University of Illinois at Chicago Online Certificate in Nonprofit Management

Views » November 11, 2003

Seed of Destruction

By Jeff Epton

Attacking Howard Dean because he isn’t Dennis Kucinich won’t get us one step closer to peace and justice for the world.

Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.) got a letter the other day from the Illinois chair of the Dennis Kucinich for President campaign. In These Times got a copy of the letter, too—after all, it was an open letter intending to provoke controversy over Jackson’s decision to endorse Howard Dean.

Lance Del Goebel, depicting Dean as Bush’s immoral collaborator, wrote, “Will you, Congressman Jackson, be explaining to your constituents that they should support Howard Dean because of the project undertaken by Texas Governor George Bush and Vermont Governor Howard Dean to dump Vermont’s toxic waste on the poor Hispanic town of Sierra Blanca, Texas?”

The agreement to dispose of Vermont’s low-level radioactive waste was signed by Dean and then-Texas Gov. Ann Richards. Although Vermont environmentalists opposed the agreement, they have declined to stigmatize Dean’s role in the affair. “I was annoyed at the time and was kind of bothered by the fact that he didn’t seem to care,” Vermont Sierra Club President Lea Terhune told the Des Moines Register. “But he was never cozy with the environmentalists. He wasn’t our boy, but he wasn’t anybody’s boy.”

Kucinich, who In These Times has covered since 1977 when he became mayor of Cleveland, is raising issues in the campaign that other Democrats ignore. And for that we applaud him. We also appreciate Dean, who has impressed many with his articulate attacks on the Bush administration and with his ability to spark fresh enthusiasm among previously apathetic voters.

But at this point in the Democratic primary campaign, progressives need to be doing the things that could make a long-term difference—building networks via the Internet, registering voters, maintaining voter databases, fostering coalitions, focusing on defeating Bush, electing progressives, and skipping the pointless, non-strategic and too-often personal debates that divide us.

Del Goebel’s letter to Jackson doesn’t do any of those good things. Instead, the letter is all about taking one’s eyes off the prize and sowing division among Democrats and independent progressives.

After pointing out that in Vermont Dean rarely governed to the left and frequently governed to the right, Del Goebel concludes with a deeply critical attack on Jackson, who is, along with Kucinich, one of the most progressive members of Congress.

“Congressman Jackson,” wrote Del Goebel, “ your help was needed to stop the freefall working people and the poor have had to endure in America since 1980. You had a chance to do something bold, something innovative, to show your constituents that you really care about them. Instead you have chosen the same old worn out lesser-of-two evils argument that only serves to prolong the freefall of those Americans … at the mercy of corporate sponsored America since 1980.”

Jackson’s endorsement of Dean is a blow to Kucinich. But Jackson and Kucinich still need each other. If Dean becomes president, it will take the combined efforts of many in Congress, led by politicians like Jackson and Kucinich, to do what they can to push Dean to govern to the left and to “help stop the freefall” that concerns Del Goebel.

Dennis Kucinich is a genuine progressive. He voted against the Iraq war and against the Patriot Act. He has a plan for universal health care. His candidacy is an opportunity to frame the issues from a progressive perspective, and to do so from inside the Democratic Party. But the larger goal is to defeat Bush, build unity among progressives who must work together after the election, and create the capacity to put post-election pressure on the president, any president, to roll back the neocon agenda and enact elements of ours. Attacking Howard Dean because he isn’t Dennis Kucinich won’t get us one step closer to national health care, a progressive tax system, or peace and justice for the world.

Help In These Times publish more articles like this. Donate today!
Subscribe today and save 46% off the newsstand price!
Or win a subscription to In These Times by taking this short survey!

Jeff Epton is the former publisher of In These Times.

More information about Jeff Epton

SHARE THIS ARTICLE |

subscribe to print magazine
stay in touch with our email newsletter

Subscribe to our regular weekly e-mail newsletter. It's packed with updates on recent and upcoming stories, events, campaigns and things every progressive should be informed about.
email this article to a friend

Your Name Your Email Recipient Email

Personal message Thought you might be interested in this article from In These Times.

