Skip to main content

I've been against Howard Dean's candidacy for a long time.  I think he is a weak nominee who has potential to hurt the party downballot, and even in future elections (by returning the party's image to where Mondale and Dukakis left it).  His almost daily gaffes (from "America won't always have the strongest military" to his bizarre appeal to the Confederate flag) and flipflops (Medicare, Social Security, NAFTA...) are enough to make any sensible Democrat who hasn't "drunk the Kool-Aid" cringe.

But I always vowed to support him if he became the nominee.  We've got to beat Bush, after all, right?  

So I suffered through all his smears against not only his campaign rivals but all "Washington Democrats" that he all but calls traitors to the party.  These are--mostly--good men and women who have fought for years for the environment, for the rich to pay their fair share, for labor, for equal rights for all.  But Dean trashed them all and implied that they weren't real Democrats, that he alone represents "the Democratic wing of the Democratic party".  

Never mind that he took this line from the late great Paul Wellstone, and that Paul Wellstone's spokesman Jim Farrell wrote about Dean in The Nation (May 8) that "when held up to the progressive standards of a Paul Wellstone, his deeds are sorely lacking."  Specifically, he noted:

While Dean may share some measure of Wellstone's passion, his record and his agenda are very different. As governor of Vermont, Dean targeted for elimination the public-financing provision of the state's campaign finance law--a law similar to the one Wellstone pushed in the Senate. In February 2002, Dean said his big donors are given special access...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. Just last year, Dean proposed deep cuts in Medicaid, which were blocked in his own legislature...Dean has said that a constitutional amendment to balance the budget "wouldn't be a bad thing" and that the way to balance the federal budget is "for Congress to cut Social Security, move the retirement age to 70 and cut defense, Medicare and veterans' pensions." In the name of fiscal conservatism, Dean's final-year Vermont budget also cut portions of the state's public education funding.

So, Dean's an insufferable, holier-than-thou hypocrite.  What else is new, right?  I mean his denouncing Bush's secrecy and  Cheney's secret energy task force--when he has secret records and a secret energy task force of his own--is one of many clear indications of that.  But I didn't reach my breaking point until today when I read clear evidence--an admission from the horse's a...er, mouth, really--that he is a petulant crybaby who will drag the party down with him if he doesn't get his way.

From Monday's NY Times:

AMES, Iowa, Dec. 28 -- Complaining about the torrent of attacks raining down on him from his rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination, Howard Dean on Sunday criticized his party's national chairman, Terry McAuliffe, for not intervening to tone down the debate.

"If we had strong leadership in the Democratic Party, they would be calling those other candidates and saying, `Hey look, somebody's going to have to win here,' " Dr. Dean, the former governor of Vermont, told reporters trailing him as he campaigned through central Iowa. Referring to one of Mr. McAuliffe's predecessors, he added, "If Ron Brown were the chairman, this wouldn't be happening."

Dr. Dean also implied that many of his supporters, particularly young people, might stay home in November if another Democrat's name ends up on the ballot.

"I don't know where they're going to go, but they're certainly not going to vote for a conventional Washington politician," he said.

That's it.  The last straw.  If Dean is willing to make ever so slightly veiled threats like this, he is not in my opinion a true Democrat, and I'm going to make one right back.  If he is the nominee, I won't vote for him--and I'll try to convince as many others as possible to do the same.  Oh, I won't vote for Bush--I could never stomach that--but I'll write in the name of a real Democrat who deserves it.  I'll vote Democratic downballot, of course (those "Washington Democrats" Dean seems to despise), and give money to Democratic candidates who are in tough races across the country.  Then I'll hold out for '08, for a respectable Democrat as nominee, who won't hold the party hostage to his personal ambition.

So I implore all of you who have already shown the sense not to support Dean, to join me.  We need to mount an effort at a kind of counter-insurgency, to "take back" the party for the REAL Democrats who work hard in the trenches for progressive change and put the party's interest ahead of personal pique.

To borrow a phrase: "WE HAVE THE POWER!!" ;)

Originally posted to SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 07:36 AM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (2.75)
    Excuse me?  You get on the soapbox and criticize Dean for saying he represents the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party, and then go onto say that all non-dean supporters should band together as real Democrats.  How blatantly hypocritical.

    I'm a "Real" Democrat you asshole, and I support Howard Dean.  Eat a dick.

    Oh, and by the way, a "Real" Democrat will vote for the Democratic nominee no matter what.  So I guess you can't be counted as a real Democrat.  I guess you just proved Dean's point.  

    When did fiscal irresponsibility officially join social intolerance as the message of the Republican Party?

    by AEDem2004 on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 07:43:47 AM PST

    •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (1.00)
      Excuse me?  You get on the soapbox and criticize Dean for saying he represents the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party, and then go onto say that all non-dean supporters should band together as real Democrats.  How blatantly hypocritical.

      How is that hypocritical?  None of the other Democratic candidates (except Lieberman to an extent, but I stated long ago that I wouldn't vote for him in the general) run against the party itself.  I've had enough of him trashing "Washington Democrats" (we'd be up sh*t creek without Tom Daschle's caucus; even when they don't filibuster, a lot of legislation and nominations are altered because of their discipline in being able to threaten filibusters) and all his other garbage that I've recounted in detail.

      You may not like my position, but you haven't shown how it's "hypocritical".

      Oh, and you get pissed off when someone implies you're not a "real Democrat"?  Interesting!  ;-)

      Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

      by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 07:52:29 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
        You can't criticize Dean for claiming other Democrats aren't real if you're going to claim his supporters aren't.  It's called hypocrisy.  

