Dean sucked "media oxygen out of the hearing room"? Oh, come on.

[madfloridian]

Isn't this a little much now? He was at GWU. He gave a speech with pretty words and no passion, so he will fit in with the other Democrats.

Will, good article, well-written, but did you have to go there? It is not Dean's place to monitor the hearings right now. It would just give the party more reason to bash him. So now we have Truth Out from the other side. Good grief. Everyone wanted him out of the election process, so he is. He had a speech at GWU.

I think all of them should be involved and working for the hearings, but this was a little unfair thing to say.

Sucked some of the media oxygen? Let's be fair.
http://www.yubanet.com/artman/publish/article_16045.shtml

SNIP.."There were also grumblings among the assembled about why it was that Dennis Kucinich was not in attendance, about why Howard Dean chose this day to hold a press conference that sucked some of the media oxygen out of the hearing room, and about why no Kerry campaign people or Senate staffers made any kind of public appearance at the event."

As people here at DU often say, "not everything is about Howard Dean." They are right. He did his share before the elections when others did not. This is not about Howard Dean. The lack of response to the hearings is about the DNC, the DLC, and the Kerry/Edwards campaign. It belongs to them, it is their problem. They own it.

[GreenPartyVoter]

1. The media have been oxygen-deprived since **co took over

------------------------------------
Would Jesus love a liberal? You bet!
http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/

[jamboi]

63. I was shocked that Dean would compete w/ the hearing in that way!

That kills my desire to draft Dean as the next Green pres. candidate. :-( :-)

[demnan]

2. I was amazed at all the anti-Dean stuff

that happened. Actually I wouldn't have trashed any of our candidates that way, much less a pretty effective one. I hope we can learn from the devisive atmosphere that was here prior to the primaries. We should adopt Reagan's commandment to ours party: "thou shalt not speak ill in public of another Democrat".

When will we learn? When will we grow up?

[ewagner]

Agree

We tend to air our differences quite publicly. The repubs do all their arguing behind the scenes and present a united front to the public.....

but then again, we're Democrats....we believe in the power of dissent.

[IAMREALITY]

3. Can't Argue With That Quote

Seems very fairly stated to me. It is non-attacking and just observational.

Not a big deal to me that Dean had his PC on the same day, but I don't really see the illegitimatcy in Will's quote.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

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

[merh]

6. If he cared about the outcome of the hearing or the election fraud

he never would have gone ahead with the speech at the time it was scheduled. He could have easily moved it to later in the day or until today.

It is Dean that doesn't care as reflected in his giving of a speech at the same time Conyers conducted his forum.

Get a grip, that is the truth - the actual facts. If he cared he would have waited to give his speech, sense he gave his speech, I guess he doesn't care. :shrug:

Will was correct and all of Deaniacs should recognize that it is the nature of politics to be partisan, even within the party, and it is the candidates responsibility to time his messages or else be held responsible if the messages overlap more pressing matters.

[cali]

9. Did it ever occur to you that Dean scheduled his

speech prior to the scheduling of the hearing? He should NOT have postponed or delayed an obligation because of that hearing. I have no problem with Will reporting the grumblng that went on, but I sure as heck don't have a problem with Dean giving his speech.

[merh]

15. Did it ever occur to you that the election fraud is more important

than Dean's message? Postponing it for a few hours would not have been difficult or impossible and it is not impractical to assume that he did not because he doesn't care.

[Zensea]

19. If the election fraud is a big deal

one speech by Dean simultaneous with a particular hearing is not going to make one whit of difference. If it's a big deal, then it will keep going. If Dean's single speech and the alleged distraction of it made the hearings dead in the water then that would just indicate the hearings were all hat no cattle. If they have serious, credible information it will keep going.

If the media are going to ignore the hearings, they will whether Dean is giving a speech or not. If it wasn't Dean's speech it would be something else to distract.

How do you think the people who made plans to be at Dean's speech would have felt if he had changed the plans to not conflict with the hearings?

Is all political activity supposed to come to a standstill because of some hearings in DC?

Let's be reasonable, not irrational about this.

I guess some people just look for any excuse they can find to bag on Dean.

[merh]

25. And if it had been Clark or Gephardt or Sharpton or . . .

Deaniacs would be slamming them. Let's see, how could this have been handled? Live CSpan coverage of the hearings could have been broadcast at the site of the speech and Dean could have been on hand to discuss why he considers the election fraud issues so important to the nation and the party. If he wants to be the leader then he should lead by coordinating efforts of other members of the party and by uniting, not dividing.

Like I said, folks whine because he is not respected, but he showed no respect of others when he spoke at the same time as the hearings. imho

[Zensea]

27. prove it

I wouldn't have been slamming them.

Prove it.

I can walk and chew gum at the same time.

[merh]

33. Well, if you are a Deaniac and you take offense to Will's reporting

of an observation he made, and you defend Dean for not postponing his speech until after the hearings, then I don't have to prove doodoo. Your posts speak for themselves.

[Zensea]

37. that's not what I was asking you to prove

Prove that I would have complained or that "Deaniacs" would have complained if Clark or Sharpton or whoever had been giving a speech at the same time.

You can't because I wouldn't have and your saying Deaniacs would have is pure opinion worth as much as any other opinion.

I would have said that they had just as much right to speak as I think Dean does.

It's not a matter of whether I support Dean or not.

[merh]

38. You are right, I can't prove something like that and to suggest I

try to do so is as ridiculous as not accepting the fact that Dean's timing sucked and was inappropriate, especially given he wants to be the leader of the party but did not recognize or respect the efforts of many of the party.

[Zensea]

43. Asking you to prove it is ridiculous, I agree

As ridiculous as the statement I asked you to prove.
Because it's not provable since it's not true.
:evilgrin:
At least in my opinion, for whatever it's worth.

[merh]

44. And you can not prove to me you wouldn't, so we are even!

:smoke:

[Zensea]

47. well I haven't done it yet, isn't that enough proof?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[merh]

52. No, cause they didn't give a speech about their vision for the

future of the party at the same time a hearing was being held that is intricate to the future of our democracy and nation.

:puffpiece: :headbang:

[Zensea]

73. well

I don't think you're getting into the proper spirit here.

I think these things are being taken too seriously.
I may guilty of doing that myself sometimes too.

Just because things are deadly serious is all the more reason to try to have some humor about it.

Ok, lecture over.

[madfloridian]

39. Are you judging all by Will's reporting? Is that your standard?

Will is a good reporter. I happen to think he could have left out this part, as it is so very divisive right now.

I have a right to disagree or agree or whatever. Please do not imply that we must agree with all he says. He would not expect that himself.

[merh]

42. I think your reaction to his reporting is silly. He reported grumblings

he did not state that he shared those grumblings. Of course you don't have to agree with all he writes, but you should recognize that their is a legitimate reason for the writing. Again, Dean wants to be the leader of the party but he is unwilling to respect members of the party who are working on an issue much larger than his views for the party.

[Eloriel]

56. He reported them as if they had validity - they don't.

And that's what we fault the mainstream media for every single farkin' day at DU.

It was a cheap, baseless shot.

And there is no "fact" to any disrespect or lousing timing in Dean's part. That is merely your opinion, which is simply baseless.

[merh]

75. How do you know the folks at the hearing had no validity?

Where you there? If so, then you can question the validity of the comments. For some of us who were not there, but who shared the same type of disappointment relative to Dean's timing, the statements did have validity.

Matter of opinion, just as you view other candidates full of fault, I too see Mr. Dean's warts.

[Eloriel]

96. The complaint has no valididty --

do you have a reading comprehension problem?

I have no idea if the people voicing that complaint have validity -- but I can tell you whoever they are, these "unnamed sources," their credibility takes a hit with this kind of ridiculous, misplaced whining.

[merh]

103. There complaint has validity as does mine.

Why is it okay for the man who wants to be the leader of the party to make his pitch to speak about "his views of the future of the party" while hundreds, if not thousands of dems are trying to get the nation to recognize that the problem is not the candidate but the election process.

Election fraud is about the future of our democracy and our nation, Dean's speech was about his vision for the future of the party! Which topic is more important?

[Eloriel]

13. Oh, please -- show me why on earth

WHAT did Dean's simultarnous speech do that harmed or detracted from the hearings in ANY way, except in some peoples' fevered minds?

Nothing. Nada. Zilch.

Put another way: read my earlier post downthread.

[merh]

14. If he cared, he would have waited - just a simple matter of

appreciating that media coverage is scarce for dems and his waiting would not have caused him any difficulties! Gee, you guys want the other kids in the playground to respect him, but you don't require him to respect them! :shrug:

[Eloriel]

36. Oh, please

He should reschedule a speech because of a Congressional NON-hearing?

Again, WHAT HARM DID HIS SPEECH DO TO THE PROCEEDINGS? ABSOLUTELY NONE!!!!

He didn't take away ANY media coverage.

The insult is a figment of your imagination.

[merh]

50. Yeah, that is why the folks in attendance at the hearing

that are members of the party were commenting on it so much so that it was reported on. Figment of my imagination :silly: yeah right! I must be out of my mind, where did I come up with that :shrug: Hmmmm, where did that come from :freak: :eyes:


By the way, I am a member of the party and I found it disrespectful and it taints my views of his leadership abilities and I do not believe that I am not alone in that either.

[bitchkitty]

29. What was he doing? That should be obvious -

He was being Howard Dean, and some people are as obsessed with him as they were with the Clenis.

[renaissanceguy]

35. RE:

<<Get a grip, that is the truth - the actual facts>>

No, a fact is something that can be proven. Had Howard Dean said that he was undermining the hearings, then it would be a fact. Right now, you have a theory.

[merh]

55. Fact, he spoke while the hearing was on going, not giving any

respect to members of the party that were struggling to have the election fraud issue taken seriously and investigated. It happened!

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

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

[madfloridian]

8. "Little Missy" new term even for DU.

I thought I had been called everything.

[cali]

10. I don't give a flying

fig who you are, and even though I agree with your point, you might try reducing your own drama quotient by reducing the number of cap words in your post. As far as addressing MF as "little missy", that's just plain rude.

[IAMREALITY]

11. HAHAHAHAHA

Oh yeah, and her saying "Then you are not seeing reality." isn't rude LOL LOL

LOL LOL I'm sorry, your post just cracked me up LOL Thanks for the levity!

:hi:

[IAMREALITY]

142. Oops, Post 7 deleted? hehe Ok, This time without saying "LM"

NOWHERE, does it say Dean actively tried to undermine the hearings.

In COMPLETE contrast to the accusations, WIll was reporting that there were Grumblings, from others mind you, that Dean held his PC on the same day. I'm sure those grumblings existed, and if so Will was completely in the right to report that.

We should all try to not be so dramatically nit-picky of the people that are actually ON OUR SIDE.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

17. It seems to me he reported fairly, as well

by pointing out his own observations and opinions (positive and negative), then reporting other people's impressions. We all know there was widespread disappointment that Democratic leaders were not present, and apparently "there were grumblings" that Dean added injury to insult by holding a news conference at the same time as the forum.

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

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

[WilliamPitt]

74. Well, next time get off your ass and go to DC and spend the money

to report on it yourself.

[Cheswick2.0]

58. I'll bet will was listening to his own grumblings

this is just silly. How do we know Dean didn't schedule his event first?

[WilliamPitt]

65. I implied nothing of the sort

I. Reported. What. I. Heard. At. The. Hearing.

Said the same for Kucinich and Kerry. Funny, there aren't any flaming threads about that. Hm.

[Hamoth]

5. AMEN

PEople are desperate for devils these days. Sad, with so many real ones in abundance.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

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

[merh]

16. Pitt was reporting the grumblings of some at the hearings

His jab was not personal comment - it was reporting. There are many that share the disappointment, Will may be one of them, but that is not what he reported. (imho) Many feel Dean's timing sucked! The holy Dean made a f'ckin' mistake, geeezeeeee he is human after all!

[Cheswick2.0]

61. ridiculous

Dean harmed nothing. Will is just being Will.

[merh]

93. And Apparently Cheswick 2.0 is just being Cheswick

- the lack of media coverage is not the issue, it is the lack of respect for his fellow dems that are fighting for democracy and not just their vision of the f'n party!

[WilliamPitt]

62. I didn't see you at the hearing

where people were wondering out loud about this. Were you in disguise?

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

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

[intelle]

68. Will Pitt wasn't doing the "grumbling"

He merely reported that some there were grumbling about it.

[Helga Scow Stern]

18. All I know is that it really hurt my feelings.

I don't mean to bash Dean at all, but I felt really let down that he gave his speech while the hearing was going on. I just felt like he didn't really care or wasn't aware of the issues so pressing for us.

"Subtle disrespect" is what JJackson said of the Republicans in not addressing the issue.

Maybe we or our concerns about vote fraud are insignificant for the powers that be, but that doesn't make me feel any more appreciation for those whose actions support this assumption.

I am sorry--I don't mean to diss anyone, but it is important that Dean and others know how disappointing this lack of respect for this issue is.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

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

[madfloridian]

51. Dean should be our daddy now, I guess.

No one else is speaking out now. So after nearly destroying him here they want him to be in charge of speaking out? But the party went after him for speaking out....they got him out of the race.

Now they want Daddy Dean back to speak up for them, to change his schedules, to arrange his speaking tours, to attack the election process when no one else is doing so.

Hogwash.

[WilliamPitt]

64. Well, if you read the article in question

it was not ONE PERSON who was mentioned. It was three: Dean, Kucinich and Kerry.

[Cheswick2.0]

69. yeah but only Dean sucked the oxigen out the air?

[WilliamPitt]

71. It is a phrase in common usage

To 'suck the oxygen' is to peel media coverage away.

But you knew that, right? You're not making a stink because you have nothing better to do, right?

Have you actually read the article yet?

[Eloriel]

89. But --- apparently it needs to be pointed out to you--

He DIDN'T peel media coverage away. There WAS no broadcast media coverage of the Conyers NON-hearing, other than C-span which carried IT live, and didn't broadcast Dean's speech until well after midnight.

It's a RIDICULOUS and BASELESS complaint.

[merh]

92. Hell, at least Kerry filed a statement with Conyer's delegation

where are Kucinich's or Dean's?

http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/kerryvotepr12704.pdf

[Pastiche423]

94. Hint:

Who was the Democratic candidate?

DUH!

[merh]

97. No shit sherlock!

But Dean's followers want us to believe that he could have done a better job and he should be our party leader, well he should be a leader now and take a stand and file his own statement of record with the Conyers group. I mean afterall the DFA has 700,000 strong and Dean is its leader.

You know, as techno as our society is, he could have arranged for one of his folks to attend the hearing with a computer and he could have asked to make a statement before the Conyers group via a computer hook up and still have made his speech or he could have sent a statement.

No, his views for the future of the party were much more important.

[merh]

90. You seem to be fixated on his greatness

and it is uncalled for you to question the poster if Dean is some "parent (daddy) figure". Is he to you? You defend him so that you attack fellow DUers rather than try to see their point.

Dean wants to lead, then by god, he should learn to lead and yesterday was a golden opportunity for him to do just that and he failed!

Not just in my mind, but in the minds of many who were at the hearing yesterday -- they felt that our future depends on the investigation of the fraud and any hearings related to the inquiries and gosh dog it, the man that wants to lead our party into a bright future didn't share their views, he figured his own visions were more important!

Talk about a fixation!

[Eloriel]

95. I'm attacking their LACK of a point

What I don't get is why Dean is being expected to be a leader while others who actually have more place, more stake, and more responsibility in this matter are being let off the hook entirely.

Where is the criticism here of Kerry/Edwards, also mentioned in Pitt's article? Where is the criticism of MacAuliffe whose JOB it is to lead the party?

Where is the criticism here of Kucinich, also mentioned in Pitt's article? It's his goddamned STATE under scrutiny right now, not to mention his own presidential aspirations put him on a par with Dean's position in all this?

Why is Dean being held up to a far, far higher standard? It makes NO sense whatsoever. And it's really ugly, especially when Dean's speech was extremely important, loaded with vision, and totally in line with what most DUers would want in their party. But instead of even bothering to SEE that, let alone talk about it, Pitt and some people with the very odd idea that Dean should somehow do the jobs that others are being paid to do can't be bothered to talk about that.

Further, it's not as if Dean totally ignored the subject. For those who bothered to listen to or read his speech, he DID address it. Why isn't that good enough? Has Kucinich?

[merh]

100. It is a matter of respect. He could have easily postponed his

speech and taken advantage of the CSPAN coverage. He could have aired the Conyers forum, then opened up his own forum to questions and comments. Then he could have given his speech. A good leader (especially a political leader) takes advantage of the positives associated with his party and incorporates them into his efforts.

Kunich did not give a speech at the same time the hearings were held, did he? If he did, then I stand corrected.

[madfloridian]

21. Dean's speech was moved from 1 hour after to 2 hours after.

The hearings got 3 hours of prime time. Everyone I know watched them on C-Span...We were discussing them via phone and internet the whole time with our friends.

Dean's speech was on at 12:53 in the early morning. Very few saw it.

It did not begin until after 12 noon. The hearings went on at 10, I think.

So what is the distance between GWU and the hearing room? Near each other, far apart.

AGAIN:
As people here at DU often say, "not everything is about Howard Dean." They are right. He did his share before the elections when others did not. This is not about Howard Dean. The lack of response to the hearings is about the DNC, the DLC, and the Kerry/Edwards campaign. It belongs to them, it is their problem. They own it.

[merh]

121. He sure made it that way yesterday, instead of respecting Conyers

and the other dems efforts, he gave a speech about his views!

Dean owns the issues too, if he ever hopes to get elected or get a candidate that shares his views elected. He owns the issues because they are threatening our democracy! We all own it and as the leader of the DFA - he should take a stand, in the name of the 700,000 strong.

[Snivi Yllom]

22. It's not possible for Dean to pull attention from a non-story

The Conyers hearing was heavy on rhetoric, light on substance. The fact the MSM ignored it is there was not much to it.

To blame Dean for that is ludicrous. Frankly the potential that Dean may be the next DNC chair is huge positive news and I am happy it did get mroe coverage.

[merh]

91. No one is blaming Dean for the lack of media coverage, they

are doubting his ability to be a leader of the party since he failed to respect the other members of the party's efforts. It is not the lack of coverage that is the issue, it is the lack of respect.

[madfloridian]

98. Failed to respect? You must be kidding.

.

[merh]

101. No, not kidding -

:eyes:

[Snivi Yllom]

102. how did he show a lack of respect?

By not attending what was essentially an echo chamber of conspiracy?

I for one am happy Dean remained above it. If there was anything substantial that merited Dean's attention he would be there in a heartbeat, you can bet on it.

[merh]

105. The whole damned hearing had merit

and that he gave his "future of the party" speech at the same time the hearing was going on was a lack of respect for all the dems that are fighting to get the election fraud investigated and the election process corrected.

[Zensea]

107. Nonsense (regarding the lack of respect point)

the hearing had merit, true. That statement is true.

But lack of respect?

Nonsense.

I wonder what Howard Dean would have to say to you about this.


Life does not come to a standstill because of a single hearing nor should it.

[merh]

108. No - but Dean should have respected the hard work of others

if he had been smart, he would have aired the CSpan hearing live and after the hearing, taken the opportunity to discuss the concerns expressed at the hearing and then profess his views for the future of the party.

He should have lead by incorporating his efforts with the efforts of others. :shrug:

[IAMREALITY]

109. From A Different Perspective

Now I'm not saying, nor have said, that I think Dean in any way disrespected the movement with any intention by holding a PC planned in advanced.

But from a different perspective, imagine if Dean, having already declared to the press for weeks about the press conference, all of a sudden came forward and said "I am cancelling this Press Conference. The Hearings on Irregularities in Ohio by the Judiciary Committee are extremely important to our democracy, and the focus at this moment should be on that."

Now granted, he shouldn't be EXPECTED to say that since so many other Leaders haven't (though some have), but what statement that would've been to the media to help with our cause if only he had.

[merh]

110. Give him a link and ask him to respond or pmail me?

I would happily discuss this with him.

[Name removed]

111. Deleted message

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

[IAMREALITY]

112. Ughh

"All this was about, was just one more jab at Dean by the supposed partisan reporter , Will Pitt."

What a ridiculously misguided statement that is.

If anything, the 'jab' (though I doubt that was its intent) was thrown by the people doing the grumblings, not the honorable Will Pitt. Will was just reporting that grumbling, you know, like a reporter is supposed to.

:dunce:

[Pastiche423]

115. "honerable"?

[IAMREALITY]

116. The word is

H O N O R A B L E
(not honerable)

Just figured I'd help ya out.

:dunce:

[Pastiche423]

118. Thanks for the help

"Honorable"?

[merh]

114. Maybe that is why Kerry wasn't there (but he did file a statement

with the Conyers folks). He didn't want the forum to be about him (like Dean's speech was) he wanted it to be about the process and democracy.
Dean's vision for the party's future or the future of Democracy and the nation - those are the issues. Instead of it being about sore loser Kerry and his fringe nutt job followers, it was about a failed system.

God, you folks are just silly. :silly:

[merh]

117. Kerry's statement

Kerry's statement on Conyer's site

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December7,2004

Senator John Kerry’s Statement on Election Reform
WASHINGTON, D.C. -Senator John Kerry released the following statement today on election reform:
“It’s critical that we investigate and understand any and every voting irregularity anywhere in our country, not because it would change the outcome of the election but because Americans
have to believe that their votes are counted in our democracy. We should be working together to reform the system because it should be unacceptable to anyone, Democrat or Republican, that in the United States many people still don’t have full confidence in the integrity of the voting process. I want every vote counted in this election, but I also want to make sure there are no questions or doubts in future elections. That’s not too much to ask in the world’s
greatest democracy and model for free elections.”


Here is the link to the Conyers' site:
http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/voteforum.html

[mzmolly]

23. Dean made the arrangement LONG before the Conyers hearing was scheduled.

:hi:

[Straight Shooter]

24. If not Dean, it would have been something or someone else to blame

Sounds to me like the media isn't the only thing that's oxygen deprived.

Dean busted his ass for Kerry. I doubt he would maneuver in such a way as to take away from anything that would benefit John Kerry.

Good Lord, the stretches that some pundits make would reach across the Grand Canyon.

[madfloridian]

26. Dean got 20 minutes the middle of the night.

The hearings got 3 hours prime daytime. I don't see the problem. The speech occurred about 2 hours after the hearings began.

This is just outrageous, and it shows me that people are just unwilling to say that the K/E campaign are responsible. Of course they are, it was their election.

I would imagine utter outrage on the part of the party if Dean or Kucinich had too much to say right now. It might offend the Republicans, and good Democrats just don't do that anymore.

Little Missy speaketh.

[IAMREALITY]

30. "it was their election"

Au Contraire Missy

It was ALL OF OUR'S ELECTION.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

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

[IAMREALITY]

34. WRONG

The Election Process belongs to ALL OF US. PERIOD.

Try Again.

:hi:

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

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

[IAMREALITY]

45. So By That Logic

It would seem that you would also believe that if someone came over your house and stole your car, it would now belong to them and not you?

Hey, feel that way if ya want.

Me? I would go out and demand that the car be given back, because it always HAS and DOES belong to me.

But to each their own.

:eyes:

[Eloriel]

77. So where are YOUR guys on demanding back what was stolen?

You see, that's the whole, entire point. WHERE ARE THEY?

Passive onlookers who can't even be bothered to make a statement about any of it, other than pale and wan "support" for the investigations. But you somehow expect Dean to carry their weight when they won't? Amazing and ridiculous.

Edited to draw the point a little finer: YES, the election was stolen from all of us, but the ones most affected were Kerry and Edwards. DEAN HAS LESS PLACE IN THIS FIGHT THAN THEY DO, or, put another way, no MORE place than any other citizen.

At least HE made mention of election problems in his speech. More than I hear Kerry/Edwards doing.

[IAMREALITY]

87. Actually,

I never said Dean should be carrying the weight, or any moreseo than anyone else.

[Zensea]

32. Hmmm

Parsing someone's words for a witty retort sure accomplishes a lot doesn't it?

On a tangent, I am a male member of the species but I'm going to say this anyway -- I consider your use of the word Missy in relation to MadFloridian to be quite offensive.

[madfloridian]

28. Where is Clark? Where is Gephardt? Ask the real question.....

where are Kerry and Edwards.

[ibegurpard]

48. Yeah, as if our beloved media would have given the hearings more coverage

if Howard Dean HADN'T been anywhere in the vicinity. This issue has been BURIED by the media and anyone who would blame a lack of coverage on a speech by Howard Dean needs to pull their head out of their ass.

[suston96]

49. Cannot see this.

I covered all my daily newspapers - 7 of them - (on line).

All the MyWays.

Not one single mention of the Conyers' historic committee hearing, most of which I watched.

I have watched political events all my adult life and this one was hugely newsworthy.

Something is wrong. The entire election fraud outrage is not being covered by the mainstream media.

Howard Dean had nothing to do with it.

Something is very, very wrong. And it ain't about newsworthiness.

[madfloridian]

53. Thanks for a thoughtful post.

The hearings got 3 hours, but no mention in the media otherwise. Dean had nothing to do with it.

[sunnystarr]

60. There was some coverage ....

Good reporting of the hearing, each different.

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/content/shared/news/p...

http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041...

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=%5C%5CPoli...


Lazy reporting of the hearing, each the same.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6685456 /

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/ats-ap_politics...

http://pennlive.com/newsflash/pa/index.ssf?/base/nation...

[rodeodance]

132. I checked serveral national newspapers this am also and NOTHING.

[Pastiche423]

54. "Dean sucked "media oxygen out of the hearing room"?

Dean did? Dean did?

What a load of poop!

Dean was the Democratic presidential candidate? How on earth did I miss THAT???

If anyone sucked anything it was the Democratic presidential candidate, Kerry for not even fucking caring enough about US to show his conceding face at the hearings!

[Cheswick2.0]

57. I 'll bet his appearance at GWU was scheduled first

In any case HD is not responsible for everything. Where is Kerry? Where is the DNC/DLC?

[WilliamPitt]

59. I report what I heard

I know the thing was scheduled days before, at about the same time as the hearing was being set up. But that's what people were saying.

Strange. I don't see Kucinich or Kerry fans flipping out, even though I reported on the grumblings about them, too.

[Pastiche423]

66. "But that's what people were saying."

As in, "some people are saying..."?

I want names! What people were saying?

[Name removed]

67. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

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

[WilliamPitt]

81. I DID NOT SAY THAT

Give me a break.

I'm out of this piss-up thread.

[madfloridian]

85. Not in the article, you said it to a good person

"next time get off your own ass and do your own reporting if you want to be absolutely sure reality aligns with your world view."

That is not fair.

[IAMREALITY]

88. In His Defense,

I don't think his statement could've POSSIBLY been any more fair.

:hi:

[IAMREALITY]

80. Will, You Fuckin Rock Man

And I couldn't think of anything better for this thread than for you to have arrived in person to debunk the overdramtic responses.

:yourock:

[madfloridian]

72. I don't know why Kerry and Kucinich folks aren't grumbling, Will.

Maybe it is because Kerry's campaign is over, and Kucinich folks at DU would rather go after us. Maybe it is because HD is running for something, maybe.

Howard Dean is running for chair, we heard David Jones arrogantly speak about the 527, and the attacks began again. It is about fairness, Will. It is like you are giving credence to the idea that Dean set this up to distract from the hearings.

I am sure you do not always report everything you hear.

Kerry people mostly feel that either Kerry should or shouldn't get involved, but they don't say much. Maybe they feel betrayed. Kucinich and Green people here are in the process of attacking us, so that is why you don't hear much from them.

Also, why isn't Wesley Clark getting involved, why wasn't he there?

Why isn't Gephardt involved...it is their country, too.

The hearings got 3 hours primetime, Dean got 20 minutes in the middle of the night. Oops. Not a problem.

I respect your reporting, I think you are wrong to have said this.

[WilliamPitt]

79. You think anything even slightly critical of Dean is wrong

and I respect that. You're a partisan and a fighter, and we need that.

But this is third person stuff, not my own thinking. Kucinich and Kerry were definitely in the mix, and that was likewise duly reported. I'm not sure what it is you want, but you're not going to get it if it means I can't report on what is happening when I go to cover things.

[madfloridian]

84. If you had implied that "anyone" took media coverage away,

I would have been equally irate. You need to read my OP again. This is so much bigger than just Dean. It is saying he did not support the hearings and tried to get coverage away.

[Zensea]

82. Kerry fans might have given up on him

that might be why they're not grumbling.

Your point opens an interesting discussion.

[intelle]

83. Will I think you reported fairly. n/t

[Eloriel]

99. And you couldn't bother to point that out in your article --

That the two events were originally scheduled at about the same time.

But I do have to agree with you about this:

Strange. I don't see Kucinich or Kerry fans flipping out, even though I reported on the grumblings about them, too.

I'll repeat my question to you: WHO WERE these "people," what are their names? WHY did they think Dean should be held to some higher standard of leadership (of being there) than, say, Terry McAuliffe? Was it the same people complaining about Kucinich and Kerry/Edwards as about Dean?

[WilliamPitt]

106. There were a couple hundred people in the room

several of whom I was personally acquainted with. I got to the hearing room at 9am and listened to the conversations as people filled the room. The people were chatting with each other about how important the hearing was, and when Jesse walked in, they surged him to thank him.

Before the hearing, and then after as people were milling about, I heard several conversations about why Kerry wasn't there, why Dean was doing his speech on that day of all days, and why Dennis didn't show up to support his progressive bretheren. I got several phone calls from people asking specifically why they weren't there. People were annoyed. I reported that. Period.

Given the insanely vituperative reaction to my statement, I'll be damned if I hand out any names regarding who said what. If you don't want to trust me, that's your bag and you can keep it. But I'm not going to sic the likes of you on anyone for voicing concerns about why three of the most important people in the party were not side by side with Conyers for this deal.

P.S. There are people up-thread here who heard exactly what I heard, BECAUSE THEY WERE THERE. I repeat: Next time, go shell out the cash and the time to do your own reporting. You can beat anyone who says bad things about Dean with a chair or something. Get it out of your system, and then write it all down.

[merh]

113. Will, you cannot make everyone happy.

Thanks for trying! and thank you for being there and keeping us informed. :hi:

[Name removed]

133. Deleted message

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

[WilliamPitt]

139. They were not having events on the same day as the hearing

Duh.

[hippiechick]

143. Dean's event was scheduled when ? And the hearing when ?

Uhhh ... maybe it was Dean and GWU's schedulers' fault for not being psychic enough to know that Congress would be holding Ohio vote-fraud hearings that day ...

:eyes:


The statement was a not-so-veiled slap at Dean, Will, please just own up to it.


:hippie:

[WilliamPitt]

145. Pathetic

Just damn pathetic.

[Cheswick2.0]

78. Don't you know that as long as anyone is doing anything

that HD is supposed to go hide in a cave and hold his breath for fear of not upstaging them? This nonsense reminds me a little of the primaries.

[hippiechick]

104. Rock on, Madfloridian

:hug: I'm with ya'.


:hippie:

[nomatrix]

119. I read the article, I didn't see that Will was making

a big deal about it. He reported some of the grumblings. If any of the other candidates or Pres. Clinton spoke on the same day, the grumblings would have been the same. So no it wasn't all about Howard Dean.

I think you are right about it being the problem of the DNC, DLC, Kerry/Edwards and every taxpayer in the U.S.

It is about the demise of the United States. The hearing should have been packed. We should be in the streets. People are not outraged. Why? Because it hasn't tipped their comfort zone yet. The draft, the new taxes we'll pay or maybe when they shut the Internet down, something will eventually move this country. I don't think the exodus from the administration is just about burn out. I won't speculate, but my instincts tell me something is about to change.


As a madfloridian, you must have been outraged with the 2000 maneuvers and ultimate outcome. Hearing after hearing, and continually, those in charge of maintaining the rule of law seldom made a "fair" decision.

The "grumblings" Will is reporting, is the absolute frustration of all of us who are having difficulty keeping a lid on this boiling pot.
I feel I am not alone in having to "fake" civility. I'm grateful Will was there to report the opinions of those exercising their civic responsibility.

[madfloridian]

122. I have done my share working on the voting problems.

I have done my share supporting candidates, donating to them, volunteering for them. I did it because our party let us down here in 2000. I was very furious. I have done my share and more.

It is my problem, it is everyone's problem. BUT if any Democrat takes a step on this without the express permission of Kerry and Edwards they would be doomed.

Dean gave a speech at another place altogether. It is dead wrong to even mention that he tried to get media attention away from the hearings.

I am tired and I have lost my country. I am angry that I am attacked here and put down because I support DFA. I am cross that it goes on with the same people doing it over and over.

It was wrong to imply that Howard Dean tried to take attention from the hearings. It is dead wrong. It is wrong not to stand up and yell to our party leaders to speak up.

It was wrong for Dean and his supporters to be treated like dirt here, then for people to expect him to be the savior by giving up his speech.

[Zensea]

123. At least they are being consistent

regarding this -- "It was wrong for Dean and his supporters to be treated like dirt here, then for people to expect him to be the savior by giving up his speech. "

See what I'm saying?:evilgrin:

[madfloridian]

125. They want Daddy Dean to step up and take charge...but wait!

They did not want him before. But he'd better not make a speech.

:hi:

[IAMREALITY]

124. Cry Me A River

"It was wrong to imply that Howard Dean tried to take attention from the hearings. It is dead wrong."

Sounds like misplaced anger to me. Most of the posts were slamming Will for reporting it, which is inarguably misguided. I'm not saying you don't necessarily have the right to be that overdramtically upset over it, but then take it out on the people who were at the hearings that were saying it, not on Will for merely REPORTING that such discussion occurred along with other discussions of disappointment about other key people not attending.

I am in utter disbelief of how long this overdramatic nit-picking thread has gotten.

[Zensea]

126. I don't have an opinion about whether Will was being fair or not

since I wasn't there.
However, just for the sake of clarity I think it is important to realize that Will is partisan. There's nothing wrong with that.
It is a little disingenuous (or maybe just an oversight) though to assume that he was simply reporting. He may well have been simply reporting, but since he also at times has an agenda (and there is nothing wrong with having an agenda) it really shouldn't be a surprise if some folk question his motivations and wonder if he was being a pure reporter of events.

[IAMREALITY]

127. Well

If there was any hint WHATSOEVER in that article that he was singling Dean out, I might tend to agree with you.

Unfortunately, all I see is a statement containing several unbiased examples of disappointed grumblings going on, and a group of posters that are stretching it way out of context for sake of drama.

:hi:

[Zensea]

135. Like I posted below

I am not saying Will was being partisan in this article, but that given who he is and other writings and actions of his in the past I understand why others might be inclined to think he was not being purely a reporter.

Like I said, I wasn't there so I don't know what really happened or was said in the crowd.

[Cheswick2.0]

136. of course he singled Dean out

people grumbled about Dean and Kerry, but Dean SUCKED THE MEDIA AIR OUT OF THE ROOM.


:hi:

[WilliamPitt]

137. Dean was the only one having an event that day

Duh.

[Name removed]

138. Deleted message

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

[WilliamPitt]

129. Yeah, that scans

I'm a partisan who hates Dean *and* Kerry *and* Kucinich. The proof of my partisan insanity is the fact that I reported grumblings at the hearing about ALL THREE OF THEM.

Yep... Little partisan ol' me.

Or something.

This thread has become the biggest sack of whining bullshit I've seen on DU in years, and that is saying something. If you're going to complain, FUCKING READ what you are complaining about.

[Zensea]

131. You're putting words in my mouth

I did not say you were engaging in partisan insanity.
I am not personally attacking your motives.
I was simply saying why I think others might attack your motives.

I realize the you which you are referring to is other posters on the thread, but if you are going to lump me in with them I suggest that you also "fucking read" what I wrote in this thread and see if I actually have said I think you are doing in this article what others have said you did. I can understand how you might not have time or inclination to do so, but then if you don't I also politely suggest that you not address your complaints regarding this stuff directly to me. Otherwise I'm likely to suspect that you are equally guilty of what you say others are guilty of.

In my comments on this thread I have been addressing whether the folk who said Dean should have given his speech are on the mark or not. I was addressing that issue, not whether you should have written about it or not. I don't have any problem with you writing about it.

[ValleyGirl]

144. LOL - Will you are such a meanie

I don't get the outrage at all. :shrug: I for one TOTALLY believe there was "grumblings" about all three of them. DC is nothing if not gossipy & not-lacking-for-complaining amongst the party, lol. (speaking as someone that is from there I know this)

[madfloridian]

128. I am in disbelief that it was even said.

Or reported.

[WilliamPitt]

130. Then there's your problem

You're shocked, shocked that people might be annoyed at Dean.

That's the premise of this whole thread.

We had to wander through me being a crappy reporter, me intentionally singling out Dean (even though I named Kery and Kucinich in the same sentence you've gotten into a twist about), then we wandered through the thicket of your woe that life is so hard for a Dean supporter, and finally arrived at the nub: You are angry and in disbelief that people said bad things about Dean.

129 posts later. Jesus Fucking Christ. Maybe, next time, post what is actually bothering you, instead of dragging me (or anyone, for that matter) through this kind of nonsense.

[Name removed]

140. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

141. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

134. Deleted message

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

[bklyncowgirl]

120. Pretty damn pitiful they couldn't cover both

This shows the attitude of our news media. They are all about presenting the easy story.

Howard Dean is good copy, controversial, outspoken and looking right now like he's planning a hostile takeover of the Democratic party. Besides, if they got lucky, he might get a little overenthusiastic and let out a scream. He didn't. He gave a short powerful speech and now they have their story on a silver platter.

The hearings were great. Lots of human drama and passion but it was a hard story to put in a sound bite. Besides, it was a story that contradicted one that they'd all bought into: Bush won. Bush won because people voted on moral values--or maybe terrorism--doesn't matter, Bush won. The possibility that the election was not clean and that maybe Bush didn't win was something that the major media is not ready to wrap their minds around. It's apparently something that the Democratic party leadership has not wrapped their minds around either. Without solid proof they never will.

The media is lazy, timid and so tied into such groupthink that the possibility that they may be missing the biggest political story since Watergate does not seem to interest them at all.

Sad. Very Sad.

[Carolab]

146. Um...

Did anyone stop to consider that Dean had booked the engagement in advance of the hearing and it was inopportune to change the date?

[merh]

148. Well yeah, that has been addressed in the posts and is exactly

why I am disappointed in Dean. I wanted to believe he could help the party, I wanted to believe that he would be the man that would work to bring us together and to get our message out, but his actions on Wed. just proved his is a minor player in a big game and he doesn't know how to take advantage of the good things for the party.

Sure, he might have had his appearance scheduled first, that is probable. However, once he and his staff learned that the Conyers forum was going to occur at the same time and the substance of that hearing, he should have immediately conferred with the folks at GWU to make arrangements that the live airing of the forum be showed at his speech location. Then after the forum, he should have opened the discussion for questions and comments and then he could have given his "future of the party" speech. That action would have embraced and supported the thousands who are working on the election fraud and would have given more coverage to the hearing.

Instead, he chose to make it about himself and his vision for the party. The party is not the issue right now and I am sick to death of hearing about the future of the party. Right now, the immediate concern of all Americans, not just the dems, is that our election process be fair, accurate and true. If it is not, we can run the newly risen Dale Earnhardt on the ticket and we will lose because the fraud gave them Kerry's votes or stole votes from Kerry.

I want a leader who recognizes the efforts of all members of the party and when those efforts are so important to our democracy, I want him to acknowledge and respect them. Dean showed a lack of respect for the thousands that are working on the election fraud, I don't blame them for being offended or Will for reporting that he heard grumblings about Dean or Kerry or whoever.

That is Will's job and he did it well.
Thanks Will :hi:

[ever_green]

147. yeah, just like people here are still pissed at Nader even though he's

been much more vocal on voter fraud than Kerry! Let's look at things clearly people. Take off the partisan blinders for a bit.

[merh]

149. Thank you!

:toast:

[Moderator]

150. I'm locking this thread

reason:

Tried to keep this thread free of personal attacks
but I failed . It contains many personal attacks .