The Only One W ith a Real Record

In Vermont, liberals didn't vote for him. They went progressive. In a three party state, it was the middle-of-the-roaders who elected him 5 times. Once that gets out, the democratic old guard (ie Gephardt and Lieberman) better really start to sweat.

Let's see. I may concede a few points here.

1. The Domestic Partnerships legislation got his signature when he was Governor. That is indeed a liberal thing, and a fine thing at that. (For the record, I'm straight, married, with kids, so this is not my battle). However, though Howard got the credit for this civil rights bill, it was the Vermont Supreme Court who mandated it, the state legislature that authored the bill mandated by the court, and Howard who signed it. Though he agrees with it, he shouldn't get the credit for initializing it, and he was hardly beating the drum.

2. Health care. That's a liberally labelled hot button. Not every kid in Vermont is insured, but that's not Howards fault. Every child in Vermont is eligable for affordable or free health care, and because of that, some phenomonal percentage of kids are insured, something over 90% (I think. I need to check.) However, for those who think it can't be done without plunging us into huge debt (republicans? Surely not! ) again, remember, Vermont had a 10million dollar surplus last year.

Liberal? You spit out the word like it's a contagious disease. Depending just how 'right' your cart swings, Clinton (ahh, satan himself) was liberal. Ohh how we suffered with all that liberal peace, employment and economic prosperity. If that is what you think is liberal, then I stand corrected. You're right. Howard's a liberal, and God bless him.

Things have changed. The leading democrats are scrambling back to the platform as fast as their little legs can carry them (check out Gephardt's healthcare program. Even I shudder at THAT one. You think Howard is left of that?!!) Not one of the leading democratic contenders are advocating tax cuts anymore and they are backpeddling on their support for Bush's foreign policy. Howard hasn't had to back peddle on anything.

Of course Dean is running on the opposite end of what Bush thinks is good policy. You don't need to be a flaming liberal to do so. The economy is a mess, unemployment is up, the deficit is raging, there is no support for the "leave no child behind" philosophy (the dept. of education in Vermont jokingly refers to it as "leave ALL children behind, unless of course, you got the $100K from that tax cut to educate them at a private upper-crusty.). The environment is taking hit after hit, the surplus in social security is pouring out like a Texas hurricane and Bush's/Chenney's unilateral foreign policy has ensured that we, in a time when we could really use some world wide help, are going it alone,

If it's a liberal who stands against all that and shows a consistant history of fiscal responsibility and no nonsense practicality, then call the rose what you like. He still smells mighty sweet.