Attention Dean Supporters! The Real History of Captive Insurance in VT

[KaraokeKarlton]

It really gets annoying to have to set the record straight time and again about Vermont and Howard Dean. But alas, I have to do it again.

The law on the books that allows and encourages captive insurance in Vermont was passed back in 1981, a full year before Howard Dean even got elected to his first political office in 1982. The man didn't even get to vote on the law for Cripes Sakes. How on earth the Boston Globe can blame Dean for a law that passed before he even got involved in politics is beyond me.

Just read this article:

http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m0BJK/6_14/100390118/p1/article.jhtml?term=

[KaraokeKarlton]

1. pssst...over here

I really wish someone would notice this.

[tsipple]

2. Actually, the Law Passed a Full Decade Before Dean

But what's ten years' difference, eh?

[KaraokeKarlton]

3. Dean was in the state legislature before Lt. Gov and Gov

And his first election was in 1982. There would at least be a somewhat valid argument that he may have influenced the 1981 law IF he had of even been in the legislature at the time, but he wasn't and didn't win his first election until a full year later.

He didn't even get to influence this law as a state rep so to blame him for any of this is beneath contempt AND dishonest, IMO.

[tsipple]

11. Good Point

And I'll add that it sounds like I piece of legislation I, as a mainstream Democrat, could support, too.

Dean has always been a champion of bringing good jobs to Vermont, but since Vermont can't really compete with big states (and some other countries) in outright paying (bribing?) corporations, he finds other ways. Good for him.

[KaraokeKarlton]

4. kick

before it gets buried.

[JNelson6563]

12. thank you

:yourock:

[chocolateeater]

5. Kick

:yourock: :toast: :bounce:

[KaraokeKarlton]

6. Thanks

I just really hate it when false information about Dean and my state of Vermont is spread around on here. Gotta set things straight anytime I see it!

[Hep]

7. I appreciate your wasting your time

either preaching to the choir or yelling at a brick wall, whichever applies!

Go write a letter now!

[KaraokeKarlton]

10. I'm working on one to the Globe already

Are you?

[Hep]

15. I'm not

But I appreciate your efforts!

[Romberry]

8. Kick!

nt*

[slinkerwink]

9. kick

[Armstead]

13. Okay since the "Dean slamming" one just rose

Here's a :kick: to keep them equally visioble

[KaraokeKarlton]

17. Good plan

Hopefully others will do the same!

[slinkerwink]

53. :kick:

:kick:

[mzmolly]

14. Well shit, Thanks!

:thumbsup:

[RogueTrooper]

16. Good work KK

:yourock:

[RevolutionStartsNow]

18. Thank you, KK

We can always count on you to set the record straight from a Vermonter's perspective.

Was Dean perceived as a corporate shill while he was Governor?

[KaraokeKarlton]

23. No

There were a few very, very far lefties who felt that way, but these folks are quite radical and tend to scream about everything just for the sake of it. The overwhelming majority of Vermonters didn't and don't have that opinion of Dean.

[tonekat]

28. screaming for the sake of it

Interesting thread, I go to VT a couple of times a year because my wife works for a captive ins co that meets there. I grab the free weeklies and see the criticism of Dean from the left in detail (I think they call Dean "Hoho" - don't know what that stems from, maybe a resident can 'splain).
I go away thinking that while those idealists may have a list of faults, they would have faults with pretty much anyone who is the least bit electable in our current society.
The articles reminded me of the letters to the editor in the Woodstock Times when I lived in that area of NYS...very idealistic, but not in the least bit realistic, which is why that small artist colony can barely keep it's infrastructure from crumbling.
There's nothing wrong with having ideals, but politics is compromise. It will be difficult enough to elect someone that simply isn't Bush. Let's get that done first before we criticize our own candidates.

[KaraokeKarlton]

34. "Ho Ho" is a nickname given to Dean around the statehouse

It's just because he is "high energy" and kept them all on their toes.

Your impression of Vermont's left (which is WAY to the left of the left, if you catch my drift) is spot on. They just like to piss and moan. Sometimes I think they just like to hear themselves screech. :shrug:

[tonekat]

45. Thanks

..for clearing that up, Karlton. I had been wondering where that nickname came from, and couldn't tell if it was flattering or insulting.
And yes, the bickering does seem pretty academic at best.

[killbotfactory]

19. What, you think the anti-Dean hit squad cares about honest criticism?

Well, maybe some people on the sidelines watching the infighting will care.

Good job.

[KaraokeKarlton]

21. Did you notice how they are totally ignoring my arguments?

On that other thread not a single Dean hater has responded to my posts. That in and of itself is very telling.

