefuls Push Energy Alternatives, Pan Kyoto
by Katherine Stapp

"Former Vermont governor Howard Dean has sided most closely with the Bush administration, endorsing the National Governors Association policy, which opposed the Kyoto Protocol unless it included mandatory emissions cuts for developing countries. The policy recommended that the United States "not sign or ratify any agreement that would result in serious harm to the U.S. economy."

"Of the Democrats now running, only Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich has stated, "the U.S. must ratify the Kyoto Protocol."

Published on Tuesday, June 3, 2003 by the Madison Capital Times
Kucinich Draws Crowd, But Not Media
by John Nichols
"Dean, a self-proclaimed fiscal conservative with a so-so record on issues of concern to working people, has been dubbed the acceptable "liberal" by the inside-the-Beltway crowd."

JUNE 3, 2003
3:23 PM
CONTACT: Marijuana Policy Project
Bruce Mirken, 202-462-5747 x113
Medical Marijuana Becomes Presidential Campaign Issue Granite Staters for Medical Marijuana Begins Organizing in New Hampshire

"Vermont Gov. Howard Dean killed a medical marijuana bill that was on the verge of passage in 2002, ignoring pleas from the medical community, AIDS patient groups, and others."

"This week, U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio became the first Democratic candidate to stand up for patients, telling the San Francisco Chronicle on May 29 that he supports legal access to medical marijuana 'without reservation. ... I have known people who have had cancer and who have been in horrible pain. Anything that can alleviate their suffering should be available.'"

APRIL 25, 2002
4:31 PM
CONTACT: Marijuana Policy Project
Bruce Mirken, 202-462-5747 x113
Vermont Senate Panel Approves Medical Marijuana

"'The pundits in Montpelier and elsewhere pronounced the medical marijuana bill dead on arrival when Representative David Zuckerman (P-Burlington) introduced it earlier this year,' Rogers said. 'H. 645 has overcome powerful opposition from Governor Howard Dean because courageous medical marijuana patients -- who risk arrest and imprisonment every day -- delivered powerful testimony in House and Senate committees. Patients convinced legislators that seriously ill Vermonters shouldn't go to jail for the simple act of taking their medicine. A vote for H. 645 is a vote to protect patients and a vote against H. 645 is a vote to put sick people in prison.'"

Voter Guide
Name: Howard Dean
In short: Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean is the only candidate who has actually killed a medical marijuana bill. Because of Dean's actions, Vermonters with AIDS, cancer, and other terrible illnesses still face arrest and jail under state law for using medical marijuana. In recent statements he has attempted to sound reasonable, but his actions have shown that medical marijuana patients can never trust him. The only reason we give Dean an F+ and not a straight F is because the latter grade should be reserved for Bush, who is as cruel and heartless as anyone could possibly be on the medical marijuana issue.

February 22, 2003
Meet Howard Dean
The Man from Vermont is Not Green (He's Not Even a Liberal)

"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."

Dean replacing critics on environmental advisory panel
April 8, 2001
(from the Regional news section)
Staff Writer

MONTPELIER - A leading environmentalist was asked to leave Gov. Howard Dean's council of environmental advisers after she criticized the governor's short-lived proposal for a coal-fired power plant in Vermont.

Elizabeth Courtney, executive director of the Vermont Natural Resources Council, was one of 20 members of the governor's environmental council, which meets about once every three months with the governor.

But after Courtney wrote a newspaper opinion piece faulting Dean for his brief advocacy of a coal plant, she learned she was no longer welcome on the council. David Rocchio, the governor's legal counsel, wrote her late last month to say she will be replaced on the council by VNRC's board chairman. The move came after she had written the governor on energy issues and showed his staff her draft newspaper piece, Courtney said.

Is Howard Dean For Real? Well, Not Entirely
By Morton M. Kondracke
Roll Call Contributing Writer
January 27, 2003
Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean ought to do well in the Iowa Democratic caucuses unless the anti-war folks out there find out where he really stands on Iraq.