        When did fiscal irresponsibility officially join social intolerance as the message of the Republican Party?

        by AEDem2004 on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 08:01:22 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (1.00)
          Well, it's more of a little "turnabout is fair play"--and the real hypocrisy is in denouncing as "not real" the majority of the party!  If there are Democrats who aren't "real", they are likely to be a minority, wouldn't you think?

          Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

          by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 08:15:20 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
        You know what, I'm tired of you trashing Dean. If you were truly a Dem you'd vote for him no matter what, you are truly a dick. I'll tell you what, although I support Dean and have sent him money, I'll vote for whomever the Dem nominee is. You simply can't be a Dem if you're advocating not voting for Dean if he wins.
    •  Is it like a pita? (none)
      AEDem2004 offered: I'm a "Real" Democrat you asshole, and I support Howard Dean.  Eat a dick.

      You're a sassy flirt!

    •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)

      Tax Return | Four words that saved America: "What I wanna know..."

      by GrassyTroll on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 10:51:17 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
    you're joking  , right ?
  •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
    the post is a joke, I think
  •  I'm not joking, scout's honour (1.10)
    I would rather have a chance to elect a real Democrat who doesn't stab the party in the back (as both Dean and Lieberman are doing, in different ways), even if I have to wait until '08, than have even the slightest chance of having to wait until '12, by which time he will have done some nasty damage to the party.

    Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

    by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 07:47:47 AM PST

    •  Re: I'm not joking, scout's honour (none)
      The whole point is that Bush will have done irreparable damage to the country by 2008.

      The Washington Dems that you extol LET IT HAPPEN.

      What is more, they are smearing Dean for saying so, putting their CYA ahead of the country's welfare.

      Seems to me that you are saying that Bish isn't all that bad.

      If you take even a passing glance at History, you will see that bush is unprecedented.

      We have had Presidents who, by their passivity, have let the country go to Hell (Pierce, Buchanan), who have tried to fix problems using the wrong methods (Hoover, Reagan) and who have been corrupt (Harding, McKinley).

      Bush is the first President who didn't care what happened to America so long as his pals get their cut.

      You have NO CLUE if you can support the non-feasance of the Dem leadership over the past few years.

      •  Your grasp of history is weak (2.00)
        Reagan was very much like Bush policywise.  They are both very bad news, though at least Shrub doesn't have the Gipper's charisma.

        The irony is that a lot of people who in 2000 voted for Nader, and said Bush and Gore were basically the same, are now saying "wow, we didn't know it would be this bad with Bush".  Well I knew it would be bad, and went all out for Gore, a guy who didn't trash his party and deserved to win.  And he would have made a very good president.

        I'm simply not going to allow Dean to get away with this kind of blackmail politics if I can help it--it sets a very bad precedent.  It's only a shade different from what Nader did in 2000 or in fact what Nader did this year, when he said he wouldn't run if Democrats nominated Kucinich.  No one should hold a bloc of voters and say "you can have these only if you do what I say".  Nuh uh.

        Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

        by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 10:11:34 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Re: Your grasp of history is weak (none)
          No one should hold a bloc of voters and say "you can have these only if you do what I say".  Nuh uh.

          That's a misrepresentation and distortion, not to mention that it assumes what Democrats too often assume, that voters are mere pawns to be shuffled about in clumps. See NYCO's excellent post on a free people for more on this.

          -- The going's good in the land of the free, but I live in another country. -- Bob Hillman

          by J from VJ on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 10:17:27 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Re: Your grasp of history is weak (none)
          I agree with you 100% about Gore, but you forget that it was the Party Establishment that failed to support Gore against the utterly ridiculous smearing he took from the media AND the GOP.

          They also failed to help with the Florida debacle.

          Lieberman personified the attitude when he said that the Dems wouldn't challenge the veracity of many (highly dubious and often openly invalid) ballots ostensibly coming in from overseas military.

          These guys are beyond defense, and beating bush REQUIRES that there be a housecleaning BEFORE the 2004 election.

          Dean is doing right to see that need relatively far in advance.

          •  Re: Your grasp of history is weak (none)
            Lieberman sucks, no question.  As I have pointed out, I said long ago that I would boycott the Democratic ticket if he were atop the ticket (I was willing to overlook his being at the veep spot, though I wasn't thrilled about it).  No one ever complained about that.

            As for the rest, though, I don't agree that the party generally didn't do anything to help Gore.  Not sure how either of us can prove our points, but I absolutely did not see it that way.

            Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

            by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 10:27:20 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Re: Your grasp of history is weak (none)
              I, on the other hand, would vote for Lieberman if he were the nominee.

              Ol'' Joe would at worst be a passive disaster as President, whereas Bush has already ACTIVELY led us more than halfway to Hell.

              You seem not to grasp the enormity of the disaster that is Bush. I don't quite understand why.

               I see Bush as an unparalleled catastrophe because I see America as having had something worth defending in the first place.

              •  Re: Your grasp of history is weak (none)
                You're right, dabize. I'm an independent and I'll vote for whatever Dem is running against Bush in November.

                I guess that makes me, along with Howard Dean, a better 'Democrat' and more loyal to the party than Slacker.

                Let's get real here -- to suggest that a Bush Administration for four more years would be better for the party than a Democratic administration (any Democratic Administration) with the thousands of appointments and reinvigoration of the party at the policy level in Washington is beyond stupid.

                It's petty and smallminded and fails utterly to see the big picture.

                Even as an independent I think it's vitally important for the Democratic party to shape up and be strong - four more years of Bush will effectively kill the party, no matter what Slackers foolish hope for '08 would be.

                ABB is the only ethical choice this year.

                -- The going's good in the land of the free, but I live in another country. -- Bob Hillman

                by J from VJ on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 10:37:33 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Re: Your grasp of history is weak (none)
                  Exactly.

                  Even Nader can see this.

