Why I Bailed on Howard Dean - by Rick in Davis

[bushclipper]

Just as their are troubling things about Clark (voting record, Republican fundraising, etc.) so there is about Dean. Examples, posted by someone earlier, include refusing to set prochoice litmus tests for Federal Judges, opposing the Kyoto treaty, calling for a "re-evaluation" of our civil liberties after 9/11, and disagreeing with Pentagon cut-backs.

This is a piece I ran across questioning such and more:

"In my religion, it is said that if one acts as though he has faith, faith will be given to him. I uneasily came around to supporting Howard Dean a couple of months ago, but much of my support was an act of faith. I knew very little about Dean, but I was very, very impressed with what I knew of his positions on the issues, his campaign organization, and his use of the Internet as a political tool.

As I learned more about Dean, I noticed some troubling details, things that were inconsistent or illogical about him. Yet, people I respect, who have been on board with Dean much longer than I, didn’t seem troubled in the least. They seemed to bend over backwards to give Dean a pass. So I had faith. I hung in there, waiting to see the Grand Unified Theory of Howard Dean. Adam in MA and many other people I respect were so certain about Dean that I honestly thought I wasn’t getting it.

Some things about Dean just bothered me. His 100 percent rating from the NRA is a huge red flag. He and his supporters defend him by saying that gun control is a states rights issue. I think the federal government has a compelling interest in public safety and gun control. So do most lefties, I think. This made me uneasy, but I acted as though I had faith.

Dean has a pretty marginal record on defending the environment in Vermont. IBM is Vermont’s biggest polluter, yet it received Dean’s Environmental Achievement Award nine times. Dean sent Vermont’s nuclear waste to the poor, mostly Hispanic town of Sierra Blanca, Texas, 16 miles from the Mexican border — a plan described as “blatant environmental racism” by Paul Wellstone. Wellstone is a man I respected and revered far more than Dean. These things made me feel uneasy about supporting Dean, but I tried to keep my faith.

Dean passes himself off as a man of the people, but the guy was raised on Park Avenue, for cryin’ out loud. We all deride Bush for coming from privilege, but Dean may come from greater wealth. What does he know of the toil of the working man? I can relate to Bill Clinton, Paul Wellstone, and Lyndon Johnson in a personal, experiential way that I cannot to Howard Dean or Bush. Given the choice, I would prefer a peer of mine, not a peer of British Royalty. That gave me pause, but I tried to keep the faith.

Dean’s constant sniping at the other candidates for supporting the war under some circumstances really started to get under my skin. Dean himself waffled about the war, saying that he would take Bush at his word about the pretexts for war and support it if Bush said America was in immediate danger from Iraq. Bush did say that many, many times, and taking him at his word is what got us into this mess. Dean bears as much responsibility for the war as those who voted for the war resolution but were against unilateral action. His posturing was phony, and it started to piss me off. But I tried hard to keep the faith.

I had not seen the Dean article in L.A. Weekly until this morning. Apparently it was old news to the Dean faithful, but I’m not sure they understand the gravity of what Dean said, even if it is spun to their liking.

I mean, we’ve already got 39,000 people working for us all around the country . . . I really do believe — and I think about this — I want to get this nomination, and if I don’t . . . these kids are not transferrable. I can’t just go out and say, ‘Okay, so I didn’t win the nomination, so go ahead and vote for the Democrats.’ They’re not going to suddenly just go away. That’s not gonna happen.”

Dean plainly said that he will not ask his supporters to “vote for the Democrats” if he loses the primary. When I read that it made my blood boil. It is a political ritual at every nominating convention that the candidates unite onstage after the last ballot, joining hands held high, and strongly and unequivocally urging their supporters to unite behind the nominee.

When I brought this up among the Dean supporters, the explanation almost uniformly was that Dean does not “own” his supporters, they are attracted to politics because of him, and they would not likely support the other candidates anyway. They point out that Dean has said many times that HE would support the nominee, but that is hardly the point. He told L.A. Weekly that he would not ask his SUPPORTERS to vote for the nominee. And that does it for me. I cannot support a candidate who says such a profoundly arrogant and counterproductive thing.

In 1980 Jimmy Carter was having a rough campaign. He was hunkered down in the Rose Garden trying to get the hostages freed in Tehran, the economy was in the tank, and he was in a bitter primary battle with Senator Edward Kennedy. But the election was far from sure. People were nervous about Reagan, and at the time of the Democratic convention the polls were very tight. I felt sure Carter could pull it out.

Earlier I spoke of the convention ritual of the candidates joining hands in a symbolic gesture of unity after the nominee is selected. Customarily, all the losing candidates enthusiastically endorse the winner, and urge 100 percent party unity. In 1980 Ted Kennedy didn’t do this… He did not even appear on stage for the traditional unity gesture. It is something for which I have never forgiven Kennedy, and why I partially blame him for bringing us eight years of Reagan.

How many of Dean’s supporters have ever even been to a national convention? How many know of the importance of party unity behind the nominee? It is vital, and for Dean and his supporters to piss on it like that is something I cannot forgive. My faith in Dean is gone. I wish him and his supporters the best of luck, but I cannot support him anymore."

[DoveTurnedHawk]

1. This Is Counterproductive, IMO

And quite a bit of what you cite has already been debunked.

DTH

[Eloriel]

28. Well, DTH, I have to hand it to you

That was a superb post -- intellectual honesty personified.

