Where were they right after 9.11? HD vs Clark:

[robbedvoter]

Dean's comments on civil liberties cause alarm

September 14, 2001
http://rutlandherald.com/hdean/33681
By DAVID GRAM The Associated Press

MONTPELIER -- Gov. Howard Dean's call for a "re-evaluation" of some of America's civil liberties following this week's terrorist attacks was criticised Thursday by a Vermont Law School professor.

"Good God," Vermont Law School Professor Michael Mello said when read the remarks Dean made at a Wednesday news conference. "It's terribly irresponsible for the leader of our state to be saying stuff like that right now."

At the same time, Clark was writing this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4257771-103677,00.html

> Decisive force
>
> We must target and destroy the terrorist network. There is no room for
> half measures
> Special report: terrorism in the US
>
> Wesley Clark
> Saturday September 15, 2001
> The Guardian
>
> America is indeed at war. The attacks in New York and Washington have
> raised the dangers posed by international terrorism to a new level. But
> despite the awful familiarity of the devastation, an effective US
> response is likely to be something unfamiliar.
>
> For the US, the weapons of this war should be information, law
> enforcement and, rarely, active military force. The coalition that will
> form around the US and its Nato allies should agree on its intent, but
> not trumpet its plans. No vast military deployments should be
> anticipated. But urgent measures should be taken behind the scenes
> because the populations and economic structures of western nations will
> be at risk.

[mouse7]

1. Howard Dean revealed as Loki, God of Chaos

Howard Dean will perform malicious tricks on you that will embarrass you to you friend, family, and co-workers. Dean will cause plagues of serpents and wolves.

Vote for Clark! Clark likes Odin!

[lurk_no_more]

20. And then there's

Food for thought from….“JAFO”

[robbedvoter]

2. Here's another snippet from the HD article:

Dean said Wednesday he believed that the attacks and their aftermath would “require a re-evaluation of the importance of some of our specific civil liberties. I think there are going to be debates about what can be said where, what can be printed where, what kind of freedom of movement people have and whether it's OK for a policeman to ask for your ID just because you're walking down the street.”

Dean said he had not taken a position on these questions.Asked whether he meant that specific rights described in the Bill of Rights — the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution — would have to be trimmed, the governor said:

“I haven't gotten that far yet. I think that's unlikely, but I frankly haven't gotten that far. Again, I think that's a debate that we will have.”

[worldgonekrazy]

47. Well that is disturbing

And this is from a Dean supporter.

The only thing I can offer in the way of an excuse is that a lot of people were hysterical following 9/11 and I think a lot of things were said that, in hindsight, should not have been. Pretty weak, I know.

Of course, I would point out, and only because you are obviously a Clark supporter, that he has some disturbing things in his past. The article you post seems reasonable enough, but what about when he praised practically everyone in the Bush Administration for the Iraq War? He knows as much of any of us that the war was waged on bullshit pretexts, yet he still thought it was a good idea. Then there is the whole thing if him working for Axciom which develops scary surveillance stuff. No candidate is perfect.

[BootinUp]

52. Common misconception here at DU about Clark

Clark did write about the successful military invasion of Iraq, he was clearly saying the military tactics were sound and praised the planners of the invasion as far as that goes. At the same time he alwasy expressed concern for the strategy behind the invasion and never praised Bush or anyone else for that. I encourage you to look for the full context of those statements. There was a recent thread like yesterday that discussed it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=30610

[worldgonekrazy]

56. No, that is YOUR perception

MY perception, and I have read some of what Clark wrote at that time and saw him on CNN a fair number of times, was that he had no problem with the military campaign. Now he says he would never have voted for the IWR, but his actions at the time do not lend credence to that. I think this is a case of a man changing his positions to appeal to the base for the primary, which is fine because everyone does it (even DK on abortion), but lets not pretend it was anything else.

[SahaleArm]

58. No perception - I assume you've read the House Armed Statement...

9/26/02: Force should be used as the last resort; after all diplomatic means have been exhausted, unless information indicates that further delay would present an immediate risk to the assembled forces and organizations. This action should not be categorized as “preemptive.”

http://www.house.gov/hasc/openingstatementsandpressreleases/107thcongress/02-09-26clark.html

[Progressive420]

59. I am a Clark supporter

You really should read his book Waging Modern War : Iraq, Terrorism, and the American Empire. It really shows that the man was totally against the war though he did applaud the Armed forces for a sucessful invasion he didn't praise the administration for the war at all.

