I about fell off my chair when I read this Associated Press article. Here’s how it begins:
Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean on Friday criticized President Bush for restricting stem-cell research based on religious beliefs even though his own faith affected his decision to extend legal rights to gay couples.
Why was I surprised? Because an AP reporter is calling a Democrat a hypocrite for criticizing a Republican! Is raining frogs outside?
As the article points out, just this week Dean said “The hallmark of Christianity is to reach out to people who have been left behind,” as he talked about how his faith impelled him to sign the gay unions bill in Vermont.
But today he says:
“I think we ought to make scientific decisions, not theological and theoretical decisions,” Dean told voters at a town hall meeting. “I think that what the president did on stem-cell research was based on his religious beliefs and I think that is wrong.”
So what Dean is really saying is that it’s wrong to make decisions in favor of conservative positions based on religious beliefs, but it’s okay when you’re deciding in favor of liberal positions.
Every time Dean opens his mouth about religion, he sticks his foot in. Do you think that perhaps the liberal establishment has realized that Dean can’t win against Bush and so they’re sabotaging him in favor of someone they think can?
Dean just has a serious problem with “hoof-in-mouth disease”But then that is the obvious problem, what bothers me is the garbage heap behind him that he is disguising.
Dom:
What’s even worse is the second graf of the story:
“The difference, Dean said, was that Bush’s decision can hurt people, while his was strictly an issue of morality or ethics.”
I mean, where does one begin to unpack this intellectual illiteracy. wtsh? The Democrat-in-waiting says stuff like *this* and BUSH is stupid? Morality and ethics have nothing to do with hurting people? That one can say, apart from a judgment about its wisdom (i.e. without engaging in circular reasoning), that his decision on gay unions didn’t hurt people. Or that a decision contrary to Bush’s wouldn’t have hurt people? As I say … BUSH IS STUPID?!?!?!?!
“Do you think that perhaps the liberal establishment has realized that Dean can’t win against Bush and so they’re sabotaging him in favor of someone they think can?”
Yep, that’s my take on it.
The illusion is that the secular media is actually criticizing a Democratic contender, fair and square. Or at least questioning his consistency. And even giving a tip o’ the hat to Bush.
The reality—or, my opinion of it—is that some people are scared to death that Doc Howie might actually snag the nomination. They don’t want that because they’re convinced Dean can’t beat Bush.
(That premise, by the way, is also sloppy thinking. We don’t know if Dean can’t beat Bush. But then liberals tend to think they know everything.)
Anyway, the way to keep Dean from even getting close to winning the nomination is to equate him with stupidity, even at the expense (and this has gotta hurt these guys) in temporarily putting Dubya in a comparitively favorable light.
And He is leading now in Iowa. His campaign has collected 40 million. That is the scary part.