Skip to main content

Frost's last big chance -- a big labor endorsement -- has gone up in smoke.
AFL-CIO leaders decided Tuesday not to make an endorsement in the race for Democratic National Committee chairman, a move that could make it harder for any of Howard Dean's rivals to stop his push for the party leadership.
The Hotline's latest delegate count:
Dean 102 (23%)
Frost 15
Fowler 10
Rosenberg 4
Roemer 4
Leland 2
This list does not include endorsements made today.

Roll Call reports (subscription only):

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) has repeatedly rebuffed former Rep. Martin Frost's (Texas) attempts to secure her support in his race for the chairmanship of the Democratic National Committee, stunting his hopes of emerging as the alternative candidate to frontrunning former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean.

Pelosi and Frost met last week to discuss the persistent talk in Democratic circles that she was telling DNC members and other party officials that it would be difficult for her to work with her former rival if he was elected chairman. The two have met three times since Frost declared his candidacy, and each time Pelosi had refused to support the Texan.

Though Pelosi assured Frost that she had no problem with him as head of the party, her daughter Christine, who is chief of staff to Rep. John Tierney (Mass.), circulated a proposal via e-mail last week that would install Dean as chairman with former Rep. Tim Roemer (Ind.) handling the day-to-day activities of the committee.

For his part, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.) has been sounding out labor leaders about the possibility of unifying behind either Frost or political operative Donnie Fowler.

Roemer for the day-to-day activities? If they want to go that route, the obvious choice would be Rosenberg.

And while this is being painted as a continuation of the Pelosi-Frost feud (he challenged her for the Dems House leadership), it's probably much simpler than that -- Pelosi is tired of backing losers in this race. Dean is looking stronger by the day, and it's pointless to endorse a candidate who has little chance of winning. That's probably why the AFL-CIO sat the race out.

Meanwhile, also in Roll Call, Donna Brazile pens an open letter to Dean:

But just as you appeared to be on the verge of catching fire in the Iowa caucuses, the winter turned harsh. People loved you in their hearts, but they became frightened of what it would mean for the Democratic Party to have you serve as our standard-bearer. Some of those same people are now involved in a last-ditch effort to stop your candidacy.

Your youthful, tech-savvy supporters were new to the game of hardball presidential politics. They were playing in a league where the rules change based on who's in the game. Soon, some party insiders flush with cash went to work to cool your jets. You haven't quite been the same since the moment they made and paid for a video comparing you to Osama bin Laden.

Perhaps this time you will make it to the top. But, as you have experienced, the climb up the ladder from ex-governor, ex-presidential candidate to chairman can be steep. The hurdles now, like the obstacles you confronted in the Democratic primaries, are mainly about ego. For all its talk about inclusiveness, the Democratic Party is extremely turf conscious. Thus, it's incumbent on you to reach out and bring these people, the very ones who went to the mat to stop you, into the fold.

The bigger fish in the Democratic pond (the party is still swimming upstream) are truly bottom feeders eating away their young, casting aside callously their base and ignorant of the sharks circling our old coalitions. They have dismissed an entire generation of potential leaders when they held power by failing to lift up those who were coming behind. With you, some of the people who have been kept down found their voice. No matter what happens next week, keep fighting for them.

And the race marches on.

Update: Frost is out. Fowler is getting his wish to be the anti-Dean, but I suspect he's going to find it a very lonely place to be.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 11:28 AM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Brazile makes it sound as if (none)
    the dems need a hatchet man.  I don't think Dean is one, but none of the others seem to be either.

    Can Dean find a hatchet man for the #2 spot?

    •  Forget Donna's Advice. . . (none)
      . . . and take mine. Don't be too quick to "reach out" to those with the long knives. Let them come to you a bit.

      The people in the party want things to be different. We are supporting you because we think you have the wisdom and the moxie to steer away from the Republican rocks and into clearer waters. If these people don't want to play nice, keel haul them. Make them walk the plank. Let these people swim after the ship with shark shoals nipping at their toes.

      There's a reason why you are ahead in the polls. It has to do with that great unfulfilled craving of the real American people for a leader who will stand up to the suits and say no when their demands get out of hand. When Wall Street gets greedy (like when they want to suck up 30% or more of our retirement savings) real Americans need someone who can't be bought off. That's why we came out in droves to give our little campaign contributions on the Internet.

      And that's why we showed up at the caucuses and cheered loudest when you talked and waved our little blue sheets of paper. We are there because we think there's the faint possibility you might be different enough to be an actual leader, not just another politician with good phrases and a confident delivery. We've been sold down the river before, but we're a little desperate and we want to believe.

      We, the real Americans, want you to scream. It's just that we want you to scream for us. It looks like you're trying to do that. Make us believe. Make us want to be the ones standing on our chairs screaming at you. You've got the power. Now use it!

      So tell Donna that you appreciate her advice and you acknowledge that a lot of people in the Democratic Party are probably scared by your ascendancy. But remind her that the reason we've been losing to the Republicans is that these same people have counseled caution when the only safe course is four-square into the wind. Then let them come to you. They will. One close look at Bush and they'll realize what we already know: They have no place else to go.

      Liberal Thinking

      Think, liberally.

      by Liberal Thinking on Wed Feb 02, 2005 at 12:04:17 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Wow Donna (3.12)
    For once I like your style. YES, YES, and YES.

    I am willing to become a Dean convert if and when he is rady to put forth the olive branch to those that torched him in Iowa. We need to come together now more than ever and I am scared we won't. If that is the case, then we are going to get smaller and smaller and it may be years before we get to open another Presidential Library and get Bono back to sing in the rain. (I cried that day bc I thought I was going to be 55 before I saw that happen again--and Bono bless him--would be long gone).

    So Howard, reach out to the doubters like me and tell them that you might bite your tongue sometimes and we'll try to help. But vindictiveness and revenge, while cathartic, are not going to get this party started.

    •  what? (none)
      When has Howard Dean ever displayed any sort of vindictiveness or revenge?  

      -- The going's good in the land of the free, but I live in another country. -- Bob Hillman

      by J from VJ on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 11:34:59 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Announcing his candidacy for DNC Chair (2.66)
        was an opportunity to reach out to the center right Dems and he didn't. He told them to quit acting like the Republicans (pretty much a similar quote to the one that started this whole malarky, the plagarized "I represent the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party")

        While that maybe exactly what you want, it comes across to those individuals like he is out to settle scores. No the best way to make everyone feel as though we all have a stake in this together.  Dean did an incredible job in implementing the internet (many of you) to raise money and I am sure wonders if that money was spent effectively. While there has been some worry over Rosenberg would hold back the funds from candidates that didn't fit the New Dem Network profilem, there some concern on the other side that Dean may withold funds from those that he felt were out to get him.

        •  Some people say (4.00)
          there [is] some concern on the other side that Dean may withold funds from those that he felt were out to get him.

          Forgive me if I scoff.

          Really, how is this not just pure rumor-mongering?  Dean believes that Democrats need not roll over, and that we have to align around the values we all share--moderates included.

          Dean is not settling scores.  He thought long and hard about whether he could best help the Democratic Party by running for DNC chair.  He asked all DFA members to send him feedback on this, and he listened to it.  He sent out feelers, saw there was good support, and went for it.  It's not a grudge match--it's how we fix the Party.

        •  differ (none)
          We differ greatly on our respective interpretations of what it means to "not act like a Republican" I guess. Good grief.  

          (And, for the record, I'm an independent in a southern red state who once registered as a Republican, and Dean's done just fine reaching out across party and ideological lines as far as I can tell.  Even if Dean becomes DNC chair, I still don't think I'll be registering with the Democrats any time soon... )

          -- The going's good in the land of the free, but I live in another country. -- Bob Hillman

          by J from VJ on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 11:50:29 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  I don't see him (4.00)
          withholding funds ever from candidates who don't exactly match his views. DFA's Dean Dozens were certainly an eclectic bunch. Think of Herseth. And if there's any former presidential candidate who worked harder for the Kerry ticket than Dean did, I'd like to hear about them.

          A free society is a place where it's safe to be unpopular. -Adlai Stevenson.

          by barb in albq on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:08:29 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Your comments here, (4.00)
          whether you realize it or not, suggest--and wrongly, I might add--that Howard Dean owes it to you to assuage your skepticism.  Sorry, it doesn't work that way.  You seem bound and determined to nitpick the semantics of Dean's comments rather than to accept them on their face.  

          Howard Dean has never appeared to be vindictive in his behavior towards anyone; in fact, he has been notably gentlemanly in not taking the politics of business personally.  You might take a page from his book.

          It appears that Dean will be the next Chair of the DNC.  That, in and of itself, is a major accomplishment given Dean's pariah status among the centrist/beltway powerbrokers and the organized effort these same folks launched.  There's a reason Dean may actually prevail here--and you would do well to study that if you are looking for real insight into the man's ability to reach concensus, to actively put the past behind him when it comes to old rivalries, to listen to people's concerns, and to articulate a vision.  He may not have courted you in a manner you deem fitting, but he certainly has courted the people he needs to accomplish his goal--like Harold Ickes--and succeeded in convincing them that his vision is 20/20.  

          The status quo is finally understanding what Howard Dean can do.  No lucid individual would have believed we'd be having this conversation ten months ago.  The fact that we are having it--with the vote for Chair fast upon us--tells us all we really need to know about Howard Dean.

          On some great & glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last & the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.

          by lightiris on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:12:13 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Ickes (none)
            Dean will only become chair of the DNC if he convinces some very savvy people that he'll do a good job, that he's not going to be the guy without any notes or plan who in a moment of huge shock and disappointment went out and gave a speech that did him horrible harm, and that he learned from his mistake of not expecting and demanding more accountability and a tighter campaign structure than what he had with Trippi as the campaign manager but others also making decisions and spending money, and nobody accountable to anyone else.  

            Becomming chair--and once I saw the Ickes endorsement I figured it was a done deal, at least in terms of Dean having no lower than co-chair status--it will be proof that, indeed, Howard Dean convinced people that he had learned from the mistakes of his campaign and that knowledge would help make him a good chair.  People like Ickes wouldn't have endorsed him, and he wouldn't have gotten the endorsement of the state chairs, if they didn't think all the reckonings and reconciliations hadn't already occurred.  

            •  I agree with you (2.50)
              that the Ickes endorsment was a big deal. It basically was a sign to the rest of the "establishment" dems that the Big Dog didn't want people to get in the way of Dean anymore. If they did, it might be bad for Hillary when she runs in 08. H

              However, there is still some healing that needs to be done and I would be pleased with Governor Dean and quite impressed if he specifically reached out to those who worked hard against himn and said, "Hey, I know we have had our differences but here we are in this boat together, let's try to make it work."  Rather than, something offensive and old. (was going to write something but I deleted it)

              Anyways, yes has learned from his mistakes I hope and I hope he continues to build trust with people like myself who are a bit skeptical right now. I would love nothing more than to be proved incorrect.

              •  Ickes Isn't a Clinton Puppet (none)
                Ickes is linked all over the party--yes, the Clintons, but also the Upper East Side money people, Hollywood, the allied groups in America Votes--don't forget, he concieved, set up and ran the Media Fund--and most importantly, organized labor.  

                You make it sound like he's the Clinton's messenger boy, but he's far more than that.  He's one of the only people who does not and never did need the Clintons for him to be a major player, but he's one of the few people who the Clintons have concluded they really need.  

                Ickes' endorsement wasn't a signal that the Clinton's were manuvering for 08, it was a signal that Ickes felt comfortable with Dean and that everyone else should too.

        •  Nope... sorry... (none)
          ... you appear to be going into this with the standard anti-Dean pre-disposition. One of the first things Gov. Dean did when he started thinking about this was to reach out to ALL DNC members and ALL branches of the party to make sure this was the right thing to do. Only once he had the signals from all or enough corners of the party did he then make the final decision.

          You appear to have bought into the anti-dean spin and not looked past it to see the real man and his style.

          "Do what you can, with what you have, where you are." - Theodore Roosevelt

          by Andrew C White on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:37:46 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  *laugh* (none)
          While there has been some worry over Rosenberg would hold back the funds from candidates that didn't fit the New Dem Network profilem, there some concern on the other side that Dean may withold funds from those that he felt were out to get him.

            There was "some concern" (actually, it was hysterical handwringing and insult throwing) that Dean would run third party if he failed to get the nomination.

            Funny, I don't recall too many of those people ever admitting they were wrong....

        •  He told the to stop acting like Republicans (none)
          Well, yes, and that's why the grass roots rallied for Dean.  We are sick of our Democrats being 'Republican lite.'
        •  Yep. (none)
          was an opportunity to reach out to the center right Dems and he didn't. He told them to quit acting like the Republicans (pretty much a similar quote to the one that started this whole malarky, the plagarized "I represent the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party")

          Bingo.  This is exactly why I do not like Dean.  

          I am repeatedly told that he's really a moderate (usually followed by a slew of non-moderate positions from the person making the assertion). However, the fact of the matter is that Dean locked up the left wing of the party by summer 2003.  

          He could have easily had a Sister Souljah moment and reached out to the moderates in a tangible way.  Instead, he gave us more wacky theories like "Bush knew about about 9/11 beforehand" (excuse me, that the aforesaid is "an interesting theory"), the Clinton wing is really a bunch of Republicans, etc.

          I did not fall off the turnip truck yesterday.  It is perfectly obvious that the "Democratic wing of the Democratic Party" line is a frontal attack on the Clintons.

          I am sorry, but if Dean wins I will be watching very closely, and if he tries to marginalize us moderates, he should not take our support for granted.

          •  Hey (none)
            if I were you, I'd start lining up to jump on the Dean bandwagon. Democrats might actually start winning with him running the Party. And I'd love to hear what "moderate" means in your world.