[BootinUp]

61. You realize CNN hired him to make tactical commentary?n/t

[in_cog_ni_to]

54. The Bill of Rights and the Constitution

are now open to DEBATE? Oy Vey! He must love the Patriot Act I & II if he's willing to debate our rights in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Damn. And I thought Bush and Ashcroft were bad...at least they have an excuse...THEY'RE REPUBLICANS!

Then I find this. :(

Howard Dean is worse than Ashcroft and the PATRIOT Act

by Scott Huminski, Unknown News
Sept. 29, 2003

Howard Dean recently has strongly criticized the PATRIOT Act and Attorney General John Ashcroft. Dean's record, however, reveals that his policy in Vermont was to appoint judges that would ignore "legal technicalities" (i.e. the Bill of Rights). His record shows that he appointed such judges. Dean increased prison funding 150% in his tenure in Vermont. Dean stated that a re-evaluation of our civil liberties may be in order post 9-11. Dean will say anything to gather votes, regardless of what his true feelings are concerning an issue.

Dean's covert implementation of a 'Vermont PATRIOT Act' in the 1990s, by simply appointing anti-Bill-of-Rights judges, is far worse than any piece of federal legislation now in place. Unlike legislation, Dean's covert Vermont PATRIOT Act cannot be repealed or modified, and it oppresses Vermonters to this day. Whatever one's opinion of the PATRIOT Act, it was at least done in public view. Dean chose to oppress the people of Vermont in secrecy behind closed doors via appointments.

Dean's criticism of Ashcroft is a sham and directly contradicts his record in Vermont.

http://www.unknownnews.net/030929a-sh.html

[lcordero]

3. This is definitely not comforting

Both of them seem Machiavellian in nature to me. It's really scary when both characters seem to be ghosts out of the book, "The Prince" or "The 48 Laws of Power".

[robbedvoter]

5. Which part of no war, but cooperation of intelligence you disagree with?

Unless of course you see OBL&company some noble crusaders that should be revred, in which case, I can't help you. Nonody can.

[worldgonekrazy]

48. false dichotomy

Things are never black and white

[terrisel]

4. We haven't had the Debate

Congress passed the 1st Patriot Act without reading it. We have had no national debate on the second.

I would prefer a candidate who would have said from the beginning that the Bill of Rights is sacred but I will take one who states that now. America=Constitution with Bill of Rights.

[JNelson6563]

6. Was Clark applying for job w/Team Bush?

Sept. 29 issue - After Al Qaeda attacked America, retired Gen. Wes Clark thought the Bush administration would invite him to join its team. After all, he’d been NATO commander, he knew how to build military coalitions and the investment firm he now worked for had strong Bush ties. But when GOP friends inquired, they were told: forget it.

WORD WAS THAT Karl Rove, the president’s political mastermind, had blocked the idea. Clark was furious. Last January, at a conference in Switzerland, he happened to chat with two prominent Republicans, Colorado Gov. Bill Owens and Marc Holtzman, now president of the University of Denver. “I would have been a Republican,” Clark told them, “if Karl Rove had returned my phone calls.” Soon thereafter, in fact, Clark quit his day job and began seriously planning to enter the presidential race—as a Democrat. Messaging NEWSWEEK by BlackBerry, Clark late last week insisted the remark was a “humorous tweak.” The two others said it was anything but. “He went into detail about his grievances,” Holtzman said. “Clark wasn’t joking. We were really shocked.”

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3087185/

He had already gone to the trouble to lay the foundation of such a possiblity, bowing and scraping to Team Bush prior to 9/11:

Comments made in May 2001 surfaced, showing Clark heaping praise on Bush and his team: 'I'm very glad we've got the great team in office, men like Colin Powell, Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice... people I know very well - our President George W Bush. We need them there,' he told an Arkansas Republican dinner.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/internation...1091321,00.html

Yes, RobbedVoter, I agree, post 9/11 behavior is most interesting. Especially when paired with the pre-9/11 behavior. Thanks for the opportunity to point that out. :-)

Julie

[robbedvoter]

9. Clark's jokes, (like Gore's) are treated as lies/sinister plots

HD's fumbles (OBL - presumed innocent - or not) are carefully covered up by AP. Did you ever wonder why that is? Or why are George Will, Novak, Safire begging us to not oppose HD or our party is doomed (same thesis - different argument each)
http://robbedvoter.forclark.com/story/2003/12/24/122315/39
Why?