                  In fact; this is the critical difference between the support for Dean this year and the support for third party candidates in other years - even people with no love for the Dems can sign on with Dean, because he promises real change from the unAmerican policies of Bush.

                  In policy terms, Bush isn't a Republican, he's essentially a Soviet-style kleptocrat.

                  He's closer to Brezhnev than he is to Eisenhower or Coolidge - or even his dad.

                •  Re: Your grasp of history is weak (1.00)
                  I don't believe Howard "I destroyed the party in order to save it" Dean would make the Democratic Party better off by his getting elected under these circumstances.  And I don't believe the precedent should be set, and I think any future candidate who contemplates playing this kind of dirty pool should not have an example to follow of someone who played this way and won.

                  Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

                  by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 11:11:19 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Re: Your grasp of history is weak (none)
                  "Four more years of Bush will kill the Democrats"--that's silly.  What, everyone's going to fold up tents and say "ah well, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em"?  Pffft.  The Mondale and Dukakis losses were very dispiriting, but they didn't kill the party--four years later they were in control of the presidency, House and Senate!

                  Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

                  by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 11:14:40 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

              •  Re: Your grasp of history is weak (none)
                Joe has attacked the party from the other side, making him even worse than Dean.  We can't nominate someone who trashes the party, either claiming the whole party is in bed with Bush, or the whole party isn't enough in bed with Bush.

                Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

                by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 11:16:20 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

  •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (4.00)
    Do we really need another diary talking about this? This one ran to 220 comments, and it's hard to believe that wasn't enough.

    But to distill what I remember from the pro-Dean arguments...

    What Dean said was true, and it's nothing more than has been said against him many times (for example, every time it's been said he's unelectable): there are constituencies that would support him that aren't guaranteed to support all other potential candidates. I believe you've made this sort of argument yourself; does that make you a traitor to the party? What about when Koppel asked the others if Dean could beat Bush, and by inaction they all said no? (To ask the question another way: when Koppel asked the others if they'd make an advertisement for the RNC, and they all said yes -- were they traitors to the party?)

    ...that, at least, is what I remember of the arguments against your position. If you have the stomach for it, you might want to look through the original, there's lots buried there, of course.

    •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
      What Dean said was true, and it's nothing more than has been said against him many times (for example, every time it's been said he's unelectable): there are constituencies that would support him that aren't guaranteed to support all other potential candidates.

      Dean's statements seemed to me to go beyond this.  He more or less said that the people who were volunteering for him and donating to him wouldn't vote for a "conventional Washington candidate".  But further, why has he said this a couple times now?  (The fact that he said it previously is one reason I won't let it slide.)  It's clearly meant as a threat: "Nominate me or I'll take my marbles (supporters) home and the nominee will lose."

      Well, I don't like blackmail, so I'm willing to get involved in some war--Mutually Assured Destruction.  Maybe we can't win without your peeps; but you can't win without ours.  So f*ck you very much, and we'll just hold out for '08.  See ya!

      Now, I'm not a megalomaniac like Dean, so I won't claim I have the power to go toe to toe with him in this kind of confrontation.  But I do think my plea will touch a chord with many of the people on the other candidates' blogs where I've posted this message; and hopefully they will pass it on.  And if it is a close election (which I doubt), maybe my efforts will tip the balance.  At this point I would get deep satisfaction from a sense that I sent that  arrogant A-hole packing, and that I helped ensure we only have to wait until '08 for a chance to send a deserving Democrat to the White House.

      What about when Koppel asked the others if Dean could beat Bush, and by inaction they all said no? (To ask the question another way: when Koppel asked the others if they'd make an advertisement for the RNC, and they all said yes -- were they traitors to the party?)

      Not at all: as others have noted, no candidate should feel obliged to raise their hands to such a question.

      Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

      by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 08:09:34 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
        And you'd be responsible for keeping the real asshole, George W. Bush, in office. Are you fucking blind?

        When did fiscal irresponsibility officially join social intolerance as the message of the Republican Party?

        by AEDem2004 on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 08:17:47 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
          I didn't notice anyone protesting the many times I said I wouldn't vote for Lieberman.  Sometimes principles matter more than ABB.  What I really hope is that write-in votes are tabulated, even if they don't officially "count".  Anyone who reads the final tallies and sees write-ins for various "Washington Democrats" will get the unmistakable message that we are not going to see our party get torn down by a self-obsessed "revolutionary", and that we would have voted Democrat had it been someone else.  

          In fact, I wonder if "A Washington Democrat" would get reported as a write-in?  Because I certainly don't want to vote third party; that would send the message that "even with Dean, you still lost X votes to the Greens" or whatever.  I want it made clear that it was BECAUSE of Dean.

          Bottom line is that I want to steer the Democratic Party back in the right direction, and I'm willing to take the chance (not a big chance anyway; Dean is pretty well doomed regardless) of enduring four more years of Bush for that.  At least we'll all KNOW we've got a lemon.

          Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

          by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 08:37:51 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
            The direction where we bend over and get raped in the ass by Bush and his cronies? The Republican direction?  I can't believe you're actually saying this.

            I'm a "Real" Democrat, and I support Howard Dean. Eat a dick, Slacker.

            by AEDem2004 on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 08:43:27 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
              No, not that direction, because I don't believe that's where the "Democratic insiders" have been taking us.  Again, see my diary entry Democratic Insiders Have Not Failed Badly!

              Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

              by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 09:20:35 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
                Of course they haven't! Which is why we got the shitty Medicare, NCLB votes.  Which is why Bush got his tax cuts, his stamp of approval for Iraq, and countless other things.

                And of course, Terry McAuliffe hasn't failed us by not doing the one thing he's supposedly good at- keeping us competetive in the money race.

