![]() |
The Weblog at The View from the Core - Monday, February 09, 2004
|
Seven Hundred and Thirty-Three Spams so far since last Tuesday. Way down from last week's Eight Hundred and Ninety-Six. Lane Core Jr. CIW P Mon. 02/09/04 08:18:11 PM |
More Vietnam Veterans Contra Kerry Joe Crecca, a POW in Vietnam, writes at the Seattle Post-Intelligencer today. + + + + + The rigors and hardships of being a POW aside, I remember the so-called "peace movement" and peace marches and rallies that were taking place back home in the United States. Our captors were more than willing, within their means, to provide us with any and all anti-U.S. and anti-Vietnam War propaganda. Without a choice in the matter, we listened to the "Voice of Vietnam" broadcasts by "Hanoi Hannah" and were shown newspaper and magazine photos and articles about those opposing the war back in the states. One of the peace marchers' standard slogans was, "Bring our boys home now and alive." The warped thinking of such people was that by demonstrating against U.S. involvement in Vietnam, they'd be shortening the war and reducing the number of American casualties. These demonstrators would also try to make one believe that their efforts would bring POWs like me home sooner. They were utterly wrong on both counts, not to mention the detrimental effect their actions had on the morale of our troops and our POWs. John F. Kerry was not just one of these demonstrators. He was leading them. These demonstrations for peace had the exact opposite effect of what they purported to accomplish. Instead of shortening the war the "peace movement" served only to protract the conflict, resulting in a vastly greater number of Americans killed and wounded, greater economic burdens and longer periods of incarceration for Americans held captive in Vietnam. The war would have been over much sooner and with a much more favorable result if those in the "peace movement" would have rallied behind the commander in chief to accomplish our mission and then withdraw. Many fewer names would be engraved into the black granite of the Vietnam Memorial if these people had supported our efforts instead of trying to derail them. After all, fighting against a political regime that up to that time had murdered more than a hundred million people couldn't have been all bad. But Kerry thought and acted differently. How many more names on the wall can he take credit for? After the war ended, some of the war protesters hung on to their anti-war postures for a while. Some of them realized the errors of their ways almost immediately, but it took others 20 to 25 years. Some, like Kerry, have not realized there was anything wrong with what he did. Instead, he hopes we will see him as a courageous Vietnam veteran. I do not. He hopes we will admire his bravery. I do not. I remember him more for his misdeeds upon his return from Vietnam. However, in the present political arena, he evidently has succeeded in gaining the support of some well-meaning but misled Americans. Given his past record, it is just astonishing that he has garnered any support from our nation's veterans. I hope people will reconsider their support for Kerry in light of his actions, which were so detrimental to our Vietnam combat soldiers, sailors and airmen, many of whom are not here today to tell you themselves. + + + + + The Blog from the Core asserts Fair Use for non-commercial, non-profit educational purposes. Power Line also blogs today a message from another veteran: As a Viet Vet (USAF 460th TAC Recon Wing, 16th and 12th TAC Recon Squadrons July 4, 1967 to Feb 12, 1968, home base Tan Son Nhut), I have been interested in the postings on John Kerry's service. The more so because I was in VVAW with Kerry for 1971 and 1972.... And John Betts writes today to tell me he has blogged a photo of John "F" Kerry with "Hanoi" Jane Fonda. (Kerry is in the background, but, then as now, he's quite distinctive.) Just Your Average Catholic Guy also blogs Kerry's Vietnam stance irks veterans, a letter at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Jan. 29. (I must admit, I'm surprised that one can find so many anti-Kerry columns by Vietnam veterans in mainstream-media newspapers; I guess they're trying to get them out of the way, so to speak, early in the race.) See also Vietnam Veteran Contra Kerry. Lane Core Jr. CIW P Mon. 02/09/04 07:46:44 PM |
Another Newmaniac Joins St. Blog's Parish My old friend Dave Armstrong has a new weblog. It's been added to Here a Blog, There a Blog on the main page, along with a handful of other additions. Also, a new category has been added to the archives: Speeches and Suchlike. Lane Core Jr. CIW P Mon. 02/09/04 07:18:07 PM |