[slinkerwink]

30. I noticed that too

that's what they did in my thread debunking Will's hit piece until I publicly called them out and they used the very weak argument about biden-lugar as showing that dean supported the war all the way. They just don't get NUANCE.

[ozone_man]

20. Thanks for setting the record straight, once again.

It seems to be a never ending process. I guess it's good to get this over with before the Bush team takes over, not that they haven't already started.

[KittyWampus]

22. It's About The HYPOCRACY

!!!!

[KaraokeKarlton]

24. Um, it would only be hypocrisy IF

Dean was the one who wanted to and worked at bringing the industry to Vermont. It had been here for a good decade before Dean took the governor's office. The industry was already established and it had been voted on and brought to Vermont through the deomcratic process.

Sorry, but no matter which way you spin it, there is no hypocrisy and nothing even worthy of criticism here. Looks like the Dean haters are just going to have to try again. But be forewarned, I WILL be waiting and watching, ready to lampoon this kind of shit at a moment's notice.

[returnable]

32. So...

self-edited.

See post #35 for a far more articulate answer...

[KaraokeKarlton]

36. What tax laws did Dean supposedly "exploit"?

If you're going to make accusations I'd strongly suggest that you get some reliable sources, provide links and site specifics, because anything less just doesn't cut the mustard.

[returnable]

39. I didn't say Dean...

...I said Bush.

But never mind - I deleted my message cuz WillPitt's post below did a far better job of articulating my concerns :hi:

[KaraokeKarlton]

44. Well, Will was wrong, as I aptly pointed out to him

So now what? I'm really curious as to what your argument is going to be now.

[slinkerwink]

47. kick for the lying anti-dean liars

[returnable]

59. I don't have an "argument"...

...I have a CONCERN. And it's quite simple.

Dean hammers Bush for giving tax cuts to corporations like Enron.

As Governor, Dean gave tax cuts to corporations, like Enron.

That's not what one would call a consistent platform.

You can go on and on about how the law was on the books in Vermont, and how Dean did what he had to do what he thought was best for the economic interests of his state. Blah blah blah.

Well, that's the same argument Bush makes: tax cuts for corporations are good business.

Dean's record as governor of Vermont suggests he thinks the same way, regardless of what he says now.

[KaraokeKarlton]

64. That's because there is no argument to be had

And someone else pointed out that it would have been a little difficult for anyone to know that Enron was dirty prior to it becoming public knowledge after they got caught cheating. I guess Dean's crystal ball was broken at the time. :eyes:

[returnable]

77. You're missing the bigger issue...

...this isn't about a specific corporation.

This is about a policy of awarding tax cuts to corporations while shifting the tax burden to the middle class.

These days, Dean is hammering Bush for proposing tax cuts to corporations.

"Once again, Washington is putting large corporate interests -- who write the big checks and, in turn, get to write the legislation -- ahead of the small businesses and working Americans who continue to bear a greater share of the tax burden in this country."

Yet that's exactly what he did in Vermont. That's not even a fact you dispute - you just chalk it up to an old Vermont law.

Well, so what? Are you suggesting Dean didn't want to give tax cuts to corporations but he was forced to by law?

From that Boston Globe article:

"But during Dean's 11 years as Vermont governor, he enacted tax breaks that attracted to the state a 'Who's Who' of corporate America -- including Enron -- to set up insurance businesses.

Dean said in 2001 that he wanted Vermont to 'overtake Bermuda' as the 'world's largest' haven for a segment of the insurance industry known as 'captives,' which refers to firms that help insure their parent companies."

Those are Dean's words - he wanted Vermont to be the "world's largest" haven for captives.

Nothing in the Vermont law about that.

And has been pointed out elsewhere, Dean cut taxes in 1993 by up to 60 percent on the premiums paid by the parent companies to the captives at the same time he was raising the state sales tax and cutting spending.

Again, the Bush argument for tax cuts for corporations while shifting the burden elsewhere is that its good for the economy and business growth.

Based on his record in Vermont, that seems to be Dean's philosophy, too, despite what he's been saying on the campaign trail :eyes:

[KaraokeKarlton]

80. Actually, I believe the tax cuts in question were Snellings, not Deans

But I suppose that's beside the point too? When Dean took office after Snelling died he left what Snelling had done in place and made adjustments to it as he went along.

[returnable]

91. Oh, I see...

...so now it was all Snelling's policy. Even though Dean ran the state for 10 years. And continued to offer tax cuts to corporations.

And I suppose it was Snelling who said he wanted to make Vermont the world's largest haven for captives.