            A free society is a place where it's safe to be unpopular. -Adlai Stevenson.

            by barb in albq on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 03:30:03 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  That's one bandwagon I'm not ready to join, sorry. (none)
              if I were you, I'd start lining up to jump on the Dean bandwagon.

              Why? Politics is only one of my interests, and unlike Donna Brazile, my job doesn't depend on who heads up the DNC.  

              If the newly-elected Howard Dean chooses to make more comments like "Bush knew about 9/11 ahead of time," I am happy to sit out the next two years in anticipation of the rout we'll suffer in 2006.

              If he governs with the agenda you set forth in your other post, I'll work for him.

              Assuming he is the next chair, time will tell.

              •  Sigh (none)
                Dean never said that. He said something that any thinking persons scanned as "Bush's behavior leaves him open to questions and challenges, even ones as extreme as ..."

                As far as reaching out to the folks who went after him in IA, those would be (among others) the Kerry and Gephardt campaigns (whose people started that miserable PAC). I haven't read or heard a single negative thing out of Dean about Gephardt since the IA caucus and the man ran himself into the ground trying to get Kerry elected.

                Hell, he hired one of the first guys who took a hatchet to him in the primaries for this DNC chair race.

                My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right. Sen Carl Schurz

                by Bill Rehm on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:12:33 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Dean's 9/11 quote (none)
                  Dean never said that.

                  Yes, he did.  

                  To quote from the transcript of the Diane Rehm show:

                  Diane Rehm: "Why do you think he (Bush) is suppressing that (Sept. 11) report?"

                  Howard Dean: "I don't know. There are many theories about it. The most interesting theory that I've heard so far -- which is nothing more than a theory, it can't be proved -- is that he was warned ahead of time by the Saudis. Now who knows what the real situation is?"

                  This is equivalent of a Holocaust denier who does not deny the existence of the Holocaust per se, but instead labels it an "interesting theory."  In other words, it is perfectly clear from context where his true sympathies lie.

                  I suppose you can make an argument that Dean misspoke or chose his words poorly, but this is not a luxury that a potential president or party chair enjoys.  Like Bush after his inaugural speech, he's forever going to be calling a hasty press conference to explain "What I Really Meant."

                  You thought Martin Frost was going to get pilloried on the Sunday talk shows because he did a campaign commercial in which he cozied up to Bush?  Just wait until the talk shows replay Dean's take on 9/11 every time we want to talk about national security policy.

                  God help us if McCain or Giuliani is the 2008 nominee.

                  •  I'm sure (none)
                    Martin Frost never said anything that could be picked apart by the media. I mean, just in his NYC appearance he reportedly turned off much of the crowd with his Dems must believe in god statements. I hear he came off like a finger-pointing, crabby sermonizer. Inspiring.

                    A free society is a place where it's safe to be unpopular. -Adlai Stevenson.

                    by barb in albq on Wed Feb 02, 2005 at 08:18:59 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Let's see now (none)
                    Petey says:
                    If the newly-elected Howard Dean chooses to make more comments like "Bush knew about 9/11 ahead of time," I am happy to sit out the next two years in anticipation of the rout we'll suffer in 2006.

                    Dean said:


                    "I don't know. There are many theories about it. The most interesting theory that I've heard so far -- which is nothing more than a theory, it can't be proved -- is that he was warned ahead of time by the Saudis. Now who knows what the real situation is?"

                    Of course, you somehow manage to drag the Holocaust and the absolute tinfoil hat type Holocaust deniers into the mix, but Dean never said that.

                    My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right. Sen Carl Schurz

                    by Bill Rehm on Wed Feb 02, 2005 at 09:55:04 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Re: Let's see now (none)
                      Of course, you somehow manage to drag the Holocaust and the absolute tinfoil hat type Holocaust deniers into the mix, but Dean never said that.

                      And, at the risk of sounding like a broken record: yes, he did.  It is in the transcript of the Diane Rehm show.  It's a verbatim quote.

                      Howard Dean thinks the 9/11 conspiracy theories are plausible enough to label them "interesting theories" and to ask "who knows what the real situation is."

                      Secondly, I never called Howard Dean a Holocaust denier.  It's patently clear that whatever his faults may be, he's not a Holocaust denier.  

                      What I said was that he employs many of the same rhetorical devices that Holocaust deniers, as well as Flat-Earthers, militia loons, and so forth, use: code words, insinuations, and caveats.  In their totality, they leave no doubt as to what they're driving at.

                      Just why Dean wants to drive at those points is a matter for speculation, of course, but I can't think of any reason that would put him in a favorable light.

                      Third, you are welcome to believe I'm "Petey," if you like.  Nothing short of revealing my name is likely to convince you otherwise, I suppose, and I won't do that.  Like many people, I blog anonymously so I can say what I think worrying how it goes over with friends, colleagues, etc.  

                      I do happen to agree with much of what Petey wrote about Dean in the lead-up to the 2004 primaries (that's how I remember who he is).  You're also in for a mighty rude surprise if you think there's only one Democrat out there who is alarmed at the prospect of putting Dean in charge of the party.

                      •  OK, you're not Petey (none)
                        You sure read like him to me.

                        I didn't just read the transcript. I listened to the show. Dean wasn't taking it seriously as a theory. He was commenting on what can get started when you have a president who operates in complete secrecy.

                        I know lots of Dems who are worried about Dean. I live in NC. There's lots of them here.

                        Like many people, I sign my name to everything I write and say, because I own it and accept the fallout that comes with it.

                        My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right. Sen Carl Schurz

                        by Bill Rehm on Fri Feb 04, 2005 at 10:28:07 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

              •  Your job (none)
                may not depend on who runs the DNC, but the power of our Party and the future of the nation just might.

                A free society is a place where it's safe to be unpopular. -Adlai Stevenson.

                by barb in albq on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 07:40:52 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

          •  Lead, follow or get out of the way. (none)
            Dean is a moderate.

            The current 'Moderate" leadership are doormats that the Republicans wipe their feet on.

            Dean is not a doormat.

          •  Leftophobia (none)
            He could have easily had a Sister Souljah moment and reached out to the moderates in a tangible way.

            He could have, and arguably that was a tactical mistake in the run-up to the Iowa caucus.  (On the other hand, it's hard to tack to the center when all the other boats are torpedoing you.)  But I think the broader issue you raise is the fear among centrists, including the self-proclaimed "electable" wing of the Democratic Party, that if the left flocks to a candidate then something must be wrong with the candidate.

            You don't trust the judgment of people to the (far) left of you, and you react negatively when they favor a candidate; you're forming your opinion based not on Dean himself, but on your impression of the people who support him.  Dean was not the hard-left candidate of the 2004 election -- that man was named Kuicinich -- but Dean galvanized the party's left because Dean came out swinging.  It wasn't that they loved Dean's NRA-friendly stance, or his budget-balancing skills or health-care proposals:  It was that Dean understood when it's time to stop bringing olive branches to a knife fight.

            Dean wasn't the candidate who said "there's no daylight between us and the President," and he wasn't the candidate who said "I can execute Bush's foreign policy better than Bush can."  Dean's message was I want my country back from the right-wing fundamentalists -- and that message energized the party's left wing like nothing before or since.

            But that doesn't mean he can't be your candidate, too.  I'm a deficit hawk, and I'm here because the GOP's War on Numbers has reached the heights of madness.  And I want Dean running the party.

        •  It looks to me that you are the one with a grudge (none)
          You are making all kinds of accusations...

          "People say".............

          "Some people thinK".........

          Are you auditioning for Fox News?

          Gore/Dean, that's my story and I am sticking to it.

          by TeresaInPa on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 03:04:51 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Hey guys (none)
          please stop downrating Garfield.

          He's not spinning, he's telling the truth. I learn a lot from this guy because he does not twist or dissemble. How often do we get someone here who works in the world he lives in who is willing to tell the truth?

          Answer: never. not in all my time here have I found one of these guys willing to speak the truth. Even the state guys think spin is communication.

          So please, I, a rabidly pro-reform Deaniac who has a long proud  record of vehement opposition to dirty campaign tactics, the DLC, Quisling, spineless democrats and greedy operatives   selfishly request that y'all don't discourage him from posting here. He knows about things I've been curious about for a long time and is willing to tell the truth about them. And I am so curious....

          Besides, he's not condescending, sneering, verbally abusive, domineering or any of the other long and unfortunate list of personality traits I've come to reluctantly accept as part of the operative package.

          "...the definition of a gaffe in Washington is somebody who tells the truth but shouldn't have." Howard Dean

          by colleen on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:58:54 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Sorry (3.25)
      BUT WHEN THE FUCK HAD DEAN BEEN VINDICTIVE????

      Every Dean supporter nearly had a heart attack when he put up the bat for Kerry... so what the hell are you talking about?

      •  Yeah (none)
        That was big of Howard to do. Not together 100% altruistic but then again politics never is. His speech on the opening of his candiacy for the DNC chair was a veiled hit at the centrists. I think that I can be converted to supporting Dean (I may have to even if I don't want to) especially if he is able to turn the other cheek and work with some of the exact same folks that took him down.
        •  Well (none)
          too bad you feel this way, but is it your personal problem.

          Dean have behaved exemplary far better than any one in the so-called weak assed leadership. So, I have no doubt that he will continue to act in a gracious manner.

          Since you are a friend of the Republican acting Dems maybe you should lecture them on the change that will place in the party and they had better jump on board or get the hell out of the way.

          •  You need us (none)
            or you get smaller....that is the way it goes.
            •  Need you for what (3.60)
              to lose elections?
            •  I think you will (4.00)
              be shocked to learn how many more Dems are out there once we finally start supporting our base and our basic, long-held values. What does "centrist" mean to you? If it means coopting Republican views that serve to abandon our base, I don't think many Dems will continue supporting that.

              If, on the other hand, centrist means a pragmatic and problem-solving appraoch sans strict ideology, then I think Dean is the perfect DNC chair. His many years governing Vermont were characterized by this approach, which is in essence common sense.

              A free society is a place where it's safe to be unpopular. -Adlai Stevenson.

              by barb in albq on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:12:28 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Centrist to some people (none)
                means moving to the right everytime the Republicans move right....

                which has distorted the political spectrum to the point where Teddy Kennedy is to the right of Nixon.

                What this has done has basically made all labels meaningless....most of these so-called centrists without any coherent ideology.  

                Unfortunately, they seem content to let Republicans define us, and their political stances seemed to be constantly on the defensive...and looking for compromise, they fail to understand, the only thing Republicans want from us is complete capitulation.

                Howard Dean was considered rude and uncouth for pointing this out, and of course, the impulse of the the DLC gsng was to shoot the messenger.

            •  true but... (4.00)
              that comment goes both ways. Too many people on both sides of the equation tend to forget that. Certain DLC types were happy to have others who were "activists" or "more to the left" only for their money and their votes, not for their ideas or anything else. Certain other intemperate souls here have implied that they don't even want money or votes from the DLC types...that somehow Dems can win without them. Guess again.

              But I would never put Howard Dean in the category of such small mindedness or lack of forward thinking. For all this media frenzy about how anti-establishment the gov is, in some ways he was the very picture of the DLC card carrying establishment. His "sin" in the eyes of some was that he wasn't content with that--he was willing to look beyond the establishment--but on the other hand, (something some of his supporters don't seem to get either) that doesn't mean he's abandoned the establishment.

              For those on all sides who can't see beyond their small walls--well, that is a challenge for Dean as DNC chair. How to suavely knock heads on all sides to get everyone roughly going in the same direction and not bickering like either high school cliques or a game of "purer-than-thou".

              But I do agree that if Dean is going to be DNC head, he's got to represent even those bozos that tried so hard to take him down. But from what I've seen, he's much better equipped to win them over than some of the die-hards on both sides.

              Abortions go up under Republicans. Business is better under Democrats. Pass it on.

              by JMS on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:20:49 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Agree (3.00)
                Yes, we need new ideas and new thinking but we also need to bring along some of the old fellas too.

                I think movement either "left" or "right" in it's conventional sense can be damaging. So we need to creat a new middle ground and move towards it by repackaging the product. Can Dean do that? Sure. But he better not cut off his nose despite his face.

                If we are perceived as becoming "more liberal" by old defintions of what it means to be liberal (higher taxes, weak on defense, spend spend spend) then we are in trouble. (here is the part where you tell me Dean didn't govern like that in Vermont--that is true) Dean did move left to out maneuver his pro-war colleagues in the race for the presidency and then was planning on coming back to the center. Unfortunately, people left him out in the cold before he had his chance to realign himself.

                Now what I am saying is that Den and the centrists and the ultra liberal, the disaffected indies, the women, minorities, and labor need to come together and realize that isn't goign to work the way it used and we need to work together in order to have a chance. Kicking anyone out could be detrimental.

                •  Old Liberalism (none)
                  you say the old definition of liberals is that liberals are "weak" on defense. Ask anyone who was living in Japan during WWII if Harry Truman was "weak" on defense.
                •  You're just uninformed (none)
                  Dean didn't "tack left" and plan to "shift right".

                  In the early days of the primary campaign, he was giving speeches in Marin County (one of the most liberal counties in the US, iirc) talking about the need to balance budgets. They applauded him.

                  He criticized the Iraq War and the Iraq War resolution. He supported the invasion of Afghanistan and the first Gulf War. How any thinking person takes that as shifting to the left, I'll never understand.

                  Did Dean tailor stuff to try to get elected? I'm sure he did. He eventually modified his "roll back all of the Bush tax cuts" plan to include preserving a break for the middle class. I guess that's something of a shift left, if you squint hard enough.

                  My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right. Sen Carl Schurz

                  by Bill Rehm on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:18:58 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

        •  Reality Check (4.00)
          Howard Dean spent the entire last year proving he could be a team player, traveling the country, and acting as a surrogate and fundraising for John Kerry.  He has been acting with the same people who took him down...and has done so for the last year.

