Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
United States

Howard Dean to Guest Blog for Lawrence Lessig 1246

Ethanol writes "Starting Monday, Professor Lawrence Lessig (whom we all remember from Eldred v. Ashcroft) is going on vacation, and his weblog will be guest-hosted by Democratic presidential candidate Governor Howard Dean. Could this be a sign that a serious contender for President (tied for first for the nomination in the latest polls) has his head screwed on right about copyright law?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Howard Dean to Guest Blog for Lawrence Lessig

Comments Filter:
  • Well he has my vote (Score:5, Interesting)

    by javiercero ( 518708 ) on Saturday July 12, 2003 @11:34PM (#6426153)
    I have seen a few of his appearances, and I must admit I am quite impressed with this guy. Then again maybe is that after 2.5 yrs of Mr. Bush my expectations for POTUS have been dramatically lowered.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 12, 2003 @11:49PM (#6426219)
      You've got to be kidding. Have you done some background work on Dean? I live in VT, and the guy is as slippery as an Arkansas governor. If you look at his history on the issues he supports he's actually proposed and pushed the EXACT OPPOSITE over the last five years. He is, in fact, a centrist dem and not a far left evangelist.

      I may not think Bush is the best option, but the better of two evils Dean is not. Basically Dean has repackaged himself to appeal to the far left which, because of the centrist nature of modern politics, has been disenfranchised by the dem party.

      You could say hes trying to pull a reverse bush; solidifying his base with the democratic hearland and then moving out to centrists on specific issues... he'll probably make the push sometime six months or so before the election.

      HOWEVER, there's a fundamental problem with that plan; the left isn't nearly as cohesive or well organized as the right, and he's depending on a skittish bunch.

      He'll lose, but he'll guarantee no other democrats win either.

      • by uradu ( 10768 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @12:36AM (#6426397)
        > guy is as slippery as an Arkansas governor

        At least the main things involving slipping with Clinton were women's panties. With our Chimp In Chief they involve things like wool and eyes. It's amazing how "outraged" some people managed to get over Bill's sex life, yet here the reasons for the Iraq war are being systematically deconstructed, and no-one seems to give a damn. Welcome to the Twilight Zone.
        • by canajin56 ( 660655 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @12:47AM (#6426453)
          But lying about a blowjob is SO MUCH WORSE! That is worth impeaching over, not silly "falsified" reports. Besides, that's not even a LIE, didn't you hear him? All these CIA reports sent to the White House about how all this Iraq stuff was false, they like, totally got lost in the mail or something. Until just now.

      • If you look at Fox News, or any of the other conservative news stations, they will say hes far left because they'd rather you vote for him than for Kerry or Gephart, the real far left.

        Dean is actually a moderate, but thats what I want because I'm an independent, not a liberal.
  • Odd behaviour (Score:4, Interesting)

    by aeinome ( 672135 ) on Saturday July 12, 2003 @11:35PM (#6426154) Journal
    Why would anyone let someone else keep their daily journal for them? And giving it away to a politician - that just begs for deep, dark secrets to be revealed.
    • Re:Odd behaviour (Score:4, Insightful)

      by BWJones ( 18351 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @02:36AM (#6426815) Homepage Journal
      Why would anyone let someone else keep their daily journal for them?

      Hmmmm, perhaps Lessig trusts him? Or perhaps this is an effort at getting exposure to a portion of the voting public they find valuable to their cause? Given that Lessig has recognition in this crowd (this did get posted on /. afterall), and /. is recognized in the press quite a bit and is often used for background research by a number of folks in the press etc...etc...etc... Really, think about it. Who reads Lessig's blogs? Typically they are educated, reasonably well connected to technology, are aware of current legal issues as well as political ones and finally, this is a rather inexpensive manner to get out the message Deans is trying to extend to the voting public.

      Given the position the Democratic party is in right now with reasonable candidates, Dean has got my attention. While Dean is not an academic per se, he did go to Yale and then received his MD from Albert Einsten College of Medicine, so one would surmise he can think to some degree, unfortunately missing in certain administrations. Additionally, this guy actually worked for a living as does his wife as physicians so there is a certain intimate knowledge of how screwed up our health care system has become, particularly under HMO's.