In 2001.

A decade after he died.

Gotcha :eyes:

[TLM]

95. The problem is not tax cuts as a concept...

the problem is giving huge tax cuts to just the top few percent and putting the burden on the working folks.

Dean did no such thing... the tax cuts that they passed in VT were not giant and were done in a way that maintained the balanced budget, rather than borrowing from our kids futures.

So to act as if Dean is the same as Bush because at some point they both supported tax cuts is total BS, since Dean's cuts were neither excessive, unfair, of fiscally irresponsible.

[returnable]

97. Finally a reasonable response

"the tax cuts that they passed in VT were not giant and were done in a way that maintained the balanced budget, rather than borrowing from our kids futures."

Very good point.

And glad to see at least one Dean supporter who isn't trying to blame Dean's fiscal plan on a law, or a dead predecessor :toast:

Dean ran Vermont as a centrist, so that he gave tax cuts to corporations should come as no surprise. The willingness to explain it away is disconcerting.

My concern remains the same as previously stated, though - Dean's rhetoric against giving tax cuts to corporations, in light of his own track record of doing just that, could bite him in the ass.

[TLM]

100. His rhetoric is not simply against giving tax cuts to corporations

But giving giant irresponsible tax cuts we can't afford to the top 1% at the expense of our economy, children's future, and the working class.

Dean is not anti-tax cut. He's anti-ridiculously irresponsible tax cuts for the rich that generate huge deficits and are balanced on the back of the working class.


Dean did not run VT as a centrist, but as a moderate democrat and he didn't give tax cuts to JUST corporations. There were a couple of tax cuts passed by Dean in VT over the 11 years he was gov and not only did they benefit everybody, but they were not fiscally irresponsible, like the Bush tax cuts he has been attacking.

So this whole issue is based on a false premise.

[KaraokeKarlton]

96. Vermont Captives help pay for health care in Vermont

They pay taxes on the premiums they bring in and it helps pay for health care for virtually all of our kids. It helps give Vermont seniors a real prescription drug benefit. If Vermont didn't offer an on-shore friendly climate for this industry the companies would turn to either Bermuda or the Caymans and would avoid US taxes altogether.

Would you rather kids be without health care, Vermonters lose hundreds, if not thousands of jobs and seniors go without medication so that all captives would be offshore?

[mmonk]

25. Expect more

accusations and spin. Then knock it down at the first opportunity.

[Duder]

26. Mostly, I see Dean people...

Good find KK. :)

[KaraokeKarlton]

27. Well it's easy to find proof of the truth

when you know something is horseshit. Living in Vermont gives me a little bit of an advantage knowing what is true and what is a load of dung.

[mmonk]

29. If what you say is true

the Dean campaign should have an easy time putting it to rest.

[Rose Siding]

33. They'll be laughing their tushies off

because the sense at a glance- for the barely tuned in- is that he's business friendly and that dispels the 'too liberal' myth. Then those who care to check will see it's a straw man.

[mmonk]

31. however,

should he come out and say he opposes the captives?

[KaraokeKarlton]

49. Why should he?

I mean, if Vermont wasn't an option for those companies they'd just go to Bermuda or the Caymans and cause more lost jobs. Dean has already said he intends to address the corporate cheating issues and he will. First things first. Once he resolves that issue it will take care of the other one.

[WilliamPitt]

35. ATTENTION, PLEASE

Certainly, this article is correct in that Dean had nothing to do with the creation of Vermont as a bastion for this sort of thing. But...

---

As a presidential candidate, Dean has attacked Bush for giving tax breaks to "Ken Lay and the boys who ran Enron." But Enron apparently was attracted to Vermont because of the benefits offered under Dean's administration. Dean, who became governor in 1991, cut taxes in 1993 by up to 60 percent on the premiums paid by the parent companies to the captives at the same time he was raising the state sales tax and cutting spending. Dean's tax cuts on captives set off Vermont's boom in that industry.

In December 1994, Enron set up a captive insurance company called Gulf Company Ltd., which is managed by USA Risk Group, a company in Montpelier that specializes in managing captive insurance companies. Indicating the closeness of a captive to its parent corporation, Enron's former chief financial officer, Andrew Fastow, was on the Gulf board and made one appearance at USA Risk's Montpelier office, a company official said. (Fastow is no longer on the Gulf board, and Enron has filed for bankruptcy.)