          Those examining entrails looking for insults to which ever agenda one is promoting will always find what they are looking, however those us of in the reality based community know Howard, and understand he doesn't hold a grudge.

          And in any case, supporting Howard Dean is more than not criticising him.  He is a demanding leader.  As a matter of fact, if you want to be a part of his team, and support his efforts, voting is the least you can do.  He wants average people to run for office, become leaders, and work constantly for promoting the Democratic Party in all fifty states.

          Those who persist in attempting to marginalize Dean, or snipe at him....will find themselves talking to themselves.

          •  D minus (4.00)
            As Dean once said, "Voting just gets you a D minus", or something to that effect.  Democracy is about more than just voting.

            Considering Kerry ran a pretty dirty campaign against Dean, and then Dean worked harder than any other former candidate to get Kerry elected (other than arguably Edwards), for no more reward than a job well done, these accusations of "vindictiveness" ring pretty hollow.

            Dean put his credibility on the line to win people like ME into Kerry's fold. AFTER Kerry tacitly backed the OBL morph ads. Vindictive?  FUCK OFF. That's as vindictive as i'll get, and a lot more than Dean ever got.

            Somewhere between civil disobedience and outright violent revolution lies the true compromise we face...
            -Maryscott OConnor

            by Leggy Starlitz on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:15:37 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Dean won me over. (none)
            As an early, enthusiastic, and highly aggressive and partisan primary supporter of Kerry's, I inevitably became an early, enthusiastic, and highly aggressive opponent of Governor Dean's.  But that was in spite of the undeniable attraction of the movement he was riding. I became convinced very early that DNC chair was the perfect role for him, and I think it was close to a year ago that I was first saying so on du... many of the criticisms I leveled at Dean during the primaries are not valid when applied to the DNC chair job and can even be strengths there.  And he certainly proved his ability to be a team player in 2004.

            GO DEAN AND GO DEMS!

            •  Exactly (none)
              Some of Dean's weaknesses in the Presidential campaign--primarily his propensity to shoot from the hip without having thought through the consequences of what he was saying--typically aren't problems for a party chair.  In the primary Dean was viewed by many to be little more than a deeply partisan anti-Bush candidate with only a few things to say good about himself and lots bad to say about Bush.  That was a caricature, but it's almost a requirement for a party chair hoping to be effective as a public advocate for the party.  

              Like boxers, candidates need to know how to avoid and deflect punches, and Dean's not particularly good at that.  But he can throw a punch with the best of them, and that's perfect for a party leader.  

            •  His biggest weakness during the pirmaries (4.00)
              was the knife the democratic party stuck in his back.

              Gore/Dean, that's my story and I am sticking to it.

              by TeresaInPa on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 03:29:11 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  Centrists (none)
          I don't think "not acting like Republicans" is taking aim at centrists. I think Dean is trying to point out that, if we play on the Republican battlefield, we lose. So, guys like Lieberman, who seem to want to show that they are sort of like Republicans, only less so, aren't the answer for the Democratic Party.

          Democrats need to figure out what issues are important to them, and frame the debate accordingly.

          Unless you count his outspokenness on the Iraq War (which I wouldn't), I don't think I've ever heard Dean take a position I wouldn't consider to be "centrist." Balancing the budget, fighting for middle class wages, addressing spiraling healthcare costs, allowing states to make their own gun laws, just off the top of my head, don't really seem all that left-wing to me.

          •  Sort of like Republicans (none)
            I don't think "not acting like Republicans" is taking aim at centrists. I think Dean is trying to point out that, if we play on the Republican battlefield, we lose. So, guys like Lieberman, who seem to want to show that they are sort of like Republicans, only less so, aren't the answer for the Democratic Party.

            I just love this.  We're not taking aim at centrists, no siree.  We're just saying they're "sort of like Republicans."

            •  Lieberman (none)
              What, you think Lieberman is more of a centrist than Dean? I think Lieberman is a right-winger.
            •  I can't speak for mhojo (none)
              but I don't think that "acting like Republicans" is really about how liberal or conservative you are.

              Lieberman, for the most part, is a pretty liberal Senator. He's a hawk on the Middle East and he's got some of that morality police thing going on about the entertainment industry, but that's not why I plan to support a Democratic challenger against him.

              It's because Lieberman apparently doesn't understand that it's pointless to make any compromise or accomodation to the current GOP leadership. He's just giving them "bipartisan" cover. Except the GOP leaders view bipartisanship as date rape.

              Same thing with the "Democratic wing of the Democratic Party". Dean's certainly more of a moderate than Kerry ever was. He just thinks the opposition party should be the opposition.

              Is Grossman a flaming liberal? Ickes? Look at the delegates who were backing Dean before the IA flameout. That was an incredible cross-section of the party.

              My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right. Sen Carl Schurz

              by Bill Rehm on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:37:45 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  ARGHH!! (4.00)
          "His speech on the opening of his candiacy for the DNC chair was a veiled hit at the centrists."

          Ferrchirssakes, Howard Dean IS a centrist! The damn party has moved so far to the right that we've forgotten what "center" is. Sheesh.

          •  well then (none)
            the people that call themselves centrists took it personally. He may be one but isn't perceived that way. So let's mend some fences.
            •  Better Yet (none)
              Why don't we all just knock down your fence a take a collective pee on your rosebushes? I'll try to get it on the next Meetup agenda.
            •  Hmm (none)
               Tell you what. I'll get RIGHT on the phone with Dean and let him know he needs to kiss your ass a lot, or you'll snark on blogs.

                I'm sure he'll get RIGHT on that.

            •  Speak for yourself (none)
              You're really pulling this out of your ass. You've provided no evidence of this simmering resentment among centrists. It seems to be yours and yours alone.

              If Howard Dean sends you an engraved invitation, do you promise to quit whining?

              •  Depends (none)
                What are they serving for dinner?  Is it a cash bar?  Will he get to take home the centerpieces?
              •  I would love to sit down (none)
                with Howard Dean and talk with him. He doesn't drink so I probably wouldn't either. But that is more than I can say for many of you when the shoe is on the other foot, would you want to sit down and talk shop with Al From? He may not be as charismatic as the Governor but he sure does know alot.

                He wouldn't even have to send me an engraved invite, an email would do but yes, I would plan on taking the center pieces and perhaps the cuttlery bc I need some new stuff.

                •  Here is your precious Al From: (none)
                  www.bullmooseblog.com :
                  Tuesday, February 01, 2005 White House Memo Revealed

                  The Moose Intelligence Service discovered this apparent top secret Administration communication.

                  To: Wormwood
                  Fr: K.R.

                  I am uncertain whether it is your determined stealth intervention or our adversary's suicidal predilection that explains this positive development. You have infiltrated the highest levels of the opposition party and appear to be determining their fate on our behalf.

                  I must admit that I did not think that this would be possible, dear servant. My cup runneth over with my deep appreciation. I am hardly worthy to be your mentor. I directed you to put in place that man that is a scream as the leader of our adversaries and you are on the cusp of fulfilling my directive. Another sign that the Lord is on our side!

                  Over the past two years, we have discovered that the weakness of our foe is in the areas of values and national security. They are perceived by many in the heartland as northeastern elitists who believe that southerners all drive prick-up trucks adorned with confederate flags. I commend you for placing an individual to lead our foes who personifies all of these weaknesses.
                  Not only that, he was the subject of international ridicule and late night comedians.

                  My gratitude to you is without boundaries!

                  We must restrain our glee over this apparent development. Last time this individual came forward, we were far too obvious in our preference. I, too, was guilty of premature elation. Rather, we must now prepare for the aftermath. I have consequently directed my minions to prepare all of the opposition work. The task is far too easy. Consider this gem - he once suggested that Osama should not be prejudged before he has a jury trial. I kid you not.

                  Our friends at the talk shows and Fox will spread the word. Just look how we assaulted two war heroes! We have plans to hold press conferences with party switchers in reaction to the election. The ads are in the can to associate our foes' office holders with their new leader.

                  The question I keep asking myself is are our foes so witless or are your efforts so sublime? It is as if our adversaries are mimicking the Heavens Gate cult and donned the purple veils and black nikes to enter the hereafter!

                  My friend, for over thirty years since I learned my trade at the feet of my marvelously evil master - the late and great RMN, we have employed cultural wedge issues to gain and retain power. Your efforts have made my task so much easier.

                  I am indebted to you.

      •  vindictiveness and revenge (none)
        are inappropriate.  There does seem to be a desperate need for housecleaning.  People in high places who are doing more harm than good, and who don't want to step aside.  Sometimes it's the Peter principle, other times plain corruption.  If someone has managed to set anchor in the middle of a nice nexus of money flow, it's extremely difficult to dislodge him without shedding blood.

        Some deadwood can be taken care of with lateral promotions or quiet payoffs to get out of the way.  But, I think there will be worse cases, of people sucking in enough money that they mistake it for ideological commitment to whatever obstructive thing they do.

        In order to reform the Dems, Dean will need more than grassroots enthusiasm and leadership by example.  He's going to have to alter the money flow through the party, which is sort of like changing the course of mighty rivers.  As we know, the ability to do that goes alongside being faster than a speeding bullet, more powerful than a locomotive, and able to bend steel in one's bare hands.  It's not easy.

        If anyone has it in him, it's Dean.  I just hope he knows what he's getting into.

        •  The river has already turned (none)
          Compare the amount of money spent, and how the majority of it was raised, by Gore, vr.s Kerry.  The river has already shifted it's flow- at this point, it's the ABDs (or a largish fraction thereof) who want to shift it back.  How?  "Bloggers leave."

          Brian

          Laws, sausages, and software- once you know how they're made, you'll never trust them ever again.

          by bhurt on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:50:33 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Um, look at the DNC chair campaign (none)
            A lot of the campaigning seemed to be about how much money the candidates were willing to promise to steer to state party chairs.  Dean made one of the better offers, saying he'd fund full-time salaries for several people in each state ($250k per state, 50 states = $12.5 million, certainly achievable and probably a good idea, but definitely not pocket change even for the DNC).

            So there's X dollars coming into the central DNC coffers whether it's from fat cats or grass roots.  And yes, Dean changed the dynamics of bringing it in.  Once it's in, it goes back out to state parties, consultants, etc.  That is the issue here, deciding who it goes to on the way out, not in.  Many, many party hacks have carved themselves comfortable sinecures in the middle of that flow, doing nicely enough for themselves that it warps their perceptions of how best to take back the country.  If whatever the DNC is doing now is making them rich, it must be good, and why mess with a good thing?  

            This is an absolutely standard problem in any entrenched organization and it's quite hard to deal with.  

    •  Why Throw A Skunk Onto This Thread? N/T (none)

      Iraq is deja vu all over again.

      by chuco35 on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 11:39:49 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Dr. Dean (4.00)
      ... has already reached out to the opposition. He has done so all along. Some have accepted, some have rebuffed. The vindictiveness and revenge and such you mention have been on the part of the opposition and expressed in some of the frustration of his supporters. You'd be hard pressed to find a case of such politically inept behavior on his part. Quite the opposite in fact.

      "Do what you can, with what you have, where you are." - Theodore Roosevelt

      by Andrew C White on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 11:42:48 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I concur (none)
        taht others have meant to do him harm in his race for the Presidency but extending the olive branch to them is a big deal. We are dealing with some pretty sensitive egos and I think that if Dean called Al From and said that he would like to meet with him and talk out the differences and possibly even hear what Al has to say face to face--he would come across as the bigger/classier man--and put some nerves to rest on the center left.

        DO you think that is possible?

        •  Of course it's possible. (none)
          It's just not a very good idea.
          •  Well (none)
            I disagree. You don't make peace with your friends and as we all remember from November 2nd--we are a smaller party now. We need each other. There has to be a dialogue and if the folks that represent the two sides that seem to disagree the most cannot sit down and talk about their differences then we are in a bit of a bind.
            •  We're a smaller party because (none)
              the right-centrists have already jumped ship, sold out the middle-class, and gone Republican. It's already too late to placate the centrists because they LEFT or they LOST.  If we're still two sides, centrists vs. lefties, we're already doomed to failure because we're going against a party that only has one side and isn't trying to "act like Democrats."

              For the Democratic Party to succeed, we need to find common ground on a variety of issues and hold our ground on those issues, just as the Republicans have done.  If we're still talking about "placating the Centrists" and making no discernable divide while the Republican party keeps running from the hard Right, that's a long-term losing solution.  You don't show leadership by following the cart.

              What do the Republicans do with their two sides, right and moderate?  They let the moderates go screw and set a strict ideological divide based on strong, disciplined stands and consistent, coded language.  Why is our road to success different if the majority of Americans actually agree with the Democrats' policy stances?

        •  Recipe for Lasanga (none)
          In honor of Garfield...

          Open freezer.
          Microwave until warm and gooey.
          Open mouth and swallow in one bite.

          After that go take a nap, Garfield.

          LL

          Lefty Limblog - It is time to WIN instead of "Appease and Cringe". Fight the Rethugs!

          by LeftyLimblog on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:09:28 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  From, Dean, and centrism (4.00)
          I am not, and never have been a Deaniac.  I don't hate Dean, and I was glad he attacked Bush openly, but I have friends who've organized in Vermont and none of them ever thought of him as a progressive.  They saw him as a DLC centrist who had to be dragged reluctantly to support progressive policies.  We're not talking Bernie Sanders, here.

          Now, as far as From is concerned:  I certainly hope that you don't use the term "centrist" to mean "DLCer" -- because from where I stand, the sooner the DLC disappears the better.  From is wrong on the issues, spends most of his time attacking the Left (because I think he hates the Left more than he hates the Right), and is funded by precisely the big corporations who are the root of most of our problems in the first place.