I Guess This Is What You Do When the Guy You Endorsed Isn't Even Going to Get Nominated Democrats in Self-Destruct Mode CLXXIII Al Gore blew up yesterday in Tennessee. + + + + + In a withering critique of the Bush administration, former Vice President Al Gore on Sunday accused the president of betraying the country by using the Sept. 11 attacks as a justification for the invasion of Iraq. "He betrayed this country!" Mr. Gore shouted into the microphone at a rally of Tennessee Democrats here in a stuffy hotel ballroom. "He played on our fears. He took America on an ill-conceived foreign adventure dangerous to our troops, an adventure preordained and planned before 9/11 ever took place." The speech had several hundred Democrats roaring their approval for Mr. Gore, the party's 2000 standard-bearer. Mr. Gore was one of three Tennessee Democrats, along with former Gov. Ned McWherter and former Senator James Sasser, being honored by the state party two days before the state's Democratic primary on Tuesday. The event served as a neutral platform for this season's candidates. Gen. Wesley K. Clark and Senator John Edwards addressed the crowd, but it was Mr. Gore who fired it up. While the other honorees and party officials gave a nod to all of the candidates, Mr. Gore, who has endorsed Howard Dean, referred to his candidate in a nonpartisan manner. He said he appreciated that Dr. Dean "spoke forthrightly" against the war in Iraq, brought new people into the party and inspired the grass roots over the Internet. But Mr. Gore told the crowd that at an earlier reception for Dr. Dean, who was in Maine, he had said that no matter who won Tennessee on Tuesday, "any one of these candidates is far better than George W. Bush." But his appreciation of Dr. Dean was tucked in passing into a fiery meditation on his own political history, including a recollection of the tactics used by the Republicans against his father, a longtime populist senator from Tennessee, in his last, losing election in 1970. He recalled that President Richard M. Nixon had used "the politics of fear" to make his father, Albert Gore Sr., out to be unpatriotic and an atheist. And when his father lost, Mr. Gore said, his father said: "The truth shall rise again." He said he recalled that defeat because "the last three years we've seen the politics of fear rear its ugly head again." Like the Nixon administration, Mr. Gore said, the Bush administration is not committed to principle but is obsessed with its re-election. "The American people recognize that there's a lot of politics going on," said Claire Buchan, a White House spokeswoman, in reference to Mr. Gore's comments. Mr. Gore said he was ready to break his silence about his disagreements with the Bush administration before the Sept. 11 attacks, but afterward he threw his speech in the trash. But then the war in Iraq came, and he felt betrayed. "It is not a minor matter to take the loyalty and deep patriotic feelings of the American people and trifle with them," he declared, adding with a shout: "The truth shall rise again." General Clark followed Mr. Gore with a notably tamer speech. But he honored Mr. Gore, saying, "The 2000 election was stolen from the Democratic Party," and that Mr. Gore "would have been and should have been a great president." Mr. Edwards arrived long after Mr. Gore spoke and apparently had little idea of what had occurred inside the room. He invoked his Southern roots and was greeted with cheers. Earlier, on the ABC program "This Week," he seemed to leave the door open just a crack to the possibility of being the vice-presidential nominee if he does not win the nomination. While reiterating that he was not interested in being vice president and did not see a circumstance where he would change his mind, he was less unequivocal when asked why he would not accept the nomination "if your party needs you." "You don't know what's going to happen a month, three months, six months from now," Mr. Edwards said. "As I sit here today, I intend to fight with everything I've got to be the nominee. I think I am the alternative in the Democratic Party to Senator Kerry." + + + + + The Blog from the Core asserts Fair Use for non-commercial, non-profit educational purposes. The speech had several hundred Democrats roaring their approval for Mr. Gore, the party's 2000 standard-bearer. They would have done much better for Gore had they delivered their state for him that year. Lest you forget, Faithful Reader, Tennessee's long-time senator and sitting vice-president lost in his home state. Here is another NYT article, Feb. 8: He is a standard-bearer of the Democratic Party, one of the best-known figures in American politics and the presidential candidate who won more popular votes in 2000 than George W. Bush. But is an endorsement from Al Gore the kiss of political death? That is the question and the joke buzzing through Democratic circles and late-night talk shows as even Howard Dean, the candidate bestowed with Mr. Gore's endorsement, traces his precipitous tumble from front-runner to the day in early December that Mr. Gore gave him his seal of approval. Of course, Dr. Dean turned his view into a compliment of sorts when Bob Woodward of The Washington Post asked him on the CNN program "Larry King Live" if perhaps he might be in a better position today had he said no to Mr. Gore's support. "I actually do think the endorsement of Al Gore