Democrats Attack!
It’s always such a treat to listen to Howard Dean and his fellow Deaniacs. They say such CUTE things.
To be honest, he said so much so much fast that I couldn’t possibly remember it all. What stands out after the buzz and static of his loony ranting is the following:
1- The wild, almost manic look in his eyes, speaking of a tempestuous nature begging to be set free.
2- The rage and hatred slithering out in his voice, rounding it out into a seething ball of poison.
3- The constant, jerky head movements; like a tourretts sufferer barely keeping his words under control and expending the energy through physical twitches.
4- The angry look on his face, adding visual substance to his vitriolic voice. Turning his face into a trollish mask of evil suppressed.
Of course his warp-speed rant about corruption in the Bush administration, the war in Iraq being wrong, and how much he hates the fact that Judge Alito was nominated to the Supreme Court, bouncing back and forth between each topic without warning or logic stands out too. It was just so fast and incoherent that I can’t remember his exact words.
This is the face of the Democratic Party? I knew there was I was a reason I became a Republican.
To be honest, he said so much so much fast that I couldn’t possibly remember it all. What stands out after the buzz and static of his loony ranting is the following:
1- The wild, almost manic look in his eyes, speaking of a tempestuous nature begging to be set free.
2- The rage and hatred slithering out in his voice, rounding it out into a seething ball of poison.
3- The constant, jerky head movements; like a tourretts sufferer barely keeping his words under control and expending the energy through physical twitches.
4- The angry look on his face, adding visual substance to his vitriolic voice. Turning his face into a trollish mask of evil suppressed.
Of course his warp-speed rant about corruption in the Bush administration, the war in Iraq being wrong, and how much he hates the fact that Judge Alito was nominated to the Supreme Court, bouncing back and forth between each topic without warning or logic stands out too. It was just so fast and incoherent that I can’t remember his exact words.
This is the face of the Democratic Party? I knew there was I was a reason I became a Republican.
posted by Daniel Levesque at
6:35 PM
30 Comments:
Howard Dean, along with Ted Kennedy and Barbara Boxer have all turned into raving maniacs, and it shows. Everybody sees them the way they really are. I think it's great!
Good post.
By the way, I have had you linked for a long time as "The Creative Conservative." That is you, right?
By
Gayle, at 3:53 AM
shudder ... shudder .. shudder .. just the thought of some of these people is tough on the nerves. It seems to be a virus that pops up every couple of decades.
By
ABFreedom, at 7:42 AM
Creative Conservative? Who's that?
By
Daniel Levesque, at 8:47 AM
Dean? I thought you were describing Dick Cheney...
By
Unknown, at 11:08 AM
Dick Cheney? Oh please.
I think all Conservatives can admit, no matter how well they get along with liberals or how moderate they are, they enjoy hearing people like Ann Coulter; same thing for Liberals and, say, Howard Dean.
The difference is whether or not you put people like that in charge of your party.
By
Rebekah, at 11:19 AM
Okay okay okay! I shall change it to Raving Conservative. I like "Creative Conservative" better though. You don't really "rave". Howard Dean raves. But that's okay. I shall fix it. :)
By
Gayle, at 11:53 AM
You have been fixed, Dan (no pun intended).
You are linked on both of my blogs as:
"The Raving Conservative (and Future President)"
How's that? Now you are committed, or maybe should be. That job is one heck of an undertaking! :)
Rebekah said: "The difference is whether or not you put people like that in charge of your party."
They don't act that way when they are campaigning. They cover up who they are until after they are in office and have lost a major election. Only then do people find out exactly who it was they voted for. What I don't understand is how so many people still don't see them the way they are now. It embarrasses me that they are American's. I would be mortified if they were Republicans.
By
Gayle, at 12:58 PM
Anybody that actually chose Howard Dean to be their representative to the whole country, no, the whole world, actually, deserves to have their sanity in question...
BoUnCeS!! LibbY!
By
Libby, at 1:00 PM
Dean is preaching to the choir, of course, and the choir happens to be of the opinion that a pretty high level of outrage is warranted.