Please help us prevent spam by verifying the word you see in the image above

Send to multiple recipients. Just separate each email address with a comma.
Reader Comments

Boy, when you are wrong, you don’t hold anything back. “... the larger goal is to defeat Bush…”?!!
That’s the same thinking that got us into this neo-con wet dream ofr a ‘gubmint’ in the first place. Dean may well defeat Bush, but he will do nothing to push a progressive agenda once in office. And then we can look forward to next excruciating series of abuse of federal power when Jeb Bush gets elected president. We either draw a line in the sand or give up and go home. A vote for Dean is a vote for the next right wing moron we elect president.

Posted by Paul Rayhorn on Nov 12, 2003 at 8:27 PM

Howard Dean is no progressive. We can work for what we think the conservative voters will accept, or for what we think is right. We can seek to be all things to all people or take a stand.

Will Dr. Dean now proclaim he wants to be the President of those with swastikas tattooed on their forearms because their children need health care too? After all, the swastika lovers share common beliefs with many of those who love the stars’n'bars.

Dean’s pragmatism (“reaching out”) appears to know limits which should have deterred Jackson. Jesse Jr. has seen which way the wind is blowing and made his decision not on the basis of ideals, but in consideration of potential deals.
And that is a shame.

Posted by Rik Reynolds on Nov 12, 2003 at 8:37 PM

I agree with Jeff—Congressman Jackson is one of the savviest progressives out there, and if in his judgment Dr. Dean is worthy of an endorsement, that should cause Dr. Dean’s stock to rise among progressives, not Congressman Jackson’s stock to fall. And while I was an avid Nader supporter in 2000, the larger goal of the 2004 presidential election *is* to defeat Bush. The “lesser evil” really is better for us than the greater evil (though I think Dr. Dean is anything but evil. Maybe more of a centrist than we’d like, but after all, the country is more centrist than we’d like). Finally, on Dean reaching out to those with Confederate flags on their cars, I think we should celebrate that a Democratic presidential candidate is explicit about trying to pull in uneducated folks in the south to the left-of-center coalition, based on their economic interests (as anyone earning less than 40K a year should be voting Democratic or lefty third party, but not Republican as many poorer southern whites continue to do).

Posted by Dan Johnson-Weinberger on Nov 12, 2003 at 11:26 PM

I think that it is just that persons approach on the issue and perhaps, a little too aggressive. But can I ask you Jeff Epton do you think that
your negative comments about
Del Goebel are any different than his of Rep. Jesse Jackson?
I think it’s a blow to all and we need to help each other pass through the anger that may arise around the inconsistencies of what people say they stand for and the actions they take which say other.
I don’t think there is a choice. people say they want “any body but Bush” mainly because he took us through an unjust war but is America ready to admit that “Any body but Bush"could entail War once again? Has America done her
homework to see that a Mr. Dean plan to expand the military is another plan to go to war?
Perhaps, America still hasn’t learned the lesson.

Posted by Kfairbanks on Nov 13, 2003 at 12:41 AM

“When did punk rock become so safe?/when did the scene become a joke?” asks NOFX in the song “Separation of Church and Skate” [sic]. The same could be asked of Mr. Epton’s left—a left more concerned with the “larger goal” of defeating Bush, than supporting a true progressive candidate like Kucinich (who could, given enough support and resources, very well defeat Bush). If progressives ever hope to be taken seriously, they sure as hell better start supporting those candidates who best represent them—and cease with the lame excuses. Our candidate, Dennis Kucinich, has stepped forward; it is up to us to get him elected.

Posted by James Seckington on Nov 13, 2003 at 1:34 AM
extended discussion >>>Continued...

Discussions with more than 5 comments are continued on our special discussion page to encourage continuity and ease of use. There are currently 60 posts.

Appeared in the December 8, 2003 Issue

Also featured Bolivia Offers Cautionary Tale for FTAA Negotiators
Resisting Globalization
The Candidates on Health Care

Full contents
Previous issues
Subscribe and save!

Also by Jeff Epton

Labor’s Future is Ours
Organized labor is the oldest, largest and most successful social movement in the… morePosted on January 21, 2005
Antiwar Action: Back to the ‘60s?
The antiwar groups originally formed to oppose the invasion of Iraq took a… morePosted on December 30, 2004
Beyond Regime Change
The “anybody but Bush” mantra that progressives are using to focus their energies… morePosted on March 2, 2004
When Mainstream Media Tells Labor Stories
Organized labor isn’t organized crime, but how would we know?Posted on January 20, 2004
From Protest to Politics
When war begins progressive work doesn’t endPosted on December 15, 2003