      All in all, I would say this strategy (if indeed this is strategy) has worked so far. They got my attention, and judging from the almost 400 posts as I write this, they got a few others attention as well.

  • There's a thing (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Apreche ( 239272 ) on Saturday July 12, 2003 @11:35PM (#6426156) Homepage Journal
    Check out

    it tells you which president to vote for based on your stance on the issues. I tested it out and it's very accurate. It gave me a reccomendation for green party 100% and Dean 96%. Since I really want Bush out and 3rd parties don't win, guess who I'm voting for? I'll probably read a few of his entries on Lessig's blog, and unless he's really unkosher this seals the deal.
    • You choose between one of two candidates because the majority does as well. If all the people like you banded togethor, and we stopped pushing those that don't care to vote, third parties might win more often.

      As for me, I'm a minor. Read: Taxation without representation.
      • by Jeremi ( 14640 ) on Saturday July 12, 2003 @11:48PM (#6426214) Homepage
        ... or you change the system so voters aren't forced to choose between "throwing their vote away" and "choosing the lesser of two evils".

        Basically you want a system that allows the voter to express more than just a single choice. There are several systems that would suffice; I myself like instant runoff voting because the process is easy to understand, and it lets me express my preferences in an intuitive "first choice / second choice / third choice" format.

        • by EvanED ( 569694 ) <[moc.liamg] [ta] [denave]> on Sunday July 13, 2003 @12:46AM (#6426443)
          There's another option, the approval vote. I think it's what the IEEE uses, so maybe that'll give it some credibility around here. Basically you can vote for as many people as you want. No one person can have more than one vote, but if there are three people you wouldn't mind haveing in office, you can vote for all of them.

          It combines the easiness of current voting with the power of ranking systems (either the instant runoff or the Borda) without binding you to order somehow rank everyone who is on the ballot. (Which is an interesting problem in itself... it probably implies computers which means $$$ and even less trust with the current systems than I have in the chad-based systems.)

          (See the intereting Discover article at for more information about voting systems.)
        • by dspeyer ( 531333 ) <dspeyer@wa[ ] ['m.u' in gap]> on Sunday July 13, 2003 @12:53AM (#6426481) Homepage Journal
          Voting reforms can help but they won't solve everything. Every voting system is abusable at a mathematical level. Take the following example:

          33% of voters prefer candidate A, tolerate candidate B and detest candadate C

          35% of voters prefer candidate B, tolerate candidate C and detest candadate A

          32% of voters prefer candidate C, tolerate candidate A and detest candadate B

          Common sense says B should win

          In our modern current system, B would win unless 3% worth of C voters decided that it was hopeless and they should vote A, in which case A would win

          Under instant runoff voting, C would be eliminated and A would win with 65%, unless 1.5% worth of B voted C so that A would be eliminated, in which case B would win with 66.5%. Now that's even more freaky.

          I think game theorists have actually proven that nothing works right regarding elections. Some improvements can be made (and I suspect IRV's flaws are less likely to become of practical importance than our current system's) but the real changes we need are an independant media and an informed public.

    • Dean is a moderate who has the balls to speak his mind, but when he was a governer his actions were very moderate.

      He almost reminds me of Clinton.
      • Dean is a moderate who has the balls to speak his mind, but when he was a governer his actions were very moderate.

        Great! Maybe that will help him get elected, and then we might just have someone with integrity in the White House.

        He almost reminds me of Clinton.

        How I miss the days when the worst thing you could say about the President was that he was getting sexual favors from the wrong person... :^/

        (yes, I fully expect 25 people to come up with worse things about him now... oh well)

        • Well there's the obvious invasion of Yugoslavia and installing a US friendly leader who dissolved the country into Serbia and Montenegro, and was then promptly assassinated.
          But there's also the enforcing of murderous sanctions that were, up until the second Iraq invasion a few months ago, killing 5000 children each month (UN and WHO numbers). And the bombings in the illegally enforced no-fly zones which included the bombing and killing of dangerous and [] deadly sheep. []
          Of course there's also helping turkey
    • Re:There's a thing (Score:4, Informative)

      by neema ( 170845 ) on Saturday July 12, 2003 @11:49PM (#6426225) Homepage
      Maybe the best bet would be to judge where your state is going. If it's clear that a candidate like Dean is going to win in your state (Dean or Kerry seem like they're going to win in California and New York, for example), then go ahead and vote for the green party. But if you're in Alabama, vote smart.
    • I'm a Canadian and tried the above-mentioned site mostly for kicks. Are Americans really left with so little *real* choice? Observe:

      3. Bush, George W. - US President (68%)
      4. Dean, Gov. Howard, VT - Democrat (67%)

      Is there really so little difference between the two main parties that the leading candidates for each rate so closely to each other?