BTW, I think all of it's been debunked. I didn't read anything new in there, just some of the truth spun a certain way, and then some misinformation (e.g., Dean has said QUITE passionately and more than once, and before this criticism ever came up, that he would support the nominee and encourage his supporters to do the same).

Eloriel

[DoveTurnedHawk]

31. Thank You

I appreciate your kind words. I guess I just really, really, really would like to hope and think that we're all on the same side, when it comes down to it.

I love Howard Dean, and would vote for him in a second, donate money to him in a second, volunteer for him in a second. If Clark had decided not to run, I'd probably be there for Dean right now. As it is, if Dean ends up getting the nod, I'll be there for him right after he clinches the primaries. I'll be there for ANY of our candidates right after they clinch the primaries, for that matter.

DTH

[edzontar]

2. You make some good points...

(on edit: and some not so good).

I still like Dean, but I accept this as a valid critique--worth debating, at least.

At least this is not a bashing-thread, as I understand the term.

Still, when the chips were down and some of the others, even Kerry, were pandering or speaking diseways about the war, Dean had the BALLS to tell it like it was/is.

He earned his support from me at that moment.

And has kept it so far.

[HFishbine]

5. Except

That it's tiresome and useless when the same lies are repeated over and over again. As noted above, much of this dude's complaints have been debunked.

[StopTheMorans]

18. it's funny that this poster insisted on posting these very comments

when they were just debunked a few hours ago in the thread Wyndcty started about Dean, and this poster also was posting in that thread (from which many a post, BTW, dealt with calling out people who insist on repeating things that have already been debunked).

[Cha]

3. This is from Dean's statement on "The Environment"...

"As President, I will bring my commitment to our environment to the White House, guided by six principles:

First, environmental issues cannot be isolated from other issues. President Bush and his henchmen try to sweep the environment under the rug; I will bring it back into the light. Environmental policy cannot be separated from other issues such as energy, trade, or economic policy. This is one reason that I will ask Congress to elevate the Environmental Protection Agency to cabinet status immediately, and not drag the process out with contentious debates about restructuring. We should take this step not only to reaffirm our commitment to the environment to ourselves, but to demonstrate it to the world.

Second, a healthy environment and a healthy economy go hand in hand. The right wing radicals want us to believe that we must choose between a healthy environment or a healthy economy. I believe the opposite is true. We need to protect our environment to keep our economy healthy. Ask fishermen whether they need a healthy ocean to survive. Ask loggers whether they need healthy, vibrant forests. From my experience as a governor, I know it can be difficult to bring business interests and environmentalists together. But I also know that the greatest gains are made when we succeed in doing just that.

Third, America should lead the way toward international environmental cooperation. In an act of diplomatic and environmental petulance, President Bush gave the back of his hand to the Kyoto Protocol. In doing so, he squandered much of America’s moral authority. On issues such as global warming, population growth, and overfishing, we have missed opportunities to demonstrate America’s ability to lead. Pollution doesn’t stop at the borders and neither should environmental policy.

Fourth, the environment is a health issue. Too many cities have smog so thick that some days children have to go indoors for a breath of fresh air. To help clear the air, as President, I would direct that adoption of health-based standards for air toxins be accelerated. Further, I would immediately crack down on those companies that violate New Source Review requirements rather than broaden the loophole that allows them to spew pollution as President Bush has done as a favor to his big campaign contributors in the energy industry. And I will ask Congress to close the loophole entirely. As a doctor, I believe clean air, clean land, and clean water are the right of all Americans. It could be considered part of my health care plan.

Fifth, America is capable of making incredible gains in efficiency and renewable energy technologies. That’s why I will set ambitious goals for renewable energy, energy efficiency, and fuel economy standards. I call on American automakers to embrace change, to see the new opportunities ahead, rather than waste time and energy resisting progress. The Japanese, instead of opposing California’s strict emissions requirements, rolled out hybrid gasoline-electric automobiles that are on the road today. In fact, Toyota is already rolling out the second generation of its Prius model. I believe that American automakers should not only catch up, they should become efficiency leaders and market leaders. Under a Dean Administration, they will get the support they would need to make this a reality.

Sixth, environmental leadership must be based on foresight. America’s environmental policies have too often been limited by the politics of a four-year presidential term, resulting in ineffective, short term policies that amount to a band-aid on a broken bone. My administration will craft comprehensive environmental policies that keep the long-term in mind; policies that proactively tackle the problems we know are looming decades, even centuries down the road. Addressing environmental threats such as global warming and over-fishing today will pay dividends to future generations of Americans.

Following these principles, my Administration will take ambitious steps to strengthen our clean air and water standards, promote renewable energy sources, conserve our wild and open spaces, strengthen our downtowns to reduce sprawl, and provide a safe and healthy environment for our children."

:kick:

[RetroLounge]

4. "but I cannot support him anymore"

I doubt you ever did...

[Cha]

6. Do you have a link for this?

This isn't you writing, is it? This is from "Rick in Davis"?

[bushclipper]

8. only from my e-mail...

... I get TONS of info from many sources. Sometimes it takes a while to sort through it all.

I have more from from him on the topic if you want it.

[bushclipper]

7. Just to stress, these aren't my words...

... I haven't decided on a candidate yet and, after being here for a short while, I'm even further from it.