Gov. Dean's Slander of Mumia / Protesters
Bob Witanek ( bwitanek@IGC.APC.ORG)
Mon, 19 Aug 1996 21:13:31 -0700
More on Vermont Governor Howard Dean's slanderous attack
against the six protesters arrested last summer during efforts to
halt the execution of Mumia Abu-Jamal. The following is an excerpt from Peter Freyne's column "Inside Track" in the August 7, 1996, issue of Vermont's weekly newspaper, Seven Days.
two choices 18.Jun.2003 10:00


Do you want to win - or at least have a chance at winning - or maintain your ideological purity?

Kucinich, or a green for that matter, is about as likely to be elected as I am.

Kucinich is in the top three of moveon.org 18.Jun.2003 10:59


It wouldn't be impossible if people like you didn't give up in order have the lesser of two evils.

Look what we have because of the Democrats (either created, helped to pass, or have done nothing against)
Fast Track
War in Iraq!
John Asscroft nomination!
Huge financial aid to a country that assassinates people in dense urban areas - Israel
(And Pelosi was attacking Bush for having criticized Israeli policies of assassination - so even the Republicans are being more outspoken about the absurdity of it!)
and on and on . . .

The WTO / World Bank / IMF are a means to enslave the entire third world - on Kucinich wants to remove them. NAFTA, started by Clinton, is a similar enslavement of low income people and is destructive to Third World Nations.

No doubt, as much damage gets done from the Democrat's policies of supporting horrific globalizing policies and wrecking entire cultures and peoples as Bush's damage in starting wars.

the point is... 18.Jun.2003 11:43

The One True b!X

If you made a full list of Kucinich's positions and statements -- or, Hell, even if you just took his proposed Department of Peace -- and showed them to the American people, he'd never find enough support to win the presidency. Regardless of whether or not you agree with him, the people would never be sold on him, like it or not.

Frankly, if MoveOn's primary ends up endorsing Kucinich, it will probably not only be a wasted endorsement, it will undermine MoveOn's credibility in some respects.

There is but one purpose 18.Jun.2003 11:52


Lets get the greedheads out of power. Dean has the best chance. From what I've seen he has the best chance of victory over the Bush power advantage. Deviding people will simply help the other side win.

yes, B!X, that is the point 18.Jun.2003 12:01

original commenter ...

You hit it on the head: Kucinich is far too out of the mainstream to ever win. Lesser than two evils isn't "people like me" giving up or selling out, it's a hard and fast fact.

You can say that's elitist, we need more parties, or we need preference rating voting, or whatever, but that doesn't change what we have. And what we have is an electoral college system that for reasons of geography and the voting patterns of the various states, starts out with Bush or pretty much any other Republican candidate in the lead. To unseat Bush, you've got to appeal to suburbanites, soccer moms, hardhats and other such folks in several key states.

If this was about picking the president of the forest kids, Kucinich might just be your man. But it's not, and he's not.

And I'll tell ya, maybe Dean's not the guy either. But I think he could be close.

Some interesting statistics, for those interested 18.Jun.2003 12:33


Rural areas are over-represented in Congress, specifically to appease the smaller states (and keep the union strong).

The electoral college was originally meant as a means to ensure a large state could not continually elect a "homegrown boy" - someone whose loyalties lie with the state instead of the union. Today, it's been hobbled and is basically pointless.

But anyway - here are some interesting voting trend statistics, from the '00 elections:

Counties won by Gore: 677
Counties won by Bush: 2,434

Population of counties won by Gore: 127 million
Population of counties won by Bush: 143 million

Square miles of country won by Gore: 580,000
Square miles of country won by Bush: 2,427,000

States won by Gore: 19
States won by Bush: 29

Average Murder per 100,000 residents in counties won by Gore: 13.2
Average Murder per 100,000 residents in counties won by Bush: 2.1

The last statistic is telling about the social differences (and everyday life) of people voting for Bush vs. people voting for Gore.

I think the key for the Democratic candidate is to completely avoid most of the red states. Whomever it is will not get them. There's nothing that can be said in most of those states to change the outcome -- the leftist policies just won't fly.

If I were the Democratic candidate, I'd be spending a fair amount of time in the 19 states won by Gore in '00, and lots of time in red states with large urban populations. (Michigan, etc). Kucinich may have a chance in states like New York, with huge urban populations. But he wouldn't stand an icecube's chance in hell of winning any of the battleground states.