Becky Aitchison, the account manager for Gulf Company Ltd., which is still in operation, said that Enron created a captive insurance company in Vermont as a way to make up for the high deductibles demanded by traditional insurance companies. While she could not discuss the Enron specifics due to a confidentiality agreement, she provided the hypothetical example of a company that has a $1 million deductible on a traditional insurance policy and decides to create a captive to be responsible for paying the $1 million. The company would pay premiums to its own captive, which in turn could invest the premiums, to generate more income. Under Vermont law, she said, the premiums are subject to a top tax of 0.4 percent, but the profits on the captive's investment of the premium are not subject to Vermont's corporate income tax, which a state official said ranges from 7 percent to 9.7 percent.

---

...Dean sure made it easy for Enron to come barstgrorming in. This is the point, right here: The rhetoric does not match the record. Dean has attacked Bush for giving tax breaks to "Ken Lay and the boys who ran Enron." Um...

[slinkerwink]

37. wow, your bias is really coming through.

[slinkerwink]

38. and have you ever thought that Enron has set up thousands of captive

companies like that all over the U.S.------Governors can't avoid dealing with those companies.

[AP]

56. And VT had more captives than all other states combined thanks to Dean's

friendly tax policies.

[KaraokeKarlton]

61. Not because of Dean, because of that 1981 law

you know, the one I've proven Dean had nothing to do with. Vermont had more captives than all other states combined long before Dean became governor.

[WilliamPitt]

63. You're skipping the issue

Yes, the law was enacted in 1991. Yes.

Yes, Dean became governor in 1993. Yes.

Yes, Dean took the 1981 law and ran with it, as described in my capital-lettered post below. Yes.

Yes, that blows a hole in his crusader rhetoric. Yes.

[KaraokeKarlton]

67. It was enacted in 1981, not 1991

Even though you gave the correct year on the second citation of the date, I wanted to make sure everyone knows it was one law, passed in 1981.

You say Dean "ran with it". I'm asking you to cite specifically exactly what he did to "run with it". I don't think that's too much to ask, Will. If you honestly believe that Dean did something wrong, then gather the facts and present your argument fairly. We all know the Globe likes to leave out important details and lead readers to conclusions that tend to be a bit off. You, more than anyone else here should not be playing into that.

I disagree that it blows a hole in his "crusader rhetoric", as you put it. Even the Globe piece shows that the captives associated with Enron were established long before anyone knew what kind of a crook Ken Lay is. I really hope you aren't implying that Dean should have know that years ahead of everyone else. I guess he should've been consulting a psychic regarding his governorship. :shrug:

I don't think you are being fair and I really expected more from you. I'm disappointed.

[WilliamPitt]

70. Oh for Christ's sake

As a presidential candidate, Dean has attacked Bush for giving tax breaks to "Ken Lay and the boys who ran Enron." But Enron apparently was attracted to Vermont because of the benefits offered under Dean's administration. Dean, who became governor in 1991, cut taxes in 1993 by up to 60 percent on the premiums paid by the parent companies to the captives at the same time he was raising the state sales tax and cutting spending. Dean's tax cuts on captives set off Vermont's boom in that industry.

In December 1994, Enron set up a captive insurance company called Gulf Company Ltd., which is managed by USA Risk Group, a company in Montpelier that specializes in managing captive insurance companies. Indicating the closeness of a captive to its parent corporation, Enron's former chief financial officer, Andrew Fastow, was on the Gulf board and made one appearance at USA Risk's Montpelier office, a company official said. (Fastow is no longer on the Gulf board, and Enron has filed for bankruptcy.)

Becky Aitchison, the account manager for Gulf Company Ltd., which is still in operation, said that Enron created a captive insurance company in Vermont as a way to make up for the high deductibles demanded by traditional insurance companies. While she could not discuss the Enron specifics due to a confidentiality agreement, she provided the hypothetical example of a company that has a $1 million deductible on a traditional insurance policy and decides to create a captive to be responsible for paying the $1 million. The company would pay premiums to its own captive, which in turn could invest the premiums, to generate more income. Under Vermont law, she said, the premiums are subject to a top tax of 0.4 percent, but the profits on the captive's investment of the premium are not subject to Vermont's corporate income tax, which a state official said ranges from 7 percent to 9.7 percent.

[KaraokeKarlton]

79. Am I frustrating you, Will?

By citing the tax breaks I was asking for the actual tax laws. Anytime I see "Up to" before a percentage I get very suspicious. I mean, a cut of .00000000001% qualifies under that "up to" figure, correct?

The article also says that Enron set up their captive in December of 1994. Who knew they were crooks back then? I'd never even heard of them, had you?

You're looking at this having information now that no one had in 1994. Hindsight is 20-20, but who knew?

