Reply #20: Well, see, here's the thing

[George_Bonanza]

I can't see how Dean is going to change this country so much, compared to, say, Kerry. Dean passed civil unions. Great for him. But Kerry has been adamantly been a gay rights proponent since the 80's. I'm sure if he was governor of a liberal state, he would've passed it too. Dean opposed the IWR. However, he changed his position from saying that Iraq could be contained, to saying Iraq needed to be disarmed in just a few months. That stance aligns with Kerry's views very well, so not much difference there. As for Kerry's vote, I think it was clear that Bush was going to war, with the Republican control of the congress and all. So Kerry's vote, to himself, was a personal symbolic one. In short, given his strong stance on disarming Saddam Hussein and forcing him to be accountable for his actions, he decided to say that America would be willing to use force IF NECESSARY. He trusted the president (just like Dean said on Meet the Press) to at least exhaust diplomacy and at least come up with a peace plan, which Bush didn't, hence the very vocal criticisms by Kerry. As for repealing all of Bush's tax cuts, it seems like tax breaks for the middle class IS a good idea, so I'm with Kerry on this one. I don't know anything about the American tax system and how it affects them, given that I don't even live there. As for the Patriot Act, Dean said that after 9/11, there may be a need to compromise certain civil liberties in the name of national security. And liberals like Wellstone also voted for it, so there's a very good chance Dean would've voted for it too, in the post 9/11 hysteria and all. As for other important issues like the environment, Dean's good, but he's no John Kerry. And Dean seems to be too pro-Israel. I want Israel to exist, but not at the cost of the Middle East, Palestinians in particular.

So in short, I don't see all this hoopla about Dean taking back the nation. He'll "take back the nation" if that means putting in Democratic mode, but what's so special about that? So will Kerry if he wins, so will Clark, so will Gephardt. Dean's has run a very fun campaign, but those campaign people will lose their influence once Dean has to surround himself with real, experienced politicians. The MoveOn guys won't be in the White House. They'll move on. If you want a candidate who's proven he will relentless pursue change in the name of justice, why not John Kerry? This man exposed Iran-Contra, BCCI, made Richard Nixon's hated enemy list, stood up to Vietnam (where was Dean?), stood up for the environment since the 70's (when there was no Green party to suck up to), has vowed to filibuster any anti-Roe vs. Wade supreme court justice appointee, and opposed Bush since 2000, everything from the environment to Afghanistan.

John Kerry and Dean are pretty similar. Both are NE liberal types, both are in their fifties, and both were born into prominent families. But Kerry is more liberal, more experienced, more battle-hardened, and is more fit to counter any Republican smear campaign.