Skip to main content

I am so, so sick of fools like  this
being in our party:

North Dakota Rep. Earl Pomeroy (D) is accusing Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean of overstepping his bounds, saying the former presidential candidate should not give up on the war in Iraq.

On Monday, Dean likened the war in Iraq to Vietnam and said, "The idea that the United States is going to win the war in Iraq is just plain wrong."

"My words to Howard Dean are simple - shut up," Pomeroy told WDAY Radio in North Dakota on Thursday.

"He is not hired to make major policy announcements on behalf of all the Democrats," Pomeroy said. "As our party chairman I believe he needs to focus on the nuts and bolts of winning elections."


I think this fool needs to hear from us.  

Want to wipe this smile off this puke's face?

Go here:

http://www.pomeroy.house.gov/

Leave him a message.

His website is really pretty disgusting.  His web page is all about the "soldiers".  "From Fort Riley to Baghdad".  Like he cares for the guys he'd just as soon leave there to be killed when it's become obvious that there is no military solution to Iraq.  

The guy voted for the war and must have a great deal of undeserved ego wrapped up in this.

I suggest we tell him that real men admit their mistakes.  

Real men admit when they've been lied to.

And real men take care of other real men, by not leaving them to be sitting ducks where they can get killed needlessly.

Originally posted to Nordic on Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 08:01 PM PST.

Poll

Is Little Lord Pomeroy a real man?

20%11 votes
11%6 votes
13%7 votes
54%29 votes

| 53 votes | Vote | Results

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

  •  Pfft... (none)
    Say that to Dean's face, whydoncha.

    There is a heaven, but ill never get there... i keep respawning...

    by Sandals on Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 08:04:02 PM PST

  •  oh, and.. (4.00)
    Just because someone makes a statement we don't like, doesn't mean he or she is a spineless democrat and we need to get rid of them.

    There is a heaven, but ill never get there... i keep respawning...

    by Sandals on Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 08:04:40 PM PST

  •  Pomeroy's right (none)
    Dean has scored a bit of an own goal here. You might think what he's saying is right, but his job isn't to do this.
    •  Well I think that's what he's doing. (none)
      Winning elections, by saying what's right. The problem is that Congress is out of step with the US, not Dean.

      There is a heaven, but ill never get there... i keep respawning...

      by Sandals on Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 08:09:27 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  In all honesty (4.00)
        What does Dean know about winning elections outside of the state of Vermont? Deans a fundraiser, period. And there's nothing wrong with that, that makes for a successful party chairman.

        Dean supporters get SO damm defensive when Democrats complain about something he says. It's not what he says, it's who's saying it! Democrats were creaming in their pants when someone as respected as John Murtha comes out against the war.

        If Dean said we're losing, I wouldn't care. But the Chairman of the DNC saying we're NOT going to win is just stupid. And it's not like only "DINOs" are pissed off at this. A LOT of Democrats are. I know people here think that everyone in the party is either Joe Lieberman or Martin Luther King but it's not that simple.

        ==== The More You Know *

        by ZT155 on Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 08:22:22 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Why are they pissed off? (none)
          Can that be explained?

          I certainly wouldn't rate any currently foreseeable outcome in Iraq as 'victory'.

          There is a heaven, but ill never get there... i keep respawning...

          by Sandals on Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 08:25:53 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Because (none)
            While many people have grown skeptical of the war and certainly of Bush's leadership of it, they don't necessarily like to think of their country as "losing" a war. Not yet. And they don't want to hear from the mouth of a person who carries the kind of cultural baggage Dean carries vis-a-vis his entrenched media image. As such, when Dean says something like this, it goes right in to the GOP's wheelhouse in a way when Murtha says it, it doesn't.

            Politics isn't about telling the truth, frankly. It is the art of winning elections so policies you like will be implemented. When Dean makes statements like this, he lessens the chances of this happening.

        •  Hey, gotta question for ya, chief!! (4.00)
          If what Dean said and what Murtha said are in nearly every instance identical...if what Dean said and what Lugar or Hagel or Warner have also said are in nearly every instance identical...

          Then what the fuck are you blathering about...hmmm?

