AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Dean for D Chair
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dean for D Chair - Page 3

post #81 of 184
2/7/05 at 2:17pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Frank777
That's a joke. The Dems want freedom of choice as long as women are only presented with one option: abortion. When was the last time Democrats broached the subject of funding crisis pregnancy centres that allow pregnant women the means to keep their child?

Appointing a Planned Parenthood doctor as Chair of the party is literally handing the Religious Right a club to beat them over the head with.

And it's going to be fun to watch. The Democrats have truly learned nothing.

This logic is so full of shit I don't even know where to begin. Your HUGE sweeping statements about Democratic positions on Planned Parenthood it isn't even funny. It's offensive!

Do so research before you spout off with such nonsense. Find me ONE Democrat who doesn't support adoption. Find me ONE Democrat who doesn't support sex education to minors, minorities, underpriveledged and the uneducated. Find me ONE Democrat who wants abortion is the ONLY option.

I can point out at least one prominant republican doctor who occupies a senate seat who DOES NOT support sex-education in public schools, who DOES NOT support the distribution of condoms in high-schools. But I certainly wouldn't point to him and say that he represents ALL Republicans.

"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #82 of 184
2/7/05 at 2:23pm
  • e1618978
  • will burn in the Fiery Pit of Hell.
Quote:
[I can point out at least one prominant republican doctor who occupies a senate seat who DOES NOT support sex-education in public schools, who DOES NOT support the distribution of condoms in high-schools. But I certainly wouldn't point to him and say that he represents ALL Republicans.

Anyone who has the following combination of opinions

- No sex ed in schools
- No distribution of condoms
- No welfare for unwed mothers

(in otherwards, about half of the republican party) Is evil.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #83 of 184
2/7/05 at 7:55pm
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
Anyone who has the following combination of opinions

- No sex ed in schools
- No distribution of condoms
- No welfare for unwed mothers

(in otherwards, about half of the republican party) Is evil.

So much for the opportunity to have rational discussion in which people hold different viewpoints and opinions.
Reply
Reply
post #84 of 184
2/7/05 at 8:06pm
Quote:
Originally posted by atomic_angel
So much for the opportunity to have rational discussion in which people hold different viewpoints and opinions.

Yeah. So much for that! Good riddance, right? Chris, I think a better question would be to ask e-numbers-person what he or she means by "evil." That would move the conversation along without the kiss-off to rational discussion.
Reply
Reply
post #85 of 184
2/7/05 at 8:11pm
I think it is amusing that zealots pretend to know what is best for their opponent's side. Why pay attention to this kind of talk in the first place?
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #86 of 184
2/7/05 at 8:14pm
Quote:
Originally posted by ShawnJ
Yeah. So much for that! Good riddance, right? Chris, I think a better question would be to ask e-numbers-person what he or she means by "evil." That would move the conversation along without the kiss-off to rational discussion.

Fair enough.

( Who's Chris? )
Reply
Reply
post #87 of 184
2/7/05 at 8:21pm
  • e1618978
  • will burn in the Fiery Pit of Hell.
Quote:
Originally posted by atomic_angel
So much for the opportunity to have rational discussion in which people hold different viewpoints and opinions.

The reason that I think people with this collection of viewpoints is evil, is because you are causing great harm. Take a schoolgirl who, through no fault of her own, does not get information about sex from her parents.

1. You prevent anyone from warning her that she could get pregnant.
2. You prevent her from having access to contraceptives.

and

3. Once she gets pregnant, you kick her out on the street with no welfare.

People that would do that are going to burn in the firey pit of hell.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #88 of 184
2/7/05 at 8:25pm
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
And to hell with the Religious Right - they are about 10% of the population, roughly the same percentage as gay people. The Democrats should (as I proposed above), form the party of "everyone but the Religious Right and communists".

And that's the reason Bush and Co. keep pounding the Democrats into the ground. Writing off such a huge segment of the population from the start guarantees you will pay for it later.

And as I've pointed out before, when your people are the chief proponents of abortion, gay rights and euthanasia, the population numbers game is always with the other side.