began the decline," Dr. Dean began, to what must have been some astonishment from Mr. Gore. But Dr. Dean instantly amplified his statement to indicate that the endorsement from Mr. Gore, a powerhouse of the establishment, so threatened the other Democratic candidates that they began the attacks on his candidacy that helped derail it. "The establishment in Washington really realized that I might be the nominee and they did not like it," Dr. Dean concluded. (On the same program, former Senator Bob Dole, the Republican presidential candidate in 1996, had a less complicated view, which he imparted on behalf of Senators John Kerry and John Edwards. "My advice to Kerry and Edwards is, if Gore calls, don't take the call," Mr. Dole said. "I mean, it may be an endorsement.") .... Lane Core Jr. CIW P Mon. 02/09/04 07:04:58 PM |
Armavirumque Agrees With The Blog from the Core On NYT covering "conservative" "forces". .... Wacky? Yes. Savvy? Quite if your editorial motivation is to slice and dice the conservative political coalition.... .... I think "what this is about" is playing up as much as possible if not more the differences of opinion among various conservative camps, to make it look like the general conservative movement in the country is weaker than it actually is. They will, concomitantly, downplay or ignore the differences between various liberal factions. (Thus ignoring, at their peril, Core's Law of Old Media.) .... See also Dust in the Light. Lane Core Jr. CIW P Mon. 02/09/04 05:44:05 PM |
Mel Gibson is Not a Catholic Redux Hey, wadda you know? Somebody agrees with me (emphasis in original): Am I the last Catholic standing who isn't completely mesmerized by this clown? The thing is incredible. Everybody is panting to give him seven bucks and sit at his feet to learn about the Passion. What is so exasperating about it is that this eagerness is transparently attributable to Mel Gibson's star status. If Fr. Nicholas Gruner had obtained funding and produced a movie about the death of Christ, we'd all be holding him off with the mucky end of a barge pole and loudly asserting that we don't do business with people who resist the legitimate authority of the Holy See. But Mel Gibson isn't a scruffy weirdo. (By the way, I see from his website that Fr. Gruner has tidied himself up recently when I used to see him at Wanderer Forum events in the Eighties, he gave me the creeps.) He's famous! He's gorgeous! He's rich! What these star-struck types don't so commonly acknowledge is that He's a schismatic! One serious Catholic after another has succumbed to shivery gratification because Somebody Totally Cool is willing to admit to being a Catholic. And what makes the joke on them particularly bitter is that he isn't a Catholic at all. Catholics belong to churches which are subject to the authority of Rome, not to half-baked fly-by-night outfits which dress up in Catholic vestments and perform Catholic rituals, but whose emblem and rule of existence is Non Serviam.... See Mel Gibson is Not a Catholic. (Thanks, Bill.) Lane Core Jr. CIW P Mon. 02/09/04 05:28:06 PM |
David Warren on the "Gay" Revolution Also, Massachusetts' governor Mitt Romney. The Canadian recent Catholic convert writes, Feb. 8, on the judicial tyranny in Gaymarriagechusetts: .... Well, I agree with the majority (4-3) in one respect: that this is an all-or-nothing proposition. Marriage is a substance as well as a word, and granting the substance without the word is rank hypocrisy. "Civil unions" confer on the same-sex couple, and will confer on any future multiple-spouse combinations, exactly the privileges previously enjoyed by the legitimately married including tax advantages, joint access to welfare and pension coverage, and full adoption "rights". (The quotes are necessary, for the idea that the adoption of a living child can be a human right is a moral obscenity, on a level with slavery.) .... While there are many opinions about the present state of public opinion on same-sex marriage, the fact that the majority on the Massachusetts court acted to subvert any political response reveals their own assumptions. The justices themselves clearly don't believe they have public support, even in America's most liberal jurisdiction. The possibility that a Supreme Court decision in Washington could extend this revolution across the United States became very real last November [sic], when its justices struck down a Texas law against sodomy reversing the Court's own decision recognizing a state's right to make such law, 17 years ago. In the opinion of the dissenting justice, Antonin Scalia, the court's majority used reasoning that would also make a challenge on same-sex marriage irresistible. Justice Scalia's opinion was mocked, but was not rebutted. We are living in a dark time, in which we see the laws that bind our civilization together arbitrarily overthrown by judicial fiat, with no comprehension and verily, no interest in what the destructive consequences will be for our families and society at large. I am more and more convinced that we must drop the pretence that these judges are fulfilling a legitimate mandate. They are the deadly enemies of all we hold dear. (Thanks, Kathy.) Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney also writes, Feb. 5, at OpinionJournal: No matter how you feel about gay marriage, we should be able to agree that the citizens and their elected representatives must not be excluded from a decision as fundamental to society as the definition of marriage. There are lessons from my state's experience that may help other states preserve the rightful participation of their legislatures and citizens, and avoid the confusion now facing Massachusetts. In a decision handed down in November, a divided Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts detected a previously unrecognized right in our 200-year-old state constitution that permits same-sex couples to wed. I believe that 4-3 decision was wrongly decided and is deeply mistaken. Contrary to the court's opinion, marriage is not "an evolving paradigm." It is deeply rooted in the history, culture and tradition of civil society. It predates our Constitution and our nation by millennia. The institution of marriage was not created by government and it should not be redefined by government. Marriage is a fundamental and universal social institution. It encompasses many obligations and benefits affecting husband and wife, father and mother, son and daughter. It is the foundation of a harmonious family life. It is the basic building block of society: The development, productivity and happiness of new generations are bound inextricably to the family unit. As a result, marriage bears a real relation to the well-being, health and enduring strength of society. Because of marriage's pivotal role, nations and states have chosen to provide unique benefits and incentives to those who choose to be married. These benefits are not given to single citizens, groups of friends, or couples of the same sex. That benefits are given to married couples and not to singles or gay couples has nothing to do with discrimination; it has everything to do with building a stable new generation and nation.... So, guv'nor, you think the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court overstepped its authority. What are you, as governor, going to do about it besides writing in the Wall Street Journal? I don't see how anybody, including elected or appointed government officials, is obliged to obey a court decree he considers to be unjust to be an attack not only on the foundations of our social order but even on the very structure of our government. Indeed, isn't one of the reasons our representative republican systems of government are set up with checks and balances so that the legislature and the executive can stand up against judges who act unjustly? I don't know how things are set up in Massachusetts, but if the governor can't submit a bill of judicial impeachment, he can surely call for one. One of the reasons we're in this fix, Faithful Reader, is that for too long, too many good and decent folks have declined to make the difficult decisions. Time's up. (Thanks, Ryan.) Lane Core Jr. CIW P Mon. 02/09/04 08:32:06 AM |
John "F" Democrats in Self-Destruct Mode CLXXII You know him: the junior "Catholic" senator from Gaymarriagechusetts who condemned the war for killing babies overseas but now supports baby-killing at home. That's what I get out of this. + + + + + John Kerry, a decorated Vietnam veteran and Democratic presidential front-runner, questioned Sunday whether President Bush had fulfilled his Vietnam-era commitment to the National Guard. "Just because you get an honorable discharge does not in fact answer that question," the Massachusetts senator said. Kerry insisted he was not making a political issue of Bush's Vietnam-era service, saying he had no trouble with the "many people" like Bush who served in the Guard to reduce the odds of seeing combat in Vietnam. But he responded sharply to Bush's claim in a nationally televised interview that his honorable discharge from the National Guard should answer lingering questions about the president's service. "The issue here, as I have heard it raised, is was he present and active on duty in Alabama at the times he was supposed to be? I don't have the answer to that question," said Kerry, who won three Purple Hearts, one Bronze star and one Silver star in Vietnam. He commented at a news conference with Virginia Gov. Mark Warner, whose endorsement is the latest piece in Kerry's drive to unite the Democratic Party behind a candidacy that has dominated primary season contests thus far. Kerry, Warner and their wives watched the NBC interview with Bush, then emerged from the governor's mansion so Kerry could accuse the president of "telling the American people stories" about Iraq. Kerry said Bush's assertion in the interview that Saddam Hussein had the ability to produce deadly weapons "is a far cry from what the president and his administration told the people in 2002." Kerry hopes Warner's endorsement helps him