[WilliamPitt]

82. Am I frustrating you?

SHOULD I FUCKING POST IN FUCKING CAPITAL FUCKING LETTERS LIKE YOU DID IN YOUR FUCKING JESUS FUCKING CHRIST FUCKING THREAD?

:)

[KaraokeKarlton]

83. Not at all

Are you trying to frustrate me?

You should really stop all that yelling before you pop a vein in your forehead.

Are you ready to admit defeat yet or shall we continue? ;)

[SeattleRob]

92. ...

very articulate

[TLM]

98. Will, man what happened to you? You used to be respectable

Now you launch into this garbage when you attacks on Dean are shown to be baseless. You’re coming off like Renfield.

Face the facts Dean did not give any excessive cuts to these companies... as the fact the state budget was balanced every year shows.

If, like Bush, Dean put his state into debt to give these guys massive cuts, you might have a point, but he didn't so you don't.

Dean attacks on Bush are not for giving any tax cuts at all, but for doing so in a way that unfair and irresponsible. The fact Dean gave some responsible and fair tax cuts in VT, while maintaining a balanced budget is hardly a rationalization for accusing Dean attacks on Bush irresponsible giant deficit generating tax cuts of being hypocritical.

[redqueen]

84. Tax breaks of up to 60%

That's enormous.

And to be fair, in order to be able to say "up to 60%", one must actually pass a tax break of 60%, else it would be "up to .00000000001%", or whatever the highest tax break actually was.

*sigh*

The cult of personality continues.

[KaraokeKarlton]

89. Consider this

Let's say the actual cut of 60% was for a captive who gained under $100 and the cut was 5% for a captive that gained over $50,000. For all we know, that could be the case and until someone produces the actual tax law for everyone to look at, any assumptions are inaccurate and unfair.

[redqueen]

99. True, details matter

So someone in his camp should get them in order and present them quickly.

Has Trippi responded to this yet?

Until there's some response from Dean's campaign, people are going to compare that huge cut to his rhetoric about Bush's cuts and think: typical politician.

[KaraokeKarlton]

105. I'm not sure if Trippi has responded or not

It doesn't even really matter what the actual cuts look like when push comes to shove because Dean provided great social programs, balanced the budget, raised the minimum wage twice AND built up a big surplus. Dean didn't do anything to harm Vermonters and put them deeply in debt. The same can't be said about Bush's cuts.

[redqueen]

107. Excellent point

Dean would do well in the GE with supporters like you out there to clear the air. :)

Just better get a database of newspapers' 'letter to the editor' addresses and a merge format ready now. :D

[KaraokeKarlton]

109. Well, I'm one of those ever-elusive "swing voters"

We're alot more bright than we get credit for. Swing voters can spot BS when we see it and with or without me, Dean's Vermont record will appeal to swing voters and the GE electorate. I think it's the more liberal people out there who are the only really nervous ones. The leadership of the party is different because they are just afraid of losing power and influence. They know Dean is perfectly electable and would win easy enough. You see, liberals tend to see things through their own personal sense of right/wrong and good/bad. That's all good and well for judging how liberals are going to vote, but it's not going to work in judging how swing voters are going to vote. I'm a swing voter myself, so I have a much better sense of judgement on what voters like myself are going to like and dislike. As long as Deomcrats fall in line behind Dean if he's the nominee, enough swing voters will line up behind you to get the job done. All Democrats have to do is stop being so afraid, because if you aren't confident in your own nominee you're likely to make us swing voters think that maybe we should vote for Bush if Democrats don't have any confidence in their own. This is the single most damanging thing about all this silly nonsense about Dean not being electable when he actually is a pretty damn solid bet.

[KaraokeKarlton]

72. Let's not make this about Kerry

I know there are some Kerry supporters who use this tactic, but that doesn't mean Dean supporters should stoop to that level. Dean didn't do anything wrong and we can show that quite clearly. There is no sense in muddying the waters by talking about Kerry. I think it makes sense to point out to supporters of especially Kerry that they should know all too well how the Globe reports and leave it at that.

[Hep]

40. "The rhetoric doesn't match the record"

How much do we have to ignore to actually consider this a valid argument?

We have to ignore that no one knew what Enron was or what it was doing in 1993.

We have to ignore the fact that sometimes governors have to woo industry is there are to be jobs. Giant companies in RTP don't pay property taxes. But they wouldn't have brought their jobs to my state had they been forced to pay. So the people very well could be worse off. I'm not saying which is more right, I'm saying it is a tough decision, and that this fact has to be ignored.

Pointless anyway.