Dean, on the other hand, could. It is precisely because he is moderate that he might win. A lot of his stances upset me too -- medical marijuana, etc -- but I've still donated money to his campaign, because I believe he can win.

Democracy is about compromise.

If you're dying of pneumonia, hampered by persistent bleeding, you stop the bleeding first.

my position 18.Jun.2003 13:56


Which I can't verify with statistics yet, but I'm thinking it would an interesting study so I might do it. I would contend that the democratic base is going to vote for whoever the democratic candidate is and that there is a huge base of people who voted for bush in the last election that are now thoroughly disillusioned by his policies and will vote for whoever the democratic canidate is. This gives the democratic candidate a considerable advantage in numbers of voters. Let's not forget that probably the most significant statistic from the 2000 election was that Gore got half a million more votes. So the democrats already had the edge and it is even larger. In addition, look for some rural states, which were screwed under clinton and even more screwed under bush to be easy pick ups for the democrats (tennessee, west virginia). Also look for no changes in states with republican controlled voting mechanisms (texas, nebraska, florida). So, with the democrats in such a good position the question becomes: how could the democrats lose? I mean, just look at how badly the dnc and the party in general has handled the past several elections it would surprise very few to see them screw up 2004. But how would they do it, or, how could the republicans manage to win?

Either bush needs to pick up votes or the democrats need to hemmorage them. The only argument I've seen put forward is for bush to run on a safety and security platform and try to pick up the soccer mom vote. I don't find this argument convincing and I haven't heard any others about how bush will attract any voters that didn't vote for him in the last election. Now, it's much easier to see the democrats hemmoraging voters. The only candidate I've heard long time democrats say they would consider not voting for is lieberman. He, perhaps singularly, has the ability to be too far to the right and lose the moderates and progressives. I haven't heard any democrats say they would not vote for kucinich, but he would lose the bush defectors, who would probably just stay home. However, kucinich, perhaps singularly, has the ability to attract progressives, which may or may not be a net win of voters (I suspect the former and think this would be very interesting to do a study on). Dean is in the same position gore was in, which is good, it means he should win without any problems. He may attract a small number of progressives and he's not likely to alienate the bush defectors. Of all the candidates I think he would be the biggest win, especially with a progressive or minority vice president (moseley braun seems like an ideal choice). Kerry, likewise, should be a big win, he'll ge tthe bush defectors in spades, but he'll lose the small number of progressives that dean might have attracted.

I think the democrats would have to run an exceptionally bad campaign in order to not receive more votes and I think the presidency will be determined, as in 2000, by the strength of the coup vs the strength of the resistance. However, one need only look at the how poorly the democrats' campaigns in 2000 and 2002 to see an emerging pattern. Perhaps then, it is wise to support the candidate who will attract the most voters (like dean, or maybe kerry) to help insulate the candidate from an exceptionally poorly run campaign. But I don't buy that any candidate save, perhaps, lieberman (and even then I suspect he would win, but that it would be very close) could actually get fewer votes than bush and/or not win the electoral college. Even kucinich who is running on nothing more than a relatively uncompromised traditional liberal platform can win, and win easily with a good campaign. But, I would tend to agree that dean, and perhaps kerry will win with more votes, and could more easily survive a bad campaign.

In the end, each of us must do what we feel is right and allow others to do the same. Many (the majority of people) will not vote at all, some revolutionaries (as I see them) will vote for bush to more quickly bring about the end of capitalism and us imperialism, many will vote "against bush" for whomever the democrats run, and some will refuse to vote for a candidate who does not represent them even in spite of bush (as people did in 2000). It's understandable that many want bush out of office (he did get votes from less than a quarter of eligible voters) but I think to do so the real committement needs to be in handling the coup that will occur when the democrats once again get more votes (and win the electoral college without florida). Although I suppose the more votes the democrats win by the easier it will be to defeat the coup, so there's that argument for a moderate again...

Yes, vote Democrat 18.Jun.2003 14:02


Well, if what you want is more nominations of types like Asscroft, more support for PATRIOT Act II, more support for Republican wars, then vote Democrat, by all means! If you want NAFTA on steroids, then vote Democrat!