Tuesday, when Virginia and Tennessee Democrats vote for the party's presidential nominee. Chief rivals John Edwards and Wesley Clark, both Southerners, must win Tuesday or face questions about their viability. Growing more comfortable each day in the front-runner's pose, Kerry never mentioned his Democratic rivals but focused instead on Bush as he campaigned throughout the state "This is a White House of facades," Kerry said in Chesapeake, Va., to a rally of at least 1,000, many of them chanting, "No more Bush! No more Bush! No more Bush!" "This is a White House of photo opportunities. This is the biggest say-anything-do-another administration that I've ever seen in all the time I've been in public life," the senator said. In Richmond, he fielded questions about Bush's obligations to the Texas Air National Guard and to an Alabama unit that took him in temporarily while he worked on a political campaign. "I have always honored and I will always honor anybody who serves anywhere," Kerry said. "I've said since the day I came back from Vietnam that it was not an issue to me if somebody chose to go to Canada or to go to jail or to be a conscientious objector or to serve in the National Guard or elsewhere." "I honor that service, but that's not the issue here," he said. In the "Meet the Press" interview, Bush dismissed Democratic criticism of his Guard record. "Political season is here," he said. Republicans have suggested that any criticism of Bush is a slight against the National Guard. Kerry objected to that notion. "Today's Guard is a very different Guard from the one that existed in 1968, '67 and '69. Anybody who lived in those periods of time will tell you that there were many people who chose to go to the Guard because the odds of being called up and going to Vietnam were very low. And that's just the truth. That's just the way it was back then. That's not the way it is today," Kerry said. Kerry said it was OK to choose service in the Guard over service in Vietnam, "but when you make your choice, people have an obligation to at least live out the choice they make." He walked away without saying whether Bush lived out his choice, saying it is up to the media "and other people" to decide whether Bush's records need reviewing. Later, at a black church, Kerry said there should be a separation of church and state in America "but not in our lives." Kerry has talked about faith more often on the campaign trail as he looks ahead to a potential general election campaign against a president who talks openly about God and religion. Kerry quoted scripture and former President Kennedy to assert that God's work "must truly be our own." + + + + + The Blog from the Core asserts Fair Use for non-commercial, non-profit educational purposes. Lane Core Jr. CIW P Mon. 02/09/04 07:26:54 AM |
Chronicling Dean's Death Spiral Democrats in Self-Destruct Mode CLXXI At the Los Angeles Times yesterday. + + + + + The day after Saddam Hussein was caught in his spider hole, Howard Dean stepped before a crush of TV cameras to offer a statesmanlike appraisal. It was "not a day to talk about politics," the former Vermont governor said that muggy December morning in Palm Beach, Fla. He saluted the military and called it "a great day" for the Bush administration. Fewer than 24 hours later, however, Dean's tone shifted and along with it the fortunes of his high-flying campaign. As his caravan motored to a Los Angeles hotel, Dean penciled a new line into the foreign policy address he was about to give. He had labored for months over the speech, helped by a team of eminent advisors that included former Vice President Al Gore. But that one line inserted on the spur of the moment, an assertion that Hussein's capture had not made America safer, dominated the headlines and reverberated in the Democratic presidential campaign for weeks. The statement was the kind of off-the-cuff observation that had long endeared Dean to legions of disaffected Democrats. But to many just tuning in to the presidential contest, it seemed wrong, and even a little reckless. Although it was unclear at the time and the truth of Dean's statement can still be debated the comment marked the beginning of his descent from front-runner to the straits he finds himself in today. "I think it sent shock waves," said Susan MacManus, a political science professor at the University of South Florida. "It was just too out there for a lot of people and Dean's believability index started slipping." After being shut out in the first 11 nominating contests including Saturday's caucuses in Michigan and Washington state Dean is hoping a win on Feb. 17 in Wisconsin can salvage his candidacy. But even his top advisors have conceded the strategy is a longshot. And in a further setback, Dean on Saturday lost the endorsement of one of the country's largest unions the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. The mid-November decision by AFSCME and the Service Employees International Union, another large labor group, to back Dean was a major boost and added to the