      Something is very wrong with that... that doesn't sound like a healthy democracy.

      (In case you care, the 100% match for me was "Libertarian candidate")

    • Wow, I'm 100% GWB, and 90% Libertarian... according to that site, anyways. Came as a surprise to me, seeing as I usually think like a moderate.

      The top democratic candidate I had was Lieberman. Not a surprise - I'd probably throw a vote his way if I had the chance, mostly because I see him as the lesser of the three democratic evils in the race.

      I keep thinking to myself, yes, Dean says what he means, but isn't that going to be a huge liability on the international policy front? Kerry has some issues from V
  • by GigsVT ( 208848 )
    Either sane copyright laws, with a socialist welfare state, or bad copyright laws, and imperialist invasion of countries?

    Why do people continue to vote for republicans and democrats anyway?
    • Because when they vote for third parties some moron wins?

      Karma is overrated.

    • I'll take option 1 if it means we'll get universal health care and quality education in the US. That's the only reason I'd be willing to pay higher taxes.
    • by cowmix ( 10566 ) *
      "Either sane
      copyright laws, with a
      welfare state, or bad
      copyright laws, and imperialist invasion of countries?"

      I beg you to spend a little time reading up on Howard Dean. His
      policies are far from a "socialist welfare state".
    • by aeinome ( 672135 )
      1) Socialism could be improved here. Higher taxes are a small loss compared to the gains in education, health benefits, and social security. Capitalism is beginning to corrupt.

      2) Because they're the ones who put their name out the most. America isn't too smart, and the average citizen does not look at all possible candidates, only the main ones. IMO, we shouldn't have political parties, because people tend to vote on party lines without even thinking about the person they are elected beyond their party.
    • Funny I do not remember American going into some socialist welfare state when Clinton was in office.

    • by EinarH ( 583836 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @12:28AM (#6426367) Journal
      Are you trolling? Whatever; I'll bite.

      They way you mentions "a socialist welfare state" and puts it up against " imperialist invasion of countries" i get the feeling that you are not very happy about it...

      But did you know that when UN classifies countries based and ranks them in their Human Development Index what you propably consider socialist welfare states(as a bad thing) these socialist welfare states top the list?

      1.Norway, socialist welfare state
      2.Iceland, socialist welfare state
      3.Sweden, socialist welfare state
      5.the Netherlands, somewhat socialist welfare 6.state
      7.Belgium, socialist welfare state
      8.the United States,
      9.Canada, somewhat socialist welfare state
      11.Switzerland, socialist welfare state
      12.Denmark, socialist welfare state
      14.the United Kingdom,
      15.Finland, socialist welfare state
      20.Spain and
      20.New Zealand

      Those I have marked socialist welfare states is those states I consider to be closer to a typical socilist welfare state modell than the United States way of "welfare state". There are of course difrences between them and different "degrees of socialist welfare states".

      So please: Don't compare "socialist welfare states " to a foregin policy of "imperialist invasion of countries"

      Why do people continue to vote for republicans and democrats anyway?
      Because your country addappted a political system that in reality only promotes a two party system.
  • Until... (Score:5, Funny)

    by pixelgeek ( 676892 ) on Saturday July 12, 2003 @11:38PM (#6426166)
    Could this be a sign that a serious contender for President...has his head screwed on right about copyright law?

    Until some lobbyist backs up to his house with a truck full of campaign contributions

  • by Farley Mullet ( 604326 ) on Saturday July 12, 2003 @11:39PM (#6426176)

    I actually kinda like Dean, but saying that someone is a serious contender for the 2004 election because he's tied for the nomination at this point is kinda like saying your kid has a serious NBA future ahead of him because he's tied for tallest in grade 3.

