Just saw the CSPAN replay of Dean/Perle debate. DEAN RULES!

[BrklynLiberal]

He was soooooo good. He did not let Perle get away with anything. Dean was strong and eloquent and dignified. The audience loved him.

(I did not see the shoe thing..Don't know if they cut it, or it was during Perle's openig remarks which I did not bother to watch.)

[ProudToBeLiberal]

1. I love Dean

:). Wow he is an excellent debater.

[johnaries]

2. Dean rocked! I loved when Perle said that Powell said pretty much

anything about Iraq that Democrats would have said, and Dean replied "But they treated him like a Democrat!"

Zing!

[Skip Intro]

3. I watched it too - just now - for like an hour or so

tuned in when Dean was finishing up something by saying, "and that's why I'm a Democrat."

The audience was definitley in Dean's corner by at least 70% I think.

Dean was excellent.

Perle resorted to the "3,000 people who lost their lives on 9*11" - I wish people would start booing those tired, see-thru thin attempts to hide behind tragedy.

Dean was excellent.

I kept waiting on the shoe thing. Never saw it either.

Got to catch the whole thing if they replay it again.

Oh, and Dean was excellent.

;)

[thefloyd]

4. I reallly like how dean makes the democratic party feel

like a fraternity (even though I was never in a fraternity...I despise them). McCuliff did some very good things economically for the Democratic party that will definitely help Dean in his job but Dean really builds a sense of spirit that honestly lacked since Clinton left office.

[blue neen]

5. The shoe thing was during Perle's opening remarks.

Dean was excellent. He showed a strong grasp of the foreign policy issues they were discussing.

[The Crazy Canadian]

6. Dean did pretty good against Perle.

These neocons always bring up how 9/11 was a tragedy and it changed everything. They try to sound like they really cared about the people who died. Give me a break. The events of 9/11 was the best thing that happened to the neocons and was the perfect opportunity they've been waiting for to roll out their PNAC plans for world domination through brute military force.

[Just Me]

10. The neoCONs do that 9/11 thingy 'cause its their "Pearl Harbor".

The more they use it,...the more I am convinced that 9/11 was MIHOP.

I am a firm believer that the neoCONspirators LIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose) with respect to 9/11 especially now that we all have the facts that this administration was provided 52 warnings and given an EMERGENCY memo re AQ attacking and other very weird shit (like a practice run involving a plane being flown into the Pentagon on 9/11).

The more the neoCONs and their cohorts use the 9/11 EXCUSE to indulge in aggressive militancy,...the more I believe all bad things which befall the American people are manipulations intentionally inflicted by the neoCONs

[immoderate]

7. A good platform for Dean.

Debating Perle has given Dean a chance to shine. Perle helps us by attracting viewers that would not tune in to a Dean only speech. After actually seeing him they may have to moderate what they say about him. They won't do this much when they figure out how much they're helping us. Dean can demolish anyone they've got.

--IMM

[Just Me]

8. I was left believing Dean would have been such a great President!!!

He is "balanced", thoughtful, certain, passionate, articulate, strong and wise.

He could have made such an incredible difference to a country divided by power-mongers!!!

I am just grateful that he is still a player!!!

He is my gladiator,...he advocates for the value and power of humanity!!! The power-mongers will be targeting him every chance they can get. But, I believe in him and KNOW he has the strength to serve as our equalizer!!!

[welshTerrier2]

9. Dean did fairly well but not great

i thought he was weak on two key areas ...

first, he totally failed to respond to the moderator's question that the election gave bush a "mandate" to continue the war on terrorism ... 59 million people voted against bush and millions more didn't vote at all ... Democrats, especially Dean, should never allow the phrase "bush received a mandate" to stand without objection ...

second, Perle said some kind of crap like 9/11 happened because the terrorists wanted to impose their values on America ...