Dean is the perfect Democrat. He comes from a big money family, attended Yale, and pretends to be a liberal, just like all the other millionaires in congress. He's figured out that the way to get attention is to pick fights with the other candidates on issues he knows he's got them cornered on. But has anyone tried to pick a fight with Dean on his AIPAC stance? They wouldn't dare. If Dean has his way he'll make sure Palestine is cleaned right up of all those terrorists, no matter what it takes. As you know, the occupation isn't the issue, it's the terrorists in Palestine, thats the real issue.

And when you look at his record, it's scary enough that the young professionals who want him in have had to sack the bad webpages that you see here. Perfect to know he's got his army of young professionals to watch out for him already.

let's not forget 18.Jun.2003 14:28


The democrats supported FTAA (and gore endorsed it in his presidential campaign).

The democrats also supported the Homeland Security Act.

And, this has been bugging me, wouldn't that be more correctly termed "Patriot Act II" and the upcoming Domestic Security Enhancement Act would be more accurately "Patriot Act III"? If we were going to label these acts in that way.... maybe we just need a mnemoic to help remember these three seperate but similar pieces of legislation. We can then move to more academic exercises such as comparing the specifics of these bills to the "Decree of the Reich President for the Protection of the People and State" and the "Law for Terminating the Suffering of People and Nation" among other fascist laws and doctrines.

A Suggestion 18.Jun.2003 17:57

don't care about party politics

why don't all registered Democrats vote for Bu$h in the next election--

they're not disagreeing with him otherwise!

Kucinich / Dean comparisons... 18.Jun.2003 23:51

Tom W.

For the sake of argument, put all political issues aside...

1. Kucinich is an unusual name. How the hell do you say it? America has never elected a president with an unpronounceable name. Ever. Remember Tsongas?

Dean... Easy to say; easy to chant; easy to remember.

2. Kucinich looks like a troll doll. Given the choice, many people choose the better looking candidate.

Dean... A little on short side, but a handsome man.

3. Kucinich is a vegan. While this may appeal to a very tiny minority, most Americans will judge him to be a wuss.

Dean... C'mon. He looks & talks like he's kicking ass and taking names.

I'm sure there are policy issues as well, but image is king.

thanks 19.Jun.2003 01:09

much appreciation

I appreciate the detective work...Thanks for sharing!

Tom W., you're way off base 19.Jun.2003 01:50


for starters, the guy isn't all that bad looking.... See this,


for example. He's short, and he certainly has deep wrinkles that can look bad on TV without good make-up, but he can be packed, and again, look at those pictures at la imc... not bad for just a day out among folk in la....

But as for your analysis, i think the more telling remark you made is your cheerleading for dean -- "looks and talks like he's kicking ass and taking names" ??? really??? I think he looks like just another asshole politician that talks a good game depending on which way the wind is blowing.

Kucinich isn't perfect. But he's the best the democratic party has going for it, and he wouldn't be a bad option for green minded folk. Kucinich doesn't flip his positions like a fish out of water. He may not be ideal to anyone, but he certainly isn't an average lying politician. Dean, on the other hand, is as much the actor as politician, just as most politicians are today

appearances are everything 19.Jun.2003 06:59

Otto Graph

The single most important characteristic of a person in carrying out the function of being a "successful" President of the United States in our biased and superficial media infested society is to make people feel good. Forget their "professed" policies and their backgrounds (if these mattered Bush would never have made it to the Presidency). Bush fails because he makes people feel fearful/bad. His father failed because he made people feel bad. Reagan and Clinton succeeded because they made people feel good. Please support the candidate that makes you feel the most good. That is what really matters in a Presidency. My choice for a candidate that makes me feel the most good is Governor Howard Dean, M.D. I am not saying this quality is all that matters, what I am saying is since no one has any idea what a President will do once he attains office (again just look at Bush Jr.), the single most important defining quality is to elect a person that makes the people around him/her and the American people in general feel good about themselves and their lives. Focus on this quality and support the candidate that does this the best and the election will take care of itself.