[JNelson6563]

13. "He wasn't kidding"

“He went into detail about his grievances,” Holtzman said. “Clark wasn’t joking. We were really shocked.”

According to Holtzman, who was there, this is no joke.

Julie

[TrueAmerican]

15. Please don't parrot Right Wing propaganda here

We know you support Howard Dean, but please don't use republican smear tactics at DU.

Thanks.

[JNelson6563]

24. Providing quote=Rep. smear tactics?

I was under the impression that providng quotes to back up one's statement was a proper method. I didn't realize that doing so was a Republican smear technique! Interesting.

So when Clark supporters use Dean quotes to back criticism of Dean are they using "right wing smear tactics" too? Or is that somehow different?

Julie

[Scott Lee]

26. Imagine what they think of providing the WHOLE quote! :)

Which, when it's done, sure deflates the entire reason for this thread.

[Justice]

30. Use Quotes of The Candidate To Back Up Comment

How very disappointing. There is a vast difference between the original post and your remarks quoting Holtzman.

One can fairly point to a candidates own quoted remarks, taken in context and make a comment about them. But to take the quoted remarks of another person - to take hearsay from a very unreliable source - and take it as gospel and them make a comment about it - that is unexcusable. What Holtzman said belongs to Holtzman - not to Clark - and can not be attributed to Clark.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

16. He was drafted.

Drafted, I tell you.

[mikehiggins]

32. Interesting, if true

However, like much in life, things are not quite that simple.

Without the draft movement, Clark would not have run. Without the draft movement, actually, Clark could not have run. Like Graham, he had no demonstrable wide base of support. He would have had difficulty raising money, putting together a staff and getting the campaign under way.

Clinton may have given him encourageing words but donors don't put up the bucks because you swim 200 laps a day, or have nice hair.

The DC movement demonstrated a widespread base of support even before Clark's campaign was a blip on the political radar. Without it he could never have put together the institutional and political support necessary to make the run.

The draftClark movement was as important to the Clark campaign as the MoveOn endorsement was to Dean.

The difference was that Dean had been running for years, was an established professional politician, had supporters and staff and a wide ranging list of corporate sponsors. MoveOn showed that support for the anti-BushCo argument was deeper and stronger than anyone had really suspected, and Dean became the personification of that emotion.

Clark had none of Dean's advantages going into this race. Without the DC movement, he'd still be working for CNN.

He was drafted, but he also really wanted to serve.

[worldgonekrazy]

49. MoveOn endorsed Dean?

I must have missed that. There was the MoveOn primary that would have determined endorsement, but nobody got the required 50% of the vote (though Dean was darn close with something like 40%), so I thought they weren't going to endorse anyone.

[mikehiggins]

29. According to the White House Clark never called Rove at all. n/t

[worldgonekrazy]

50. Notice it doesn't say that Clark made the call

Friends made it for him, according to the article.

[Rose Siding]

17. He had a job selling CAPPS II

He made money hawking the invasive CAPPS II program to Congress.

So while Dean was acknowledging the coming dialogue, rather than recommending any actual changes, Clark was busy selling changes to which we hadn't agreed.

[LouisFC]

23. some thoughts...

I would just like to say first of all that I couldn't care less when Clark registered as a Democrat, but as it seems to be a problem for some, I will point out the following.

1. "GOP friends inquired, they were told: forget it"
Would we all be better off the Bush administration had been able to look past its partisanship and accepted this offer from General Clark? I suspect we would. The country would certainly be a lot better off if we had listened to Clark about the dangers of invading Iraq.

2. "I would have been a Republican, if Karl Rove had returned my calls"
(The Daily Standard, Clark Never Called Rove, by Matthew Continetti 09/22/2003) “... the White House has logged every incoming phone call since the beginning of the Bush administration in January 2001. At the request of THE DAILY STANDARD, White House staffers went through the logs to check whether Clark had ever called White House political adviser Karl Rove. The general hadn't. What's more, Rove says he doesn't remember ever talking to Clark, either.”

3. "he went into detail about his grievances"
I have a few of my own I would like to share with Mssrs. Owen and Holtzman. I find it odd that this quote gets used to somehow show that Clark is a closet Republican. Do you not have detailed grievances about the Bush administration?

4. "heaping praise"
Please read that speech. I do not believe "heaping" to be descriptive of what General Clark said and his speech that followed is consistent with what he says now about the importance of multilateralism.