[WilliamPitt]

9. Response to a few of these

1. 'The Man of the People' thing. It is always comforting to have guys like Clinton, Johnson and Wellstone out there running things, guys who came from nothing and understand what that means. Too often, though, those experiences fail to translate. Johnson, despite the Great Society, was instrumental in the creation of the Southeast Asian bloodbath, and Clinton basically paved the way for the NAFTA and GATTing of union jobs.

John Fitzgerald Kennedy and Franklin Delano Roosevelt were 'Men of the Very Very Very Rich People.' Both of them also basically saved the world, FDR far moreso than Kennedy. Robert Kennedy, had he lived, would almost certainly have become a champion of the poor. He was well on his way. Being poor does not automatically transfer a veneer of nobility, and being rich does not automatically make one a bastard.

2. All candidates attack each other.

3. I'm not sure you have a solid handle on Dean's war stance. My understanding is that he wanted a 60-day wait period for the inspections to finish. While this is not a "No War!" stance, it could have, if adhered to, saved us all an enormous amount of grief.

4. The last bit scares the shit out of me. I pray that this is not the mindset of Dean or his supporters. If it is, we may as well pack it in right now, because we're fucked.

[sangh0]

11. You deserve a medal

for being the only one in this thread who commented on the main point of this thread, which is Dean's statement that he would not ask his supporters to support the Dem nominee if it wasn't Dean himself.

[WilliamPitt]

13. Terrifying

if true.

I forgot one.

5. While I am no fan of guns, I am also enough of a cold, hard, pragmatic bastard to know that a candidate with a 100% NRA approval rating is solid gold in the South and West. Anything that pulls the fangs of the NRA in this upcoming election is a good thing. If he wins, we become the base, and can kick the shit out of him over this issue.

[bushclipper]

17. I have to agree...

..Whereas the rest of the post was the author's disagreement with some of Dean's actions and positions, that is business as usual in politics.

The "non tranferable" quote, however, is scary - especially how it was related to Kennedy and Carter, which I didn't know about.

[gully]

21. Does anyone have link to that accusation.

Sounds like another paraphrase where essential elements were left out.

I recall the flap where Dean said, many of his supporters were 'new' to politics and he didn't think they were transferrable? He wasn't certain who they would support if he didn't get the nod. **That is not saying he wouldn't ask them to support the nominee...**

[WilliamPitt]

25. Nope, it's right here:

Energy is what Dean and his campaign have these days. In one two-day period in July, they were able to bring in more than $500,000 over the Internet, double the amount raised by Dick Cheney at a North Carolina dinner for Bush that the campaign used as a challenge. Over the past week Dean embarked on his Sleepless Summer tour, which put him in six cities in six days to emphasize that while Bush is taking his ease at his Texas ranch, regular Americans don’t have the luxury of a month’s vacation. Crowds — and cash — continue to outstrip expectations, with some 40,000 attending rallies and more than $1 million raised. (Dean will appear in Los Angeles September 29 and 30.)

“Well, it’s been a great pleasure,” Dean says as he exits the car at Burbank Airport. (“Are we horribly late? . . . What time is wheels-up? In 15 minutes? Really?”) We’ve spent the rest of the ride-along discussing the future. As Edwards and Lieberman and Gephardt appear to fall back, and Bob Graham’s campaign seems to have difficulty getting off the ground, the calculus seems more and more to involve Dean vs. Kerry. But Wesley Clark still is an unresolved question.

When I ask Dean about Clark, his response is characteristically two-fold. He praises him with sincere fervor: “I know Wes Clark, he’s a very good human being, and he’s got an enormous amount of integrity.” At the same time, on the subject of Clark entering the race, he shows more than a glint of steel. “It’s going to be very hard to start late,” he says, “and think you’re going to do well in Iowa and New Hampshire. It’s going to be incredibly hard. I mean, we’ve already got 39,000 people working for us all around the country . . . I really do believe — and I think about this — I want to get this nomination, and if I don’t . . . these kids are not transferrable. I can’t just go out and say, ‘Okay, so I didn’t win the nomination, so go ahead and vote for the Democrats.’ They’re not going to suddenly just go away. That’s not gonna happen.”

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/03/41/features-wolf.php

I'm going to have to sit down and think about this.

[VelmaD]

39. The last paragraph is disturbing...

I've got several friends trying to pimp Dean to me and that really didn't help their cause.

Why the hell can't he tell his supporters to vote for the Democratic nominee if it isn't him? If you support your party then that's what you do. Sounds a bit selfish to me. Gonna have to read more and think deeply.

This picking a candidate thing is hard. *big sigh* :-)

DV

[gully]

45. I think it's paraphrased...

"I can’t just go out and say, ‘Okay, so I didn’t win the nomination, so go ahead and vote for the Democrats.’ They’re not going to suddenly just go away. That’s not gonna happen.”

I agree with the poster below who feels Dean is saying he can't speak for his supporters. I don't read this as a threat personally.

I would venture to guess none of the candidates running today is going to speak in terms of suggesting their supporters get behind the nominee as it is premature. But, it is assumed all of them will do so in the end. And I'm certain Howard Dean will do the same.

I have contacted headquarters and was assured that Dean would encourage his supporters to vote for the Democratic nominee if he is not that person.

I would hope there is an offical rebuttal soon.

