Intellectual Conservative Logo

We are the only site on the web devoted exclusively to intellectual conservatism. We find the most intriguing information and bring it together on one page for you.

Links we recommend
Link to us
Free email update
About us
What's New & Interesting
Mailing Lists
Intellectual Icons

Democrats, Democrats Everywhere...
by Paul Walfield
11 May 2003

Can you name all nine of the Democrats running for President?  Are nine dwarves better than seven?

As of the first week of May 2003, there were nine democratic presidential candidates vying for the nomination from their party to run against George W. Bush in 2004.  It would be too easy, and perhaps premature, to point out the obvious difficulties the democrats will have in 2004.  Instead let’s see what America’s Democratic choices will be in the next presidential election.  In no particular order...
Howard Dean on PBS, “I believe that Iraq does have chemical and biological weapons, and they are a threat to many nations in the region, but not to the United States. Therefore in my view, the United States ought not to attack unilaterally.”  Further, “I have no problem with supporting a United Nations attack on Iraq.” And, “Saddam must be disarmed. He is as evil as everybody says he is.” 
Finally, when it came to whether Iraq was better off without Saddam Hussein, Mr. Dean told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, “We don't know that yet. We don't know that yet, Wolf. We still have a country whose city is mostly without electricity. We have tumultuous occasions in the south where there is no clear governance. We have a major city without clear governance. We don't know yet, and until we do...”

The USA Today on Al Sharpton: “Sharpton probably is best known for his association with Tawana Brawley, the Poughkeepsie, N.Y., black teen-ager who falsely claimed to have been kidnapped and raped by several white assailants. Sharpton, who became a high-profile adviser to Brawley's family, accused a local prosecutor, Steven Pagones, of taking part in the rape.  Pagones sued Sharpton for defamation and three years ago won a judgment. With the help of some black businessmen, Sharpton paid the $65,000 award, but he has never retracted the charges or apologized.”
On CBS News Sharpton said, ‘“I'm qualified, probably more qualified than any other person who is expected to be on the Democratic ticket for 2004, because I actually have a following and I speak for the people," said Sharpton, who has never held public office.

Sharpton is also reported to have called white businessmen in Harlem, “interlopers.”

Senator Bob Graham on announcing his candidacy on May 5, 2003, “The Bush administration has reneged on America's promise and jeopardized our future.”  And, “Instead of pursuing the most imminent and real threats to our future -- terrorism -- this Bush administration chose to settle old scores with a war in Iraq against Saddam Hussein.”  Mr. Graham on his own website on April 10, 2003, “I share the jubilation of the Iraqi people as we see statues of Saddam Hussein falling to the ground in Baghdad, and I share all Americans' pride in the skill and courage of our victorious men and women in uniform.”

John F. Kerry: “Why can't America have a strong military that advances our values around the world?”  Apparently Mr. Kerry believes that America’s military, at least until the date of the democrat’s first debate on May 3, 2003, has not advanced America’s values.