          Dean should probably meet with him to keep his enemies closer to him than his friends.  But make no mistake, jettisoning the DLC will make the Dems' ship sail much truer, lighter, and faster.

          "Run, comrade, the old world is behind you!" -- Situationist graffito, 1968

          by Pesto on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:40:52 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Can I get a... (none)
            "I certainly hope that you don't use the term "centrist" to mean "DLCer" -- because from where I stand, the sooner the DLC disappears the better.  From is wrong on the issues, spends most of his time attacking the Left (because I think he hates the Left more than he hates the Right), and is funded by precisely the big corporations who are the root of most of our problems in the first place."

            AMEN BRUTHA!

            "Do what you can, with what you have, where you are." - Theodore Roosevelt

            by Andrew C White on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 02:24:19 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  Oh yes.. (none)
            From can probably share some serious wisdom about losing. I mean, Dean's only lost a primary and he's got those damn five wins as Governor. He can't hope to play in From's league.
        •  I think you missed the key... (none)
          point of my statement. He has been doing this all along. This is not some new revelation.

          As for From... well... you don't want to hear my opinion of him or my views on where he and his should end up.

          "Do what you can, with what you have, where you are." - Theodore Roosevelt

          by Andrew C White on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 02:22:49 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  My advice to those... (none)
          "and put some nerves to rest on the center left."

          on the center left is that they stop listening to the likes of From and Reed, put their pre-conceived notions aside, and actually pay attention to what Dr. Dean has been saying and doing. The only ones threatened by Gov. Dean are those that having been destroying the party on behalf of their corporate overlords.

          "Do what you can, with what you have, where you are." - Theodore Roosevelt

          by Andrew C White on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 02:30:14 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  A challenge. (none)
            I have a challenge to all you people who think Dean is a moderate.  Could you please explain to us why he is a moderate without using the word "corporate" or other derivations thereof?

            If you can't, you might stop to think about why moderates find your defense of Dean's moderation unconvincing.

            •  He's moderate (4.00)
              because he doesn't have an overwhelming ideological axe to grind. He is approach to problem-solving is pragmatic and reliant on common sense. He is a consensus builder. Moderate means he isn't an extremist -- he's not particularly politically correct and the only things he's extreme about are the need to offer quality healthcare to ALL our citizens, and leveling the playing field in any way possible so that America retains a middle class. He's also against unnecessary wars of imperialism. What is immoderate about any of these positions? For many years they were the defining characteristics of the American mainstream's positions.

              A free society is a place where it's safe to be unpopular. -Adlai Stevenson.

              by barb in albq on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 03:20:13 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  Take a look at his record... (none)
              ... as Governor of Vermont for 11 years. I think you'll find what you are looking for.

              Counter question... how come those who are moderates now look like or can be painted as if they were flaming liberals?

              If you can't do that without saying things like green and nader, you might stop to think about why liberals find the (your?) defense of "moderate" or "centrist" Democrats unconvincing... yea verily even aggravating, frustrating and even pissing me (us) off.

              "Do what you can, with what you have, where you are." - Theodore Roosevelt

              by Andrew C White on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 07:59:52 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Re: Take a look at his record... (none)
                Counter question... how come those who are moderates now look like or can be painted as if they were flaming liberals?

                Because they do an about-face and start opposing free trade, attack President Clinton, endorse conspiracy theories about 9/11, suggest it's a bad thing that Saddam is gone, etc.

                True, Dean did many of these things sub rosa, using code words and insinuations, but the totality of his comments made his stance perfectly clear.

                From this, I conclude that one of two things is going on.

                One possibility is that whatever his record as governor of Vermont, he's changed ideologically.  Maybe he had a genuine ideological change of heart, rather like Justice Stevens on appointment to the Supreme Court.  Or maybe he was being blown around like a leaf in the wind by the Deaniacs.  Neither possibility is very flattering.

                The other possibilty is that he didn't really believe what he said during the primaries and that he intended to return to the center once elected.  

                But the problem here is that in a political campaign, ultimately we must judge the candidate's platform at face value.  That is particularly true when it would have been blisteringly easy for Dean to give a signal that he had not abandoned his centrist ideology.  And of course, lack of conviction is not a Good Thing in the post-911 political world.

    •  Even Her Metaphor Is Revealing (none)
      Donna Brazile knows it, but doesn't understand it ...

      The bigger fish in the Democratic pond (the party is still swimming upstream) are truly bottom feeders eating away their young, casting aside callously their base and ignorant of the sharks circling our old coalitions.

      So, which is it, Donna? A pond? Or a stream, complete with a current?

      The big fish may believe they're in a pond, but they're drifting down the river of politics ... in a current, you either fight the flow, or you're washed out to sea ... if these big fish refuse to swim, let them go ...

      vote early - vote often

      by wystler on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 11:52:41 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Um, what...? (4.00)
      Dean did his utmost to get Kerry elected.
      He did his utmost to get Dems elected up and down the ticket.
      He didn't pull a Nader (in fact, he took Nader on, to stem any potential bleeding of Dem votes to the Nader candidacy)
      He kept his grassroots network active AND told them to get behind Kerry

      So, when you talk about vindictiveness and revenge, what exactly, are you talking about?

      Are you talking about his attitude toward the current administration?

      If so, well, I definitely think vitriol, at least, is called for.

      •  No (none)
        I am talking pre-election...reaching out to the DLC and moderate dems. Put them at ease.
        •  The DLC has no beef with Dean (4.00)
          Al From does.

          Look, you really don't know what you're talking about. I've followed this whole soap opera for the last two years. At the DLC meeting that preceded the first From Nastygram, several members stood up and defended Dean, citing their previous work with him during his tenure as governor.

          In addition, Bill Clinton walked out of that meeting and immediately granted an interview to the AP in which he praised Gov. Dean's tenure in Vermont, calling his children's health program a shining example of New Dem policy.

          The next morning, From and Bruce Reed fired that first shot across the bow. Of course, the fact that they were allegedly advising two of Dean's primary rivals had nothing to do with it, right?

          If anyone is dividing this party, it's people like From and Lieberman, who never miss a chance to paint the whole rest of the party as "out of touch." It's fine to disagree on policy, but when you start lip-syncing Republican talking points to fire on members of your own party, you've become a problem.

        •  You don't get it (none)
          Dean's philosopies are largely moderate.

          His tactics are not. But desperate times call for desperate measures.

          And why should, pre-election, when Kerry was the nominee - duh! - should Dean reach out to the DLC? Dean has his PAC. They have theirs. What did they want from Dean? What would Dean want from them?

          As for reaching out to the DLC, I really believe that Dean should reach out and pat Al From on the back.....right before shoving his face into a toilet for a swirlie.

    •  olive branches (4.00)

      I am willing to become a Dean convert if and when he is rady to put forth the olive branch to those that torched him in Iowa.

      The irony of this statement is that Dean's been throwing olive branch after olive branch at the center right Democrats you describe since he withdrew from the race last Februrary.  Those same center right Democrats have, in turn, continued to pick at Dean and his supporters with snide comments ranging from Begala's line about having "the grown ups back in charge of the party" (scroll down) to Donnie Fowler's recent missive about oranges and orange juice.

      Dean will work with the DLC wing either way, but magnanimity is a two way street, and the DLC wing could make life easier for all involved by remembering that.

      The Devil crept into Heaven, God slept on the 7th, the New World Order was born on September 11th - IT<

      by tomaxxamot on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:00:30 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  First off (none)
        Love the name tomaxxamot; I used to have those ones and thought they were the coolest.

        yes, I agree, it is a two way street but someone has to get the party started by initiating direct contact with the other. I think it would be incredible if Howard Dean called Al from and asked him what he thought about the future of the party and how they could work together.

        •  I think (none)
          The problem here is what you mean by 'work with". I have the sneaking suspicion that this translates to "support all of what he wants". Uh uh. Pay face saving lip service (just like those guys did with others when they owned the court), sure.

          Being a figure head for business as usual? No.

          •  If (none)
            Howard Dean is the centrist that a great deal of people claim he is, then what is the problem with them meeting and talking it out.
            •  South African Whites after the end of Apartheid (none)
              that is what you sound like.

              The amount of  fear they had after the abolishment of aprthied was directly relative to the amount of hatred they metted out or condoned. The most wicked promoter of aparthied were the most fearful of the Blacks. Those who had lived their lives apathetic to the horrors of aparthied took a wait and see attitude. Those who had fought against aparthied embraced the change.

            •  Nothing (none)
              If by that you mean showing up, nodding your head, and pretty much patting Frommie on the head and saying "good boy, I'll take it under advisement".

              If, as i suspect, you mean listening rapturously and then implimenting everything he says, then forget it.

              It would be nice if you would address that point.

              •  I mentioned it in another post (none)
                But here you go again. We need to be repackaged---not in the usual left/right debate but with NEW ideas on new issues and old ones. I think that sitting down and talking the two may be able to decide where they can work together. That would be great. You know Dean isn't going to soak up everything that From tells him to do; nor should he. But there can be a dialog. I don't see any problem with that.
                •  Fair enough (none)
                  Just so he understands that he isn't driving the bus anymore. The sick feeling I have is that when no one is willing to play figurehead for the old power structure, they'll start backstabbing fast and furious...regardless of any outreach efforts.
                  •  It isn't driving the bus (none)
                    It is working out differences and moving forward.

                    From, Will Marshall, and Bruce Reed didn't get where they are bc they are stupid. Dean would be well served to unite their resources under his umbrella rather than pushing them out into the cold.

                    •  See the above post (none)
                      From the Bull Moose (DLC) blog.

                      Now, ya wanna talk about that "reaching out" to poor, yet "brilliant" Al From again?

                    •  If you are concerned (none)
                      It is working out differences and moving forward.

                       about working out those particular differences (with From, Reed and Marshall) it's not Howard Dean you should be concerned about (and certainly not from a revenge standpoint), it's us and several million people like us. We 'liberal activist elites' are really very pissed off with those guys.

                      Lots of us have tried to communicate and 'work out' differences with them for years and to say they've been non-responsive would be an understatement. Likewise, from a purely pragmatic viewpoint, one which looks at results, I must say I disagree with you that those are smart guys. Unless, of course, defanging a formerly vibrant political party which represented women, minorities, labor and the poor is something to be regarded as an achievement.
                      My take is that the DLC disliked Dean so intensely because he reached out to folks like us and met with an enthusiastic response. What do you think?
                       

                      "...the definition of a gaffe in Washington is somebody who tells the truth but shouldn't have." Howard Dean

                      by colleen on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 07:13:41 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  I have explained this alot (none)
                        It is not you and the liberal masses. It is the perception of the desire to go backwards to the 1960's weak on defense; we don't want to crush a daisy because every living thing has a soul; let's be a reactionary group that is happy with the status quo.

                        What the D's don't have is a set of core values and an ideology that comes off of them like the conservative movement does. (here is when you give me a list) but instead comes together once every 4 years and poll tests some issues and tells the people what their agenda is. The conservative movement just pulled off a 30 year effort of creating intellectual thought that progressed their ideology. The take over of the House, Senate, and Presidency has been a long time coming. Every year since '68 we have seen a drop in Democratic identification. In '02 for the first time we were on equal parity and this year for the first time since the Depression more people Id'd themselves as R's. That is scary. The thought is that when you get a moderate voter to vote for you it is like you get two votes. One vote that is going for you and one that is not going to you opponent.

                        So what they have tried to do is create a force against the rising conservative tide. So with American Progress, DLC, adn Brookings--we have a $30-40 million dollar annual budget that goes towards intellectual development on the left while Heritage/AEI/Cato+ 39 others have around a $300 million annual investment in shifting the country to the right.

                        I disagree with the defanged part too. Two terms of Clinton, greatest growth in the middle class, lowest crime rates in years. Then W came along and said he was going to continue the prosperity but at a cheaper cost and look where we are now.

                •  Let me get this straight... (none)
                    We need new ideas, and the best way to get those is for Dean to go take advice from Al From?

                    In that line of thinking, I'm pretty sure I just broke my arm. But before I go to the doctor, I better ask my dog what he thinks I should do.

                •  From? No (none)
                  Dean has no reason to talk to the guy except maybe to nod his head and then ignore everything From said.
                  Fraom and Reed are nothing more than a couple of guys who created a company to soak up some corporate money.  When they can not longer hand otu money at election time,  the coporate donors to the DLC will dry up and the jokers will have to get a useful job.

                  Gore/Dean, that's my story and I am sticking to it.

                  by TeresaInPa on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 03:15:00 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

          •  I think it means (none)
            what Republicans mean when they say they want to work with Democrats.

            That Dean will be acceptable to the DLC if he capitulates to Al From's increasing unrealistic dictates.

            Alas, that will not happen.  One does not dictate positions from a position of weakness.  

            However, I guess we should thank our friend for playing, and hope that he shows his support for fellow Democrats by working phonebanks and canvassing neighborhoods, in order to get Democrats in his state elected, rather than shilling for Al From.

        •  well... (none)

          I think it would be incredible if Howard Dean called Al from and asked him what he thought about the future of the party and how they could work together.

          How do you know that Dean hasn't already done that?  If he had and From wasn't receptive, then Dean might have chosen to just not announce the call so as to let both From and himself save some face.

          The DLC deserve a place at the table and I'd expect Dean to give them one.  For their part, the DLC need to recognize that the "New Democrat" strategy only worked with Clinton and that since he left office, it's cost us three elections in a row.  They shouldn't be fired or driven out of the party (ideological purges are bad no matter who's behind them) but it's past time for them to get demoted.

          The Devil crept into Heaven, God slept on the 7th, the New World Order was born on September 11th - IT<

          by tomaxxamot on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 02:22:58 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  The New Math, yet again (none)
            The DLC deserve a place at the table and I'd expect Dean to give them one.  For their part, the DLC need to recognize that the "New Democrat" strategy only worked with Clinton and that since he left office, it's cost us three elections in a row.