    • If he is "tied for the nomination" of one of the parties of a two party system, it stands to reason that he is at LEAST in a 25% probability percentile (given that there is a 50/50 chance of either a democrat or republican getting elected, and if the last election is any indicator, I think that figure is pretty reasonable). I think that qualifies as serious contender.
    • Dean's position at this point could actually mean quite a lot, because the Democratic nomination will probably be determined before the first primary or caucus vote is cast. There hasn't been a true upset for the nomination since Jimmy Carter in 1976. The primary process is simply too front-loaded -- the season starts early, and then the primaries come all at once -- for a candidate to come from behind and build up momentum. What will determine the nomination is the "invisible primary": who raises the most
  • Better Questions (Score:3, Insightful)

    by webword ( 82711 ) on Saturday July 12, 2003 @11:40PM (#6426179) Homepage
    Does this mean that Lawrence Lessig likes Howard Dean? If yes, why? What ideas? Are they friends? Does Lessig think Dean would be a good president? Does it mean that will see the "real" Howard Dean? What kind of traffic boost will Lessig's site get? Will people associate Lessig's ideas and writing with Dean's, and is that a good thing? What is Dean's real motivation behind this? As a geek, do you think this is a good idea? Will your grandmother care, and does it matter that she does not understand this blog stuff? What is your favorite color?
  • howard dean (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pohl ( 872 ) on Saturday July 12, 2003 @11:41PM (#6426182) Homepage
    I celebrated July 4 by getting off my ass and carrying placards in parades and handing out literature for Howard Dean in two small towns in Iowa. I had never done anything like that before. I had to get up at 5:30 in the morning to do it, and it was worth it.

    Don't get me wrong, I haven't exactly caught Dean Fever yet, although we see eye-to-eye on many issues and I'm really impressed with the level of grassroots support that he has. It would be nice to have a president that isn't already owned before getting into office.

    But, then, I'd settle for a president that can use the word "imminent" correctly. I think Dean rises to that challenge.
  • by HanzoSan ( 251665 ) * on Saturday July 12, 2003 @11:42PM (#6426189) Homepage Journal

    Howard Dean has the balls to be pro P2P?? If he has the balls to make a move such as this, I will vote for him on principle.

    It seems these other politicians are spineless, but if he has the guts to do this, he deserves to be President.
  • by Zergwyn ( 514693 ) on Saturday July 12, 2003 @11:47PM (#6426205)
    Overall, he didn't do that bad a job. In some ways Dean is actually an interesting mix of left and right. He is a former doctor, which partly explains a lot of his very strong positions with regards to health care. He certainly has come across as one of the strongest left standing democrats in many ads and articles, but he has an A grade from the NRA as he was not at all anti-gun ownership in Vermont. He is also reasonably fiscally conservative. Our state didn't go too overboard with spending, and we actually still have over 10 million dollars in our "rainy day fund," for what it's worth. My biggest quibble with his term was actually in regards to education, but a lot of that was the fault of the legislature and the courts (which ruled our old method was unconstitutional). Of the candidates, we could do a lot worse (come to think of it, we have been doing a lot worse) then Dean. Having met him, and lived with him as head of the state, I think he has some good ideas. I was actually kind of pro-war, but Bush has screwed us so badly on the domestic front in virtually every field, from economics to scientific research (VERY important to me) to basic civil rights, that I would vote for virtually anyone over him. I would recommend people look at his stands.
  • Topic.. (Score:5, Informative)

    by EinarH ( 583836 ) on Saturday July 12, 2003 @11:49PM (#6426224) Journal
    "Could this be a sign that a serious contender for President (tied for first for the nomination in the latest polls) has his head screwed on right about copyright law?"

    From the comment-section on LL's blog:

    Good heavens. Dare I interpret Governor Dean's guest blogging on Prof. Lessig's site as a sign that he supports copyright reform?
    But, good lord, if he's actually in substantial agreement with Dr. Lessig on the issue, it's like a dream come true. ...posted by Evan

    LL responds:

    Good point, and I should have made this clear: Dean's guest blogging says nothing about Dean's views about the issues I've been pushing here. I've never discussed these issues with any member of the Dean campaign. And as we don't (yet) determine elections, I'm not even sure that Dean has worked these issues out himself.