[zeemike]

58. I am a bit surprised William

That you need to sit down and think about it. It seems to me like an inconsequential remark. He was saying that He does not have total control over his idealistic supporters and that seems to be a statement of fact. And to me that says that he is not the Jim Jones that everyone says he is.
But think on it anyway. If these idealists smell a rat they just may jump off the Demo ship and go elsewhere out of disgust for being fooled yet again.
And how much thought are you giving to Clark who voted for Nixon and Reagan? Do you ask yourself if Clark supports the policies of the Reagan administration like trickle down and union busting? Is that of any concern to you, or do you like them as well?
Inquiring minds want to know?

Oh I forgot to ask;
Is party loyalty more important to you than policies?

[Cha]

16. Dean has already said that he Will support the Democratic

nominee if it is Not him!

What Dean means by this statement is that he has gotten People into the political process who normally wouldn't bother. If Dean isn't the nominee my guess is that he will go out and campaign for that candidate and keep those People in the Fold! :kick:

[sangh0]

20. Dean has also said the opposite

but you believe one statement, and ignore the other

[WilliamPitt]

26. That's not how I read that at all

"Non-transferrable" is not ambiguous...and it is a threat.

[gully]

30. I didn't read it as a threat, but as an opinion.

He doesn't know if they will remain interested given they had no interest before his run? I think it's a fair assumption. But, I plan to dig further by calling his headquarters later.

Peace, out!

[virtualobserver]

41. It didn't sound like a threat to me.....

It sounded like a truthful assessment of the mindset of his loyal supporters, and his discomfort with abandoning them if he does not win the nomination.

This one off-the-cuff and easily interpreted remark is balanced by many unambiguous statements by Dean that he will definitely support the nominee.

[WilliamPitt]

42. How do you 'abandon' supporters if you lose the nomination?

Is he going to take them home with him to Vermont?

[virtualobserver]

47. by tellng them to get the hell out of there.

a passionate candidate draws very passionate followers.

He has said many times since then that he will support the nominee.

[w4rma]

51. My translation

"I can’t just go out and say, ‘Okay, so I didn’t win the nomination, so go ahead and vote for the Democrats.’ They’re not going to suddenly just go away. That’s not gonna happen.”

My translation of this Dean quote combined with Dean's Larry King Live "I will support the Democratic nominee." quote:

Dean can't just go out and tell these folks to vote Democrat and expect them them to do what Dean tells them to do just because he told them to do it. And they won't just leave the political process. Some might vote Green, some might vote Democrat, some might vote Republican, some might lose their enthusiasm and not vote at all. Dean will support and endorse the nominee if he he doesn't win the nomination as he says that any of the 10 Democrats running are a big improvement over Bush.

[AP]

43. Men of the People

Robert Caro said that a big reason Johnson cared so much about civil rights was because he had to drop out of school and move to a tiny Texas town where he worked as a school teacher to raise money so that he, himself, could go back to school and improve his own economic situation. Most of his students were immigrants. Johnson stayed after school to help the Mexican janitor learn English. He never got paid for doing that. He just did it because he thought it was the right thing to do.

Caro said that that experience probably explains why he was so committed to passing the Civil Rights Act.

I've heard people say that Kennedy, because he was Catholic, appealed to the working class. They saw him as an outsider, just like them. Kennedy also was the playboy president for the playboy era. James Bond was the model for masculinity, and America was richer than it had ever been before. If there was a moment when America wasn't going to be concerned with class, it was going to be that moment. And, anyway, the religion thing kept the working class on Kennedy's side.

I don't think America has had a moment like that since (however, I do think Bush I benefitted from being president during the age of The Preppy Handbook, Bonfire of the Vanities and the Oliver Stone mantra, "Greed is Good"). I don't think America's going to be very fond of an upperclass president now, at a time when Americans are losing jobs and riddled with debt. I agree with Kevin Phillips that this was part of the reason that Democrats didn't warm to Gore and Bradley the way they warmed to Clinton. If America were feeling rich right now, I'd say, sure, nominate Dean or Kerry, America won't care about their lives of privilege. Because America isn't feeling rich, I think nominating someone privileged is going to kill turnout among the working and lower middle class base (and it's going to hurt the rich candidate's attempt to make the economy an issue).

I've heard someone say that FDR, when he was governor and started really losing his mobility, began going to Arkansas for rehabilitation where he was put together with people of all ages and classes. They say that his disability was a major reason why he was so concerned with the plight of the average American. In any event, by the time he ran for president, the rich called him a traitor to his class, and he embraced that characterization.

I don't see any of the privileged candidates embracing the notion that they're traitors to their classes (and, I don't know if they have even done anything to warrant that characterization -- granted, during the Clinton administration there wasn't much of a chance to stick up for the working and middle class, but they've had 3 years of Bush, and some have had some years of Reagan-Bush to fight against the rich).

I wouldn't dismiss class and privilege so quickly. It's going to be very important in 2004. It was very important in 2000, but the Democrats dealt with it very poorly.

[WilliamPitt]

46. FDR was considered a traitor to his class

He was shunned by his own people for his economic stances.

[AP]

49. Yes.

That's what I'm saying.

If FDR hadn't been considered a traitor to his class, do you think that most Americans would have voted for him during the Great Depression? It was a crucial part of his identity. If he was just a rich, comfortable guy who didn't seem to understand the plight of the average American, he wouldn't have won, and kept winning. FDR spent a huge amount of energy to project a concern for the average person -- a HUGE amount, and I'm not talking about crying when he heard a hard luck story.

Kennedy ran during a time of relative plenty, and he still had to rely on the average American Democrat seeing him as a Catholic outsider in an America run by protestants. Sid Blumenthal writes about how his Jewish and Italian and Irish and Polish neighbors in Chicago heavily related to him because he was Catholic.