sense that Dean was steamrolling toward the nomination. With its record-shattering Internet fundraising and overflow crowds at rallies, the Dean campaign had often seemed to defy the laws of political physics. He showed a shaky command of issues during a summer interview on "Meet the Press"; he caused a flap last fall by saying he wanted to appeal to Southerners who embrace the Confederate flag; he drew fire for sealing some of his gubernatorial records. None of it seemed to matter to his supporters, who had been thrilled by his early and staunch opposition to the war in Iraq. But in the end, Dean was tripped up in large part by human frailties: impulsiveness, inexperience and an unwavering confidence a reflection, perhaps, of his physician's training, which kept him from modifying his strategy to fit changing circumstances, as if doing so was admitting a misdiagnosis. Dean has said he was never comfortable in the role of early front-runner, and it showed. The candidate and his staff also made rash decisions, spent too much money and physically overtaxed themselves. "There wasn't the restraint and maturity of husbanding resources for the long haul," said David Nagle, a former Iowa congressman and Dean backer in that crucial state. "You don't need a different color T-shirt at every event . They were spending resources like there was no tomorrow." As the front-runner, Dean came under withering fire from his opponents and heightened scrutiny from the media, and failed to bear up well under either. He was the first to attack the other major Democratic candidates, denouncing their backing of the Iraq war and calling them craven for not being tougher on Bush. But Dean grew irritable when he became the target, at one point asking Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe to muzzle his foes. Flush with cash, the campaign decided to forsake federal matching funds, freeing Dean to spend as much money as he could raise. He bought ads in several states and boasted of running a national campaign. The idea was to win Iowa and New Hampshire, then lock up the nomination in the contests that quickly followed. But Dean strategists badly miscalculated. Heady with their stratospheric success, the candidate and his crew mistakenly thought the passion of die-hard "Deaniacs" would translate into a groundswell of support. When Dean stumbled in Iowa and New Hampshire, dropping both to Sen. John F. Kerry of Massachusetts, the campaign was at a loss and nearly broke. "We never had a second act," said one senior advisor. In short, the laws of political physics finally caught up with Dean, who learned the hard way that successful candidates bend to their immutable force, not the other way around. It all began unraveling in Iowa, coming apart with remarkable speed. When Dean gave his now-notorious speech after coming in third in the state's caucuses, he gave voice to the very quality that most worried many Democrats: He lacked the judgment and temperament to beat Bush. "That crushed us," a Dean advisor said. The moment, showed endlessly on cable TV and spread worldwide via the Internet, might not have damaged Dean so much had it not followed a gaffe-filled stretch in which the candidate tossed out one controversial remark after another. He gave a domestic policy speech that rivals portrayed as an attack on former President Clinton. He highlighted his own inexperience by saying he would seek a vice presidential running mate with a foreign policy background "to plug that hole in the resume." He escalated his fight with party centrists by calling them the "Republican wing of the Democratic Party." Dean had made his share of outspoken, and sometimes misleading, statements earlier in the campaign. But a turning point seemed to come when Dean won the surprise endorsement of Gore in mid-December. "At that point, alarm bells went off in newsrooms all across America, in all the different campaigns and among the Washington establishment," said Joe Trippi, Dean's ex-campaign manager. "People went, 'Oh man, this guy's going to be it.' " Suddenly, every mistake Dean made was magnified. Coverage of his campaign, his past comments, and his record as Vermont governor grew more aggressive. Still, Dean refused to temper his remarks, even when they kicked up a fuss, dismissing the reaction as "gotcha politics." But the political climate was changing, as more voters began focusing on the campaign. Dean's outspokenness suddenly became a liability. "We have an electability year, not a speak-your-mind year," said Andrew Stern, the SEIU president who, while sticking with Dean, has sounded increasingly skeptical of his chances. "Dean got across the threshold when he convinced people he could win through his fundraising and endorsements. But since then, he's lost ground." As Iowa's Jan. 19 caucuses neared, Dean supporters were noticing the change, even if the candidate hadn't. "When I talk to people about Howard Dean, they say, 'The guy shoots from the hip, he gets himself in trouble, he's arrogant,' " Weldon Abarr, a carpenter, told