          The only way to ensure a free press is to own one

          by RedDan on Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 08:30:39 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Its who Dean is (none)
            Its his media role as "loose cannon" and "far left" and "anti-war."

            Dean is the media face of the peacenik Democratic wing.

            •  Don't you mean to say (none)
              the face of that large, diverse group of people comprising peaceniks, lefties, righties, conservatives, and disparate others who felt that this war was being railroaded through congress based on lies and spin, that it was a disaster in the making, and that it would be a complete fuckup from start to finish?

              The face of the people who have been shown to be correct on just about every single one of those points?

              Does it really come down to the fact that people just cannot stomach that they were WRONG, and terribly, bloodily so?

              The only way to ensure a free press is to own one

              by RedDan on Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 08:57:45 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Perhaps (none)
                But politics, and winning elections, doesn't depend on any of the above. The current social and political reality is what it is.
                •  I think you are incorrect, (none)
                  and I think that the recent results in the special elections and the recent trends in various public opinions regarding the war, the intelligence and how it was used, the president, and the republican party show you to be entirely incorrect.

                  What is Bush's approval rating? Somewhere between 35 and 45%?

                  Right.

                  What is Dean's approval rating? around 50%?

                  What is the approval of the GOP vs the Democrats? That's right, currently the Democrats enjoy a 10-15% lead over the GOP.

                  So, what were you saying again? Or was that you projecting your opinion onto the nation and trying to mask your views behind the mantle of "social and political reality"?

                  Social and political reality is that this war is a disaster, we cannot and will not win, and everybody knows it...only the people most responsible refuse to admit it, to admit their errors, and to work to make the best of a terrible situation...they would rather look for someone to blame.

                  The only way to ensure a free press is to own one

                  by RedDan on Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 09:56:15 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Dean's approve/disapprove (none)
                    The last poll I can find, conducted by Pew in October, rates Dean as follows:

                    4 Highly Favourable

                    25 Somewhat Favourable

                    22 Somewhat Unfavourable

                    15 Very Unfavourable

                    19 Never Heard of Him'

                    15% Couldn't Answer (?)

                    So basically, Dean has an approve level of 29%, a disapprove of 37%. Thats not that much better than Bush if you extrapolate.

                    •  Lame. (none)
                      34% either didn't know who he was, or wouldn't give an answer.

                      More people said they saw him as favorable than said they saw him as unfavorable (25%-22%).

                      The only place he loses is in the extremes, where nobody is changing their mind ANYWAY.

                      So, really, what you're saying here is that he stands pat. This is hardly Joementum numbers.

                  •  Dean's approval rating (none)
                    I'd be quite interested if you have a link for the 50% approval.  I've never seen him break 30% as DNC chair.  The most recent I could find were 23/41 and 25/40 for fav/unfav.  Thanks.
          •  Why don't you re-read what I just wrote (none)
            Thw white house was shocked to lose the support of Murtha. You think Dean and Murtha are no different? Wow.

            Bush is the reason we're losing. If we did this multi-laterally and didn't disband the Iraqi army, we'd be gone by now. So Dean, the Democratic Party Chair, is now going around saying that Republicans AND Democrats are the problem. How is that going to help win elections?

            ==== The More You Know *

            by ZT155 on Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 09:03:10 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  If wishes were fishes (none)
              my stupid, obnoxious, fucked up friend, then beggars would eat like kings.

              The white house was not shocked to lose the support of Murtha, they were shocked that he stood up and stated clearly that the military brass was telling him to get their army OUT before it got DESTROYED.

              Bush is not the reason we are losing. The reason we are losing is because this kind of war is UNWINNABLE from the very start.

              If we didn't do this, if we didn't do that - what a bunch of fucking horseshit. Who CARES? It was DONE, it IS done, and there is NO going back.

              Not only that, but have NOT done those things, the fact of the matter is that the war would STILL be unwinnable.

              Dean is now going around saying that ANYONE who thinks this war is winnable has another think coming...

              And he is right.

              Just ask the military.

              The only way to ensure a free press is to own one

              by RedDan on Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 09:07:34 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Dean is not a credible voice on foreign affairs. (none)
                Like it or not, 2003/4 destroyed that for him.