I don't need to go down the laundry list -- it's readily available for anybody who cares to find it; suffice it to say that the big question at the moment is which Reep Congressman is going to be indicted next. My money's on Duke Cunningham, though Bob Ney's making a decent showing at the moment.
The Dems may be a party of opportunists and angries, but I'll take that over power-hungry amoralism any day. It's just sad that those are the only choices.
Don't be a wacko!
By
catastrophile, at 3:57 PM
Howard Dean is a screechy maniac. How he gets away with his drivel in the first place bemuses me, but he also has a record of calling others extreme. Very brainy.
But don't complain about Dean! He ensures the Republicans continue winning elections as long as he's chairman. And we can just sit back and laugh.
By
MJ, at 4:26 PM
You know what's funny about all this criticism about the Moderate, Howard Dean (although a pretty good one, as moderates go) is that I can't recall anyone ever criticizing his points, his planks, his plans.
Instead they tend to focus on really important stuff like his eyes, or his voice or his head movements. Criticize the man's plans if you want (I have), but all this nitpicking about his mannerisms is really below the intelligent folk who debate here and other places, don't you think?
Let's talk IDEAS, people.
I mean, have you ever heard me or any of the more progressive folk here rage on and on about W's monkey face or bobbing head and smirk (well, okay, MAYBE the smirk)?
By
Dan Trabue, at 4:53 AM
Okay Dan Trabue, I took you up on your challenge. Go to Let Our Voices Be Heard and you will read some of Dean's talking points. I imagine you won't like it, but you asked for it! :)
By
Gayle, at 5:38 AM
OK, Miss Gayle, I read what you wrote. I get it, you're opposed to anything that mainstreams homosexuality (vis a vis what Dean is endorsing). Now, at least you're talking about his positions and not his expressions.
That's what I'm talking about.
Now can we take that a step further and can you give me any non-religious reasons why you oppose our gay brothers and sisters from having the same rights that you and I enjoy?
If this is purely a religious point of view, I can respect that and you're welcome to it, but I'd also have to respectfully say that we can't make laws based on religious views alone. There ought to be some significant logical reasons why we'd deny rights to some that we offer to others.
And really, I guess that's off the topic for this post. OK, you're opposed to Dean because of his positions on homosexuality. Fair enough.
Criticize him for that if you wish, but do so based on some reasoning and let's just leave the name-calling out of it. This makes sense to us all, doesn't it?
By
Dan Trabue, at 5:57 AM
Dan, you're getting ahead of the game here. Homosexuality is next week's debate of the week.
By
Daniel Levesque, at 6:05 AM
I didn't have to say this earlier, so here it is. 90% of communication is non-verbal when someone speaks. Body posture, facial expressions, movements, and tone of voice round out the full message of the speaker. This is why Howard Dean's demeanor when he speaks is so important to the message he is communicating.
By
Daniel Levesque, at 8:39 AM
Umm, TIME to say this earlier. Sorry.
By
Daniel Levesque, at 8:40 AM
But could I not validly say the same thing about Bush's ridiculous headbobs and smirks? He comes across to many as a frat boy who doesn't take anything seriously as long as it doesn't interfere with his vacations.
But that's just an appearance and for that reason, I don't generally talk about that side of it. I'm much more concerned with the content of a leader's actions than their presentation.
And as far as content, I find Dean a MUCH MUCH less flawed leader than Bush.
By
Dan Trabue, at 9:19 AM
You absolutely could say that about Bush's head bobs and smirks, and a great many people do. Perhaps now you understand how the message can be changed, and the way it is recieved can be affected by the demeanor of the speaker.
By
Daniel Levesque, at 9:43 AM
Oh, I understand it, but I wouldn't be critical of Bush if he were saying all the right things (or even when he's saying the wrong things) merely on the basis of his mannerisms.
That's my only point: That this is all I hear about Dean and not arguments for and against his positions.
By
Dan Trabue, at 9:48 AM
Dean is easy to pick apart for what he says. It's everywhere. He calls Republicans names, speaks about how much he hates Republicans, verbally assaults everything the Republicans do and try to do. He even goes around claiming, without any proof, that Bush knew all about 9/11 before it happened. I focused on his mannerisms because they support what he says to a T.