If you're a privileged candidate in this economy today, and you're not a traitor to you class, I don't know how you're going to win. This isn't 1960, James Bond, Everything-a-Go-Go America.

[Cha]

10. And this is reverse snobbery....and says more about "rick from

davis" than it says about Dr. Dean the former Govenor of Vermont.

"Dean passes himself off as a man of the people, but the guy was raised on Park Avenue, for cryin’ out loud. We all deride Bush for coming from privilege, but Dean may come from greater wealth. What does he know of the toil of the working man? I can relate to Bill Clinton, Paul Wellstone, and Lyndon Johnson in a personal, experiential way that I cannot to Howard Dean or Bush. Given the choice, I would prefer a peer of mine, not a peer of British Royalty. That gave me pause, but I tried to keep the faith.

It reeks of trying to compare Dean to bush without any fu=king logic at all.

[sangh0]

12. Why don't you address the main point?

Which is Dean's statement that he would not ask his supporters to support the Dem nominee if it turns out that Dean isn't the nominee.

[Cha]

19. I just did!

[clar]

38. I'll try

Dean has said numerous times, as recently as yesterday that the most important thing is getting bush out of office. On Larry King he stated that he'd strongly support the nominee. Same on Charlie Rose, and I've read it in print in The Burlington Free Press and other print media. I don't think the LA Weekly story is indicative of too much in the face of Dean's repeated assertions that he'd strongly endorse the nominee.

[sangh0]

50. Dean has said the opposite also

Though Dean may have said that he will support the nominee, whoever it is, he has also said he won't if the nominee is not Dean.

So why do you believe the former statement, but ignore the latter?

[noiretextatique]

57. isn't this a lot like clark's republican votes?

you know, we shouldn't judge him by all those prior republican votes, since he became a democrat two weeks ago? i think this dean meme is similar.

[sangh0]

61. Yes it is

And with both issues, I think it proves nothing but it does give a reason for concern.

[DrFunkenstein]

22. Then I Don't Want To Get Any Crap About Kerry, Either

I'm going to hold you to this, Zidzi.

[Cha]

27. After all your jumping on Dean posts with all your negativity..

I don't jump on Kerry posts with any negativity...so I am not beholden to you At All!

:kick:

[Nicholas_J]

14. Be prepared

For massive personal attacks for this type of poost.

If you do not ascribe to the "Authorized Version" of Dean Fundamentalism, expect to be skewered.

Still no matter what Dean says about those 39,000 people not voting for ANYONE else, Dean does forgets to deal with the simple question and a simple solution. HE could still ASK that the support whoever is the nominess if he is not. He is as free to do this as those who have supported his campaign are to decide not to vote. They are free to not abide by his request, but there is NOTHING to prevent him from asking. His excuse is bullshit. As free as I am to choose not to vote if Dean is the nominee.

You are correct, there is a great deal about Dean, and even more in his past record, that is as conservative as his A rating from the NRA, as also indicated by the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws F+ rating for his killingof medical marijuana legislation that had passed both the house and senate in Vermont.

There are literally thousands of articles pointing out the diconnect between Deans action and his words as candidate.

Lets look at a New Republic interpretation of Deans statements:

DEAN'S NOT SHARING
by Jonathan Chait

Candidate: Howard Dean
Category: General Likeability
Grade: D

Those who are pro-Dean, or at least anti-anti-Dean, argue that the cult following he's built will benefit the Democratic Party even if Dean doesn't win the nomination. But Dean himself argues the contrary. Commenting on Wesley Clark's possible candidacy in an interview with L.A. Weekly, Dean explained:


"It's going to be very hard to start late," he says, "and think you're going to do well in Iowa and New Hampshire. It's going to be incredibly hard. I mean, we've already got 39,000 people working for us all around the country ... I really do believe--and I think about this--I want to get this nomination, and if I don't ... these kids are not transferrable. I can't just go out and say, 'Okay, so I didn't win the nomination, so go ahead and vote for the Democrats.' They're not going to suddenly just go away. That's not gonna happen."

Notice that Dean is not only predicting that his supporters wouldn't vote for another Democratic nominee, he's suggesting that he won't even encourage them to do so. Does anybody still want to argue that Dean isn't the Democratic Party's greatest gift to George W. Bush?

http://www.tnr.com/primary/index.mhtml?pid=650

[bushclipper]

36. I've been in the politcal game a long time...

...and I've weathered many snipes and dirty tricks from a lot worse than anything that could come out of here.

[gully]

15. Rick should get his facts straight before he 'bails'.

Guess he wasn't much of an asset considering.

[Cha]

23. There are all sorts of people who "don't have their facts straight"

..trying to do all our candidates in.

[StopTheMorans]

24. well, with no link to "Rick in Davis", I can only assume that he is

"Karl in DC"

[Cha]

29. That was my first thought!

It's so easy to say "rick from davis" ...is it not?

[StopTheMorans]

33. yeah, why the hell not just say "God from Heaven", it would

carry more weight :eyes:

[Larkspur]

32. Replying to your false accusation that Dean will not support the Dem

nominee if it is not him.

Dean has always said that he will support the Dem nominee, whoever it is, because it is imperative that Bush be gone next year. He said this in his March 15, 2003 speech in California and he has repeated it often.