                Murtha is a credible voice just because he has so much pull with the military and hawkish establishment, whereas Dean has none. It's Nixon goes to China all over again.

                •  Did you actually read what (none)
                  Judis wrote?

                  No?

                  In fact, Dean is more credible than Joe L., Biden, and Kerry at this point - IF you base your judgement on facts, history, statements, and reality.

                  That Dean is PERCEIVED as being a foreign policy naif is not necessarily the same is that he is, in fact, a naif.

                  The fact that Dean and Murtha (and Hagel, Lugar, Scowcroft, Odom, and so many others) are SAYING THE SAME FUCKING THING would seem to me to effectively render your judgement moot, irrelevant, and pretty much inoperative.

                  The only way to ensure a free press is to own one

                  by RedDan on Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 09:16:57 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  We're not talking about me. (none)
                    We're talking about America. America doesn't trst Dean.

                    They're wrong to do so, but sticking your head in the sand and pretending the 2004 primaries never happened doesn't make it so. I don't want Kerry doing this stuff either, for the same reason. They're damaged goods.

                    You seem to think I agree with Pomeroy's position on the war. I've already said I don't, so knock it off. But just because I agree with Dean doesn't mean he's my choice to spread this message.  

                    •  "America doesn't trust Dean" (none)
                      How do you know that?

                      My Dad, who is the most fundamentalist freeper-type of right-winger (and a career Army officer and an engineer with three degrees) actually told me way back when that he liked and admired Dean.

                      Which shocked the hell out of me.  

                      Dean is a straight shooter and people know that.  He doesn't bullshit.  That's appealing to everybody.

                      If you really think "America doesn't trust Dean" you've been watching WAY too much mainstream media.

                      That's what they want you to think.  

                      You will NOT get a feel for what America thinks by watching CNN.  You will get the exact opposite.

                      •  I posted this in response to RD above (none)
                        I don't think Dean is quite the lightning rod some Dems think, but he isn't a great plus for the party either. Here are the most recent numbers on Dean I have:

                        The last poll I can find, conducted by Pew in October, rates Dean as follows:

                        4 Highly Favourable

                        25 Somewhat Favourable

                        22 Somewhat Unfavourable

                        15 Very Unfavourable

                        19 Never Heard of Him'

                        15% Couldn't Answer (?)

                        So basically, Dean has an approve level of 29%, a disapprove of 37%. Thats not that much better than Bush if you extrapolate.

                      •  I don't watch CNN (none)
                        Or any television news, for that matter, and I don't trust anecdotal evidence. Dean has been typecast as a peacenik who can't be trusted on foreign policy, even by a significant portion of Dem voters. You may not like or agree with their opinion, but that doesn't change it.
                    •  America trusts (none)
                      Dean more than they trust the President, and trusts the Democrats more than they trust the GOP.

                      So tell me again what the public thinks, except this time, base it on real numbers, not on talking head psychobabble.

                      The only way to ensure a free press is to own one

                      by RedDan on Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 09:57:28 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

        •  why is it stupid? (none)
          Sorry, but if you think it's stupid, then I think YOU'RE stupid.

          There is no military solution in Iraq.  Period.

          Get over it.  

          Anybody with half a brain needs to start getting rational and deal with this reality.

          There's no "winning" and at this point there's no "losing".  People are so fucking stupid to think in these terms.

          We did what we set out to do.  Regime change.  Done.  

          Now the military presence is doing more harm than good.

          Murtha pointed this out very specifically -- the Al Quada crowd and the basic Iraqis are united against us.  We leave, and they will deal with each other as need be.

          We are in the way of "winning".  

    •  To do what, have a conversation? (none)
      Dean didn't make a major policy statement.  He said that we can't win the war.  Bravo to him.
    •  let's see if I've got this right (none)
      Dean scored a goal for the GOP by publically agreeing with what the American people are telling the major pollsters.

      Does this fairly state your position?

      If it does, I question your sanity.

      Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

      by alizard on Fri Dec 09, 2005 at 02:25:56 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Beltway Dems don't get it (4.00)
    Most Americans believe this war is a mistake and most Democrats want out of it as soon as possible.

    Beltway Dems like Pomeroy need to lose the consultants and start talking to real people.