    So please don't read anything into this more than the obvious: This is yet another way in which the Dean campaign has understood something about the net. ... posted by Lessig

    It's a win-win deal. LL gets someone to blog while on vactation, Dean reach out to a couple of thousand potentional voters. But interesting anyway. Looking forward to reading this blog.

  • by Anonymous Coward
    We non-USians can look forward to a great Democrats vs Republicans /. flamefest.
  • This isn't exactly about copyright, but it is when you think about who has been pushing for the majority of the copyright measures we know and disdain: .h tm
  • by cowmix ( 10566 ) * <mmarch&gmail,com> on Saturday July 12, 2003 @11:56PM (#6426248) Homepage
    Shame on /.

    Howard Dean has used the Internet, specifically blogs, better than any presidential candidate. Every day, you can read their official blog or countless other personal blogs that give up to the minute info on what doing on the campaign trail. I have never felt more involved, or informed in a presidential campaign until Dean's.

    All this use of blogs and such as created a tremendous amount grassroots support. Unlike other candidates that have raked in 1000s of dollars from big interests, Dean's campaign raised more than any other Democratic candidate last quarter mostly via the web with the average donation being $66 dollars..

    Anyway, I feel that no matter what Dean's positions are (btw.. I think they are great) /. should give a thumbs up to how he is doing biz..

  • by phantomlord ( 38815 ) <> on Sunday July 13, 2003 @12:10AM (#6426295) Journal
    ok... so where are the people shouting about how Dean is getting the equivalent of a monetary donation that's not being given to other candidates? What is it that all the money that everyone on slashdot goes to fund? Media: ads, office staff, platform talks, getting their message out, etc. Lessig is more of less a political lobbiest of a special interest group, but many of the slashdotters believe the same thing he does, so it's ok in this case... we just need to shut up the ones we disagree with. If Rush Limbaugh were to run for office and stay on the air during campaign season, wouldn't all the CFR people whine that he has an unfair advantage? How about if he let a single candidate guest host his program for a whole week?
  • by Elf-friend ( 554128 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @12:13AM (#6426310)
    Normaly this news would excite me, but the Howard Dean that is running for president is not the same man as he was as our governor. I just don't know what to make of him anymore. Initiatives he opposed in Vermont now have his support, and vice-versa. His tirade over the war (regardless of your position on the war) seemed over the top. I found him downright scary.

    I've met our former governor three times (it's a small state, and my involvement in statewide 4-H events gave me the opportunity). He seemed very personable, but actions towards the end of his time here tended to disillusion me (and many Vermonters) about "Howard the Coward" as some called him (especially after he wouldn't sign the civil-unions law publicly, instead of behind closed doors). A man who easily won his first three elections, found the next two more chalenging (many think that, if the Republican candidate - the same woman both times - had been more likeable, he might have lost). It is possible he could not have won another (his hand-picked successor did not).

    I just don't know what to think of this move, I fear it is more than likely a political ploy, something we have seen more than enough of in Vermont these last two terms. The Democrats are desperate for the voters that went Green last time, because they know they need them. In Vermont, though, Dean was always very business friendly, too much so for me to trust him on this now. Which is the real Howard Dean? That is the question.
    • by gad_zuki! ( 70830 ) * on Sunday July 13, 2003 @01:17AM (#6426575)
      >. The Democrats are desperate for the voters that went Green last time, because they know they need them.

      The dems don't want him, they want their boy Gephart or *shudder* Lieberman. The DLC publically flogged Dean supporters by calling them "the activist elite" [] and tried to compare them to politcally impotent ultra-lefties. Dean supports responded back here. []

      The green vote simply isn't important. I'm sure that more than half of those votes are permanent third-party protest votes and regardless of what the Dems want you to think it was a bad ballot and a piss-poor Gore campaign that got Bush into office.

      Regardless, everyone who isn't in the GOP wants an electable Democrat. I can't see why Dean wouldn't fit the bill, especially with Iraq turing out to be a quite the quagmire for Bush.

