Dean's Shallowness/Will's Forgetfullness
Drinking From The Shallow Well Of Dean's Intellectualism: From The Tampa Tribune
One curious bit of revisionism here as Will takes on Dean for a few slips of the tongue. Admittedly, its good sporting fun, but Will misses on one shot, yet still manages to get in enough solid body blows to make his central point.
The issue Will makes about Dean on gay marriage is one that I'm sure all the Deanheads will see and think to themselves: "Yeah, he screwed up in answering the question and it may show some serious personality quirks that makes you question whether or not he should be President ... but the way he stood up to Chris Matthews was really cool."
*sigh* ... roll tape:
Appearing on "Hardball'' with the human Gatling gun, Chris Matthews, Dean said that in terms of legal rights, there is no practical difference between same-sex civil unions and marriages. Matthews: "So why are we quibbling over a name?'' Dean: "Because marriage is very important to a lot of people who are pretty religious.''So, the argument about the public meaning of marriage is merely a semantic quibble important only to the "pretty religious''?
That's bad enough ... but then there's this:
Dean has said of his faith that "I don't think it informs my politics'' and that he became a Congregationalist "because I had a big fight with a local Episcopal church about 25 years ago over a bike path.'' Fine. His faith, whatever it is, is his business and no disqualification for the presidency. But his qualifications supposedly include a searching intellect. Where is the evidence?
On the first point, if Dean think the issue is going to go away based on that type of dismissal, he and his supporters will be in for a rude awakening after Labor Day 2004. Regardless of where one stands on the issue, it is not something that just "pretty religious" people oppose.
On the second, is anyone expected to find any solace in Dean being "more like me" based on him choosing articles of faith conditional on the bureaucratic wrangling of a bike path? If that's not enough, let's check in with Amy Sullivan on Dean's religious outreach:
My only main substantive beef with the guy is that Dean just absolutely does not get religion. His campaign, to its credit, does have someone starting religious outreach, but it's a Unitarian Universalist minister. No offense to UUs, but that's not going to play well outside of New England.
Brilliant ... just f*cking brilliant. Forget the Dean as Carter parallels. Forget the Dean as Clinton parallels. Let's start talking about the Dean as Dukakis parallels. All that's missing is him showing up in Georgia with his own bales of hay to use as backdrop to show how he "gets" the rural south ... oh, and thow in the really hot chick from Hee Haw, also. If Bubbas are to be pandered to, at least let them have a little fun in the process.
Anyways ... back to Will:
Asked by Matthews whether he supports state right-to-work laws protecting the right of workers not to join a union, Dean said no. But he also said, ``I very much believe that states ought to have the right to recognize - to organize their own laws. So I'm not likely as president ... to order states to change them.'''Order states? Imagine the media derision if Bush ever suggested such an understanding of federalism.
Apparently George Will has never heard of No Child Left Behind. The Federal Govt does have a nice way of forcing states to do things ... its called money. You want it, then you abide by the rules they set forth. Want that highway paved anytime this century? Let Uncle Sam tell you what the speed limit is, then. States can opt out, but we're talking significant dollars that make it really unlikely and rare. If states can't yet opt out of the 5-7% of education bucks the Feds pay because the rules for NCLB are too steep, why do we think they'll back out on areas where federal dollars account for 20%-or-more? That methodology has had a surprising stay even with Republicans in power. Someone inform George Will and let the revolution begin.
Will's comment on Dean's flip-flop in the very next sentence, however, is duly noted. Furthermore, Will's main point could not be any truer:
America needs what Dean seems intellectually and temperamentally ill-equipped to provide - truly thoughtful opposition in an election that should turn on two huge issues. One is: How do we guarantee economic growth sufficient to generate tax revenues to finance a welfare state whose entitlement menu is being substantially expanded just as 77 million baby boomers are about to retire? The second is: Can America's security be attained without adopting foreign policy goals of unattainable grandiosity - nation-building, regional transformations
Comments
You know, I am totally ready for conservatives to paint this election as a battle of the intellects between Bush and Dean. Dean is smarter than Bush, no contest. Damn, have you ever heard either of them speak? Bush makes Dean look like a friggin' rocket scientist. I would LOVE to see them debate.
Will writes:
"America needs what Dean seems intellectually and temperamentally ill-equipped to provide - truly thoughtful opposition"
What Dean is ill-equipped to provide is calculated, focus-group produced answers to every single question, designed to offend as few people as possible. So he offends people sometimes. But you know what? That's life. To bend an old saw, you can please some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time. Dean shoots from the hip, and check it out: it's working. People adore him, they see him as a real person.
To say Dean is not an intellectual is to miss the point that it is actually Dean speaking, not a team of policy advisors and handlers. He's got those, sure, but unlike Bush, Dean tells them what to help him with, rather than them giving him a script and teaching him how to pronounce the words. Dean is an incredibly smart man - I get that sense every time I hear him speak. When he talks about small business, he talks from a real knowledge. When he talks about health care, he talks from a real (personal, deep) knowledge.
Posted by: Ian | December 8, 2003 10:32 AM