  •  Here's the problem (4.00)
    And this again is why the Democrats lose.  They are making this an issue when they don't have to!  This is just stupid.  The problem is the Democrats all live within the beltway and just don't get it.  People outside the beltway really don't care about politics.  Yes, the major stuff gets play.  But Democrats in Washington think that everywhere is like Washington.  No, it's not.  Ask regular people if they heard (or care) what Howard Dean had to say.  The answer (outside the beltway) is NO.
  •  Ignore Dean at your peril (4.00)
    John Judis at TNR has the goods...

    Ignore Dean at your peril or, in your case, trash Dean and his statements at your peril.

    February 2003. After Secretary of State Colin Powell made his case for war at the United Nations, most other leading Democrats applauded. Senator Joe Biden called Powell's case "very powerful and, I think, irrefutable." Senator John Kerry called it "compelling." Only Dean dissented. "I heard little today that leads me to believe that there is an imminent threat warranting unilateral military action by the United States against Iraq," he said.

    Later that month, Dean warned that the Bush administration was preparing to invade Iraq unilaterally. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay charged that Dean "either doesn't know what he's talking about ... or he's seriously uninformed, or he's just misleading the American people and his party."

    April 2003. Senator Joe Lieberman declared that the capture of Baghdad and the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime vindicated his support for the invasion. "The vindication that I feel is the confidence that with Saddam gone, America's going to be a lot safer than it otherwise would have been," Lieberman said. House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt said that "it's a continuation of a historic, long-term trend that we stand on the right side." Once again the dissenter, Dean said, "All these folks who are crowing about their vote and the outcome are going to learn that the occupation will be very difficult." He added, "I'm not a pacifist. We've removed a horrible dictator, but the price we're going to pay is down the road."

    June 2003. As reports began to surface that the Bush administration might have misled the country about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, many leading Democrats were hesitant to question the administration's probity. Republicans dismissed any doubts. Senator George Allen asserted, "It's not a question." But Dean said, "We need a thorough look at what really happened going into Iraq. It appears to me that what the president did was make a decision to go into Iraq sometime in early 2002, or maybe even late 2001, and then try to get the justification afterward."

    December 2003-January 2004. After Saddam Hussein was captured on December 14, Dean appeared to go out on the farthest of limbs. "[T]he capture of Saddam has not made America safer," Dean said. "The Iraq war diverted critical intelligence and military resources, undermined diplomatic support for our fight against terror, and created a new rallying cry for terrorist recruits." Gephardt termed Dean's statement "ludicrous." Kerry took it as "more proof that all the advisors in the world can't give Howard Dean the military and foreign-policy experience, leadership skills, or diplomatic temperament necessary to lead this country through dangerous times." Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie said, "It's baffling that anyone could possibly think life under a brutal dictator who routinely tortured, raped, and imprisoned his own people is better than the freedom and democracy taking root in Iraq today."

    Much of what Dean said on those occasions has now become conventional wisdom.

    The only way to ensure a free press is to own one

    by RedDan on Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 08:10:30 PM PST

  •  am I the only one... (none)
    who longs for the days of Terry McAuliffe... with his factually inaccurate statements couched in "politically correct" language?

    </snark>

  •  Little fucker (none)
    Go to hell sir.

    Howard Dean, keep talkin

  •  Good lord...... (none)
    ...what a scary picture. Check his phone records and see if he has been communing with Gym West, former Mayor of Spokane.

    Why do they disappoint us so? Are these really Democrats? Are we not men? They are Devo!

    "What luck for rulers that men do not think." - Adolf Hitler

    by Bensdad on Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 08:30:06 PM PST

  •  I like Earl Pomeroy... (none)
    ...but I like him a little bit less than usual right now.

    Dean didn't say anything wrong at all. He esentially agreed with Chuck Hagel. Dean isn't speaking for all Democrats, but I think most of the party's base agrees with him.

  •  umm (4.00)
    Pomelroy is correct. Dean isnt the policy head of the party, and he has the highest disaproval numbers of most major democratic figures. His job, which is what hes actually good at, is grass roots organizing to make sure all races are contested. He needs to stop putting his foot in his mouth and go help win back congress. I suppose youd rather have an R from ND.
    •  and I suppose (4.00)
      you like the status quo of the minority party.

      there has never been a better opportunity in my lifetime to utterly destroy the republican party.

      now is not the time to be fearful or timid.