      Sorry, but there's no ploy. Dean is fighting influencial (read: very wealthy and very connected) members of his own party right now and in interesting ways (appeal to the populace, net-based action, etc) just to get heard.
      • That's not true. (Score:3, Interesting)

        by sheldon ( 2322 )
        The dems don't want him, they want their boy Gephart or *shudder* Lieberman. The DLC publically flogged Dean supporters by calling them "the activist elite" and tried to compare them to politcally impotent ultra-lefties.

        The DLC, and the website you linked to is part of the New Democrats. That is the centrist Democratic coalition that was brought together by President Clinton. Neither group is "The Democrats", they are part of the Dems, but not the whole. The Democratic party is not really a or
  • PRIORITIES! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Baric ( 681935 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @12:22AM (#6426338)
    I believe that every Democratic candidate except Dean voted in favor of the Patriot Act. Dean didn't get a vote, but he was outspoken against it from the very beginning. Every other candidate was willing to vote for that egregious act because it was politically expedient at the time. That is not the kind of decision-making I want from the next President of the United States. Love him or hate him, Dean is the Democratic candidate best qualified to LEAD this country and not FOLLOW the whims of popularity. I will NEVER cast a vote for anyone who voted for that Act. Ever.
  • It's simple.... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by FooGoo ( 98336 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @12:42AM (#6426423)
    Dean wants to be the internet candidate. He can't afford to compete in other media so he is pulling this pseudo grassroots crap. It's too early for all this election crap.
  • by vnv ( 650942 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @12:45AM (#6426442)
    Just who is Howard Dean?
    "I don't mind being characterized as 'liberal' -- I just don't happen to think it's true." -- Howard Dean, in Salon.

    If he is not a liberal, just who is he?

    To find out, we have to move past his political machine. Like Bush, Dean is very adept at associating himself with issues and causes that are important for his campaign. Thus for Dean we see his association with Lessig and an apparent concern for "the commons". Nothing could be farther from the truth.

    Let's take a look at how Dean compares to Kucinich [], a long time liberal Democrat.

    Howard Dean, a subset of the comparison points:

    Health care plan

    Complex 4-prong plan, extending multiple state and federal programs piecemeal, combined with tax credits and incentives, all of which Dean claims is more likely to become law, but still won't cover everyone

    Death penalty

    Favors for "extreme" crimes like terrorism or the killing of a police officer, although critical of Bush administration's "careless" approach to executions

    Roe v. Wade

    Pro-life until recently; now the only candidate pledging to make Roe v. Wade a "litmus test" for appointing federal judges. Pro-choice, but refuses to make Roe v. Wade a litmus test for federal judges

    Kyoto treaty

    Says we must "take another look," but has "concerns" about some provisions

    Patriot Act

    Would repeal "parts," but also wants to expand intelligence agencies; praises Russ Feingold as only Senator who opposed the act, ignoring Kucinich's vocal House opposition, falsely implying no other candidate opposed the Patriot Act


    Notes problems with "free" trade, suggesting the need for inclusion of human rights, environmental, and labor standards in trade agreements -- but still pro-NAFTA

    "Star Wars" ballistic missile system

    Would cut only 1/8 of the funding, transferring it to international threat-reduction programs

    Pentagon waste

    Disagrees with any proposed Pentagon cutbacks, and advocates aggressive expansion of intelligence, police, and special forces

    Medical marijuana

    Firmly opposed, although promises to abide by a proposed FDA evaluation

    War on drugs

    Has accepted National Governors Association position: more federal funding for all aspects of the drug war; however, also speaks of drug use as a medical problem, and has called the War on Drugs a failure; website and recent speeches simply do not clarify what policies he would pursue, as far as I can tell

    We see that Dean is very much like a "lite" version of Bush. There is very little in Howard Dean that is liberal.

    Bush would be delighted to run against Dean who is simply a watered down version of Bush. And Dean comes from Vermont, bringing only 3 electoral votes. Easy campaign, easy victory.

    What Bush doesn't want to do is run against a real Democrat who actually represents the tough issues that this country is facing. Or have to deal with a candidate whose home state carries 21 electoral votes.

    Howard Dean may look snazzy on paper and in the media, but in reality, he is merely the lite version of Bush and would do little or nothing to actually make America better for Americans. We'd have the same screwed up medical system, giant defense budgets, pollution, and corporatist America that we have with Bush. Voting for Kucinich or for the Greens is change. Dean is status quo, more of the same Bush Doctrine.