Now is the Time 19.Jun.2003 17:29

repost of repost

Folks, the bottom-line is that we are many months from the primaries. This IS THE TIME when we should be pushing like all hell for the MOST PROGRESSIVE candidate so that when the primaries come around, ALL THE CANDIDATES have to steer a bit more towards the progressive camp because the entire terms of the debate get pushed a bit more towards the progressive spectrum, regardless of who starts locking in initial wins in the primary. It's really that simple.

Support Kucinich now. One year from now, change your mind and actions if that comes to pass.

The Dean discussion - is he progressive- can he win? 26.Jun.2003 06:06

Common Sense

Think about it.
The Dean candidacy is the third time that democrats have toyed with a governor of a small state who, when he gets to Washington, must spend at least a couple of years learning how to manuever against the lobbyists, Republicans, and agencies. WE DON'T HAVE THAT KIND OF TIME TO WASTE!
You want a real environmentalist? Vote for John Kerry.
You want someone who has never taken any pac money nor become beholden to any corporate interest? Vote for John Kerry
You want someone who actually knows something about foreign policy? Check out Kerry's record.
You want someone who understands what is wrong with NAFTA and knows that the US is in a weakened fiscal condition internationally? Listen to Kerry.
You want someone who knows the difference between stupidity and corruption? Vote for Kerry.
Get real, people. We need someone who has remained independent, thinks for himself about complex and difficult issues, and knows the ropes inside the Beltway. We need someone who can assemble a cabinet and a legislative program quickly and effectively. John Kerry even makes the most sense about the use of military power and waging war. Kerry has the record and the talent and he's sexier than Dubya.

dean v kucinich 03.Jul.2003 05:09


was looking for quick update to add to our flyer for the kucinich table (Phoenix). For great comparison see:
 http://www.bobharris.com/kucinichdean.htmland found you
thanks for the compilation...

I just want to say I've met both Dean and Dennis (funny, Dennis is Dennis to everyone, Dean is "Governor" or Dr. to all his supporters-should tell you all you need to know right there) Anyway.
We had a fund raiser here last week-end. Dennis is the most dynamic, magnetic person! I can't imagine a progressive heading anywhere else. WE charged 25.00 to get in. No one was turned away. Dennis talked to everyone. Hugged grandmothers, referred people he knew from other towns, handed out phone numbers. Have you had him up there? Do you know him? He's just a green democrat. It's the primary for crying out loud. Dean people (progressive types) have been bamboozled. Why would a TRUE progressive be supporting anyone other than Dennis?

Now. As for Dean (who looks like a little gnome in person, btw - and had a stuffy 2500 a plate lunch at the same time we were partying with DK)
I started out Dean-switched to Dennis and couldn't be moved now for anything. This was at the time Dennis was still "considering" a run.
Look at Dean's position on Israel. It's right alongside Lieberman for crying out loud. I am confused about what this site is---I thought it said indymedia (will, I guess that's accurate). Here in Phoenix indymedia means something else. This is a conservative area-boy is it ever-but the progressive community tends to support the good guys-esp in the primary. Really. I know the Dean folks here-you are being manipulated just like the Kerry, Edwards folks.
I just hate to see this. It makes me sad. I had so much hope.
I'm going back to my conservative valley people...we seem to have it together a little more.

Hi mjh 07.Jul.2003 15:34


Thanks for your comment. People *are* being horribly manipulated with Dean. They haven't learned yet, which is really sad. Down here in the Bay Area in CA, alot of gays are supportive of him because of his supposed gay rights stance and it's a real battle to open their eyes.

I fear our country is doomed. Seriously, it's a country of millions of know-nothings working cogs behind the gun barrels pointed at every oppressed brown person all over the world. That Dean could gain this support as a liberal means were right back to Nixon, and treading water in circles. Meanwhile, the pocket nukes are that much more developed, the calmatives and microwaves for the crowd control (see recent Popular Science articles), and the many other devices to spy, manipulate, torture, and murder. Dean will grin away on his power. We can only hope he gets nominated, doesn't win, and Bushladen brings on a revolution, or nuke war happens, to stop the war machine the US is becoming, before there is omnicide.

Dennis is great. And he's a democrat. I believe he could turn things around. But they'll murder him before they'd let him take the reins.