[redqueen]

88. No, the rhetoric doesn't match the record

This has nothing to do with whether Enron was criminal or not.

Dean lambasts bush for giving huge tax breaks for Enron, apparently. IF this is true, then he is being a bit disengenuous (being kind) and he'll be beaten up with it in the GE.

[Hep]

104. Doesn't jibe

Two different subjects. First, Dean didn't give tax breaks to enron if they didn't move to vermont. Second, the actions of a president are different from the actions of a governor. Third, the actions of a governor serve the interests of the people of the state. It's absurd to apply those decision to a policy that is meant to benefit the American people.

[slinkerwink]

41. here's another hit piece on your man, Kerry

The Boston Globe
June 23, 1995, Friday, City Edition
By Kimberly Blanton, Globe Staff

Community groups seeking Sen. John Kerry's support for hearings on the merger of Fleet Financial Group Inc. and Shawmut National Corp. were unhappy yesterday to learn he would be feted by bank officials in a fund-raiser.

The fund-raiser is planned for Sunday night at the Narragansett, R.I., home of Fleet chairman Terrence Murray. Cohosting will be Joel Alvord, chief executive of Shawmut, according to people familiar with the event.

Massachusetts community groups said the event raises serious questions about whether Kerry can give his heartfelt support for their request for Federal Reserve hearings on Fleet's planned acquisition of Shawmut.

So much for not letting them in the back door....eh?!

Isn't Nexus-Lexus fun?!

Want some more about words mathcing deeds....?

The Boston Herald
September 22, 1995 Friday SECOND EDITION
By ANDREW MIGA

Activists rap Kerry over welfare vote

WASHINGTON - Bay State human services advocates yesterday accused Sen. John Kerry of turning his back on the poor by voting in favor of the GOP's sweeping welfare reform bill.

"Sen. Kerry has sunk to the lowest level of political expediency," said Betsy Wright, head of the Massachusetts Human Services Coalition. "He's abandoned the children of Massachusetts."


--snip—

Wright charged that Kerry, a Democrat, backed the GOP plan in hopes of defusing criticism from Weld that he's too soft on welfare recipients.

"Kerry has one eye on Weld," said Wright. "It's disgusting. He's afraid to take the heat from Weld. Activists are horrified by Kerry."


And how's this for words mathcing deeds:

In 1991, Kerry voted against the Gulf War Resolution after the Iraqis had invaded Kuwait-GHWB had formed an international coalition and our troops were on the ground....

Fast forward to 2002, Kerry voted for the IWR when Iraq had been encircled and bombed for over a decade, their army was in tatters, UN inspectors had accounted for almost 98% of their CBN programs...but Dubya said they were an immediate threat to the security of the US...

So they weren't a threat in 1991...but they were in 2002? Hmmmmm....here's what Kerry had to say about the Iraq situation in 1991:

The Boston Globe
August 28, 1990, Tuesday, City Edition
By Tom Ashbrook, Globe Staff

US should allow Iraq room to back off, Kerry says;
CRISIS IN THE MIDDLE EAST

The time has come to give Iraqi President Saddam Hussein diplomatic room to negotiate a withdrawal from Kuwait, US Sen. John Kerry said yesterday.

With an international embargo firmly in place and US troops poised to check further offensive action by Iraq, Kerry said, the United States and its allies now need to clear a diplomatic path for a solution short of war.

--snip—

But with the Iraqi leader now "boxed" by international arms and sanctions, the senator said, new initiatives are necessary to break the military standoff and defuse the Persian Gulf crisis.

What changed?!

[tsipple]

48. Fleet Had a Big Banner

It was on the wall in the spin room at the last Democratic debate in New Hampshire. I saw it on C-SPAN.

It bothered me a bit. I'm not sure I like the idea of corporations sponsoring Democratic (or Republican) functions.

This White House press conference is brought to you today by Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold Medicine, bringing relief to you quickly so you can get a good night's rest. And by Taco Bell. Run for the border! And by the Archer Daniels Midland Corporation, supermarket to the world. :wtf:

[WilliamPitt]

51. How does talking about Kerry answer questions about Dean?

[slinkerwink]

52. well, it's pointing out any Dem's so-called "hypocrisy" for dealing with

corporations.

[WilliamPitt]

54. That's like shooting fish in a barrel. Now, can we stay on topic?

[slinkerwink]

57. you're the one that went off topic in this "insurance" thread

[Hep]

58. Are you really asking this?

It's just funny from anyone who supports Kerry, considering he can't STOP talking about Dean. Answering questions about his IWR vote with statements about what DEAN said or supported. It's just amazing.