                I'm a "Real" Democrat, and I support Howard Dean. Eat a dick, Slacker.

                by AEDem2004 on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 09:25:03 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
                  Terry McAuliffe was a genius at raising SOFT money.  He's not allowed to do that any more!  The DNC always struggled to get hard money, long before McAuliffe.

                  As for your other quibbles, the vast majority of Democrats voted against them--though in the case of Iraq they were wrong to do so.

                  Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

                  by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 09:34:09 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

          •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (3.66)
              Sometimes principles matter more than ABB.

            Not in politics and not this year.  I will a vote for Lieberman or Kerry or Gep if they are the nominee.  A republican congress with a republican president,like this one, can do immense, generational damage. I don't want to chance that and Dean is the best shot to change it.

            I will happily change my vote when I see someone else emerge as more likely to take Bush down. If Dean is such a pushover, they will need to take him down first. If Clark can take Dean down in the next two months, he will have my vote.  

            Politics isn't about running the most honorable or noble campaign.  It isn't about being the best son.  It isn't about altruistic principles or consistency.  It is about getting fannies to the polls and pulling levers.  Do it with fear, do it with hope, do it with lies, but get them to the polls.

            Running against the Washington establishment is a time tested,proven way for democratic victory.  Clinton?  Yup.  Carter?  Yup.  At the convention, they conciliate. Before that, they kill each other.  Right now, the guy with the biggest bat and the nuts to use it is Dean. He bats clean-up.

            And I think Dean was right.  I am in his posse and I will, if necessary, vote for someone else in the general. But I won't give up my beer money for Lieberman.  

            Enjoy every sandwich-Warren

            by barr on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 09:07:54 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)

            Hi SlackerInc,

            If I weren't late for catching a train, I'd write more.  But wanted to share a sentiment.

            Dean is simply making the case that his grassroots support is a strength he'll bring with him to the General, and one that makes him a stronger candidate.  That's really all he's saying if you think about it.  There are those who argue that his supporters are now a new army that will fight for the nominee; well, I certainly would, but to say that is to negate the entire strength of the Dean campaign!  It's like saying, "Clark attracks people who are looking for foreign policy experience.  He should declare that if he loses to Dean, he'll transfer all his supporters to Dean."  He doesn't need to say that, because it's obvious it doesn't work that way.  For some reason people don't get that with Dean, and he needs to spell it out for them.  He is about as loyal a Dem as there is, I truly believe he'll go to bat for the nominee if it's not him.  But he makes a critical statement in defense of his campaign: that its strengths are important and unique.  And people like you call him disloyal.

            Oh, and by the way, I protested like hell when you (or anybody else) said they wouldn't support Lieberman should he get the nomination.  I don't like him, but I understand that even if this election doesn't put the country on the right course - I at least owe it to my country to shift it from its current collision course with disaster.  The threat to our democracy posed by Lieberman is nil.  By Bush it's substantial.

            Do the right thing, Slacker.  Rethink your assumptions.

      •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
        I don't know how it happened, but my reply to you here got put down at the end of the thread, I'm sorry!
      •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
        It's not fucking blackmail, you moron!  He's just saying that his supporters aren't likely to support a Washington candidate, and that one of the strengths of his campaign is that it's about taking back the party AND the White House.  

        If you think that those Congressional Dems have been doing their job, let me cite some examples:

        1. Iraq War Resolution
        2. USA PATRIOT Act
        3. No Child Left Behind
        4. Healthy Forests
        5. Clear Skies Initiative
        6. Medicare Bill
        ET CETERA...

        This isn't blackmail, it's justified retribution.  SO SHUT UP.

        Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change! -Peter Griffin

        by alli at notre dame on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 01:18:05 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Other than the PATRIOT ACT... (none)
          which even Paul Wellstone (a far truer progressive than Dean) voted for (and Dean himself played games with the flag issue btw), how many of those got a majority of Democrats voting for them?  None IIRC.

          Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

          by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 01:29:37 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Re: Other than the PATRIOT ACT... (none)
            It doesn't matter whether they had a Dem majority or not, because enough Dems rolled over and played Republican so that the bills could pass.  If they'd done their job and put up a fight, then the Repubs wouldn't have hijacked our issues, our environment, ad infinitum... I'm furious with them, as are so many other people, and Dean is furious too.  That's why he's fighting.  That's why I like him.

            Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change! -Peter Griffin

            by alli at notre dame on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 01:52:33 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
        Are you really as naive (note that I am avoiding using the word "stupid") as you portray yourself to be in this post, or are are you merely using this argument to set up a straw man you can then knock down with your personal spin?

        Dean's statements seemed to me to go beyond this.  He more or less said that the people who were volunteering for him and donating to him wouldn't vote for a "conventional Washington candidate".

        Do you believe that Dean has performed some sort of "Vulcan Mind Meld" on his supporters that they will act on whatever he says?

        You're kidding, right Slack?  God almighty...

        Read my post at the very bottom of your diary.

        Dean has a lot of supporters who are not affiliated with the party.  They won't necessarily vote for a Democrat who is not Howard Dean.  Facts are facts.

        Spin it anyway you want, but your faux naivete is embarrassing...

  •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
    Another Dean-hating thread. I am so sick and tired of these threads. Kos needs to have one BashDean thread every day instead of these stupid 40 DeanHater daily Diaries.
  •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
    New Year's Eve has started in Hong Kong, so I can't take the time for a serious reply. But one quick point. Suppose Dean was asked: All these people who are supporting you, will they still vote for the Democrat, assuming you don't get the nomination? Is it okay for him to answer honestly? (I don't know that that was the situation, whether he volunteered these statements or was responding to a question -- I asked on the previous thread, and didn't get an answer.)
    •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
      Were that the case, he should answer "well, I am sure my supporters want Bush out of there as badly as I do, and they know any of our candidates would be a huge improvement over Bush."  That's what any of the other candidates would say, more or less.  To take a shot at the others the way he did, in that context, is unforgivable.

      Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

      by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 09:23:56 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
        But them saying Dean can't win, is?

        Anyone else says, "Don't vote for Dean," and it's acceptable. Dean says, "My supporters may not vote," and people have kittens.

        Mr. Pot? I have a lovely kettle to introduce you to...

      •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
        I'm so angry at you right now you have no idea.  Where were the other candidates when Ted Koppel asked them if Dean could beat Bush?  Why should Dean pledge his supporters votes for them, giving them away like they're some kind of possession, when the other candidates insulted him on national television?  No, Slacker, no other candidate would say that more or less.  They would say that there supporters don't like Howard Dean, and some bullshit about him leading the party in the wrong direction, just like you're doing now.  So, on the contrary, what the other candidates did is unforgivable, and what you are doing is unforgivable, too.

        You're so incredibly hypocritical.  I'm in disbelief.

        I'm a "Real" Democrat, and I support Howard Dean. Eat a dick, Slacker.

        by AEDem2004 on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 09:29:07 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
          Go ahead and cite examples of other candidates saying their supporters don't like Howard Dean.  Anyone who talks of being more "electable" is referring not to their hardcore supporters abandoning the party, but to swing voters not going for Dean.  Huge difference.

          Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

          by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 11:24:38 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
        That's what any of the other candidates would say, more or less.

        Not true. Show me where other candidates have said this. Geppy's friends have already said that Dean's foreign policy would be worse than Dubya's. How respectful of the Democratic party was that?

        -- The going's good in the land of the free, but I live in another country. -- Bob Hillman

        by J from VJ on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 09:31:12 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
        Oh, like the others did at the debate...your hypocracy is showing.

        Donate to Dean! Annoy Al From! Click Here!

        by ElitistJohn on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 10:57:18 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
    Slacker, your whole post ignores the fate of the Democratic Party as an organization, regardless of Dean.

    Basically, has the democratic party, by virtue of these internal squabblings, ceased to be expedient as a national party?

    I would contend that it has, precisely because of the fact that we have so many disparate candidates and ideas that claim to speak for it, but I'm curious to hear your thoughts.

    Ninjas for Howard Dean!

    by Slade on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 08:27:37 AM PST

    •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (1.00)
      Unfortunately, you may well be right.  If someone besides Dean is nominated, the Deaniacs will get all pissed and won't vote for the nominee, as Howard has instructed, er, observed.  If (as is likely) Dean is nominated, there may or may not (I'm pushing for may) be an equal or greater backlash the other way.  

      But even if Dean is elected, he has trashed so many in the party that they won't likely be terribly inclined to embrace him once he's president.  It could be another Jimmy Carter situation (Carter, for those who don't recall, was contemptuous of Congressional Dems and thus had a very rocky relationship with them).

      I'm basically hoping that by '08, Democrats can win with an alliance of their tried-and-true voters, helped by the demographic change outlined in Judis and Texeira's book The Emerging Democratic Majority.  Throw in a decent number of Deaniacs--they will be tired of GOP control and won't by that time be quite so petulant, one would suppose--and nominate a less antagonistic, unifying figure like Gore (though he did endorse Dean, he didn't actually make all those abrasive remarks and there is still overwhelming sympathy for him after 2000), Edwards, or Clark, and we should be okay.  Obviously nominating Gephardt or Kerry would bring back a lot of that animus and thus would be bad choices.

      Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

      by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 08:49:24 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (3.33)
        Bull fucking shit.  Deaniacs support him because WE WANT BUSH GONE I will vote for a fucking garbage can over Bush provided the garbage can is running as a Democrat.  Even if that garbage can is Joe Lieberman, John Kerry, or Dick Gephardt.  I'll vote for them, I'll campaign for them, I'll do what I have to do to make sure we capture the ultimate prize, because the stakes are too high to pack up my marbles and go home.  And you'd be hard pressed to find many Dean supporters who disagree with me on that one.

        What Howard said was that HE CAN'T JUST TAKE HIS SUPPORT AND THROW IT ON SOMEONE ELSE. HE CAN'T MAKE HIS SUPPORTERS TRANSFER THEIR ALLEGIANCE IF HE DOESN'T WIN And that's true.  No other candidate is entitled to another's supporters if he wins a primary.

        I'm a "Real" Democrat, and I support Howard Dean. Eat a dick, Slacker.

        by AEDem2004 on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 08:59:07 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (3.75)
        I'm not convinced that The Emerging Democratic Majority holds all that much water.  In large part, it seems based on assumptions that voting patterns will remain constant as major sociological factors (like percentage of the overall population, and wages) change.  But that's another argument.

        I also think you may be reading too far into Dean's charges against "washington democrats."  My read on these statements has always been that he believes he's the only candidate speaking to democrats who are offended by democratic congresspeople's capitulation on issues like PATRIOT I (and II, more recently) and the war resolution.  Moreso, Dean's alluding to unelected party leaders who've not taken on Republicans on these issues.

        Your comments about "instructing" his supporters not to vote for said "washington democrat" also involve a pretty serious assumption (some less charitable souls might even say you're twisting his words.)  If Dean thinks he's giving voice to the people not happy with washington democrats, one might reasonably conclude they wouldn't vote for them.  That's the only conclusion Dean's actual words really come to.

        I think you overstate the difficulties Dean may have with Congress, as well.  Thus far, no campaign has been as friendly with Congressional campaigns as Dean's has.  He's working to make the connections right now, rather than wait until his election to start finding support.

        Ninjas for Howard Dean!

        by Slade on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 09:26:08 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Emerging Democratic Majority (none)
          We could go 'round and round about what Dean meant...I still think my interpretation is valid.