[mikehiggins]

28. Did anyone really need an opportunity to post this stuff?

didn't you start typing as soon as the names Dean and Clark appeared in the same post?

So, let me get this straight.

Dean thought we should debate civil liberties after 9/11? Sounds like a real, break through populist leader to me. Just who were those pesky amendments intended to protect, big business?

Clark thought we should go and kill Osama bin Laden?

The other stuff about Clark has been posted and reposted time and time again. The White House denies Clark ever called Rove so maybe he was teasing the two GOP officials who quoted him, just like he claims.

Most Americans were willing to say positive things about Bush before 9/11. Most Americans wanted the whole election mess to be put behind us, and attacking and criticizing BushCo was seen as just dragging that controversy out again. As it happens, the complete unedited talk Clark gave was not quite as supportive of the Bush agenda as the parts the "truth squad" like to parade around DU as if they were "late breaking news".

Inconvenient facts, as it happens, but facts nonetheless.

Don't you folks ever get tired of this stuff?

Governor Doctor Dean is the anointed front runner of the primary season, endorsed by the elected President of the United States and a whole slew of other folks, as well as the media and, supposedly, Rove and the White House.

What the hell are the Dean supporters so afraid of that they keep having to post and repost these lame attacks? Do they know something we don't know about their candidate? Seems possible, doesn't it?

[Rose Siding]

34. Cue spooky music

Look at you! So willing to point out that something has been posted b-4 about Clark but old Dean stuff, well- he's pro corp (Don't see HOW advocating a dialogue would lead you to that conclusion, but whatever)

And even though- even though!- the WH is your source to exonerate Clark, they actually support Dean. Uh...? :silly:

[mikehiggins]

37. Facts are facts, Jack

The White House says Clark didn't call.

It wasn't them that keeps posting and reposting this stuff, was it?

As to advocating a dialogue over the Bill of Rights and civil liberties which is what the first quote alluded to? Is that what you're talking about? Is that the position you want to be defending?

As to supporting corporations? Wasn't he the governor of Vermont? Was he anti-corporation during that period? He certainly wasn't anti-Nafta or free trade. Why assume he was anti-corporation.

Look, most all of us know Wes Clark is not the shining white knight on horseback that will save us from all the world's evil. We just believe he stands a much better chance at beating Bush than the other eight candidates do.

There are lots of attacks and counters bouncing around DU these days and most of us would just prefer to wait and let the voters sort it all out in the primary.

Why not just ignore the anti-Dean stuff and I'll ignore the anti-Clark stuff. Then people will stop posting it.

Until that happens, however, I'm retired and an insomniac with gout. I'm ready to keep pricking balloons as long as folks keep trying to float them.

[Rose Siding]

43. Labor gave Dean the first Paul Wellstone Award

and several union endorsements. I trust they are more up on Dean's record with corporations than I, but Clinton favored Nafta as well. The results make our trade practices worth re-examining and Dean has wisely done so.

Do you think Clinton is advising Clark? I know he and Dean speak a couple of times a month.

As to advocating a dialogue over the Bill of Rights and civil liberties which is what the first quote alluded to? Is that what you're talking about? Is that the position you want to be defending?

THREE days after 911? I'd defend a dialogue (discussion, examination, evaluation, conversation) about anything at that point as is befitting of a democracy. It was weeks before I didn't think something else was coming any minute. You? You should read the rest of the article. It was a very sound thing to say.

What I wouldn't defend is, months later, the sale of IT programs that gave access to your financial history to an airline ticket agent just because you want to go on vacation.

[worldgonekrazy]

51. I don't want Dean to be anti-corporation

And I don't believe he is.

Corporations are not an inherently bad thing as they do provide quite a lot of jobs. The problem is when they are not properly regulated, and Dean has said this time and time again. "Capitalism with rules" is what he calls it. Seems a lot better than W's alternative.

[blm]

66. Dean pushed deregulation as governor.

And he made a verty chummy SECRET deal with BFEE loyalists the Koch brothers when he allowed them to buy Vermont Yankee.

How ANY Democrat can trust any politician who pushes to deregulate electricity is beyond me. Then he makes a deal with the KOCH BROTHERS???? Pure BFEE loyalists who no doubt have given Rove all the internal paperwork he needs while Dean laughably keeps his papers sealed so Democrats can't avail themselves of Dean's true deregulating, pro-corporate nature.