Speaking about the possibility of war with Iraq in a NY Times article on September 6, 2002, Kerry said, “Those who think that the inspection process is merely a waste of time should be reminded that legitimacy in the conduct of war, among our people and our allies, is not a waste, but an essential foundation of success.”  Mr. Kerry seems to believe that only the UN can give legitimacy to America’s pursuit of its own security.
Kerry, a Vietnam veteran, threw his medals away and over the White House fence in protest.  He later admitted they weren’t actually his real medals.  Mr. Kerry later explained that he didn’t have time to go home and get the real ones.
Carol Moseley Braun on PBS: “I believe that this administration is on the absolute wrong track, particularly as regard to using the war on terror as a subterfuge, as a cloak, if you will, for what is really an extreme political agenda.” 
On February 19, 2003, Slate reported the following, “Though she was never indicted or punished, Moseley-Braun had some close calls with the law. The first occurred during her 1992 Senate campaign, when it came to light that three years earlier, she had deposited a check for $28,750 into a personal money-market account. The check in question actually belonged to Moseley-Braun's mother, who owned a property in Alabama on which she'd sold the timber-harvesting rights; the $28,750 was a royalty payment. Edna Moseley was staying in a Chicago nursing home at the time and relying on Medicaid to cover her expenses, something ostensibly reserved only for the near-indigent—not people with $28,750 checks to their name. The royalty should have been used to reimburse Medicaid; instead, Moseley-Braun divvied up the money with her two siblings. When the situation came to light, she apologized and paid Medicaid $15,240. The Illinois Department of Public Aid declined to launch a criminal probe.”
Dennis Kucinich, who, up until the time he decided to run for president of the United States in 2004, had been consistently pro-life.  His spokesperson was reported in National Review to have said last year, “He absolutely believes in the sanctity of life and that life begins at conception.”  However, times have changed -- along with Mr. Kucinich’s ambitions -- and now he says, “I support a woman's right to freedom of choice,” adding, “I do not believe that Roe v. Wade should be overturned.”  And, “as president, I would protect that right [to abortion], and I would also make sure that appointees to the Supreme Court protected that right.”  Perhaps Mr. Kucinich had an epiphany and sees the error of his ways as a once devout Catholic.
To an audience in Iowa, Mr. Kucinich said he wants to create a new governmental department: “The Department of Peace will create a structure of government that will look at where violence starts. Poverty and homelessness are weapons of mass destruction it is not too late to seek a newer world.”  There appears no truth to the rumor that Mr. Kucinich keeps unicorns in his magic kingdom behind his house.
Joe Lieberman.  In the words of William F. Buckley in National Review, “when he signed on with Al Gore, his servility to his patron was judged, by some, to be excessive. He modified his stands in favor of vouchers for private schools, modified his advocacy of privatizing a part of Social Security. He had already temporized on the gravity of Bill Clinton's misconduct. And his call on Hollywood to mitigate the sex and violence or invoke "legal restrictions" was entirely neutralized. In Hollywood he promised that if elected, his ticket would go no further than to "noodge you" on sex and violence. The Washington Post published an editorial entitled, "Where's the Old Joe Lieberman?"  Though Mr. Buckley did say that the old Joe Lieberman is back.
John Edwards.  “It is a test of presidential leadership to lead in a way that rallies others to our cause," he said. "This president has not done that.”  Mr. Edwards was for using military force against Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein.  However, he seems despondent over the fact that while the White House claimed fifty nations were with us in our fight against Saddam Hussein, France, Germany, and Russia were not.  Evidence from Iraq is beginning to show us all why those countries wanted Saddam to stay in power.  Hopefully, Mr. Edwards will find a different issue to harp upon.
The Hill newspaper is reporting that Mr. Edwards recently found himself in a bit of a quagmire over campaign contributions.  It seems a number of otherwise not very politically minded law firm workers maxed out contributions to Mr. Edward's campaign, with at least one of them saying that they expected reimbursement for the contribution. 
Dick Gephardt.  Congressman Gephardt has proposed an all encompassing healthcare plan which was described by fellow democrat Howard Dean as a “pie-in-the-sky radical revamping of our health care system.”  A USA Today article explained, “He would pay for the plan by rolling back the 10-year, $1.35 trillion tax cuts enacted at the behest of President Bush in 2001 and repealing any further tax cuts. He also would cancel the existing employer tax deduction for offering health benefits and use the savings.

Nevertheless, his proposal would increase the federal budget deficit.

The bulk of the cost to the Treasury, more than $100 billion a year, would be the tax credit for employers. In addition, states and localities would get $53 billion to $62 billion a year to offset 60% of their employee health costs. An additional $60 billion to $70 billion would subsidize coverage for the jobless and others.”
While it is true that no one is perfect, it boggles the mind that out of the millions of democrats in this country, these folks are the top nine.

Paul Walfield is a freelance writer and member of the State Bar of California with an undergraduate degree in Psychology and post-graduate study in behavioral and analytical psychology. He resided for a number of years in the small town of Houlton, Maine and is now a California attorney.

Email Paul Walfield

Send this article to a friend