I mean, you're absolutely right. It's the inconsistency that's wrong.

[slinkerwink]

60. I agree

[WilliamPitt]

65. Um

http://truthout.org/docs_03/121003A.shtml

[Hep]

73. Let me refute your point with an article I wrote.

Thanks!

[dave29]

94. You're right

we shouldn't talk about Kerry. He's finished anyway.

[sandnsea]

87. Did they get the hearing?

Do you know anything more about the Fleet/Shawmut merger? Do you even know if it was a good thing or what the complaint was about? Do you have anything more than the typical Dean cherry-picking? Do you have an actual case, with facts and evidence?

I've already answered the other stuff, welfare reform, everybody was for that. GW1, he was right. We should have used diplomacy and engaged Iraq to make change. Maybe we wouldn't be in the mess we're in today if we had.

[KaraokeKarlton]

42. Will, go back and read what you just posted carefully

specifically the "benefits offered under Dean's Administration" part. Dean didn't offer the benefits, the Vermont state law did. And you just agreed that what I posted proved that Dean had nothing to do with that law. The Globe has worded that article in a way that implies things that simply aren't true yet causes emotional reactions. Don't help perpetuate that kind of BS.

I might also add that before anyone runs off half cocked and ranting about any tax breaks this industry got they really should look up the actual specifics. All I'm seeing is a bunch of accusations and assumptions without a single damn specific fact to back them up.

The cause? Some people are so damn eager to destroy Dean that they are LOOKING for any reason to claim victory...even if that means being lazy regarding the facts.

I'd really like to think we're better than that here.

[RevolutionStartsNow]

43. You changed your subject line from

"Not the whole story, I fear" to "ATTENTION PLEASE" in all caps?

What's up, Will? I respect and trust you, but I'm curious about your mood recently.

I am not opposed to asking questions about Dean's record in Vermont, especially regarding this important issue, but let's make sure the discussion is productive and fair.

Dean is right to attack Bush for his behavior. Ken Lay is a major Bush contributor and a criminal.

What could Dean have done differently? Is it also possible that his experience in Vermont brought him to the point where he is now? How is Dean's behavior in this situation different from other governors who were put in the same situation by Enron?

[WilliamPitt]

50. I wanted to make sure it got read

[Hep]

55. Exactly

When do you get your "THE MEDIA" membership card? Was there an initiation at Franken's house? Did they haze you?

[WilliamPitt]

62. That'd make it easy for you, wouldn't it.

I can't have genuine concerns about Dean. I must have An Agenda. I must be Part Of The System.

Keep trying.

[slinkerwink]

66. you seem too apologetic about Kerry though

and you haven't even addressed my post showcasing the the boston globe article.

[WilliamPitt]

69. Apologetic about Kerry?

You must have missed the 5,000 posts/threads I've put up lamenting his decision...but then again, I do give him a lot more credit than Dean, seeing how he absolutely routs Dean on experience and basic, fundamental liberal credentials.

[Hep]

76. Go with that

I really do want you to keep supporting Kerry...


...by focusing the discussion on Dean.

[Hep]

75. Wow

Like, you're an influential person here. and you're well respected. Don't let that get to your head.

You don't seem to understand that I was talking about your admitting to changing your "headline" so that more people will read it. Can we say, "AL Gore Claims to Have Invented the Internet"?

I've always acknowledged your past fairness. I don't appreciate your jumping to conclusions about my character based on my criticism of your media-style tactics.

[JNelson6563]

68. No Will, you've been a changed man

since your meeting with Kerry and other big-shots. You wrote a post that clearly demonstrated how incredibly star-struck you were and then your next offering (that I recall) was a regurgitation of Kerry propaganda (cold-anger/hot-anger) and you've been doing your best to totally discredit Dean ever since.

What are your plans if Dean wins the nom? Will you back him? Will you first write a note of apology and ask permission from King Kerry?

What a sad devolution I have seen in you of late.

Julie

[Hep]

78. I have to agree with you

He's been critical of Dean in the past, and he's been wrongly attacked for it by Dean supporters. And I've jumped in on his side. But lately I feel as though the whole "Dean Criticism" thing has become more a recreational thing than a serious attempt at debate. Just people having fun pissing Dean supporters off. It might make for good recreation, but it certainly doesn't make me feel very good about ultimately being on the same team as these people who show precisous little respect to other well meaning democrats lately.

[WilliamPitt]

81. Utter crap

I've been openly supportive of Kerry here for a year. It is no secret. More and more lately, I have become deeply concerned about a Dean nomination. Again, no secret.

