A Tale Of Two Howards (But Only One Billmon)
Howard Dean, July 26, 2006:
“The Iraqi Prime Minister is an anti-Semite…We don’t need to spend $200 and $300 and $500 billion bringing democracy to Iraq to turn it over to people who believe that Israel doesn’t have a right to defend itself and who refuse to condemn Hezbollah.”
Howard Dean, September 8, 2003:
Howard Dean came under fire yesterday from two rivals for the Democratic nomination for saying the United States should not “take sides” in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Five days after Dean told supporters in New Mexico that “it’s not our place to take sides” in the conflict, Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (Conn.) accused him of advocating a “major break” from the United States’ long-standing policy of explicitly siding with Israel in the Middle East.
Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.) said: “It is either because he lacks the foreign policy experience or simply because he is wrong that governor Dean has proposed a radical shift in United States policy towards the Middle East. If the president were to make a remark such as this it would throw an already volatile region into even more turmoil.”
Dean’s response? So far, at least, he’s standing his ground:
In an interview, Dean sought to clarify his statement but did not back down from his belief that the United State cannot negotiate peace unless it is seen as a neutral party in the region. “Israel has always been a longtime ally with a special relationship with the United States, but if we are going to bargain by being in the middle of the negotiations then we are going to have to take an evenhanded role,” he said.
An evenhanded role? Sounds like he was failing to condemn aggression against Israel to me…
Howard should take lessons in consistency from the loathsome Billmon, from whose site the latter reference came: he was anti-Israel then:
For what it’s worth (which probably isn’t much) Howard Dean now has Whiskey Bar’s endorsement for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Why? Because the good doctor has dared to utter the unmentionable truth: That the United States simply cannot afford to continue its current policy of absolute, unqualified support of the state of Israel.
…and he’s anti-Israel now:
The military and political leaders of the Jewish state are doing and saying things that go way beyond the blustering arrogance of a powerful nation at war. Not to put too fine a point on it, but they are behaving like a gang of miltaristic thugs — whose reply to any criticism or reproach is an expletive deleted and the smash of an iron fist.
Well, at least we know where Billmon stands…and of course, should he ever be invited to address Congress, Howard Dean will no doubt address another group of Democratic businessmen to condemn him…
(hat tip to longtime reader Sean P for the Howard Dean tipoff)…
[...] In RightieWorld, one either supports Israel’s every cough or one hopes for Israel’s destruction. It’s beyond their comprehension that a person could support Israel’s right to exist in peace and yet condemn its current actions. This rightie thinks Howard Dean is inconsistent because he said, in 2003, that the United States should not take sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — “Israel has always been a longtime ally with a special relationship with the United States, but if we are going to bargain by being in the middle of the negotiations then we are going to have to take an evenhanded role.” But in 2006 he said of the government of Iraq — “We don’t need to spend $200 and $300 and $500 billion bringing democracy to Iraq to turn it over to people who believe that Israel doesn’t have a right to defend itself and who refuse to condemn Hezbollah.” [...]
Sorry, I’m not buying it. In 2003, Dean said the US needed to be “neutral” in its approach to Isreal and its neighbors. Now Dean is unequivicably demanding that Iraq take Isreal’s side in a dispute with Hezbollah. Where’s the neutrality? And your “right to exist” distinction is silly. The Palestinian Authority never recongized Isreal’s right to exist in deed or in (Arabic) word, but Dean still preached for “neutrality”. Now that he smells an opportunity to pander, he won’t.