          But on EDM, I would argue that it's hard to envision that the demographic changes would result in anything but:

          (1) A solid Democratic majority;

          (2) A shift of the Democratic party well to the left, and a shift of the GOP to the center, such that elections remain close or perhaps with a slight GOP edge if both parties move far enough;

          (3) A shift of the Democratic party well to the left, a GOP that stays resolutely right, and a third centrist party that becomes a major player as an increasing number of people see too much extremism on either side;

          (4) Two other three party scenarios, where a successful third party opens up on the left if the Democrats don't go far enough that way, or on the right if the GOP chases votes too far to the center.

          And I don't believe the base of the GOP will allow (2) to happen any time soon.  So the only way the Democrats don't dominate is if a third party gets into the fray in a serious way.  That's a tough thing to pull off, so I see (1) as being most likely.  And in any event, the other scenarios allow for a party significantly more liberal than today's Democratic Party to be in contention, and that ain't a bad thing.  :)

          Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

          by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 10:23:51 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
    Let's ask some more of the questions we're led to by this post, shall we?
    1. Slacker, would you rather have Bush in the White House than Dean?
    2. Who do you think is supporting Dean?  Is a little under a third of the party not hardworking and dedicated to progressive values?  Or are those of us who support Dean just fools?
    3. Why is the Democratic Party even worth preserving?  The DNC in particular has a history of pettiness; what qualities, in your mind, redeem that  particular group?

    Ninjas for Howard Dean!

    by Slade on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 08:35:22 AM PST

    •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
      1. Previously, even with all my qualms, no.  As of now, yes.  If this were in a vacuum, and had no impact on future elections, the future of the party, etc., then of course I'd rather have Dean in there, even if he is an A-hole who doesn't deserve it.  But it is not in a vacuum.
      2. There are a variety of people who are supporting Dean for a variety of reasons, though I don't think they make up a third of the party (and the final tallies in the primaries won't gauge his real support, since a lot of people just go with who has the "momentum"--if this weren't true then Iowa and NH wouldn't matter much).  I'd just as soon not try to characterise them; not any point that I can see except for making things uglier.
      3. Why is the party worth preserving?!?  The fact that Dean supporters ask such questions just reinforces my position that their "movement" is a dangerous virus that threatens to destroy decades of progress in an almost Maoist paroxysm of "permanent revolution".  I've more specifically defended the "party insiders" in a previous diary entry.

      Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

      by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 09:17:06 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
        On the first two, fair enough.  Snarkouts, anyway, the both of'em.

        But on the third point.  No one's talking about destroying "decades of progress."  I don't know many Dean people, for example, who'd like to do away with major democratic programs of yesteryears.  I'm not sure why you've included vague references to bloody communist revolution, either; some Dean supporters (myself included) are simply suggesting that the National Democratic Party no longer does an adequate job of representing all the people it claims to represent, and should thus either be reformed or (worst case) knocked apart.

        You seem to have this idea that this "revolution" would leave a vaccuum; not so.  In (at least) four years as sitting president, Dean would have ample time to reform the democratic party, especially if he can cultivate a body of congressional supporters.  This could produce a stronger, more focused national organization.  It could prove to be a waste of time, with the original party bigwigs regaining power (for whatever reason) as soon as Dean left office.  However, wouldn't either result (the adoption or repudiation of the Dean "anti-insider" agenda) be better than the scenario you currently envision, in which 30 percent of the party (roughly 12-15 percent of the national electorate) is opposed enough to the parties' (non-Dean) nominee that they can be counted on not to vote for him?

        Ninjas for Howard Dean!

        by Slade on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 09:40:05 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
          It's not a third of the party we're talking about.  Didn't Dean make some reference to "1.5 million" or something along those lines?  Like, those that have "signed up" in some form or other.  Anyway, that is clearly my impression--that he is referring to his dedicated "shock troops".  And though this is a much smaller number and the party can survive without them, it is particularly offensive because if Dean gave different signals, I think most of them would support any nominee.  But Dean has kind of laid down the gauntlet, and I'm trying to fire back.

          Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

          by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 10:00:57 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
            You can't have it both ways, Slacker.

            1.5 million supporters that you don't even know won't support another candidate, and that Dean never actually claimed to control, are hardly a reason for the shitstorm you've kicked up.

            Ninjas for Howard Dean!

            by Slade on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 06:53:59 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (4.00)
    Oh get over yourself.

    Why do you assume it's a "veiled threat" and not a mere statement of fact? He's a doctor, not a lawyer, remember -- trained to state facts even if he doesn't endorse them himself (e.g., Dr. Dean: "you're very sick." - Dean haters: "OH MY GOD! DEAN WANTS ME TO DIIIIIIE!!! BURRRRN HIM!!!! HATESSS HIM!!! TAKESSS MYYY PRECIOUSSS!")

    Josh Marshall also imputed motivation to Dean's statement of fact, suggesting that if one states a fact, one is also encouraging that fact to be true. This is a serious critical thinking deficiency that I believe results from too many lawyers and wanna-be pundits in politics and not enough scientists, analysts, and doctors. The mere statement of facts does not imply endorsement of those facts in the minds of scientists and doctors. Josh is too blinded by his own preconceptions to think outside of the spinning Beltway box. It's a shame, really. I'm also curious how he would define "committed support." What other candidates have said that they will support whoever the nominee is?

    Wes Clark, a candidate many Dean-haters seem partial to, was reported saying the following:
    --
        "I don't think the Democratic Party can win without carrying a heavy experience in national security affairs into the campaign," [Wesley Clark] told Salon in a phone interview last week. "And that experience can't be in a vice president."

        Asked if he was referring specifically to the much-discussed possibility of a Dean-Clark ticket, he said: "It's no substitute. It won't work, and it won't carry the election for this party."
    --

    So, Clark is another Dem candidate suggesting that there will be negative outcomes for the party if he's not nominated (as a tactician and strategist, he's also probably been known to state facts he's not endorsing, as well...).