    • Bush lite? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Heisenbug ( 122836 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @12:13PM (#6428289)
      I haven't seen anything 'lite' about Dean. Whenever I actually look into his stance on an issue, I find that he's thought it through very carefully, and that he seems to be taking a principled stand -- while being open to discussion. He doesn't go for the simple answer -- he goes for one that makes sense to him, whether or not it looks good. It helps that I agree with many of his stances, once I understand them -- but it helps even more that I respect the way he thinks and speaks. That's one way that he comes in way beyond Bush in my book.

      But the important thing is that his views usually make more sense once you look into them. For example, he's often labeled as 'pro-gun' -- because he thinks that Vermont, with roughly 3 murders a year, should have a different set of gun laws than New York. That's not entirely crazy, is it?

      I've looked into a few other issues that you name:

      "Pro-choice, but refuses to make Roe v. Wade a litmus test for federal judges."

      I read that interview. Basically, he was saying that he would assess judges based on a wide array of issues, of which abortion was just one. Are you saying Dean is like Bush because he refuses to take a simplistic stance? Come on ...

      "Kyoto treaty
      Says we must "take another look," but has "concerns" about some provisions."

      Specifically, that the treaty might go too easy on third-world pollution. Is that too soft on the environment for you?

      "Patriot Act
      Would repeal "parts," but also wants to expand intelligence agencies; praises Russ Feingold as only Senator who opposed the act, ignoring Kucinich's vocal House opposition, falsely implying no other candidate opposed the Patriot Act"

      It is unfortunate that the House Democrats are so underplayed in general -- but now are you saying Dean is like Bush because he's going to apply standards of constitutionality to the Patriot act?

      "Medical marijuana
      Firmly opposed, although promises to abide by a proposed FDA evaluation."

      So he's going to overcome his own prejudices, and apply the same standards of medicine to marijuana that are applied to other drugs. Shocked, shocked am I.

      "Bush would be delighted to run against Dean who is simply a watered down version of Bush."

      I simply don't buy that. Gore was watered down, the middle-of-the-road boring candidate. That seems to be what the Democratic Party wants again -- and I agree with you that such a candidate wouldn't stand a chance against Bush.

      But Dean comes across as honest, intelligent, daring, and willing to take principled stands. He's neither boring nor, as you suggest, conservative. Although I think you've nailed the problem the democratic party faces, Dean is the solution and not the problem.
  • by Nameis ( 556253 ) <> on Sunday July 13, 2003 @12:47AM (#6426449)
    The political truth is that Dean has the same chance of being elected as Microsoft going open source.

    That being said, like a lot of fringe candidates, Dean actually has a few good ideas [] - like copyright reform and his general clues with technology - that stand out from his normal wackyness. With luck, other candidates from *both* parties will take notice of Dean's relative success and adopt accordingly.

  • Dennis Kucinich (Score:5, Insightful)

    by -tji ( 139690 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @01:16AM (#6426570) Journal
    Dennis Kucinich seems to be one of the more clueful candidates.. From his www site: []

    As President, I will repeal the Patriot Act to regain for all Americans the sacred right of privacy in our homes, our libraries, our schools.

    He got a "66%" rating from the ACLU.

    I couldn't find any ratings from the EFF on the various candidates, so I'm not sure where he stands on Tech Liberties.
  • by cmacb ( 547347 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @01:21AM (#6426584) Homepage Journal
    The last few times I've checked Lesig's blog he has his head compleatly up Deans behind.

    Is there a track record of how he might vote on something like the DMCA?

    If you saw Dean's appearance on Meet the Press you can't possibly be too comfortable with him as President. If he aspires to the job he has a LOT of homework to do.

    My guess is that Lesig is among the hard core liberals (surprise!) and all members of that group would gladly vote for Adolph Hitler next time around if it mean revenge for 2000.

    Blind rage over what they feel was a stolen election will drive them to do totally irrational things until 2004.