    •  I'm glad someone said it. (none)
      Earl Pomeroy isn't representing San Francisco or West Hollywood, for God's sake, it's North Dakota! And as much as I love Howie, he's a fundraiser, not a policy-setter. He lost that job 19 months ago.

      Visit RemoveRepublicans.com and follow every 2006 Senate race.

      by AnthonySF on Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 09:43:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Amen To That... (none)
        ....the idea that we could trade up for Earl Pomeroy in North Dakota and come out ahead on the bargain in delusional.  Even if we're singling out conservative Dems to slap around, Earl Pomeroy wouldn't be on too many people's short list.
      •  That's BS. (none)
        It would not have lost Pomeroy one vote to just say, "That's Howard's opinion, I don't share it, but we're a party where you get to speak your mind."

        Instead he said "shut up."

        But why should Dean shut up? Like Pomeroy, he's just giving his opinion and 'appealing to his base', right? So if it's good enough for Earl, why is it not good for a man who speaks for millions of us, even if we won't get a chance to vote for him, to do likewise?

  •  I need a ND address to email him! (none)

    Bush is NOT America!

    by annefrank on Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 09:09:10 PM PST

  •  You know why our politicians lie, so often? (none)
    Because the ones that tell the truth--like Dean--get punished, as the truth isn't something that everyone is ready to deal with.
  •  Is it contradictory to say what Dean said is true (none)
     and that he was not wrong to say what he said, but that we should not be too hard on a ND rep who makes critical comments about Dean saying it?  I do think it is not entirely obvious that the DNC chairman should get too far in front of the party as a whole, though what he said is true and perhaps on important issues that is more important than getting in front of the rest of the officials who have to run for office.  

    But ND is not Connecticut just to choose a random example. And that might excuse some distancing behavior.

  •  Lay off the man (none)
    He's the congressman from North Dakota, not fucking Berkeley.  I imagine a lot of folks who voted for Rep. Pomeroy wouldn't take kindly to Earl toeing the party line on such sensitive issues as whether or not "Iraq" is turning into another "Vietnam".

    "A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned how to walk forward." FDR

    by Belltowner on Thu Dec 08, 2005 at 10:03:57 PM PST

    •  Let me get this straight.. (none)
      ...we're supposed to lay off a guy from ND who decides to open his trap and tell the DNC Chair to 'shut up' (when he could have just said "that's his opinion"), but we're supposed to put shit on Howard Dean because he said "this war isn't winnable" - when it clearly isn't?

      So the advice this douchebag is giving Dean is the opposite of what he's doing himself, yet Dean is the bad guy?

      If it's "just Pomeroy's opinion" that Dean should shut up, and he's simply appealing to his home crowd, that works both ways and means Dean should pipe up loud and proud so he can appeal to HIS base - the 90% of Democrats that don't live in Buttface ND and think that Iraq has been an awesome adventure.

      •  Dean should cool it on this one (none)
        "Governor John Hoeven was sworn in today as the new at-large congressman from North Dakota today, expanding the GOP's hold on the House of Representatives."

        My congressman is Jim McDermott, does an excellent job of not undermining vulnerable collegues from other parts of the state, such as Rep. Rick Larsen (D-WA).  I think Dean should shut up about the war be unwinnable, because if its true, it doesn't need to be said, and also because Earl Pomeroy's constituents probably aren't ready to hear it.

        "A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned how to walk forward." FDR

        by Belltowner on Fri Dec 09, 2005 at 09:25:14 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Of course they're not ready to hear it. (none)
          But by the time they ARE ready to hear it, the Republicans will be saying it, and then where are we? Late to the game, as usual.

          They'll never be ready to hear it until they've heard it enough times for it to sink in. Their kids are dying for no good reason.

          WE should be wrapping ourselves in the truth now, so that when it finally sinks in, we're associated with nothing but.

  •  Non ND residents can't message (none)
    Just gave it a try and zip codes from outside ND won't allow a message to be sent to Pomeroy via his site.
Click here for the mobile view of the site