    Why aren't you complaining about Clark's divisiveness and lack of commitment to the party?

    -- The going's good in the land of the free, but I live in another country. -- Bob Hillman

    by J from VJ on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 09:28:18 AM PST

    •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
      I have problems with Clark.  So much so that I resigned as County Coordinator, and then later got so ticked at him (over the flag-burning amendment issue) that I demanded my contribution back.  (As it happens, Dean is the only candidate to whom I am still a contributor: $10, because...well, it was done at someone else's behest after they did me a favour, put it that way.)

      BUT...I would still vote for Clark in the general election.  He has not trashed the party, and he has not threatened that his hardcore supporters would go elsewhere.  Saying that he is more "electable" is a lot different--it refers implicitly to people who are not really Democrats at all, and who are not committed supporters of anyone.

      Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

      by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 09:55:58 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
        "he has not threatened that his hardcore supporters would go elsewhere"

        Once again, do you understand the distinction between making a threat and stating what one believes to be true in response to a question?

        -- The going's good in the land of the free, but I live in another country. -- Bob Hillman

        by J from VJ on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 10:00:47 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
          Oh, give me a break!  This defense is as lame as the mobster who argues, "But Your Honor, I was just mentioning to the man that it would be an awful shame if something bad happened to his wife and kids, that's all!"

          Why would he say "they're certainly not going to vote for a conventional Washington politician" when many here say they would vote for just such a nominee?  Is your defense of him that he's not making threats, he's just clueless?  LOL

          Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

          by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 10:05:03 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
            Sigh. Let go of the hate. You'll feel better, really.

            Obviously, you are already making the mob analogy. And I'm saying I don't think it's appropriate (in fact, it's quite silly to the point of hysteria).

            First, Dean doesn't control his supporters. Observing that many of them are ticked off at Democratic appeasers doesn't take brilliance -- it's obvious. Suggesting that those who are really ticked off may not vote for one is also obvious. But he can't compel that to happen, and obviously doesn't want it to happen (given his comments that he himself will support the Democratic nominee, whoever  it is.) Also, we don't know from the article which "they" he was referring to -- there are some Dean supporters (greens, independents, Republicans) who will not vote for a Dem candidate other than Dean -- do you dispute this? If not, why have a
            cow that Dean, once again, speaks the truth?

            Are you saying that Democrats want to hide from reality? (They've certainly been doing a good job over the last three years, so maybe they do.)

            -- The going's good in the land of the free, but I live in another country. -- Bob Hillman

            by J from VJ on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 10:12:58 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
              And your explanation for his use of the word "certainly"?  C'mon, give it up.

              Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

              by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 11:06:26 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
                Because some of them CERTAINLY will go back and vote for a Republican or vote for a third-party candidate or not vote at all.

                What part of Dean can't put a gun to his supporters' heads and tell them to vote the party ticket don't you fricking understand?

                •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
                  What part of "he didn't say 'some of them', he said 'they certainly won't vote for a conventional Washington politician'" do YOU not understand?

                  Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

                  by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 05:33:03 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
                    What part of the quote don't you understand?

                    Dr. Dean also implied that many of his supporters, particularly young people, might stay home in November if another Democrat's name ends up on the ballot.

                    "I don't know where they're going to go, but they're certainly not going to vote for a conventional Washington politician," he said.

                    MANY OF THEM. Not "All of them."

                    Note that we also don't have the true context of the quote - we don't know exactly what the wording of the question was, we only have the reporter's paraphrasing of it - and that paraphrasing could be an exaggeration.

                    Which is why I like to use more quotes than some other reporters when writing for the paper I work for... paraphrasing can be problematic.

  •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
    <<If he is the nominee, I won't vote for him--and I'll try to convince as many others as possible to do the same.  Oh, I won't vote for Bush--I could never stomach that--but I'll write in the name of a real Democrat who deserves it.>>

    I'm sure the president appreciates your help in reelecting him.

  •  oh please/troll diary (none)
    You know, you might as well have just made your diary entry FOOD FIGHT!

    Politics is the art of controlling your environment. Participate! www.musicforamerica.org 1-800-MFA-6835

    by Outlandish Josh on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 10:18:19 AM PST

  •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
    A plea...maybe you all truly enjoy fighting over this ad nauseum, but it's just making me...nauseous. And even for you, Slacker, it's got to be a little frustrating to see the same old arguments trotted out over and over again against you--unless you're into that sort of thing. Slacker, you once seemed reasonable, if biased (I mean in the sense that most of us here have a bias of one sort or another), but the more Dean succeeds the more desperate and/or deranged you're appearing. Obviously if he weren't doing so well, you wouldn't be so upset. Sadly, it's not just you, but you're a symptom of this larger problem. Dean's not exactly helping either, if he's drawing more attention to it. He's got to get bigger than "they started it" (even if they did) and I think he will, once more doubts have been put to rest by actual elections. But honestly, it's sad sad sad to see this kind of vitriol when we're supposed to be on the same side. Get over yourselves. And folks, if Slacker is getting to you--leave him alone! Let him stew in his stomach acid every time Dean wins a primary--let alone in November. It'll be much worse punishment than anything you could say to him.

    Half of Dean's supporters think he's electable, the other half think he's unstoppable.

    by JMS on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 10:41:03 AM PST

  •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
    Welcome to 5 days ago.

    Militant Agnostic. I don't know and neither do you.

    by cioxx on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 10:45:16 AM PST

  •  SlackerInc Exposed (3.00)
    Is SlackerInc a sincere liberal concerned about the future of the Democratic Party or a faux leftist Republican troll?

    From his bio he points to his website which points to an article quoting him in the WashingtonPost.

