An indecisive president is *not* what is best for this great country. Dean Flip-Flops Invite Criticism FOXNews Thursday , September 11, 2003 WASHINGTON — Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman (search) renewed his criticism of rival Howard Dean (search) on Wednesday, reiterating remarks made at a debate Tuesday night in which he lambasted the former Vermont governor for suggesting the United States not take sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. "That's a break of more than a half century of American foreign policy carried out by the presidents of both parties and it's harmful," Lieberman told the Council of Foreign Relations (search) in New York City. In Tuesday night's debate of the nine Democratic presidential hopefuls, Lieberman attacked Dean, noting that the latter said in a debate last week that Israel should get out of disputed territory claimed by Palestinians. The stir generated one of the most heated moments of the debate, marked by the candidates' reluctance to criticize one another. "Let me say to Governor Dean, he has said he wouldn't take sides, but then he has said Israel ought to get out of the West Bank," Lieberman said. "I'm disappointed in Joe," Dean responded. "My position on Israel is exactly the same as Bill Clinton's, I want to be an honest broker." "Not right," Lieberman retorted to the comparison. To that, Dean replied: "Excuse me, Joe, I didn't interrupt you and I would appreciate it if you didn't interrupt me ... It doesn't help, Joe, to demagogue this issue." Since the debate, Dean has suggested that President Bush should ask President Clinton to negotiate some sort of peace settlement with the Israelis and Palestinians. On Wednesday, Democratic House members supporting Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry (search) and Missouri Rep. Dick Gephardt (search) wrote to Dean to suggest he be more cautious in his choice of words. "This is not a time to be sending mixed messages," read the letter circulated by Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., and signed by more than two dozen House Democratic members, including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., a Gephardt backer. "On the contrary, in these difficult times we must reaffirm our unyielding commitment to Israel's survival and raise our voices against all forms of terrorism and incitement. "It is unacceptable for the U.S. to be 'evenhanded' on these fundamental issues," the letter stated. New York Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a Dean supporter who is Jewish, said he was comfortable with Dean's position, although he could seen how some of Dean's language could spark concern by supporters of Israel. Dean's clarifications, however, should have cleared the confusion up, he said. "This is sent out by Gephardt supporters and it should be seen for what it is - a political document trying to exploit his statement before he has a chance to clarify it," Nadler said. The Congressional Black Caucus (search) and Fox News Channel co-sponsored Tuesday's debate, which featured all the candidates courting black voters. Dean, whose rallies generally have fewer minorities than his rivals, also got into trouble when he went out on a limb by making a bold — and inaccurate — assertion "I'm the only white politician that ever talks about race in front of white audiences," he said. In fact, all the candidates discuss race on the trail regularly, and North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, who grew up in the segregated South and is counting on southern black votes, was first to take offense. "I talk about civil rights and race everywhere I go, no matter who the audience is. What Howard Dean did was divisive, it's division we are in fact trying to overcome," Edwards said. Dean has altered his positions on a variety of issues — the number of troops in Iraq, tax cuts, Social Security, trade and campaign finance reform. On Iraq, Dean called for more troops, then hinted the United States should get out, and now says he believes the United States should stay there but not add troops. On tax cuts, Dean first said he would repeal about 80 percent of the tax cuts pushed by President Bush. Now, he wants to repeal them all. On Social Security, Dean once suggested raising the eligibility age, but now says it should stay as is. On trade, Dean said the United States should only trade with nations that meet strict American standards. Now, he says they must meet looser international standards. And on Cuba, Dean once said he wanted the trade embargo relaxed, but now he says it should remain. All the while, he has trumpeted his candor and straight talk on the campaign trail for months, but in his response, his aides, when asked about all his shifting policies, responded that one of his strengths as president is his flexibility. A lot of Dean critics are now asking what flexible straight talk sounds like.
flexibility is not a bad thing. indecisiveness is a bad thing (see Orlando Sanchez). i don't know which this is.
Yet another blow to Dean's credibility. This man will be soon EXPOSED for the sham that he truly is. (and MadMax doesn't know what he's talking about regarding Sanchez -- nice cheap shot by the way.... totally unecessary, unsubstantiated and irrelevant) Pathetic, really.
Thanks for the link. Though most of these charges aren't exactly "flip-flopping," I see what you're getting at. I'd *much* rather have a president who, when presented with new information or ideas, is strong enough to redefine his positions. Bush refuses to acknowledge anything that doesn't fit with his ideas (much like you and I, but we're not leading the free world), and this is a dangerous way to govern. Flexibility and open-mindedness are *extremely* important parts of creating a bi-partisan, forward-looking government. As we've discussed here, the world isn't black and white.
If refining your position on the issues over the course of time is grounds for disqualification, there wouldn't be any candidates left. Besides, every politician seems to change their tune from audience to audience in order to *gasp* pander for votes.
I just hate it when politicians flip flop on the issues... well in this case when an entire political party flip flops. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A6853-2003Feb26?language=printer Speaking to a cheering crowd in Chattanooga, Tenn., one day before the Nov. 7, 2000, election, George W. Bush repeated a line that had by then been a standard part of the stump speech for many, many months--and one that now seems, in the face of looming U.S. military action in Iraq, quite contradictory. "Let me tell you what else I'm worried about: I'm worried about an opponent who uses nation building and the military in the same sentence. See, our view of the military is for our military to be properly prepared to fight and win war and, therefore, prevent war from happening in the first place." The line was an explicit condemnation of Clinton/Gore foreign policy--specifically that the White House had stretched the military too thin with peacekeeping mission in Haiti, Somalia and the Balkans. President Clinton and Vice President Gore, his Democratic opponent, had strayed from the central mission of the military: to fight and win wars, Bush said. That line proved to be among the most popular in the stump speech, guaranteed to evoke an eruption of applause from the conservatives who packed Bush's campaign rallies.
Why does anyone care what trader and texx think about Dean. It's not like they would consider voting for him if he were more consistant on issues. The Bush vs, Bush video clearly demonstrates how changing events can and must change one's course of action. Thinking men reconsider their positions often. Inflexible dogmatic leaders are doomed to fail.
I see what you're saying and, though I disagree with that they say, everybody's entitled to an opinion.
agreed...the most valuable component in any system is the most flexible one. that doesn't mean you have no backbone or integrity...but it means that as events change your reality, you don't make decisions based on dogmatic schemes.
Nice post, GeneP. I agree entirely. I've been disappointed by some of Bush's changes after 9/11, but I acknowledge fully that the times suggest *some* sort of change of thinking.
Will Saletan is obsessed with trashing Dean. This is at least the third he has written. Dean opposed 'Saletan's war. I wish he would just get over it.