As far as his supporters, Dean does not have mind control over us. While Dean will set the example and ask all of his supporters to vote for the Dem nominee, should it not be him, there are some who have no faith in the Dem Party as represented by the other candidates. Dean has given hope to these people that the Dem Party can be rehabilitated. If he's not the Dem nominee, they would be crushed the most.

Personally, I will vote for the Dem nominee if it is not Dean, but whether or not I will enthusiastically volunteer for that nominee and financially contribute to that nominee's campaign depends upon the nominee. If the nominee spurns us or seeks to exploit us unfairly, I will not be working or contributing to that nominee's campaign. The best they'll get is my vote.

And in my opinion, Dean is a power broker in the Dem Party because of us. Even if he loses the nomination, he could be the new head of the Democratic Party, replacing Terry MacAuliffe. However, Dean best serves this nation as President first, Party leader second.

[AndyTiedye]

53. No Use Comparing them to Wellstone, We'd All Vote for Wellstone...

...if we could. :cry:

I am less concerned with comparisons to 1980 than with 1968.
We know that any progressive who looks like (s)he might win will be Wellstoned. :cry::cry:

Alas, my favorite, Carol Mosley-Brown, is in no danger of winning.

It needs to be a real horse-race to the convention, with several candidates who
outpoll Bush (we seem to be close to this point), and they must not savage each
other. If there is only one candidate who can beat Bush, that candidate will be Wellstoned.

[blm]

59. Kerry's liberal rating is closest to Wellstone's

of all the candidates.

And he flies his own plane.

[CMT]

34. speaking of the Kyoto Treaty

Dean set limits in his state above what was called for in the treaty.

[DianeK]

35. i guess i must be missing something...

I mean, we’ve already got 39,000 people working for us all around the country . . . I really do believe — and I think about this — I want to get this nomination, and if I don’t . . . these kids are not transferrable. I can’t just go out and say, ‘Okay, so I didn’t win the nomination, so go ahead and vote for the Democrats.’ They’re not going to suddenly just go away. That’s not gonna happen.”


it sounds like he's talking about the kids that are working for the campaign..i have heard say himself that he would support whoever the democratic nominee turns out to be. i think that would normally be called an 'endorsement'...endorsements are powerful..whether or not he goes to his campaign volunteers and thanks them for working so hard and then says 'oh by the way, don't vote in the upcoming election'..whatever..i don't know...kind of hard to swallow..but an endorsement is influential to his supporters

[CWebster]

37. Oh look a Dean-bashing flamefest

based on a bunch of falsehoods and ignorant slurs, instigated by a Clarkie newbie and egged on by the regular cast. of skulkers.

[bushclipper]

40. We welcome your critique...

...take each point in the article and show them to be falsehoods and ignorant slurs. We need the clarifications.

And as I've said, I'm leaning Sharpton.

[StopTheMorans]

44. come on, I debunked the points that you cited

from Wyndycty in his/her thread, yet you insisted on citing them here. ANd you were in that thread, so I'm fairly certain that you must have seen them. So why do you insist on repeating falsehoods when you know that they are false, and then asking people to re-debunk them when you've already seen the answers? What exactly are you looking to accomplish?

[Cha]

54. From reading your post I can only conclude that the poster is

being ...shock!...Disingenous!

[JNelson6563]

56. It's been done

again and again and again. Welcome, I see you are new. Your newness does not give you the right to come in, post a bunch of already debunked nonsense and then demand a new debunking for your benefit. Yes, we're glad to see new posters but I urge you to look around at what's been posted, discussed and debunked before you post.

The tact in this thread smacks of the same sort of nonsense we witness when those "lifelong Deomcrats" call C-Span and whine about Bush bashing or some such crap--insisting the left has gotten so vicious they're becoming Repubs. :eyes: Just an FYI.

Julie

[Bertrand]

48. To take just a snippet of the article

had not seen the Dean article in L.A. Weekly until this morning. Apparently it was old news to the Dean faithful, but I’m not sure they understand the gravity of what Dean said, even if it is spun to their liking.

I mean, we’ve already got 39,000 people working for us all around the country . . . I really do believe — and I think about this — I want to get this nomination, and if I don’t . . . these kids are not transferrable. I can’t just go out and say, ‘Okay, so I didn’t win the nomination, so go ahead and vote for the Democrats.’ They’re not going to suddenly just go away. That’s not gonna happen.”

Dean plainly said that he will not ask his supporters to “vote for the Democrats” if he loses the primary. When I read that it made my blood boil. It is a political ritual at every nominating convention that the candidates unite onstage after the last ballot, joining hands held high, and strongly and unequivocally urging their supporters to unite behind the nominee.



Dean doesnt plainly say that he will not ask his supporters to "vote for the Democrats". He's pointing out the reality of him bringing in supporters that have not been apart of the political process and that alot of them are loyal to him, not to the party. I disagree with him implying that all of them are not transferrable, but that's a minor issue probably do to him mispeaking. The person who wrote this article is jumping to conclusions.

[haymaker]

52. More of the same. To all Dean supporters,

I know you are not mindless idiots like you are so often made out to be here at DU (or shall I say we, because I too support Dean, however it is still way early, but he does kick Shrub's ass on a daily basis).

Remember, Bush is the front-runner, not Dean, and all the Dean haters are merely pissed at Dean because he is ahead of their personal favorite pink tu-tu wearer. That or they are trolls (I'm not calling anyone in particular a troll, mods, just stating the obvious, so when someone hits the alert button, maybe you should examine their motive).