Dean in Boone, Iowa, in early January. "I'm a little afraid about what's going to happen." Dean's response was quick and revealing. "They say, 'Howard, he can't be elected, he said the capture of Saddam hasn't made us any safer.' Well, we're now at Code Level Orange," he said, referring to the national security alert system. "We now have fighter pilots escorting aircraft through American airspace. We've lost 23 more American troops since Saddam was caught." Dean shrugged his shoulders and smiled confidently. "Seems to me maybe I was right and they were wrong?" Still, the question persisted, at nearly every stop across Iowa and New Hampshire: How are you going to beat Bush? "Electability" became the buzzword and the one quality seemingly atop every voter's priority list. Dean told crowds he wasn't going to beat Bush they were. "I believe we are the only campaign that is capable of bringing new people into the electoral process with enormous enthusiasm," he said in late December. "We're going to energize the daylights out of the Democratic Party and the people who voted third party last time." But as Dean touted the strength of his following, another candidate emerged who was also willing to take on Bush this one a Vietnam veteran with a shock of salt-and-pepper hair, a reassuringly sober demeanor and a gravelly voice weighted with authority. John F. Kerry had grown desperate toward the end of 2003. His campaign was nearly out of money and, worse, had lost several top staffers in a messy shake-up. Kerry mortgaged his mansion on Boston's Beacon Hill, brought in new managers with ties to the state's senior senator, Edward M. Kennedy, and settled on a strategy pinning his hopes on Iowa. Instead of speaking in long, discursive passages as though he were still on Capitol Hill, Kerry began delivering shorter, punchier speeches. He opened himself up to marathon question-and-answer sessions with undecided voters. Crowds began to build and the candidate's confidence grew. Dean, meantime, was struggling. A 4-year-old videotape surfaced in which he criticized the Iowa caucuses. The story made headlines across the state and took up the first 20 minutes of one nightly news show in Des Moines. "We knew we were in deep trouble," said one campaign strategist. There were also signs that Dean's grass-roots appeal built on his opposition to the Iraq war had hit a ceiling. The number of supporters signing up on Dean's website hovered at 500,000 for much of December and January far below the 900,000 that Trippi had forecast. Soon, it became clear that the ebullient crowds that packed events to hear the former Vermont governor were not necessarily representative of a larger pool of voters captivated by Dean. They were the voters captivated by Dean. On an icy evening in early January, more than 800 giddy supporters jammed into the ballroom of a hotel in Fargo, N.D., and greeted Dean with half a dozen standing ovations. A month later, just 1,231 North Dakotans cast ballots for Dean. In Iowa, the campaign had identified 37,000 voters who said they definitely intended to vote for Dean in the state's Jan. 19 caucuses. Dean got 18,000 votes, a dismal showing that stunned the campaign. The night of the Iowa caucuses Dean gave his frenzied speech, defiantly rejecting the voters' verdict. Later, he said he was trying to buck up the young campaign workers who had poured their hearts out for his candidacy. It was a performance urged by some top aides. But it epitomized the shortsightedness of Dean and his campaign. "We were just talking to the people in that hall, when someone should have taken a deep breath and realized we were talking to a national audience," one strategist said. "It should have been about electability, electability, electability and instead we fed into everyone's biggest concern." After Iowa, Dean mounted a charm offensive. He poked fun at himself on the David Letterman show and sat for a prime-time interview with his seldom-seen wife, Judy. His speeches worked in more references to his son's hockey games and Dean's career as a doctor. But his attempts to show a softer side weren't enough. Dean placed a distant second in New Hampshire, and has finished far back in the nine contests since then. And polls show him far behind in Wisconsin, his "must-win" state. Last week in Madison, Wis., Dean was cheered by a crowd of 700 enthusiasts packed into a club. They stomped on the floor and screamed until they were hoarse. The scene recalled the energetic rallies that marked Dean's candidacy in its heady days last summer. Now, however, Dean realized passion was not enough. "We need your help," the beleaguered candidate told the crowd. "It's a lot of fun to come to this and have a hootin' and hollerin' time and crank everybody up." But, he added, "We've got to win." + + + + + The Blog from the Core asserts Fair Use for non-commercial, non-profit educational purposes. Lane Core Jr. CIW P Mon. 02/09/04 07:15:16 AM |
The Blog from the Core © 2002-2008 E. L. Core. All rights reserved. |
Previous | Week | Next |