Quote:
Originally posted by Northgate
This logic is so full of shit I don't even know where to begin. Your HUGE sweeping statements about Democratic positions on Planned Parenthood it isn't even funny. It's offensive!

Do so research before you spout off with such nonsense. Find me ONE Democrat who doesn't support adoption. Find me ONE Democrat who doesn't support sex education to minors, minorities, underpriveledged and the uneducated. Find me ONE Democrat who wants abortion is the ONLY option.[/B]

Well blame the people, blame the media, blame anyone except the Democrats. All I ever hear from the Democrats is how pro-choice they are by fighting for abortion and "reproductive rights." If they have any other ideas on the subject, it might help to discuss them once in a while.

And if you think lecturing "minors, minorities, underpriveledged (sic) and the uneducated" constitutes a plan for dealing with abortions in North America, well, all I can say is that you've obviously never dealt with the situation at close range.



And I stand by the point of my original post, which is that rightly or wrongly, elevating a Planned Parenthood doctor to the head of the party will only serve to further alienate the Red states from the Democrats.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #89 of 184
2/7/05 at 8:29pm
  • e1618978
  • will burn in the Fiery Pit of Hell.
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
I think it is amusing that zealots pretend to know what is best for their opponent's side. Why pay attention to this kind of talk in the first place?

Everyone's a zelot in their own special way, and you have to pay attention to somebody...
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #90 of 184
2/7/05 at 8:31pm
  • e1618978
  • will burn in the Fiery Pit of Hell.
Here are the "12 tribes of America", our voting blocks.
First you need to pick which blocks you want the Democratic party to apeal to, and that will determine your platform.

http://www.beliefnet.com/story/153/story_15355.html
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #91 of 184
2/7/05 at 8:37pm
  • e1618978
  • will burn in the Fiery Pit of Hell.
Quote:
And as I've pointed out before, when your people are the chief proponents of abortion, gay rights and euthanasia, the population numbers game is always with the other side.

But there is a certain point where you cannot go, even if it means that you will lose the election. The democratic party cannot be pro-life or anti-gay, and neither can I.

I don't think that your numbers are all that convincing, BTW - the republican victory was a group of interests working together - its not like the religious right is a big percentage of the population, they are just vocal. I don't think that the Democrats need to comprimise social issues in order to win.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #92 of 184
2/7/05 at 8:41pm
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
1. You prevent anyone from warning her that she could get pregnant.

Shouldn't she learn this (primarily) from her parents?

Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
2. You prevent her from having access to contraceptives.

Is abstinence an option at all?

Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
3. Once she gets pregnant, you kick her out on the street with no welfare.

Well, here I agree (though not necessarily about the (government) welfare part). Kicking someone out for this reason is wrong.
Reply
Reply
post #93 of 184
2/7/05 at 8:47pm
Quote:
Originally posted by atomic_angel
Shouldn't she learn this (primarily) from her parents?

They're doing a bang-up job of it these days, aren't they?

Quote:
Is abstinence an option at all?

Yes, but it is also a pipe-dream to think that kids will, on the whole, be abstinent. They're going to have sex. The least we can do is acknowledge that fact and try to equip them not to kill one another with their genitals.

cheers
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #94 of 184
2/7/05 at 8:55pm
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
They're going to have sex. The least we can do is acknowledge that fact and try to equip them not to kill one another with their genitals.

This has always struck me as an amazingly weak argument.
Reply
Reply
post #95 of 184
2/7/05 at 8:58pm
Quote:
Originally posted by atomic_angel
This has always struck me as an amazingly weak argument.

If my point were not true, you would be correct.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #96 of 184
2/7/05 at 9:07pm
Quote:
Originally posted by atomic_angel
Is abstinence an option at all?

Mandatory sex! 8)
Reply
Reply
post #97 of 184
2/7/05 at 10:52pm
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
They're going to have sex. The least we can do is acknowledge that fact and try to equip them not to kill one another with their genitals

Abstinence is great until you're ready to have sex and then what? Abstinence programs don't work:
Quote:
So, if [they] promote abstinence in high school sex-ed classes, what do you think happens?

I gave it away in the headline: Kids have more sex.