            When was DLC strategy tried in the past three elections?  Not once.  Gore abandoned Clinton, campaigned on a populist platform, and later distanced himself still further from the DLC.  

            His one sop to the DLC -- the choice of Lieberman -- was the only reason we won Florida.  Absent Lieberman, Florida would have voted just as it did in 2004: close, but a discernable win for Bush.

            In 2002, we were treated to a hodgepodge of tactics, but running on an anti-war platform, propagating nutso conspiracy theories about the death of Wellstone, and orchestrating a highly partisan funeral for the man were hardly staples of the DLC playbook.  

            In 2004, the DLC were largely supporting Edwards or Clark.  Kerry was from the Kennedy wing of the party, not the DLC.

          •  You are correct that the DLC has done nothing but (none)
            lose.  They have helped us right out of power in every branch of government.  Why do they deserve a place at the service.  They are nothing more than a consulting firm.  Let's let them go out of business.

            Gore/Dean, that's my story and I am sticking to it.

            by TeresaInPa on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 03:17:56 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  Clue upload; (none)
          Howard Dean very likely believes that Al From has nothing to offer the party.

          Sorry, but the DLC is but one PAC within the party. They caught a rising star with Clinton but as I say, Clinton is a rule unto himself. He would have won if he was DLC, ABC, XYZ or from the rhubarb pie wing of the party.

          We tried it the DLC's way. Their political philosophies are compromised, their appeasement tactics suck, and they're vicious shits. Out to the curb with them.

    •  That's a dumb comment (none)
      Dean campaigned tirelessly for Kerry, one of the men behind the torch bearers.  What more do you want?
      •  Isn't it obvious? (none)
          He wants Dean to become From's bitch. He's got the same definition of "working together" that George Bush does.

          He wants Dean to "work with" Al From by doing whatever the hell Al From says.

    •  So... Kerry and Gephardt (none)
      were the ones who mostly set the flames that burned him in Iowa, and he turned around and worked his butt off for Kerry (contrast with Bill Bradley, who gave Al Gore one tepid endorsement and skulked off home - and he wasn't even mistreated - could've delivered NH and saved us all),  How is Dean vindictive?  He HAS reached out to those who treated him VERY BADLY.
    •  Already done. Say thank you. (none)
      Howard Dean swallowed his pride, and stood side by side with John Kerry, who had been extremely vicious about Dean in the primaries, and campaigned his heart out for Kerry. He raised money for him, he pushed the grassroots to their reluctant acceptance of Kerry.

      What more can you ask? You can't ask him to do more than that. He did the right thing. That's enough.

    •  defensive reactions (none)
      will probably be made by folks more interested in revenge than moving past dysfunctionality.  i see a lot of them.

      but you shouldn't doubt dean either.  Dean deserves and will need -- from even the doubters -- the same respect and support he gave to kerry after kerry won the nomination.  

      ask yourself, did kerry reach out to his democratic party doubters?  no.  my point:  he shouldn't have to (which is where i get annoyed at deaniacs).  but now, guess what?  neither should dean.  he should be 100% focussed on winning elections, not on earning yours or my support.

      •  Enough. (none)
        did kerry reach out to his democratic party doubters?  no.  my point:  he shouldn't have to (which is where i get annoyed at deaniacs).

        It turned out there were very valid reasons for doubting Kerry's ability to beat Bush.

        He got my vote and I do not like the man or what he stands for. He got money and time, too. What more do you want?

        •  what do you think kerry stands for? (none)
          instead of polarizing our party, lets get down to specifics.

          besides winning primaries, what did kerry say that's so diametrically opposed to dean.  dean said we should stay in iraq too, you know.  post-invasion.

          if dean was nominated and lost, do you think there would be reasons to doubt HIS message?

          i most sincerely doubt it.  so why should anyone doubt kerry's message just cause he lost?

          what if dean was nominated and his whole entire platform was "ALL IWR votes were wrong," and still lost.  i bet you'd still support him, which is fine.  no one, no, i should be more specific, i know some people do, and i don't really agree with them, specifically, let me say this:  i do NOT criticize your loyalty to dean.  what if a faction of the dem party proceded to absolutely trash dean within an inch of his life cause an anti-IWR vote message ALSO turned out to be a losing ticket????  I would still support dean.  it's only people like you who refuse to still support kerry cause he lost.

          before you do anything at all, before you start pretending i don't support dean, answer those  questions directly.

          what i wanted to add to my reply to the person before you is this:  i am less worried about centrist dems ability to support dean unconditionally than i am about deaniacs ability to continue to support dean after 2 or 3 years of his tenure as dnc chair.

          i'll be keeping an eye out.  it will please me immensely to see the true nature of deaniacs when they turn on dean himself when he responds to the realities (realities he never had to face in the primaries) of political discourse in america.  

          •  Conscience. (none)
            I doubted Kerry  from the beginning because he voted for the war. That was and is still a critical issue for me. I do, you know, get to have a conscience about the issues. I do get to say what's important to me. Once he was the nominee, I tried, honestly, to look past that. But ultimately, the American people didn't buy his spin. And in my heart, neither could I.

            Did I still support him with my vote, my money and my time? Did I make up and give out (mostly) or sell "Because I love America I will vote for John Kerry" merchandise?  I ask again: what more do you want? If you want a soul-deep accord with Kerry and a true belief in who he is and what he stands for, you can keep on wanting, because I just don't have that to give, and I don't feel compelled to anyway.

            If the whole world turned on Dean because of the IWR vote and his position on the war, I wouldn't. It would be like turning on myself. Unlike Bush, I can admit a mistake. Opposing the war was not a mistake.

            deaniacs ability to continue to support dean after 2 or 3 years of his tenure as dnc chair. ...  it will please me immensely to see the true nature of deaniacs when they turn on dean himself when he responds to the realities (realities he never had to face in the primaries) of political discourse in america.

            The future will be what it is. If you go looking hard enough for "deaniacs turning against Dean" then I'm sure you will find some little thing you can spin that way, and crow your triumph. Good luck! Enjoy!

            I don't know why you think this will happen, or want it to. It's contemptuous of Dean and Dean's supporters. It reflects much more on you than it does on Dean and Dean's supporters.

            •  no you don't (none)
              get to say what's important to you.  scant perusal of your comment history shows you care more about making people lie in their shit (http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2005/2/1/14280/98027/69#69), and that, while the rest of us will never rest until bushco is out of the whitehouse, you'll never rest until you can find out who created those ads (http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2005/2/1/14280/98027/65#65).  dammit.

              and don't reply to this. (just cutting to the chase here, your act, like your agenda isn't hard to follow here either.)

              thanks in advance.

              •  Uh, no. (none)
                You also don't get to define what is most important to me, or make up some mythical either/or situation.  

                If I say that finding out who did those ads is important to me, that is not irreconcilable with the fact that I also want Bush out of power. Both of those things are important to me. That's like saying if you like apples, you can't like peaches. It's not one or the other. That's just poor logic.

                And getting back to the real point, besides your hissy fit, you want me to embrace Kerry because, why? What does it matter now? What did it matter then? I gave my vote, money and effort IN SPITE OF my very strong opposition to his war vote.  Nothing's going to change about that. And I don't apologize for it. We had no reason to go into Iraq, and tens of thousands of people have died needlessly.  Now you feel Kerry is owed, by me, some soul-deep affection for him in spite of the fact that every day, the evidence mounts and mounts about how wrong he was? Uh, no.

                I have found your comments pointless. Now you're all huffy and mad at me. That's also pointless. Don't know what your problem is. Don't care. Have a snit by yourself if you really need to.

                •  important? (none)
                  or the last thing you ever do?

                  make up your mind, girl.

                  and i told you not to respond and you can't respect that simple request.

                  did i say "embrace kerry"?  or are you trying to define what i'm trying to say?  pot.  meet kettle.

                  i bet you are.  you're on the south rim of the grand canyon and i can see your act from the north rim, hon.  don't need hubble to figure you out.

                  trans.  parent.

                  •  You... (none)
                    and i told you not to respond and you can't respect that simple request.

                    You didn't request anything. You commanded. I didn't obey.

                    When this conversation started, you wanted to know what my problem is with Kerry, and I told you. You chose not to accept that and instead invented this idea that my only political goal could be the ad-campaign investigation, to the exclusion of all others. Yes, it is important to me, but so are my thoughts on Alberto Gonzales' confirmation. And on several other topics, quite a few really, to which I have responded or offered thoughts here on Kos.

                    You've created this false dichotomy. Maybe it makes sense to you. But in your world. In mine, it does not.  

                    Good luck with your problems.  

                    •  when this coversation started (none)
                      i was responding to this guy....

                      http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2005/2/1/14280/98027/2#2

                      which clearly means you started this conversation with me.  and you're losing it.

                      dork.

                      you're the one who said this:

                      "Because if it's the last thing I ever do, butts will be kicked because of that ad."

                      not me.

                      your priorities are crystal clear.

                      •  What color is the sky on your world? (none)
                        I feel like laughing out loud at your absurdity. I expect children, not particularly bright ones, to have such problems figuring out logical concepts, but this is my first instance of coming across an adult like this.

                        You evidently have your panties in a bunch about this statement of mine:

                        If it's the last thing I ever do, I'll find out about that ad campaign.

                        Your problem, again, using small words, is that you set up a false either/or situation.

                        Just because it's important for me to do, and I'm determined to do it, does not mean that it's the only thing I want to do, or even that it's a priority. I intend to, whether you like it or not, live a full life, and do a lot of things, politically and personally, besides that one thing.

                        I have stated it is something I want to do, something I'm determined to do. That is not logically equal to it being my only priority.

                        I honestly feel sorry for you at this point. You are obviously itching to make some personal stand against me and you come up with this statement and then declare it to be the only thing I care about? Uh, no.

                        :::shakes head::: No. Your problem is, I'm happy to say, not mine.

                        •  not my problem (none)
                          not my words:

                          your words:  "Because if it's the last thing I ever do, butts will be kicked because of that ad."

                          either/or situation is yours. pottery barn rule, babe.  you own it.

                          sky is blue in my world.

                          it's a beautiful day.

                          "Because if it's the last thing I ever do," establishes priority.  clearly.

                          •  This is just stupid. Just plain stupid. (none)
                            I'm sorry, but you're just being stupid here.  What are you? Rain Man? You've got Aspberger's Syndrome? You don't think three dimensionally? Well, I do, and you're wasting my time.

                            ONE MORE TIME, for the LAST TIME:

                            I said "If it's the last thing I ever do" NOT "It will be the only thing I ever do."

                            My statement establishes DETERMINATION not PRIORITY. Those are not exclusionary concepts!

                            "If it's the last thing I ever do" speaks to the quality of my perserverence, resolve, and persistence in the task.  "If it's the last thing I ever do" means one is determined to see that task is accomplished, at some undetermined time in the future.

                            It doesn't necessarily mean right now. It doesn't necessarily mean that it's the only thing one will do.

                            Ask someone else to explain the logic to you. I'm done here. Carry on with your inane reasoning and hysterical hate if you need to.

                          •  "the last thing i ever do" (none)
                            establishes priority.  clearly.  

                            which clearly means if you had one last thing to do in life.... one last wish ... we know what it is.  and it's not to get bush out of office or to get a dem elected.

                            it's to punish other dems for not agreeing with you.  i never said you weren't determined.

                            just like you're attempting to punish me with a troll rating.

                          •  You're embarrassing yourself. (none)
                            Go ask people if "if it's the last thing I ever do" means that it's the only thing you'll ever do.

                            Go on. Really. Try. Several people. Ask if it's the same thing.

                            Really. People will stare at you. Or, if you're not lucky, laugh. Because it's really really dumb.

                            Problem? Yours. Laughing? Me.

                            Excuse me, but I'm going to end my lunch break and get back to my life, and just to let you know, probably at no time this afternoon am I going to actively investigate the ad campaign thing. It's not, actually, no matter how much you stomp your feet and pee in your pants, my only priority See? Multiple priorities! What a concept!

                            Haaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahaaaaa!

                          •  check. i did that. (none)
                            "yeah, 'the last thing i ever do' would mean it's the no. 1 priority to me."  -- co-worker A.

                            "sure.  if i said 'it's the last i ever do,' then that would make it the most important thing to me."  -- co-worker B.

                            BimCat:  Hey Joyce, If I said "it's the last thing i ever do", what would that mean to you?

                            Joyce:  It would mean that's the most important thing to you in your life.

                            only anecdotal evidence so far.  but i took you at your word, and gave it a shot.

                            shall i keep going?

                            holding you accountable to your own words is futile and boring, actually.  i've noticed that.  you're definitely right about that.

                          •  I doubt you asked, (none)
                            but if you did ask, you asked the wrong question.  

                            You asked if it was the most important thing in life. You didn't ask if it was the only thing in life.

                            I'm saying it's not the only thing in my life. Nor my only political priority. Nor even the number one. But something I WILL see accomplished.

                            If it's the last thing I ever do, I will see Florence, Italy some time in my life. I really will do that. But am I driving to the airport now, immediately, to do it? No. Is it a goal? Yes. A very big one. But do I have a life? Yes. Do I have other goals? Yes.

                            You're a very two-dimensional thinker. I'm surprised you have a job.

                          •  oh but i did ask (none)
                            for the fun of it, cause it's a slow day.

                            and it's a multi dimensional thing to establish a set of priorities.  which is what you did when you said "the last thing i ever do."  the appropriate question is NOT "is it the only thing" cause everyone knows there are always other things.... the appropriate question to ask is clearly:  "is it the most important thing?"  

                            and, until you feel like setting the record straight, we know what the most important thing to you is.