    I think it is irresponsible to turn over your blog to anyone else, particularly someone who has tremendous internet resources of their own. This is pure partisanship and has nothing that I can see to do with Open Source, DMCA, RIAA or any other issues for which Lesig is notable.
  • by joltinjoe ( 689035 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @02:00AM (#6426697)
    1. He opposed the Patriot Act from the start and speaks out against it now. 2. He opposes the FCC and Michael Powell's plan to relax restrictions on media ownership. 3. He is radically changing our politics by basing his campaign on campaign contributions coming from tens of thousands of people giving $10, $25 and $100. Which means if he pulls it off and wins the White House -- the people will actually own the damn place for the first time in decades. I'll take my chances on P2P with a guy and a campaign who at least knows enough to try to guest blog for Lessig.
  • by HarveyBirdman ( 627248 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @02:35AM (#6426814) Journal
    Wow. I can hardly contain myself. My nipples just got hard, I can tell ya.


    Got go read what that politican has to say, yesiree.

    Mmm hmmm.

    Yup. I'm sure it'll be different, and, um, oh, I dunno...


    I wonder if my Tivo picked up "Dead Like Me" tonight?

  • by Anenga ( 529854 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @06:17AM (#6427348)
    I think everyone who likes Dean should read this article []. While I think he is the most vocal and stands out the most from the current democratic canidates (and of course earned a LOT more money), I think he is too mysterious and won't give his real opinions on a lot of issues. For example (from the article):
    • He was asked if he'd vote for the Medicare bill with a prescription drug benefit that is likely to pass Congress soon? Dean wouldn't say. Why?
    • Is he still for a balanced budget amendment? He said only that he's "tempted" to be for it.
    • Should a gay marriage in Canada be recognized in the United States? He refused to give a responsive answer.
    • Would he name the Democratic candidates who he said need a "backbone transplant"? No, he wouldn't.

    While I'm not crazy about everything Bush has done so far, I support him a lot more than any of these other democratic canidates. I think the appeal of the democratic party is fading out in a lot of Americans, they're now more interested in national security rather than domestic issues. If the economy is "good" & WMD/Saddam etc. is found by 2004, Bush will win in a land slide.

    Another problem for the democratic party is that nobody knows any of the canidates. I've asked a few people I know (who are democrats) who'd they vote for, and everyone responds with "Is Hillary running?" or "Probably Gore".

    Howard Dean needs to be more open about what he supports and what he doesn't, he's too worried about what people think of him. (Like on the Gay Marriage issue) If he isn't honest in these interviews, how can Americans trust him?
  • by Joe Trippi ( 689074 ) on Sunday July 13, 2003 @12:05PM (#6428245)
    As Governor Dean's campaign manager I thought I could answer a few questions and make a comment or two as well. We have absolutely forbidden any staff from posting or writing anything for Howard Dean and then post it under his name. In other words everything the Governor blogs and everything he blogs for Lessig will be written and posted by the Governor himself. One of the reasons we thought Lessig would be a good place to guest blog is that it helps to build this trust that it is really the Governor doing the guest blogging -- and that the community will trust that Lessig would not have allowed it if it wasn't so. Any thoughts as to how to answer the issue of trusted identity would be appreciated. It is something we have been really trying to figure out -- as I have pointed out -- how do you know this is really me? And we are not trying to kid anybody -- particularly anyone here -- we know we ain't perfect -- and that we don't get it all -- but we are trying to get it -- trying to reach out to everyone using every tool we can -- because as someone who you will probably regard as a political hack -- who has worked on 6 Presidential campaigns -- I can tell you what you already know -- ITS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY -- The only way to put power back in people's hands is for the people to buy their government back. A million to two million Americans contributing $100 each or whatever they can -- will be a force that will not only win the Presidency -- but will also strike enough fear into everyone else in Washington -- that we can change our country's politics. The biggest challenge is to cut through people's cynicism -- nothing will change if we can not get beyond that and get people to participate in their self-government again -- and believe that together we have the power to protect our rights, and our civil liberties, and reclaim our government. That is what this campaign has been trying to prove -- that is why we are doing what we are doing eveyday to build a community that will carry that cause. That is why Howard Dean will guest blog for Lawrence Lessig -- to reach out -- in an authentic voice -- and see what happens. Why? Why the hell not? Joe Trippi campaign manager Dean for America please excuse the double post.

"The one charm of marriage is that it makes a life of deception a neccessity." - Oscar Wilde