Anti-Dean folks....

[AmyStrange]

(Mods---as far as I know, this person isn't a member of the
DU:
============

(this guy --or gal-- is not like alot of the folks
here---please be gentle)

from: 

[e-mail]

Oh Please! Your really don't think that Dean supporters are
hard to point out? The arguments they make are so not thought
out it is frightening they are given the right to vote. Some
of course are not because they are only 12. Let us look at
your weak unfounded arguments:


>ME:
>"It makes sense for the same reason this site exist.
>Anything that makes Dean supporters look bad helps
>Kucinich and Kerry and all the other candidates, and
>if pretending to be Dean supporters and attacking
>other candidates certainly makes Dean look bad by
>association doesn't it?"

First off, this site is for people that oppose Dean for the
nomination and to exchange information on the site to give to
others. It is not for convincing Dean supporters. Anyone that
supports that man is not rational, thus any argument you make
will not change their mind. However, it does change the minds
of people that are considering Dean among others.

>ME:
>"Which makes me wonder why this yahoogroup is needed
>then? Why not just spend time helping your candidate
>rather than spend time criticizing Dean?"

Because Dean is a major problem. He risks the entire party and
others that really do care about environment, people, and
progressive issues from winning the nomination and defeating
Bush in 2004.

Another arrogant statement:

>ME:
>"I'd rather have him change his position when the
facts
>warrant rather than have him keep saying the same
>thing regardless of the facts."

What has changed about the Death Penalty in the last oh, 6
years, that warrants someone to change from being anti-death
penalty to be pro-death penalty? Please name one fact that has
changed.
What has changed about Nuclear waste dumping in the last 6
years? Name one new fact, please. Your candidate changes his
positions based on the believes of the demographic base he
trying to woo. Not based on changing facts. If you were a
fish, I doubt the hook would even need bait if you fall for
this line.

>>>You 
>>> want place that in the hands of Governor of a
tiny
>>> little state with a 
>>> population of 600,000 and no other experience.
That
>>> is asinine, to say the 
>>> least.

>ME:
>"Oh yes, being a governor of a big state like Texas
is
>much much better."


Again, you are boxed into the notion that only Bush and Dean
exist, and upon either one we much decide. This is a false
dilemma. Their are more honest, better prepared people to do
the job. We don't have to choose between Tweele Dee and Tweele
Dum. There are 8 others in the running and a possible 4 others
gearing to run in 2004.  

>>>"Hoping that Dean can learn fast enough about
foreign
>>> policy to prevent 
>>> another 9/11 or worse is one hell of a roll of
the
>>> dice for American's 
>>> future.


>Me:
>doesn't make any sense, because what you are
>arguing for is that Bush be re-elected?"


HELLOOO!!! Anything upstairs????? Both Dean and Bush can be
defeated. Honestly, you don't really think before typing
sometimes do you? That is goal here! Prevent Dr.Doom and Mr.
Crackhead from being in White House. Neither one should be
there.

I don't want to have to choose between two crooks. I want to
choose between a Mr. Good Guy and Mr. Crackhead. 

>Me:
>I meant, how do you know that all the people who
>are attacking Dean criticizers are Dean supporters?"


Easy, they type silly arguments that have no base in logic and
reason. Not to mention before I was with my current candidate,
I was with Kerry, before that Dean. That is where I learned he
is full of himself and is a sneaky slimy politician that
shoots his mouth off without even thinking through the issues.
So I know who they are and where they live, and what their
names are. It is not random people. Most of them are members
of several Dean groups. When someone attacks, you see the name
listed in other sites, they also have websites that are for
Dean. Not that hard to figure out really.

To be honest, I am glad you are for Dean. Your positions and
arguments do him more harm than good. It is people that make
arguments like yours that keep Dean at only 16% of the Vote in
California. One might argue that is better than the other
candidates, but that is because the smart voters are divided
among 8 other candidates. 

A quick few points. 

1) There is no such thing as Criticizers, they use the word
"critic". I am sure Bush would use that word, but
not other intelligent people.

2) If you type in the words "who will be president in
2004" on a google search and hit "I feel lucky"
it takes you to Dean's web site. What the stupid morons don't
realize is that who ever wins the election in 2004 will not be
President in 2004 unless Bush wins re-election, because his
term ends in January of 2005. But ya know what, that is fine
if Dean is President in 2004, just as long as someone other
than Bush or Dean is President in 2005.

It must be annoying to be in such company.






Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
ADVERTISEMENT
 
 
 

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

[e-mail]



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service. 

[LastRobot]

1. wow

I always enjoy reading anything from someone who criticizes another person for things they themselves do. This person not only slaughtered the English language while complaining about your poor use of grammar -- he also does not argue about Dean's positions, trying to turn YOU into the argument. This is a common technique used by many Conservatives as of late and I'm very sorry that people on our side are starting to pick it up, believing it is the only way to compete.