"What are your plans if Dean wins the nom? Will you back him? Will you first write a note of apology and ask permission from King Kerry?"

The reply you deserve for this would earn me one of those nifty new warnings, so use your imagination. Use it well. In the meantime, clue in to the thousands of times I have clearly stated that whoever gets the nomination gets my vote, support and work. I think I posted a whole thread about that yesterday, titled "ABB starts after the nomination."

As for sad devolutions, I will say this: It is a sad devolution for this website and the party as a whole to get jacked by a bunch of people who scream "bash" and "Rove" and make Nazi inferences whenever the sainted holy Dean gets some well-deserved criticism. We're going to get turned into hamburger in less than a year because of this, and I will hold you and your ilk personally responsible.

[JNelson6563]

85. Oh spare me your sanctimonious hypocrisy

So, if Dean wins the nom and we lose you'll blame me? haha

Not those who scream "we can't win" over and over? I'm ABB too and guess how much time I spend writing posts bashing others? None.

You have changed your tone since your meeting with the Big Boys and it hasn't been in any constructive way. You were star-struck and I am not alone in this opinion. Now you spend lots and lots of time here doing all you can to discredit Dean.

Why not share some of the positive developments of your candidate's campaign? Oh, wait, you're a Kerry man, nevermind.

I wonder how many of the other Big Boys from your Big Day waste their days on obscure DBs bashing Dean with bunch of nobodies?

I suspect the answer from them compared to the answer from you clearly illustrates much of what I have asserted.

But hey, if you want to believe that by posting mountains of anti-Dean stuff here at DU will save your man, have at it. I'd love to stay and help inflate your ego and all but I'm off to post Dean signs around town and then it's off to my son's concert. :hi:

Julie

[KaraokeKarlton]

86. Dean has proven his detractors wrong on all other things

Why do you think his electability will be any different? I know you support Kerry and are frustrated that he's not doing better, but in all fairness...if Kerry can't handle the challenge Dean poses how is he supposed to handle the one Bush will pose. And better yet, if he can't handle Dean why does he even deserve a shot at Bush? This is the time where candidates EARN that right, and Kerry hasn't lived up to his potential. Is that Dean's fault? Nope.

[TLM]

102. He's right will you were pretty fair to all candidates...

until this meeting with Kerry... then all you've been posted is Dean bashing crap from the hot cold anger crap to the spun quote crap about Dean supporting the war, where you made a point of ignoring the half dozen times Dean said Bush had not made the case for war in that interview.

Really sad to see you take this road.

[sandnsea]

90. Worship Dean?

or be damned??? Will has always tried to be fair. When he was still leaning Dean, he hit me very hard when I wrote on Dean, but was always fair. If you want to talk about somebody trying to discredit Dean, that would be me. Will is reasonable and rational and simply has a different opinion. I don't know why even a difference of opinion on Dean is unacceptable around here.

[slinkerwink]

46. from another Dean supporter

brought revenue into the state that wasn't there before, right? -by offering tax breaks? So VT would have had zip if he hadn't given the breaks, as well as not gaining any jobs.

If he'd given the breaks and rec'd heavy contibutions or an increase in personal wealth and then allowed the jobs to leave the country *that* would have been hypocritical. That doesn't seem to be the case.

Is it wrong for any dem to do any kind of business with corps?

[Nazgul35]

71. Ohh my God...

he created jobs in the United States!?!? The Bastard!!!!

[Duder]

74. Isn't 1994 when...

Ken Lay began to serve as a trustee of the Heinz Center for Economics, Environment and Science which Teresa founded to memorialize her late husband?
Guess I can google John Kerry enron and find out, but the point is that the view of enron was different in the mid-nineties.

[dave29]

93. And you wonder now

why Dean wants re-regulation. Perhaps he has seen what doesn't work - and wants to fix it.

Good on him.

[Eloriel]

110. OMG.

I hate seeing you sink to this level, Will. I really do. It SO demeans you and your awesome talent. The next instance of intellectual dishonesty I see from you in support of your candidate and/or tearing Dean down (or trying to) will send you to my Ignore list. Yes, I'm sure you don't mind a bit; but I mind fiercely.

[redqueen]

101. ? for those implying that huge tax breaks to coporations are good

because they create jobs... you do realize you're supporting trickle-down economics, right?

Just asking.

[TLM]

103. The cuts obviously were not huge...

as the VT state budget was balanced.

So obviously the policy was productive for VT.

[slinkerwink]

106. kick

[redqueen]

108. Good point

I'm a left left left liberal, so by nature anything smelling even remotely like 'trickle-down economics' automatically gets my antennae up.