By
Daniel Levesque, at 10:35 AM
As head of the Democratic party, it is Dean's sole job to trash Republicans.
Besides, the party of Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Uncle Ted Stevens, The Savage Wiener, Sean Hannity, Rick Santorum, John Cornyn, Jeff Sessions, Pat Buchanan, Donald Rumsfeld, Crybaby Bill Frist and so on, has no room to be calling anyone a "raving maniac".
By
Samurai Sam, at 12:01 PM
Y'know, Mild, every time I hear somebody compare this current batch of Reeps to the Clinton administration, a Bush impeachment seems a little more likely.
As far as what your war hero (and wasn't it just a year ago that the right wing was arguing that you could find a military decoration in a box of Cracker Jacks during Vietnam?), Duke is in hot water for more than just the home sale. Look into it.
By
catastrophile, at 12:09 PM
Dan said,
"You know what's funny about all this criticism about the Moderate, Howard Dean... is that I can't recall anyone ever criticizing his points, his planks, his plans."
Moderate?? Okay, my head's about to explode. Call ANYONE a moderate but Dean.
Okay, I can criticize that...
Dean quotes:
"I hate Republicans and everything they stand for",
"This is a struggle between good and evil - and we're the good",
Bush "refused to fund special education",
(months before Tom DeLay was even indicted)"Tom DeLay ought to go back to Houston where he can serve his jail sentence".
He has also insinuated the ridiculous notion that George Bush knew about 9-11, and of course, I'd hardly call "YEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAARGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!" a "mannerism".
By
Rebekah, at 3:17 PM
If you start from the assumption Reeps today stand for dishonesty and corruption, hating everything they stand for isn't a bad thing.
If you look at Dean on the issues beyond his opinions on the crooked Reeps Currently in Charge, he's not a far-left type. He was endorsed by the NRA eight times, for example.
If you don't like Dean, that's your right. But it seems a bit ridiculous to call him extreme in an era where anybody who questions the President's judgement or honesty is accused of supporting terrorism. We're sick and tired of being called traitors, and Dean is a manifestation of that.
If you want a return to civility, look to your own house.
By
catastrophile, at 5:41 PM
Catastrophile,
If you start from the assumption that democrats are inherrently corrupt and dishonest then Howard Dean is even loonier than he seems.
On the other hand if you start with the assumption that neither pary is neccessarily more corrupt than the other and it is only ideology that seperates them, then Howard Dean is still a lunatic.
It's a running hypothesis on every side that in order to get to the national level in American politics that you have t be so corrupt and in bed with special interests that there is no honesty in national politics at all. I only give this partial creedence myself. I think there IS honesty in politics, I just thinkthat it gets lost in the mix as promises and morals are forcibly broken by the existing power structure.
By
Daniel Levesque, at 6:51 PM
I dunno.
One of the most endearing things about Dean is the way the establishment Dems attacked him in the primaries.
I watched the DNC Chairman race with great interest, and it was always the grassroots supporting Dean and the old leadership trying to stop him.
And now that he's in the power seat, the story that's emerging is that major donors are upset because he's flouting them in favor of, once again, the grassroots.
So there's at least a promise of change there. He came from the outside and it was the activists, not the power structure, that put him where he is.
Besides: If you start from the assumption that all Dems are inherently corrupt and dishonest, then it really doesn't matter what Howard Dean says or does, does it?
By
catastrophile, at 7:39 PM
I'm just not clear on how anything Slick Willy did excuses the actions of others. Knowing history is useful, but bringing up the actions of past administrations to deflect criticism of the current one is not.
By
catastrophile, at 12:41 PM
Actually, I think bringingup past administrations is simply a way of pointing out how flawed politicians are in general, and pointing out the hypocrisy of defending the wrongdoings of one politican while condemning the next.
By
Daniel Levesque, at 2:48 PM
I'm cynical enough to believe that Clinton deserved all the humiliation that was piled upon him . . . but I don't think his crimes compare to the wholesale looting being perpetrated these last few years. Just my opinion, but somehow the assertion that all politicians are like this just doesn't work for me.
Maybe it's just that this bunch are so damn good at it.
By
catastrophile, at 5:18 PM
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
By
Anonymous, at 7:05 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home