                          •  is troll rating people (none)
                            really the best you can do?
                          •  Yes. (none)
                            I've made it a priority. If it's the last thing I ever do, I'll troll rate pointless shit from nuisance trolls.

                            :-)

                          •  LOL (none)
                            at least you can admit i was right:

                            "it's to punish other dems for not agreeing with you.  i never said you weren't determined.

                            just like you're attempting to punish me with a troll rating."

                            take care, ok.

                          •  Straight records and warped minds. (none)
                            I have a very difficult time setting a record straight when you can not or will not read, or when you apply irrational, illogical and warped concepts to what is fairly plain.

                            In your mind, such as it is, if I have a lifetime goal, then I cannot have others. In your mind, such as it is, if I am determined to do one thing, I can't be determined to do another. You stated that I am not allowed to define what is important to me. You alleged that I cannot be determined to see Bush out of office because I made the statement about the ad-campaign.

                            Now you demand that the record be straight. It's been straight for quite awhile, making this conversation stupid, annoying, and harassment. That is to say, trollish behaviour on your part.

                            But you want a straight record? Here, let me refresh your recollection.

                            I made a straight-up answer to your warped either/or view here:

                            Where I said:

                            If I say that finding out who did those ads is important to me, that is not irreconcilable with the fact that I also want Bush out of power. Both of those things are important to me. That's like saying if you like apples, you can't like peaches. It's not one or the other. That's just poor logic.

                            and again, there is no mistaking what I said here

                            When this conversation started, you wanted to know what my problem is with Kerry, and I told you. You chose not to accept that and instead invented this idea that my only political goal could be the ad-campaign investigation, to the exclusion of all others. Yes, it is important to me, but so are my thoughts on Alberto Gonzales' confirmation. And on several other topics, quite a few really, to which I have responded or offered thoughts here on Kos.

                            I have established clearly, the following:

                            (1) I am determined that at some future time I will find out who created the Dean/Osama ads and kick their butts and I made the statement that "If it's the last thing I do before I die" as a metaphorical (although I'm sure you'd prefer it to be literal) statement of my level of committment to it
                            (2) this is not my only priority
                            (3) I do not share your unique understanding of "if it's the last thing I ever do" as a statement of sole priority. My understanding of it is as a measure of determination.  

                            The issue is, as it has always been, clear. The discussion is over.  Thank you. Goodbye.

                          •  the record isn't that complex (none)
                            1.  you started this conversation.  i was responding to someone else and you responded to me first.  remember this simple fact when you're talking about who's annoying who and handing out the troll ratings.  if you don't want people to respond to you, then don't respond to them.  that really shouldn't be such a difficult thing to understand.  

                            2.  and, again, i'll take you at your words, what more do people have to go by?  are they to read your mind?  when you say "if it's the last thing i ever do" you are NOT stating your sole priority.  you are stating, just as you say, a measure of determination.  a measure of determination that does not cancel out all others (no one ever said it did, did they?) but does seem to precede all others.  by how much?  i'm not going to guess.

                             
                          •  Ay yi yi (none)
                            Look, let me be even more clear here:

                            My first priority is always going to be to kick Republican butt.

                            One of my other priorities, one which I feel in my heart will also accrue to the benefit of our party, and thus our nation, is to make sure that Democrats who ran the  "Dean/Osama" advertisements are also kicked in the butt.

                            I really don't think it's a fair characterization to say that because of the latter, I'm not sincere about the former. "If it's the last thing I do before I die" is, above all, a figure of speech, and wild interpretations of it to make me seem like I'm gunning for Kerry, still, are just plain wrong. And things like "you don't get to state what's important to you" and "it's clearly a priority" and other snarks are unappreciated belligerance. Don't poke me with a picador and then expect me not to be pissy about it.

                            Priorities shift a lot, due to urgency, and the value we place on the various competing interests. The Osama/Dean thing is always going to be in the back of my mind. If I run across information on it, or find a way to run down more definitive information on it, it'll jump to the front of my mind. And butt kicking will commence. Right now? I really am focused on a strong statement against Gonzales.

                            I apologize for saying something that was unclear to you or anyone, and for my loss of patience with this. But running amuck with a figure of speech and trying to paint me into a corner with it is really ridiculous on your part too.

                          •  ok. same here. (none)
                            My first priority is always going to be to kick Republican butt.

                            i'd be lying if i tried to pretend that's not a given.  

                            at the same time, i like to think just cause something goes without saying doesn't mean it can't ever be said.  a qualifier, now and again, helps us squeamish take their medicine.

                            anyway, in an effort to achieve some detente on the topic itself:  the dean/ads/primary wounds are gonna be with us for a while longer, there will be more than enough time to hash that out.  in the end, from a purely practical perspective, wether i care about dean, kerry, gep, clark or not doesn't matter.  i care about the party.  those ads were not good for the party.  it's the repugs who pull divisive shit.  not us.

                            that said, i don't think the accountability moment will happen in a way that will ever really repair the damage.  sooner or later, we'll have to let it go.  it's enough that guys like frost are now politically bankrupt within the party.  there's some residual support, but he's going nowhere and he knows it.  that train's left the station.  it's enough that kerry is now the poster child for everything wrong with the democratic party and gets his nightly whippings on the daily show.  these things, in and of themselves, are the accountability moments.  they happen in small doses every day.  we won't be rushing the DLC barracks and sending them to the guillotine.    they'll adapt some.  or they won't.  they'll become obsolete.  we evolve.

                            lastly, i'll apologize as well for being stubborn to a fault and for the snark upthread.

                          •  Very cool (none)
                            I understand what you say, and see wisdom in it.

                            I appreciate your accepting my apology. I likewise accept yours.

                            S'Cool. Be well.

  •  Backroom Deals (none)
    What really surprises me is how little leverage anyone beside Dean has right now in this race.  If there was someone with maybe half his total, or even a solid 30 votes, they could start making eyes at some of the still-uncommitteds and try to put together a win for Dean in exchange for something.  But right now, they can't offer anything more than a blip.  Still, Rosenberg could get a COO spot if he endorses Dean now - his odds of winning have to be pretty low and he would work well in a Dean-NC.

    http://csliberals.blogspot.com - member of the Democratic Signal Machine

    by Mikey on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 11:34:13 AM PST

  •  Oh my! (4.00)
    "The bigger fish in the Democratic pond (the party is still swimming upstream) are truly bottom feeders eating away their young...."

    "The bigger fish...?"

    "... bottom feeders...?"

    "... eating... their young...?"

    Oh my.

    "Do what you can, with what you have, where you are." - Theodore Roosevelt

    by Andrew C White on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 11:34:16 AM PST

  •  Donna wants in from the cold (4.00)
    Sounds like she has figured out which way the wind is blowing.
  •  holy mixed metaphors, batman! (4.00)
    "The bigger fish in the Democratic pond (the party is still swimming upstream) are truly bottom feeders..."

    Okay, okay. I've never liked Donna Brazile, who will assume her rightful place alongside Susan Estrich, at the knee of Bob Shrum, among disgracefully bad Democratic campaign operatives, but she has a good point here.

    I've been for Rosenberg all along with Dean as my second choice. Hopefully there's a role for Simon in the emerging org chart.

    I'd like to see Frost run for Senate next year, and leave the party-building to people who are willing to publicly identify with the party.

  •  Today's Endorsements (none)
    Today, Blog for America posted that

    53 new voting members of the DNC, including six entire state delegations, 12 state chairs, 12 vice-chair as well as Mayor Wellington Webb endorsed Governor Dean for Chair of the DNC.

    The state delegations are American Samoa, Colorado, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Hampshire & Oregon.

    If these are not included in Hotline's list, that makes 155 votes.

    Who will be the next one to drop out?

  •  Nice of Brazile... (none)
    ...to come around--I always had the impression that she was anti-Dean and was one of the "establishment".

    She has a good point, tho'---once the race is over, we ALL need to unite against the Repubs--that should be our ONLY focus.

    This is what we Deaniacs did--we rallied around Kerry, gave time and money because we wanted a DEM victory--

    A Dem victory is our GOAL! rah, rah

    •  I think she still is (none)
      She's just hedging her bets.  Not too long ago she was quoted in WaPo saying that "this thing's not over yet."

      Liberal: "I still think it's a respectable word. Its root is "liber," the Latin word for "free," and isn't that what we are all about?"--Mary McGrory

      by mini mum on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:00:46 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The consultant's rule: (none)
        Always be nice to the person who may (or does) control the purse strings.
        •  True (none)
          But it also helps to not trash that person early on.

          BTW, how's your fusion candidate Howmon Rosendean® doing?  He hasn't been on the radar screen lately.

          Liberal: "I still think it's a respectable word. Its root is "liber," the Latin word for "free," and isn't that what we are all about?"--Mary McGrory

          by mini mum on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:22:04 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  exactly (none)
          or something about not getting too excited about what Maureen Dowd says.

          I get the feeling that these people are not much like most of us. I'm not sure if they'd recongize a conviction if they fell over it.

          But whatever--they aren't going away...

          Abortions go up under Republicans. Business is better under Democrats. Pass it on.

          by JMS on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:23:45 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Who is Brazile talking about? (none)
    Who torched Dean? If she's right about the "big fish," who are they and how do we get rid of these assholes?
    •  unity and discipline are the mantra (none)
      not circular firing squad
      •  That's right. (none)
        And you can't have either if you're always looking over your shoulder.

        Look, a lot of the "big fish" that Brazile is talking about don't actually have a constituency. They just don't. At best From has created a club with a relative handful of dues-paying members, but it's not a constituency like it may have been a decade ago.

        Many of the rest of the 'big fish' are failed consultants. Others are failed politicians. There is no need to reach out to them. By definition, THEY will suck up to YOU if you're in power.

        Whoever wins the DNC chair needs to lead. Part of leadership is reaching out to other leaders who have constituencies, even if you don't agree with all of the stances of those leaders. However, another part of being a leader is recognizing when the tail is wagging the dog, when the "hired help" (as is were) is trying to make leadership decisions. IMO, that's what's wrong with Shrum, From, Brazile, and a whole host of these cling-ons. They don't have constituents, they just have big egos and big mouths (and they aren't particularly good spokespeople).  They understand the concept that they can be "in" or "out" and they know being "in" pays much better. Even From gets this. If Dean or Rosenberg wins, he knows HE has to build a bridge to THEM, not the other way around.

        In my opinion...

        •  I agree, but we are talking about (none)
          generalities here. Therefore when you say what you just said with specifics I agree. When you say Democrats without specifying then I try to indicate the goal. Either they will come to us or us to them, but unity and discipline must happen.
        •  I think... (none)
            That this is the moment of the failed consultant. They're suddenly switching to Dean in order to foster the image that they have power, in the hopes Dean retains them.

            I've seen it in business before. The ones with the weakest positions blow damn strongly once the outcome is foreordained.

            She's hoping she can come to Dean later and make a case that she helped him into the chair, so that he'll owe her.

            I get the feeling even she doesn't believe it'll work, but has to try.

    •  There is a long list (1.33)
      • Kerry
      • Gephardt
      • Edwards
      • Clark
      • Kucinich
      All of them contributed to the Osama ads.

      • Hill and Bill Clinton
      • McAuliffe
      • Al From
      • Evans Bayh
      • Joe LIEberman
      • Trippi

      and a string of political operatives and consultants.
      •  Kucinich? (none)
        Did he really contribute to that?  He's the most anti-war of all of them!  I thought he had some principles!  Can you point us to documentation of this?

        Check out my lte archive at http://www.livejournal.com/users/tomletters and feel free to use my ideas for your own lte's.

        by DemDachshund on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 11:59:38 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Wait a minute!!! (none)
        Kerry

        Gephardt

        Edwards

        Clark

        Kucinich

        contributed to the Osama ads? There's evidence of this beyond just some loose associations? Not that I don't think those associations could be tighter than what they appear - but I'm all about hard cold printed out fact.

        Where? How? What?

      •  Primaries are over! (none)
        Politicians will do anything to win--
        We need to get over "who did what" and look FORWARD as an indestructible team.

        There will be more than enough bashing from the Repubs and the media--we don't need to have the Dems bashing our own.

        We have to learn lessons from their playbook--example, much as it disgusted me, McCain did what he could to make his party win [after what the Bushies had done to him]!

        If we want to win, we have to hang together against the outsiders!

        •  Accountability moment. (none)
          we don't need to have the Dems bashing our own.

          They should have thought of that before comparing a long-serving decent and honorable Democrat to be like Osama Bin Laden.

          Sorry, they shit in the bed. I intend to see they lay in it.

          •  Not Even! (none)
            That TV ad didn't compare Dean to OBL; it made the plain point that Dean had no military or foreign policy experience and was not qualified to protect Americans from terrorists. The ad was true and correct.

            Here is the text from the ad.  Show me where it compared Howie to Osama:

            "We live in a very dangerous world and there are those who wake up every morning determined to destroy Western civilization. Americans want a president who can face the dangers ahead, but Howard Dean has no military or foreign policy experience. And Howard Dean just cannot compete with George Bush on foreign policy. It's time for Democrats to think about that, and think about it now."
            If Howard Dean and his weepy followers can't even stand up to a mild challenge to his foreign policy experience from Dems, how the hell could Dean do battle against Rove and the Repugs?  

            I've never seen such pathetic snivelling in my life.  No one ever compared dear Howie to Osama, so get the fuck over it...    

            •  That VO was entirely over a pic (none)
              of OBL.  It was worse than it sounds.  But, mostly, it was Democrats saying Dean didn't have the right stuff to protect us.  That's a rap every Dem has to work hard to beat in a general election, and we've got no business throwing it at each other.