Dean never discussed the issue of what motivated the terrorists to attack the U.S. ... we have supported tyrants for generations; we have exploited people all over the world for our own mercenary purposes; we have flaunted the arrogance of our military power ... Dean did a good job mentioning that America has lost its moral standing in the world but never linked U.S. conduct to the motivations of what led to the 9/11 attack ...

i watched the debate with mrs. wt2 and a good friend of ours ... all hardcore lefties, btw ... mrs. wt2 thought Perle was more effective in making his points ... my friend and I considered it a draw ...

[Just Me]

11. You should run for office!!!

Have you ever considered running for office?

If not, why not?

GO FOR IT!!!!

We need people like you serving as our "representative".

[Guaranteed]

12. You'll never see Dean discuss the terrorist's motivations in the

"we deserved it" sense. You did see him note tonight, repeatedly, that terrorism is very much a product of economics, though.

Where I thought he was weakest was in simply pointing out that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Perle kept saying over and over that we needed to "defend ourselves," yet Iraq was never a threat, and I didn't hear Dean call him on that simple point.

[welshTerrier2]

13. there is an important distinction between motivation and justification

under no circumstances should any Democrat, or anyone for that matter, suggest that the killing of almost 3000 American civilians is ever justified ... so, while i agree with you that Dean would never discuss motivations in a "we deserved it" sense, i think you've somewhat conflated my call for citing motivations with condoning the acts of 9/11 ...

it is a long way, a very, very long way from condemning U.S. foreign policy to saying the innocent Americans who were killed "deserved it" ... the important point here is that the conduct of the U.S. government AND the killing of innocent American citizens are BOTH WRONG ...

the leadership this country so badly needs is leadership that can teach the American people that our greatest strength comes not from our military power at all ... this doesn't mean we undervalue the need for a strong military ... America needs to be able to defend itself from any and all attackers ... but we will grow weaker, not stronger, if we rely more heavily on military solutions than on building strong alliances and earning respect for American values throughout the global community ...

when we allow our government to act for the sole benefit of multi-national corporations who seek only to exploit the weaknesses of other countries, we are doing nothing but swelling the ranks of the terrorist camps ... we must make a direct linkage between U.S. conduct in the world and the increased risk from terrorist attack that that conduct causes ...

[Guaranteed]

14. Again, you won't hear him saying that.

You might hear him arguing against our foreign policy separately from the terrorism issue, but no sane American politician will ever criticize our policies as the root of the terrorists' motivation- whether it's a correct assessment or not.

[welshTerrier2]

15. i agree with you but

i think that's tragic ...

they are choosing not to tell the American people the truth about the impact (be it justified or not) of our totally corrupt foreign policy ... and if we can't lead by teaching Americans the truth, those who hate America will grow in numbers every day ...

perhaps this is politically pragmatic, perhaps not ... but it sure as hell is not what is best for the country ...

i generally find that analogies are not very helpful, but here's one that somewhat conveys how i see this issue:

imagine that there's a bully in a bar who is twice your size and strength ... he starts insulting you for no reason ... you make a crack about his IQ ... he gets in your face and starts pushing you ... you start cursing at him ... he takes out a gun and shoots you ...

i think it's important to understand what effect your conduct had on the sequence of events ... perhaps you could have acted differently to avoid getting shot ... in no way whatsoever does examining your conduct, and even criticizing it, justify what the bully did to you ... but if you were in the exact same situation a second time, I would hope that you would learn from the mistakes you made ...

the point is that there is a critically important difference between examining your own conduct and learning from the mistakes YOU made versus justifying the actions of another party ... again, if Americans fail to connect their own conduct in the world to the sequence of events that led to 9/11, i'm deeply concerned that we will be hit again ... and again ... and again ...

maybe Democrats are wise to fear the political fall-out that would result from the point I'm making ... but it's also a possibility that those who speak the truth and do the best job protecting our citizens will ultimately be rewarded with the greatest political success ... I'd like to think that doing the right thing and teaching the right lesson makes for the most pragmatic politics ... perhaps it does; perhaps it doesn't ... i guess i see avoiding the truth for political reasons as cowardice ...