Don't lose your zeal just bacause some supposed convention veteran says you are losing it for the whole team. Give the money to his campaign if you care to. Go to the meet up and work as hard as you can. Do not listen to all this bullshit. Dean can win. He is not afraid of losing as are many of the rest. He is not tearing the party apart, he is saving it. He has brought more people, excitement, and cash into a presidential election, this early in the campaign, than ANY candidate in the history of the Democratic Party and all many here can do is attack him.

Well let's not make any mistake, it is those who attack Dean at all cost who will give Bush four more years to slash and burn. Not all of you.

Fight the good fight.

[Cha]

55. Thanks Haymaker....When I think of Dean...he was running way

back when we didn't know if Al Gore was going to run or not.

Dean has the confidence to deliver, IMO!

[kodi]

60. wow, you broke your cherry, that's politics, get used to it.

it will never change unless jesus comes back, then all bets are off.

[dsc]

62. Rick is a liar

This message is replete with errors and falsehoods. I will attempt to enunciate them one by one.

Some things about Dean just bothered me. His 100 percent rating from the NRA is a huge red flag. He and his supporters defend him by saying that gun control is a states rights issue. I think the federal government has a compelling interest in public safety and gun control. So do most lefties, I think. This made me uneasy, but I acted as though I had faith.

The NRA doesn't rate by percents they give letter grades. He does have an A for his record in Vermont. In general that A has been earned due to not passing gun control in Vermont. Dean has said clearly and often that he favors the assult weapons ban, Brady, and closing the gun show loophole. He also opposes immunity for gun manufacturers. He wouldn't get an A federally.

Dean has a pretty marginal record on defending the environment in Vermont. IBM is Vermont’s biggest polluter, yet it received Dean’s Environmental Achievement Award nine times. Dean sent Vermont’s nuclear waste to the poor, mostly Hispanic town of Sierra Blanca, Texas, 16 miles from the Mexican border — a plan described as “blatant environmental racism” by Paul Wellstone. Wellstone is a man I respected and revered far more than Dean. These things made me feel uneasy about supporting Dean, but I tried to keep my faith.

No material was sent anywhere at anytime. He had no input on where the material would have gone. When he found out it was in an unsafe place he backed out of the deal.

Dean passes himself off as a man of the people, but the guy was raised on Park Avenue, for cryin’ out loud. We all deride Bush for coming from privilege, but Dean may come from greater wealth. What does he know of the toil of the working man? I can relate to Bill Clinton, Paul Wellstone, and Lyndon Johnson in a personal, experiential way that I cannot to Howard Dean or Bush. Given the choice, I would prefer a peer of mine, not a peer of British Royalty. That gave me pause, but I tried to keep the faith.

It should be noted that Lyndon Johnson grew up poor but was a very wealthy man upon assuming the Presidency. I don't think money, or lack there of, is everything. Reagan, Nixon, and Collidge all grew up poor. FDR, Kennedy, and Teddy Roosevelt were rich. Dean is not terribly wealthy. For a family with two doctors his net worth isn't absurdly high. It is certainly lower than Kerry's and probably Clark's. And he earned the money he made by being a Doctor. That isn't what Bush did and Rick damn well knows that.

Dean’s constant sniping at the other candidates for supporting the war under some circumstances really started to get under my skin. Dean himself waffled about the war, saying that he would take Bush at his word about the pretexts for war and support it if Bush said America was in immediate danger from Iraq. Bush did say that many, many times, and taking him at his word is what got us into this mess. Dean bears as much responsibility for the war as those who voted for the war resolution but were against unilateral action. His posturing was phony, and it started to piss me off. But I tried hard to keep the faith.

Not only does Rick mess up what Dean said but also what Bush said. Bush actually articulated a doctrine that invasion was OK even without imminent threat. Further Dean wanted the UN to prove that Saddam was a threat not Bush. So you are just plain wrong on both counts here. Dean didn't say he trusted Bush on whether Saddam was an imminent threat and Bush didn't say Saddam was one.

I had not seen the Dean article in L.A. Weekly until this morning. Apparently it was old news to the Dean faithful, but I’m not sure they understand the gravity of what Dean said, even if it is spun to their liking.

I mean, we’ve already got 39,000 people working for us all around the country . . . I really do believe — and I think about this — I want to get this nomination, and if I don’t . . . these kids are not transferrable. I can’t just go out and say, ‘Okay, so I didn’t win the nomination, so go ahead and vote for the Democrats.’ They’re not going to suddenly just go away. That’s not gonna happen.”

Dean plainly said that he will not ask his supporters to “vote for the Democrats” if he loses the primary. When I read that it made my blood boil. It is a political ritual at every nominating convention that the candidates unite onstage after the last ballot, joining hands held high, and strongly and unequivocally urging their supporters to unite behind the nominee.

When I brought this up among the Dean supporters, the explanation almost uniformly was that Dean does not “own” his supporters, they are attracted to politics because of him, and they would not likely support the other candidates anyway. They point out that Dean has said many times that HE would support the nominee, but that is hardly the point. He told L.A. Weekly that he would not ask his SUPPORTERS to vote for the nominee. And that does it for me. I cannot support a candidate who says such a profoundly arrogant and counterproductive thing.