              It wasn't so much the fact of the ad as the fact that Torricelli was the major donor - dishonest, discredited Torricelli.  And labor PACS that were close to Kerry and Gep.  If you're going to attack your opponent in such an ugly way, you should be man enough to own it.  It was very Bush-like.

              •  No (none)
                Torricelli was not "THE" major donor.

                Unions gave $200,000, Leo Hindery and S. Daniel Abraham each gave $100.000, and J. McDonald Williams and Robert G. Torricelli each gave $50,000. And there was nothing illegal or unethical about the ad.

                Can't you whiny Deaniacs get anything right?

                •  Yes we can get lots of things right (none)
                  One thing we can get right is knowing who the back stabbing self promoters are.  They have a right to be scum, and we have a right to run decent human beings against them in the primaries.
                  We can also do our best to make sure they don't get powerful positions in the party.

                   It's called grassroots. And Grassroots are in the house!

                  Gore/Dean, that's my story and I am sticking to it.

                  by TeresaInPa on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:02:34 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

            •  You know Politus (none)
              Your comments about Dean are far less valuable than a syphillitic baboon flinging shit.
              •  Still waiting... (1.50)
                You still have not shown where the ad compared Dean to Osama.  Were you lying about it or just ignorant?

                I am struck by how much the Deaniac horde lives in a fantasy world of its own design...

                •  You're right! (none)
                  It's not an comparison. It's a threat. It's like what Cheney said: "If we do the wrong thing - we'll get hit by terrorists!" Same bullshit.

                  So, please accept my humble apology for stating that it was a comparison to Osama bin Laden. It was the threat of Osama bin Laden.

                  Was it still a vile and uncalled for ad of the worst sort? It was. The stench of a comparison is only slightly different from the stench of a threat. But one wouldn't expect you to get the larger point: that it was a dirty ad. In fact, I'm pretty sure you wish you had written it.

                  And one more correction: I was being extremely unkind to syphillitic baboons to compare them to you. I've seen my share of rabid hate-crazed shit in my life, but you and your hate of Dean and Dean's supporters is beyond it all.

    •  i'm starting to think (none)
      that a little birdy told her about all those fishies.

      The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity. --Yeats

      by JaneKnowles on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:12:17 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Surely You've Heard of (none)
      ... the "Torricelli Wing of the Democratic Party 'Losership'".  

      They took a bunch of corporate cash and ran ads against Dean in Iowa comparing Dean to Osama Bin Laden.

      Same kind of tactics that Rethugs used against Max Cleland a triple amputee vet.

      Nice Dems, huh?

      LL

      Lefty Limblog - It is time to WIN instead of "Appease and Cringe". Fight the Rethugs!

      by LeftyLimblog on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:16:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Nice letter, Donna (none)
    And I believe Dean is the man who's both smart enough to recognize up-and-coming talent and selfless enough to help them rise. Which is just what we need. There are so many bright people with good ideas in the progressive crowd - I read them here everyday.

    Many seem to fault Dean for his occasional outbursts of temper. But my Gawd, who could deal with these current political clowns (and even some of them in our own party)without wanting to scream now and then?

    At the same time, I believe Dean is savvy enough to get that aspect under control. His ideas are based on sound logic, and I think with a bigger stage from which to express them, respect would grow for both Dean and the Dem party.

    •  What outburst of temper??? (none)
      Please stop repeating unfounded rumors.  Thorough searches have been made for manifestations of Dean's alleged temper, with no sightings.  There was one time, while he was governor, that he pounded his fist on his desk.  Other than that, zip.  

      Dean has a calm temperament.  He is passionate.  Don't confuse moral outrage with anger.

      •  Please allow me to clarify (none)
        I guess I was talking primarily about the 'scream' episode.

        Rightly or not, that generated a lot of negative press and also (sadly) invokes negative comments from some of our own folks. I have never understood this circular firing squad mentality, but that's another subject.

        I do notbelieve that Dean is temperamental or unstable. I am sorry if my wording lent that impression. I have watched several of his video talks and find him to be a reasonable man, worthy of our trust.

        What I intended to convey, and perhaps did so poorly, was that if we gave Dr. Dean a chance to speak for our party, that others would come to see him as reasonable also... and by extension, maybe stop to consider that the Democratic message is reasonable.

        I admire Dean's passion. Even if he did have a temper, I wouldn't hold it against him. I can have a terrible temper myself, so I understand such feelings.

        As for moral outrage, there is much to justify it in the current administration. So much so, it's amazing to me that fisticuffs don't break out in the House or Senate daily.

  •  Don't Know Much About AFL (none)
    Don't Know Much About CIO
    Don't Know Much About Donna Brazile
    Don't Know Much About Nancy Pelosi

    But I do know this much sir
    We've got the votes of that I'm sure
    What a wonderful world - Chairman Dean!

  •  The fear about Dean (none)
    is unfounded and is based on "baggage" that the media will also contrive and overblow in order to demonize anyone else who shows Dean's potential to revive progressivism.

    I hope folks will check out my diary from today on this entitled

    "Forget Dean's baggage: the RWCM will give Fowler baggage too"

    Check out my lte archive at http://www.livejournal.com/users/tomletters and feel free to use my ideas for your own lte's.

    by DemDachshund on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:02:13 PM PST

  •  Pelosi's suggestion of Roemer for day-to-day head (none)
    ... strikes me as having the potential to create a completely dysfunctional party apparatus.

    And, wow, where did Brazile's sentiments come frim?

  •  Again, we have to push these people together (4.00)
    At the risk of coming across as too simplistic, we have to force Pelosi, Frost, and Dean to some extent, to bury the hatchet.

    Pelosi - pros:  is a straightforward liberal which appeals to the base of the party.
             cons:  does not have much experience in taking on tough races in battleground areas; she also made some clumsy choices against the pre-existing Hispanic Caucus in favor of fellow Californians; not necessarily good about spreading cash to necessary contests.

    Frost - pros:  is a fighter and has proven himself to succeed in hostile territory; hates team W with more passion than you can imagine; very good at fundraising; smart (he was behind the Tx legislative quorum bust to Ardmore).
            cons: has a calculated conservative streak tailored to where he ran but does not translate well on the larger scale.

    Dean - this community knows Dean better than anyone, and certainly better than I do, so I will not conjecture.  

    We NEED all of these guys moving in the same direction.  Basically we need California, the Midwest, and the Northeast, and all of the diversity therein, to come together and get the bad guys out of office.  

  •  What if this isn't about Dean? (none)
    What if at the heart of it the failure of the AFL-CIO to endorse has less to due with Dean, than it does with the internal politics of the AFL-CIO?  Namely, the close association of Dean with Stern and the SEIU.  

    There's a huge divide in the AFL-CIO right now between Stern and his gang, and the rest of the AFL-CIO.  I doubt this has as anything to do with Dean, but more so with Dean's association with Stern and the SEIU.  The SEIU and several other unions started something called the New Unity Partnership.  At the heart of the division is a fight over whether or not the AFL-CIO should "reform" to centralize power at the cost of local's autonomy, and opponents argue at the cost of union democracy.

    I'm speculating when I attribute at least part of the anti-Dean fight to AFL-CIO infighting, but it should be noted that a large portion of the DNC's voting members are labor members.  While we don't have the sort of nexus between politics and unionism that exists in Britain, where union chiefs vote in blocks member's votes in Labour party poltics, American labor has made a major move into the political arena in past twenty years and controls the Democratic party in many parts of the country.  That the opposition to Dr. Dean has less to do with Dean than with establishment labor figures concerned that the election of Dean elevates Stern, who did after all break solidarity with a far greater number of unions (in membership totals, nearly equal) who had chosen to stand behind Dick Gephardt, who had been a labor stalwart for twenty years regardless of his support of the Iraq war,  is something that seems to escape the attention of many Kossacks, for whom labor is a sideshow not center stage.

    .....

    In order for labor to have meaning, and the working class to be organized, remember the rise of labor rewrote the American social contract and labor unions were and remain the base and a bastion of the Democratic party, unions must work to serve their members, rather than members working to serve their unions.  In the context of politics I think it's important that "Reform" democrats, and Dr. Dean in particular dissassociate themselves from the notion of the revolutionary vanguard and embrace union democracy and the empowerment of the rank and file, as essential to rebuilding the labor movement, and retaking our losses in the working class.

    •  SEIU defines it otherwise... (none)
      not about Local vs. National, but about a group of powerful, high-income union worklers who are protecting themselves at the expense of millions of service workers who have no protections.  Many of the old-guard unions have done very well for their membership - so well that they are deeply invested in the status quo now and don't want the mistreated service workers of the world to rock the boat.
      •  Which would be more plausible (none)
        if not for the SEIU's history of dropping in people with little or no work experience in a local as leadership.  The parachuting of college educated organizers into unions under trusteeship really shatters the idea that the SEIU is change from below. Many of the older industrial unions are pissed because Stern is organizing in fields that can't be outsourced, yet he tells other unions working in fields where the company can ship jobs overseas that they need to adopt the model that's working for his union.   Stern has important good ideas that he brings to the conversation, but he's a piss poor messenger.  I for one think that somebody who's rose through the ranks like Ron Gettlefinger at the UAW, can understand what the rank and file wants better because he's from that background.  Stern has always been a full time organizer, he doesn't have a background having been rank and file in his union.  

        The idea that the mean old industrial unions are trying to keep the service sector employees down is bull.  The old industrial unions had their fights about union democracy in the 60's and serve their members now.  The SEIU seems more interested in pursuing the interests of its organizers that have roots in social movements instead of trying to work for the concerns of its members.  And Stern has used trusteeships to shut the peasants rank and file up when they raise a fuss.  The industrial unions are concerned that Stern wants to do the same thing to the whole damn AFL-CIO, because his the NUP included giving the federation the power to force unions to merge.

        •  Well, there's food for thought in there (none)
          but it is also true that making changes for huge classes of workers is really a social movement.  When manufactuting was king, unionism itself was a social movement.  I'm not saying that the unions don't work for their workers.  I'm saying that the interests of an autoworker who works in a very safe union shop for good money and good benefits with lots of time off are just not the same as the interests of someone who works for a contract employer providing a privatized social service and makes very little money and has no insurance and is expected to work 50 hours a week for no extra money because they are on salary aren't necessarily the same.  I'm not sure what we should do about them not being the same.
          •  very safe union shop? (none)
            Man, you really dont know what you're talking about.  Autoworkers are an endangerd species, they've had health benefits cut.  People providing social services have it much better off than the guys who've spent their lives on the assembly line, they don't have to worry about their job being shipped overseas.  A little solidarity on bad trade deals, which are raping the middle of the country, would be nice, and would go a long ways towards bringing out working people who don't vote because they feel the Democratic party is more interested in protecting a woman's right to choose than provide the means for a man or women to feed theif family.  It's fundamental ignorance of this sort, and the bullshit image of the autoworker or the machininst as being spoiled is just an excuse for burying the people who built the union movement up.  
            •  Their jobs are always (none)
              open to privatization - where they can take a 30% pay cut and lose benefits or lose their jobs.
            •  I didn't say they were spoiled. (none)
              By very safe I meant OSHA-compliant.  And when you are in a "right to work" state as I am (right to get screwed is more like it), you can't make a shop a union shop.  You have to continue to work for membership with every new employee, AND non-members are legally entitled to all of the benefits that the union negotiates for its members.  Everyone wants to free-ride.  No one wants pay dues.  So we don't have "union shops".

              I didn't say they were spoiled.  I said the unions have succeeded for them.  That's great.  But there are still battles to fight.

              The people providing social services that have been privatized make about $22,000 a year and are not provided insurance.  Is this better or worse than the auto workers?

              •  about the same (none)
                older factories have better contracts, but with the divestment of assets by the big three, the new contracts with outfits like Magna and Metaldyne that have bought up old GM and Ford factories has been in the 20-25K range that's for union shops.  The old contracts with GM, etc. were 30-40K a year with solid benefits.  The newer non-union shops end up somewhere in the 16-20K range, with piss poor insurance.  The work is also a lot more physically demanding than social service work, and the right to work bs is hardly unique to service workers.  Many states that are autoworker strongholds have to deal with people trying to push right to work laws, if they haven't already passed.  Indiana seems to be headed in this direction, and the local COC said as much during the campaign.
  •  I hope... (none)
    Donna does not get the opportunity to blow another presidential election.  What progressives need are campaign managers who can win campaigns and not just spend money.

    Please visit my webby, www.stumpysfindings.com. A friend said, "I feel like I've entered a slick modern museum of cool stuff."

    by stumpy on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:17:30 PM PST

  •  Frost is out! (none)

    "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." H. L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)

    by Hanna for Change on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:18:07 PM PST

  •  My main beef (none)
    with Brazile's letter is that she perpetuates the myth that Dean's supporters are all young newbies. In my meetup group the vast majority have been 40+, with many senior citizens.

    A free society is a place where it's safe to be unpopular. -Adlai Stevenson.

    by barb in albq on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:18:22 PM PST

    •  Yeah... (none)
      ... one of our problems is not enough young folks involved!

      "Do what you can, with what you have, where you are." - Theodore Roosevelt

      by Andrew C White on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:33:07 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  anyone who (none)
      is not of the consultant/professional politician class would be considered a "newbie" to these people. And the youth thing is just a convenient stereotype--not entirely accurate, but not going to go away. Not sure if it's even worth using energy to fight it.

      But speaking of anecdotal evidence, the one Dean rally I went to did seem to feature a lot of college students or just out of college types--relatively few people in remotely business attire (I was wearing a maternity dress and felt overdressed) though it was a little after 5 and easily accessible to Philadelphia's business district. So if you went to one of those things it wouldn't be too difficult to get the overall impression that Dean fans were mostly under 30 and those who were over 30 were aging hippies.