From Reuters:


Despite taking courses emphasizing abstinence-only themes, teenagers in 29 high schools became increasingly sexually active, mirroring the overall state trends, according to the study conducted by researchers at Texas A&M University.
Reply
Reply
post #98 of 184
2/7/05 at 10:54pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Ra
Abstinence is great until you're ready to have sex and then what? Abstinence programs don't work:

Yup.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #99 of 184
2/8/05 at 5:12am
  • e1618978
  • will burn in the Fiery Pit of Hell.
Quote:
Shouldn't she learn this (primarily) from her parents?

You missed the part where I say that the hypothetical girl does not, through no fault of her own, get any information.

You are punishing someone for their parents inaction.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #100 of 184
2/8/05 at 9:41am
Quote:
Originally posted by Frank777
And as I've pointed out before, when your people are the chief proponents of abortion, gay rights and euthanasia, the population numbers game is always with the other side.

Pro-choice does not equal pro-abortion. It's an easy concept to understand of which I'm sure you'll refuse to. Gays and lesbians are our brothers, sisters, sons and daughters. I don't remember any recent Democrat running on euthanasia rights.

Quote:
And if you think lecturing "minors, minorities, underpriveledged (sic) and the uneducated" constitutes a plan for dealing with abortions in North America, well, all I can say is that you've obviously never dealt with the situation at close range.

Since when did "education" and "options" becoming lecturing?

My wife and I had an unplanned pregnancy about ten years ago. It was at a "planned parenthood" center that we were presented with our "options". We chose adoption. So, please, do us all a favor and get off your high-horse and stop "lecturing" people on what they know and don't know. Because if you had your way you'd close all the planned parenthood centers which could have had a consequential outcome.

Quote:
And I stand by the point of my original post, which is that rightly or wrongly, elevating a Planned Parenthood doctor to the head of the party will only serve to further alienate the Red states from the Democrats.

Your ignornance about Planned Parenthood is astounding. You either choose to only believe the right-wing propaganda or choose to stick your fingers in your ears about "reality". Both are literally horrifying.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #101 of 184
2/8/05 at 11:31am
Quote:
Originally posted by Northgate
Your ignornance about Planned Parenthood is astounding. You either choose to only believe the right-wing propaganda or choose to stick your fingers in your ears about "reality". Both are literally horrifying.

Apparently, you either continue to miss my point, or are intentionally ignoring it. What Planned Parenthood does or does not do, is irrelevant.

There is an impression of the group that is already formed by most of the "Red Staters" that the Democrats are trying to win back. Elevating someone so closely affiliated with PP will have consequences in those regions.

My point is about tactics, not abortion itself.

Even Hillary has seen the light and has moved to moderate the way she talks about abortion. While I'm sure we differ on a huge number of points, there's no denying she's a smart woman.

If she can pick up on that, why can't the rest of the party? You can rail about my "ignorance" all you want. When the right wing uses the PP connection, (and we all know they will) the Democrats will find themselves on the defensive in an election yet again.

Those who fail to learn from history, deserve to fail anyway.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #102 of 184
2/8/05 at 11:41am
My understanding is that Dean worked as an OB/GYN at a Planned Parenthood clinic and never performed abortions. Maybe that fact will highlight what Planned Parenthood is (an organization that attempts to help moms-to-be) and what it is not (just an abortion clinic).
Reply
Reply
post #103 of 184
2/8/05 at 2:09pm
Quote:
Originally posted by BRussell
My understanding is that Dean worked as an OB/GYN at a Planned Parenthood clinic and never performed abortions. Maybe that fact will highlight what Planned Parenthood is (an organization that attempts to help moms-to-be) and what it is not (just an abortion clinic).

That is exactly my point, too. I guess in an ideal world we could run campaigns on the facts and not on the disinformation that the GOP has so successfully brainwashed the populace with.

Frank's arguing that the populace has bought into the disinformation about Planned Parenthood, therefore Democrats should abandon it. I couldn't disagree more. If sticking by one's principles is a death nell, then so be it I guess. At least I know what's true and what's bullshit.