[Progressive420]

60. and since when

have we trusted everything a republican says i know alot of you were in another thread saying we couldnt trust what John McCain said about losing seats in Congress why in Gods name would you trust them when things they say are going good for you but when they say things that arent going your way your totally against them you should pick a position and stand with it regardless of what any republican says

[November 2004]

7. The difference is

that Dean can win the democratic nomination and lose the presidency while Clark can win both.

Thanks, robbedvoter; good post! :hi:

[JNelson6563]

8. But the Pubbies already have one of their own

why would they switch now? :shrug:

Julie

[TrueAmerican]

12. That's right why would they switch to Howard Dean

Howard Dean and Joe Lieberman are the two most conservatives out of the candidates.

[JNelson6563]

14. Read again, slowly this time:

WORD WAS THAT Karl Rove, the president’s political mastermind, had blocked the idea. Clark was furious. Last January, at a conference in Switzerland, he happened to chat with two prominent Republicans, Colorado Gov. Bill Owens and Marc Holtzman, now president of the University of Denver. “I would have been a Republican,” Clark told them, “if Karl Rove had returned my phone calls.” Soon thereafter, in fact, Clark quit his day job and began seriously planning to enter the presidential race—as a Democrat. Messaging NEWSWEEK by BlackBerry, Clark late last week insisted the remark was a “humorous tweak.” The two others said it was anything but. “He went into detail about his grievances,” Holtzman said. “Clark wasn’t joking. We were really shocked.”

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3087185/

Julie

[TrueAmerican]

18. Read even slower: Howard Fineman

Howard Fineman = Right Wing Media Whore.

[JNelson6563]

19. quotes are quotes

no matter who the reporter is. Are you charging Fineman with manufacturing quotes???

Julie

[TrueAmerican]

21. Quotes can be easily taken out of context

Surely, you don't believe the right doesn't twist words around?

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Justice]

31. Quotes From An Unreliable Source Aren't Reliable

Here you have Fineman quoting Holtzman.

And you believe those two over Clark? And over the context of the statement itself, and the fact there are no records of calls to and from Clark/Rove?

Come on, your posts are not believable. I am so amazing disappointed that you would do this.

[JNelson6563]

46. The quote is not denied by Clark

in fact he admits to it by trying to dismiss it as "a joke". ;-)

Sure it was.

Julie

[mikehiggins]

38. Fineman is quoting two GOP officials.

They are quoting Clark.

This wouldn't make it in any court of law, and most especially when the White House denies any calls were made and Rove denies have ever spoken to Clark.

So, do we believe Clark when he says he was tweaking two GOP guys or do we believe them when they claim he was serious.

If we believe them, then why shouldn't we believe the White House and Rove?

Maybe Clark played a joke on these guys and they were too dense to catch on? Or maybe this is a deliberate smear?

You CHOOSE to believe one set of republicans over another set of republicans? Lots of luck bunky.

[JNelson6563]

45. Clark did not deny the quote

he tried to blow it off. That doesn't really mesh with his little speech of praise that is in my sig line, another quote he and his supporters do not deny (of course since it's on tape that's kinda hard to do ;-) )

Julie

[TrueAmerican]

10. That sums it up

Dean = 4 more years of Bush
Clark = No more years of Bush


No more fuzzy math.

[worldgonekrazy]

53. Ah, now you are even using Bushisms

Interesting.

[robbedvoter]

11. Here's another snippet from the Clark article:

Some will call for full disclosure and near-legal standards of evidence before acting. Others will arm a hair trigger, seeking to use the most readily available information, even if scant. But we must not pose legality and expediency as opposite extremes. To be expedient, we must act within the bounds of international law consistent with consensus among the emerging allied coalition. Maintaining this consensus will be one of the prime challenges we face.

[Scott Lee]

25. Um, did you leave something out of the quote, robbedvoter?

Why yes....yes you did....the part questioning whether it's wise for a cop to ID someone "just walking" down the street?

See if you include that bit in, it was clear Dean was putting a pro-civil rights edge on his comments.

I can see why you would creatively edit such a comment.

[HFishbine]

27. Clark was on it

After 9.11 Clark went to work as a paid lobbyist for Acxiom in an effort to help the government build suveillance dossiers on American citizens -- a true American patriot.

http://www.rightpolicy.com/clark.htm

[LouisFC]

33. One more time...

I assume from the number of posts you have that you have already seen this, but for those that haven't and might be swayed by your comment:

http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/972597.asp
“Government and industry officials who have attended meetings with Clark described him as thoughtful and persuasive. Jones, the Acxiom official, said Clark repeatedly stressed the need to “properly balance legitimate privacy interests and the need for security.” Jones said that was a core theme of Acxiom’s effort to win government contracts”

[HFishbine]

35. An Acxiom official

defending Clark. Nothing to worry about.