This hasn't been spun it has been explained. Believe it or not we aren't cultists with Dean as our great leader. Most of his supporters, or to be more accurate most of the supporters I have met, are like me. We are ABB. I have consistently said, never once saying the opposite, that I will support whomever our nominee is. I said it, I mean it, and that is that. But Dean's actions have nothing at all to do with that. I said it when I was a Gore supporter. I say it now. What any intellectually honest person who reads what Dean says knows it means is that he can't guarentee what they will do. Dean has said, over and over and over and over and over and over again that he will support the nominee. He said it on Larry King, he said it in LA Weekly, he said it on MTP, he said it on This Week. Just how many effing times does he have to say it. I have not once seen Kerry asked this question nor have I seen these insulting crapola posts in regards to his supporters.

How many of Dean’s supporters have ever even been to a national convention? How many know of the importance of party unity behind the nominee? It is vital, and for Dean and his supporters to piss on it like that is something I cannot forgive. My faith in Dean is gone. I wish him and his supporters the best of luck, but I cannot support him anymore."

This is Rick's worst lie. Nowhere does he have a quote from a Dean supporter trashing Democratic unity. Nowhere does he have any evidence that Dean supporters haven't been to conventions. For the record I haven't due to being to poor to go. Funny how being an elite activist works huh. He slanders every Dean supporter to a purposeful lie about what Dean said. There is a word for people who do that. It is liar.

One final point to other posters. I have no idea what number this post will be but I sure hope not to hear nonsense about us not addresing Rick's lies and errors in subsequent posts.

[bushclipper]

64. He did have a few facts confused...

1. You are correct, of course. The NRA gives letter grades. Dean recieved an "A." We'll never know if that "A" was a 90% or %100 or something in between. But his candidacy was endorsed by the NRA. He supports closing the gun show loophole but considers the whole matter of sensible gun control a state issue.

2. "Dean advocated sending nuclear waste from his state to the poor, mostly Hispanic town of Sierra Blanca, Texas. Wellstone called the proposal "blatant environmental injustice" and fought to delay the measure in the Senate. It ultimately passed but was later determined unsafe." http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0523-03.htm

Dean's environmental record is puzzling to me. He never got the endorsement of Vermont's Sierra Club. Not that that is real important but...

IBM is Vermont’s biggest polluter, yet it received Dean’s Environmental Achievement Award nine times. Dean has also been quoted as saying, "I've had 40 or 45 private meetings with IBM since I've been governor. And IBM has gotten pretty much everything they've asked for." I've only seen this quote in multiple articles about Dean though never in it's original source. May be taken out of context, but maybe not.

I'm also troubled by Dean and his welfare position. He said some welfare recipients "don't have any self-esteem. If they did, they'd be working" and scaled back Vermont's welfare program, reducing cash benefits and imposing strict time limits on single mothers receiving welfare assistance.

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0523-03.htm

Now, we're on the topic of Dean.

[dsc]

66. The NRA gives A+'s and since Dean didn't get one

we can safely assume it wasn't a 100. Dean didn't advocate sending waste to a poor area of Texas. He advocated sending it to Texas for sefe disposal. Given the vast unpopulated areas of that state it wasn't unreasonable to assume it was going to one of those. When he learned differently he didn't send the waste. Those are established facts which even the activists down there agreed to. The town Sierra Blance wasn't mentioned in the proposal. Texas, and only Texas, had any say in where the material would go once it got to Texas. That is why the man is lying when he says the opposite.

On welfare did you vote for Clinton? Are you voting for Kerry? Both did the exact same thing (without the dumb remark).

[wyldwolf]

68. You speak of established facts...

...did you just say Dean didn't get an "A" from the NRA?

Dean didn't advocate sending waste to a poor area of Texas. He advocated sending it to Texas for sefe disposal.

Source after source after sourse say it was the mostly Hispanic town of Sierra Blanca... which is a poor town.

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0523-03.htm for example. Google for more if you need to.

Wellstone called the proposal "blatant environmental injustice" and fought to delay the measure in the Senate. Are you saying that Dean suddenly realized it wasn't safe after it was taken up in the Senate?

Or are you implying Dean wasn't kept abreast on the situation until Wellstone fought against it?

Where are your sources that dispute the above?

[dsc]

71. No I didn't

you need to try reading. I know for Dean bashers reading posts is too difficult but what I said was two things. One that the NRA gives letter grades not the numbers that Rick claimed and two that Dean didn't get an A+. An A+ and an A are different grades and it was a directly relevant point given that Rick cliamed Dean got a 100%. Again try reading. I know for Dean bashers that is hard.

[stickdog]

63. The writer of this article is ridiculously uninformed and full of shit.

One should really actually make an attempt to FIND OUT ABOUT a candidate before writing a piece of crap about him:

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/dean/articles/2003/09/21/born_to_privilege_searching_for_a_purpose/

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/09/22/a_meteoric_rise_in_vermont_politics/

[bushclipper]

70. Well, tell us - with sources - why he is ridiculously uninformed ...

...and full of shit.

People that agree (and disagree) have been providing sources all day in this thread.

[dsc]

72. Several examples have been provided

He is full of shit when he claims the NRA gave anyone a 100%. Even you admitted that. that is only one of several I have provided.

[AnnabelLee]

65. bushclipper

Please edit your post to four paragraphs and provide a link.

Thank you
AnnabelLee
DU Moderator

[bushclipper]

69. As I stated...

I stated that it was from my e-mail. (No link) I've also said that there was more of it (much more actually) so I have not posted the entire piece.

[shanti]

67. *yawn*

*filing my nails...*