      Abortions go up under Republicans. Business is better under Democrats. Pass it on.

      by JMS on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:38:37 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  FROST HAS DROPPED OUT (none)
    YEAH!!!!! DEAN HAS WON!!! :)
  •  Report and link on BFA re: Frost out! (none)
    This just in: Martin Frost has dropped out of the DNC race, with strong words of support for Governor Dean:
    http://www.nationalreview.com/tks/054925.html

    "Do what you can, with what you have, where you are." - Theodore Roosevelt

    by Andrew C White on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:24:26 PM PST

    •  Great Googly Moogly (none)
      Sez my friend PastorDan.  Frost and Leland?  With all the news about Michigan, Fowler won't last long either...

      Liberal: "I still think it's a respectable word. Its root is "liber," the Latin word for "free," and isn't that what we are all about?"--Mary McGrory

      by mini mum on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:41:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Frost statement in part... (none)
    "I am calling my supporters to thank them and to inform them of my decision today to withdraw from the race for DNC Chair. I have also called Governor Dean and congratulated him for running a strong campaign. The challenge ahead for Governor Dean will be to unite the Party, rebuild the DNC and win elections in every region of the country."

    "Do what you can, with what you have, where you are." - Theodore Roosevelt

    by Andrew C White on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:26:52 PM PST

  •  Leland out too... (none)
    "Wellington Webb quit yesterday and David Leland, the former Ohio state chairman, also quit the race earlier today.

    Donnie Fowler, son of former DNC chairman Don Fowler, and Simon Rosenberg remain in the race."

    "Do what you can, with what you have, where you are." - Theodore Roosevelt

    by Andrew C White on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:28:32 PM PST

  •  Leland out also (none)
    "David Leland, former chairman of the Ohio Democratic Party, dropped out earlier in the day"

    By WILL LESTER Associated Press Writer

  •  CSPAN coverage of DNC Chairman candidates... (1.75)
    Candidates for Chairman of the DNC
    1/29/2005 (Dean is at 11:45)

    Quote from Howard Dean:

    I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for.

    Nice.

    Shorter Donna Brazille:

    I'm still relevant!  I don't want Dean to win, but if he does, here's something to prove that I supported him, even though I didn't - cutting him down every chance I had on Fox News.

    Me - I hope Dean doesn't get it - so, it looks real bad for me right now.  I want fundamental change.  If Dean loses this, he might finally flip out of the Dem party.

    •  You'd practically have to be a fascist (none)
      not to hate Republicans and everything they stand for these days. Have you been alone on an island these past 4 years, away from all news?

      A free society is a place where it's safe to be unpopular. -Adlai Stevenson.

      by barb in albq on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 03:32:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  AFL-CIO the reason (none)
    is that the unions could not agree on one candidate so it was not the AFL-CIO's place to endorse.

    I think it's too bad. The unions need more power in this spot. They should never is out.

    "I will never accept an analysis that says a leader who stands for equality and fairness and who has the courage of his convictions is doing the wrong thing."

    by CrazyDem on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:49:47 PM PST

  •  From CDP Chairman Art Torres: (none)
    January 31, 2005 (Updated February 1, 2005)

    From CDP Chairman Art Torres:

    Dear Fellow Democrats,

    This weekend was very eventful in New York as the National Association of State Democratic Chairs and Vice Chairs met to interview all seven candidates for the DNC Chair position.

    As Chairs and Vice Chairs we had made a commitment to each other in Orlando, Florida when we first heard the candidates for DNC Chair on December 9, 2004, to remain neutral until our organization made a decision by roll call vote to endorse one candidate.

    I want to thank all the Democrats in California and elsewhere who wrote to me regarding their concerns and their preferences for one candidate or another.  I read every letter, postcard, petition and email that was sent to me - as it should be.  A leader must always listen in order to be truly representative and still compatible with one's conscience.

    Our organization endorsed formally Howard Dean this morning at around 9 am PST with 56 Chairs and Vice Chairs voting for Dean, and five abstentions, which were added to the majority for a total of 61.  Twenty-one members voted for Donnie Fowler, five for Martin Frost, three for Tim Roemer, three for Simon Rosenberg, three for Wellington Webb and none for David Leland.

    I want you all to know that I supported Howard Dean within the Executive Committee and then of course in the final roll call, along with our First Vice Chair Alex Rooker. The following DNC Members have contacted me with their support for Howard Dean (I will update you as others email into me regarding their support):

    Hon. Gloria Molina Hon. Carole Migden
    Aleita Huguenin Rachel Binah
    Robert "Big Red" Rankin Ed Espinoza
    Garry Shay Mary Ellen Early
    Vernon Watkins Jeremy Bernard
    Bob Mulholland Steven Alari
    Patricia Ford Alice Huffman
    John Perez  

    The results are still coming into our poll - check out the numbers.  We will include the final tally in my newsletter this week.  

    "Do what you can, with what you have, where you are." - Theodore Roosevelt

    by Andrew C White on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 12:53:01 PM PST

    •  Thanks for this (none)
      I was wondering how Torres weighed in, since he sounded like a definite Deanocrat leading up to this.  If you go the CDP homepage and look at the poll for chair, Dean currently leads with 82.7% of the vote.  (Sorry, I'm too lame to figure out how to link.)
  •  Blah, Blah, Blah... we need everybody! (none)
    While I wish not to diminish the importance of the DNC Chair in our fight to regain political power (or even greater political relevancy), too great an emphasis on this position and the DNC organization itself could be damaging.  We need all of these people (Frost, Dean, Fowler, Rosenberg, etc) and the political coalitions they represent to become successful once again. Yes... we need progressives, moderates and even some conservatives to build a winning coalition.

    The Republicans understand this and that's why they have been successful.  Republicans have managed to sell their wrong-headed policy to many moderates and "soft" conservatives, banishing progressives to the peripherals of political discussion.  This marginalization of Democrats results largely from the false credibility Republicans are able to engender with the American people and the media - a false credibility that is the product of a well-organized and unified front.  Simply put, people are willing to believe a Party that appears to have its act together.

    Sadly, we have been complicit in the formation of this dynamic and suffer from our own delusions.  It's just that our delusions are politically damaging.  We tend to waste our energies publicly fighting internal party battles in some deranged quest for ideological purity and/or magical political leadership.  These skirmishes only serve to accentuate the relative "togetherness" of the Republicans. In the end, we look like a losing team and Republicans win.  (i.e., is there any doubt that Tony Coehlo's [sic?] ill-advised comments in the heat of the presidential campaign seriously hurt Kerry?)

    If we want to win, we need get together and seriously discuss the direction of the Party without declaring our own separate political fiefdoms within the Party.  We are all Democrats and each candidate for the DNC Chair is an indispensable long-term asset in our future endeavors.  None of them, individually, is the "magic bullet" that will bring us political power.  That power only comes from the collective voices of a Party focused on victory.  

    •  Did you bother to read the position (none)
      of the bulk of the posts here or consider the historical facts of the most recent election before posting? There is one that I have read that follows a long the line of circular firing squad, and another that says that by definition reform means not supporting the status quo. In both cases, it seems their thesis is different from yours. No one is saying that the power elite can't be a part of the move to become the opposition party, and eventually regain the majority status. They are, however, arguing that the power elite can not expec the status quo. This is a different position than what you are suggesting. In the way you are suggesting it's about firing on our own. In the one that people here seem to be arguing it is trying to figure out how to actually win against the Republicans by rethinking the structure of our organization, how we pick leaders etc. If the people you are referring to are able to change with the times, then they should in theory be safe because its not about attacking their idealogy. Even the talk about Frost, you will notice was never about his idealogy.
      •  I think we agree (none)
        I did read the above posts and your comments are very instructive.  I believe we are essentially in agreement.  Whoever may be the next DNC Chair, the most important factor for political success in the future is a strategy which presents the Democratic Party as a unified front representing the "mainstream" of America.  In my mind, that mainstream consists mostly of progressives and moderates along with some conservatives.  
  •  Can Someone Explain... (none)
    Who gets to vote in the DNC race, how they vote and how they get to be in that position?  What ability as a registered Democrat do I have to determine who gets voting roles in the party?  How are these people chosen?
    •  I think (none)
      it may be different in each state but mostly it involves some variation on getting involved at the precinct and ward level, and moving on from there to the county central committee, the state central committee and the DNC itself by getting elected.

      That's why in NM we're urging people to run for precinct or ward chair, as well as the county committee, at our upcoming Dem ward and precinct elections on March 3rd.

      A free society is a place where it's safe to be unpopular. -Adlai Stevenson.

      by barb in albq on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 03:43:50 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  DLC Democrats you are hereby put on notice! (none)
    Start behaving like Democrats. The Democratic wing of the the Democratic party is now taking back control of the party. Frost should serve as a reminder that it does not matter how long you have been a Democrat. What matters is that you don't undermine your party when the going gets tough. It hurts the party and it will come back to bite you.
    •  Gee, (none)
      I'm a big Dean supporter, but I wouldn't have put it that way. Benign neglect is a much more useful way to deal with the DLC, not open confrontation.
      •  I disagree their backroom deals have hurt (none)
        the party. We need to unite behind the principles of  the Democratic Party. They need to understand that we are no longer going to put up with their behind the scene manipulations. They turned the party into a watered down version of the Republican party and its cost us dearly. I for one don't want a Republican fifth column running my party any more. If that offends too bad I am tired of losing the stakes are too high
  •  Frost out (none)
    Roll Call is reporting that Frost is out.

    "Former Rep. Martin Frost (D-Texas) began informing party leaders Tuesday that he is dropping out of the race to chair the Democratic National Committee, sources said -- a move that adds further momentum to the frontrunning bid of former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean for the post."

  •  I think so-called "moderate" Dems (none)
    are the ones who drank the Kool-Aid, and not Dean supporters.

    They've bought into the notion that to outright challenge this administration, and the neo-cons, is to court the anti-American label.

    I also do see quite a bit of turf protection going on -- those in power want to keep their power and Dean promises to shake things. In a certain sense, Dean can't reach out to those moderate/same-old-same-old Dems because he's promising a paradigm shift.

    The battle comes down to whether you think the "centrist" (aka moving farther right) is the correct position (a la Clintons, etc) or whether it's time for a change.

    Most of those who support Dean or certain other candidates want to see change; want to win elections; want to see the net/grassroots remain active; want to be considered something more than an ATM.

    In lieu of specific examples, I think the moderate Dems feelling that Howard Dean hasn't "reached out" to them is more a case of Howard Dean not assuring them that their fiefdoms will be protected.

    And, yes, that's a harsh judgment. But if by moderate Dems you mean citizens who are not "inside" politics, then, again, I need specific examples to understand their issues.

    The list I created in my post above should go a long way toward assuring moderate Dems of both Dean's commitment and integrity.

    What else do they want?

  •  I like the idea of a coalition with Dean (none)
    Dean's a tough guy, and he won't compromise his principles when someone is buzzing in his ear. Quite the contrary, he'll find the right mechanism to make sure that all perspectives are heard, and the right decision is made. I believe it would be a good thing for party unity.

    And if there ever IS a malicious coup, he'd have his "enemies" close. Not that I really believe this will happen, but it's a worry in the back of my head that they might try paralyze the DNC Chair with various influences. It couldn't hurt to keep the discussion face to face, instead of behind the back.

  •  Donna Brazile (none)
     She has been supporting Dean since before Gore endorsed him in the primaries.  She does her real work out of the limelight. She isn't looking for a job. She has a job. I think she wants a Democratic Party that serves the people not the corporations.  A polite thank you might be in order.  
  •  re Frost out (none)
    Thank goodness. How Frost was able to remain in the running one day after his absurd run-with-the-thugs ads came to light is a mystery to me. I believe in a big tent. But that doesn't mean the people on the far side of the appeasement wing get to run the party. Go Howard!

    "Scrutinize the bill, it is you who must pay it...You must take over the leadership." - Brecht

    by pedestrian xing on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 02:33:07 PM PST

  •  Leland endorses Dean (none)
    From the DFA site:

    In a press release today, David Leland has encouraged those voting members who endorsed him to put their support behind Governor Dean:

    Leland, who had been publicly endorsed by the Chair of the Ohio Democratic Party and others in the 10-member Ohio DNC delegation, said he would encourage these members and his other DNC supporters to vote for Gov. Howard Dean for DNC Chair. "Gov. Dean has demonstrated his ability and commitment to build our party from the grassroots up."

  •  Chairman Art Torres: Update on DNC Chair (none)
    "I want to thank all the Democrats in California and elsewhere who wrote to me regarding their concerns and their preferences for one candidate or another.  I read every letter, postcard, petition and email that was sent to me - as it should be.  A leader must always listen in order to be truly representative and still compatible with one's conscience."  more...

    http://www.cadem.org/site/apps/nl/content2.asp?c=fvLRK7O3E&b=190089&ct=368674

  •  "Cockroaches"...."prostitutes" (1.00)
    ..."Republicans"

    All terms Howard Dean himself has used in the not-too-distant past to refer to fellow Democrats.

    I don't know what kind of alternate universe some of the people on this site live in, but it seems to me that calling somebody a cockroach is not a way to win their heart.

    See http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/12/30/elec04.prez.lieberman.dean.ap/

    as I'm sure some on this site will think I just made it up.

    I have no horse in this race but would only ask people to consider whether Howard Dean is Karl Rove's biggest present ever.

    Edwards/Lincoln '08

    by jimsaco on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 03:01:53 PM PST

  •  following the link (none)
    Dean has referred to members of Congress as "cockroaches," called Democratic leaders "prostitutes" and referred to the centrist Democratic Leadership Council as the "Republican wing of the Democratic Party," Lieberman said.

    He was especially critical of Dean for saying the United States was no safer after Saddam Hussein's capture,...

    So we have CNN citing Lieberman in the hottest moment of primary campaign.  Is it possible that Lieberman was embroidering the truth a bit?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site