[BootinUp]

36. Not one more time

HFishbine will continue to smear the Clark as long as he is a threat to the "chosen one". It doesn't matter to HFishbine and others here at DU that Clark is for immediate repealing of the Patriot Act provisions that weakened rights of privacy, and for re-examination of the whole thing.

In a word, this is politics, and dirty smears are fine. Clark new it coming into the race, he made the decision to go ahead anyways and try to do something good for our country.

[HFishbine]

39. Face the facts

Look, the original post of this thread invited us to compare Clark's and Dean's positions on civil liberties after 9/11. I point out the fact that Clark went beyond any rhetoric and actually went into action as a paid lobbyist to help a company get business with the government for the purpose of establishing surveillence dossiers on American citizens. That's a fact.

You can call this a smear if you want, but it's not. I, in fact, find much to like about Clark. But, until Clark offers an explaination for how he can reconcile his stated objections to the Patriot Act (which I acknowledge) with his paid work for Acxiom, I will continue to raise the issue and I won't vote for him unless there is a satisfactory answer.

Believe it or not, I understand the reaction when I raise this issue. Clark has not armed his supporters a response to this question. Until he does, all that is left is misdirection, diversion, ad hominem attacks and avoidance. I think we'll all be happier when Clark adresses this issue.

[BootinUp]

40. Lets examine The Facts

You are opposed to the development of these software/database tools. Because that is what we are talking about. You are entitled to that position.

I am opposed to changes in the law that would impinge on the Bill of Rights and on the freedoms we expect as Americans.

The important point I would make is that a tool can be used for good things and bad things. Lets agree to both support laws that would make it illegal to use Axcioms databases for "bad things".

I support the efforts of our law enforcement to protect us against terrorists opperating in our country. I support Wesley Clark's efforts to do that as well.

[HFishbine]

41. Fair enough

Now, let's hear it from Clark.

(Just to be clear though, you mistate my objections. It is the implementation of CAPPS that I think violates existing laws -- specifically, the US Constitution.)

[BootinUp]

44. In case others want information

on CAPPS II here is a good link:
http://www.eff.org/Privacy/cappsii/

With efforts like CAPPS II underway, we need to elect people like Clark that are not afraid to fight for privacy rights, and can work with other officials to insure the proper use of information.

[SahaleArm]

55. Nice website...

Bush Cheerleading? http://www.rightpolicy.com/

[IndianaGreen]

42. You guys ready to support Dennis Kucinich?

I am saying this because Dennis is the only candidate that has been 100% correct on the issues. Why have liberal-Lite when we can get the real thing?

[dfgrbac]

57. I want a candidate who will oppose the Empire!

I don't hear Clark saying the right words.

[Progressive420]

62. Read his Book

the whole last chapter is about his opposition to an empire.

[FrenchieCat]

63. That's why I don't bother to post on Du

anymore. Dean supporters don't see anything wrong with anything that Dean has ever said or has done.

It's a lost cause.

When a negative is revealed about Dean that would normally be objectionable by most Democrats' reasonable standards, supporters don't comment on the actual issue raised....they deflect by criticizing the candidate of the originating poster.

That's how you know that it's all a lost cause.

the Dean defense is not defense...it's nothing.....
there's no reasoning.

That's why we will lose if Dean is the nominee...

[blm]

64. They don't want to believe that Dean was suggesting a Patriot Act on 9-14

just THREE days after 9-11.

Then they sanctimoniously try to smear every Democrat who voted for the Patriot Act even though they fought for sunsetting, something Dean never suggested.

Dean is way more of a fascist in his core than ANY other candidate.

[Rose Siding]

65. Can you explain the "negative"

I just don't see how inviting dialogue, days after 911 is a bad thing. I was ready to talk and talk about what the heck we needed to do- what might come next- could it be prevented- what were the options. Didn't you experience anything like that?

If only people who *didn't* experience something like that fit into your definition of a "reasonable" Democrat, that tent is really shrinking!

(and I don't know how to say this but you're...um... posting on DU)

[eileen_d]

67. That is funny as all get-out!

Thanks for finding those quotes, robbedvoter.
:kick: