If anyone asks about Democrats who betrayed the party in 2004,

[ProSense]

this asshole is at the top of the list: Matthew Dowd.

[karynnj]

1. I saw that article in yourGD post - it really is something

The comments on "gentleness" are :puke: worthy. Before I believe he is genuine he will have to say a lot more than he did here. He could start by stating that the flip flpo theme he used was never true - and expand his comments on Kerry was right. Kerry has been the strongest, most consistent voice on Iraq and a legacy of 2004 is that the likes of the NYT and others still speak of the "muddiness" of Kerry's position. (So, much that I was surprised at the directness in what he said in the 2004 Daily Show - which I rewatched when I saw the link before he appeared again.)

He does take more personal responsibility than Sam Fox did, but he was far more involved. Before he preachs "gentleness", he should try to atone for his role in the 2004 campaign.

[ProSense]

3. Exactly!

They're all despicable. The NYT needs to cut the spin, especially given its role in advancing the Iraq WMD lie.

[JI7]

4. he needs to discuss the right wing attack tactics

and how they purposely lied and smeared. it wasn't just a case of being mistaken or wrong. they KNEW they were lying then.

[ray of light]

2. I was about to post this too.

Yep. Kerry was right. AND kerry's message in 04 was gentlemanly and "gentle" uh...just what Down is 'advocating' now.

I feel like raging at him. He was a hatchet man who now wants a gentleman in office and a gentle campaign?!!!!

[wisteria]

5. Depressing. That is what came to mind when reading this article.

Dowd had a feeling in 2004 that Bush was wrong, yet he still played a major part in the attacks against Kerry. I think he always surmised Senator Kerry was the better choice for this country yet he allowed ambition to over rule his better judgment.

How very sad for this country there were people like him in 2004 that accentuated the lies and the smears in order to get a "likable guy" the continued power he craved.

What if, damn it, what if, his conscious and sense of justice motivated him to do what was right instead of doing what was wrong.

[karynnj]

6. Wow, that could have been dramatic

Could you imagine the impact had he stopped, quit and said he was quitting because he thought they were going the wrong direction on Iraq. Instead, in addition to the flip/flop - which was untrue, Dowd was one of the WH people who responded to every plan or recommendation Kerry made with "that's just Bush's policy" when he knew it wasn't - and the stupid media reported that there was no difference between them.

[globalvillage]

7. I have no compassion for this man.

He sold out his country for George Bush. Someone needs to make it clear to people like Mr. Dowd that George Bush is NOT the United States of America. Were does this misguided sense of loyalty come from? Does he think he can atone now for what he's done with some lame mea culpa? It goes to motive, and Mr. Dowd's was to protect George Bush at the expense of the American people.
He KNEW. He knew what he was doing was wrong, yet he did it anyway.
The article is too soft. There's a word for people like Mr. Dowd.

No mercy here. It pains me to say it, but I don't feel one bit of empathy for this man.

[ProSense]

8. Here's a

nice comment in a diary about Dowd's mea culpa.

[blm]

9. heh...in another thread Hill isn't looking so well for her backstabbing, either.

Any Dem who backstabs the entire party by sabotaging other Dems and their candidacy needs to be exposed for their protection of BushInc.

[kerrygoddess]

10. Dowd left the Dem Party in 1999

He was well ensconced with BushCo by 2004. I think his admission is a vindication for JK. We can't change the past, JK would be the first to say that - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=5561

The '04 sell-outs were the Clintonistas who worked against JK.