At some point I expect Republicans to start advizing Democrats that their continued insistence that there is an unprecedented revision of history within this administration (supported wholesale by the Republican controlled congress) wrt the war in Iraq that it wouldn't be prudent to continue running a campaign that points out such lies.

Smells of fascism in its infancy to me.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #104 of 184
2/11/05 at 4:11pm
According to Gallup.:

If Howard Dean were elected chair of the Democratic National Committee, what kind of job do you think he would do - excellent, good, only fair, or terrible?

Excellent 63
Good 27
Only Fair 5
Poor 1
Terrible 1

Now, I have to agree with Kos on this one. Corporate Media and the Right Wing Noise Machine will soon begin its anti-Dean barrage. It's definitely coming.

I think Frank777 (sorry bro, I gotta call you out on this) is proof positive that dis-information is the rule of the land and his commentaries in this thread will be the way the GOP and its band of rabid wolves will try to paint Dr. Dean - as a baby killer.

On one hand Frank repeats the negative information as if it's true, but then admits later that elections are won and lost on the maligning "perceptions" the GOP shoves down our throats through its unbridled manipulation of the mainstream media (not in so many words, but implied).
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #105 of 184
2/11/05 at 9:00pm
So when Dean falls on this face you'll have a pregenerated excuse that deflects blame. Great.
Reply
Reply
post #106 of 184
2/11/05 at 9:12pm
You know, Scott, what Bush needs to do to heal the divide in this country is move more to the left.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #107 of 184
2/12/05 at 4:17am
I thought we were talking about Dean?
Reply
Reply
post #108 of 184
2/12/05 at 6:15am
  • e1618978
  • will burn in the Fiery Pit of Hell.
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
I thought we were talking about Dean?

Can somebody please remind me what Howard Dean and "Democracy for America" stands for? I looked on his web page, and couldn't figure it out.

I remember wanting to vote for him, but I can't remember what he said that made me feel that way. It couldn't have been "tax the rich", because I hate that part.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #109 of 184
2/12/05 at 9:29am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
Can somebody please remind me what Howard Dean and "Democracy for America" stands for? I looked on his web page, and couldn't figure it out.

I remember wanting to vote for him, but I can't remember what he said that made me feel that way. It couldn't have been "tax the rich", because I hate that part.

Try this video from two years ago, before the start of the Iraq war: http://dotpeople.com/av/15.Mar.03/dean
Reply
Reply
post #110 of 184
2/12/05 at 10:12am
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
I thought we were talking about Dean?

Oh, we are. I just think it's hilarious that conservatives are so concerned over the fate of the Democratic party that they're offering all kinds of well-intentioned advice, most of which boils down to "You are clearly going to have to become Republicans in order to save the Democratic party."
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #111 of 184
2/12/05 at 10:15am
  • e1618978
  • will burn in the Fiery Pit of Hell.
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
Oh, we are. I just think it's hilarious that conservatives are so concerned over the fate of the Democratic party that they're offering all kinds of well-intentioned advice, most of which boils down to "You are clearly going to have to become Republicans in order to save the Democratic party."

Why does the Democratic party have to be liberal in all areas? Financially conservative and socially liberal sounds pretty good to me (and not like the Republicans at all, in fact it is the antithesis of the Republican party, which is socially conservative and spends money like there is no tomorrow).
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #112 of 184
2/12/05 at 10:24am
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
Why does the Democratic party have to be liberal in all areas?

The Democratic party is liberal? There are liberals in the democratic party? Where? You certainly could've fooled me, considering in this last election Kerry bent over backwards to avoid being called a liberal.

Quote:
Financially conservative and socially liberal sounds pretty good to me (and not like the Republicans at all, in fact it is the antithesis of the Republican party, which is socially conservative and spends money like there is no tomorrow). [/B]

You are describing another Bill Clinton, a man whose politics, many of us good liberals believe, gave a bad name to liberalism. At any rate, it would not surprise me one bit if the Democrats' first volley with Dean as chair is that they're the party of fiscal responsibility.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #113 of 184
2/12/05 at 10:25am
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
Why does the Democratic party have to be liberal in all areas? Financially conservative and socially liberal sounds pretty good to me (and not like the Republicans at all, in fact it is the antithesis of the Republican party, which is socially conservative and spends money like there is no tomorrow).

You've just defined the existing difference between Democrats and Republicans, and Howard Dean embodies that difference.

Fiscally conservative and socially liberal? You're a Democrat.
Fiscally liberal and socially conservative? You're a Republican.

That was one of my previous sigs. The problem with it is that it's all about domestic policy, and foreign policy is critically important. That's where Dean (as a presidential candidate moreso than as a party chair) falls short, and that's where we really needed someone like Wes Clark in 2004. Unfortunately, he just wasn't ready for prime time.
Reply
Reply
post #114 of 184
2/12/05 at 10:33am
  • e1618978
  • will burn in the Fiery Pit of Hell.
Quote:
Fiscally conservative and socially liberal? You're a Democrat.

If I felt that was true - I would love to be a democrat, but I just don't see it.

If the democrats were financially conservative, they would want to reduce government spending, balance the budget, and after the budget was balanced lower taxes.

What I see is no talk about reducing spending, just talk about reversing the tax cuts so that the government can continue to spend and spend.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #115 of 184
2/12/05 at 10:40am
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
.

If the democrats were financially conservative, they would want to reduce government spending, balance the budget, and after the budget was balanced lower taxes.


Oh like, not going to useless wars? You know, funding for wars is government spending too.

And as far as I remember, you are one of those war-mongerers in the North Korea topic.

So you want to go to war every chance you get, and blame the Democrats for not being financially conservative.

Great.
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
post #116 of 184
2/12/05 at 10:56am
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
If I felt that was true - I would love to be a democrat, but I just don't see it.

If the democrats were financially conservative, they would want to reduce government spending, balance the budget, and after the budget was balanced lower taxes.

What I see is no talk about reducing spending, just talk about reversing the tax cuts so that the government can continue to spend and spend.

You can look at rhetoric, but you can also look at reality. On a comparison between the reality of Republican and Democratic governance, there's a clear history, and a clear difference. Republicans spend more than Democrats, and they also take the politically popular actions of cutting taxes, which of course leads to deficits which increases future gov't spending even further. Look at the Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush pattern. It's crystal clear.
Reply
Reply
post #117 of 184
2/12/05 at 11:00am
  • e1618978
  • will burn in the Fiery Pit of Hell.
Wars are ususual non-recurring line items in the budget, domestic spending is ramping up forever.

Its true, that it would be wonderful if the world was
peaceful and everything, but sometimes you have to go to war regardless if you are a democrat or republican.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #118 of 184
2/12/05 at 11:09am
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
Wars are ususual non-recurring line items in the budget, domestic spending is ramping up forever.

Wars are recurring; we've had two wars in less then 3 years and they are still on-going. That's 200 billion dollars of spending right there. And from the looks of it, we are gonna have more wars. That's another 200 billion. Tell me which domestic program spent 200 billion dollars in 3 years.


Quote:
Its true, that it would be wonderful if the world was
peaceful and everything, but sometimes you have to go to war regardless if you are a democrat or republican.

You have to go to war only if you're attacked. Attacked as in war is declared against you. You don't have to go to war to find WMD's that never existed.

See the difference?
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
post #119 of 184
2/12/05 at 11:23am
  • e1618978
  • will burn in the Fiery Pit of Hell.
Quote:
You have to go to war only if you're attacked. Attacked as in war is declared against you. You don't have to go to war to find WMD's that never existed.

See the difference? [/B]

Wars can't go on forever, we are too good at killing. If we kept up the current pace of wars for the next 20 years, everyone would be dead.

Therefore, even if it takes 5 or 10 years, the current "war fad" will be over, and domestic spending will have more effect on the budget than war.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #120 of 184
2/12/05 at 11:28am
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
Wars can't go on forever, we are too good at killing. If we kept up the current pace of wars for the next 20 years, everyone would be dead.

Therefore, even if it takes 5 or 10 years, the current "war fad" will be over, and domestic spending will have more effect on the budget than war.

Did you mean to imply that killing half of everyone is an acceptable target?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Dean for D Chair