    A quote of his: The Silent Majority Speaks Up

    And I'm disappointed in, and embarrassed by, the left.

    An edited list of list of some of his beliefs: http://slackerinc.blog-city.com/

    I am a "maverick" because I am for:

    --banning abortion
    --mothers staying with their babies for the first year or two
    --ending affirmative action
    --a hawkish foreign policy

    I really believe him when he states above:

    I've been against Howard Dean's candidacy for a long time.

    If he is the nominee, I won't vote for him

    But I am suspicious of his reasons.

    When he says:

    he is a petulant crybaby who will drag the party down with him if he doesn't get his way
    is he referring to himself?
    •  Nice selective quoting (none)
      My blog lists those as my "maverick" positions (and explains them--you cut them all up).  It first lists my "left" positions:

      I am on the left because I support:

      --gay rights
      --reparations for slavery and for genocide against American Indians
      --the ACLU
      --strong environmental regulations
      --increased taxes on the wealthy and on corporations
      --a living wage for the whole world (at least double the current minimum wage domestically, variable internationally)
      --universal health care (preferably single payer)
      --fair trade instead of "free trade"
      --The Palestinian struggle against the apartheid Sharon regime in Israel

      Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

      by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 12:15:42 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Nice selective quoting (2.75)
        You are clearly being disingenuous in your reasons for not supporting Dean.

        You are clearly supporting Bush's reelection, and trying to encourage others to do so as well.

        You are clearly a troll.

        I clearly stated the list I provided was edited and gave the link to you web site for anyone to check out the longer version.

        •  Re: Nice selective quoting (none)
          You don't even make sense.  If I do believe in the positions I laid out on my site (which I do), then there's no way I could support Bush.  Sure, it makes me uncomfortable with some aspects of the Democratic Party, but it's far far worse on the GOP side.

          But if you think it's all a ruse to pose as a (type of) liberal...why would I not pretend to be more orthodox?  Why say I'm uncomfortable with abortion?  Or is this some kind of double secret reverse psychology?  Which would make this post triple double...something, LOL.

          And it's on the public record that I ran for City Council with the support of the local Greens.  Then there's my shop (recently closed down, but open until a couple months ago), that sold Democratic/leftist propaganda (and nothing remotely right wing).  There are some Missourians on this blog, including some with ties to Kirksville--they could check it out with a little effort.  Do you really think I've been in "deep cover" or what?

          Nope, you watch.  If one of the others pulls this nomination out of the fire, I will be behind them like crazy.

          Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

          by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 12:58:08 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Re: Nice selective quoting (none)
            So discuss policy differences.

            Don't make up stuff that you imagine he is going to do and then attack him for what you made up.

            No way you can support Bush?  Yeah, right.  

            That is what you are currently doing by attacking the Democratic front-runner.  

            That is what you have stated you will do by not voting for the Democratic nominee.

            That is what you are doing when you try to get others to do the same.

    •  Re: SlackerInc Exposed (none)
      Is SlackerInc a sincere liberal concerned about the future of the Democratic Party or a faux leftist Republican troll?

      In all fairness, he could be a socially conservative Libertarian with a pathetic and somewhat obsessive need to codify subordinate gender roles because 80% of the women in the country are more intelligent than he is.
      But I do agree that Slacker isn't a leftist, much less a 'maverick leftist'.
      And he certainly argues like a republican.

      "With a healthy dose of fear and violence, and a lot of money for projects, I think we can convince these people that we are here to help them." Donald Rumsfe

      by colleen on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 04:40:25 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah, right (none)
        In all fairness, he could be a socially conservative Libertarian

        How many Libertarians support increased taxation on the wealthy, a big increase in the minimum wage, and more stringent environmental regulations?  Plus "socially conservative" usually involves religion (I'm an atheist) and opposition to gay rights.

        with a pathetic and somewhat obsessive need to codify subordinate gender roles

        What's really sad is that you have bought into the Second Wave feminist idea that traditionally male pursuits are superiour and traditionally female ones "subordinate".  There's nothing subordinate, or unworthy, about bearing, nurturing, and raising children, while running a household, creating art and writing, and engaging in other intellectual pursuits along the way.  In fact it is far more impressive than working a 9 to 5 if you ask me.

        because 80% of the women in the country are more intelligent than he is.

        What drives you to lash out and say such silly things?  As it happens, my meeting the entrance requirements to the Triple Nine Society (higher combined SAT scores than 99.9% of the population) make this mathematically impossible.  But clearly that should have been evident already from my vocabulary, grammar, knowledge of history, etc.

        I do think my wife (an honour student in lit crit and women's studies at a selective and rigourous university) is almost certainly smarter than you are, though.

        But I do agree that Slacker isn't a leftist

        Economically, I am left in pretty much every respect.  Feel free to try to explain otherwise.

        much less a 'maverick leftist'

        That doesn't even make sense.  "Much less"?  LOL  Even were I not a leftist (hardly proven) it would still make me closer to a "maverick leftist" than to a doctrinaire leftist.

        And he certainly argues like a republican.

        How so?  IME I argue much better than Republicans, since I regularly smoke them in debates.

        Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

        by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 05:52:01 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Babies and bathwater (4.00)
    The fact that you won't put your country above your party says a lot about you -- and none of it very nice.

    One third (or more) of this country's registered voters aren't democrats or republicans. If the democratic party can't hold up against one of it's own nominees, and it can't stand up (or get the votes) for it's own senate or congress, then exactly what does that say about your party?

    Voters aren't sheep as much as they may emulate the herd mentality sometimes. No candidate can guarantee his/her supporters will do anything more than vote their conscience -- or their anger. It's a double edged sword, but that's the way it is -- that's the way it's supposed to be.

    Dean can't do it, Clark can't, Gep, none of them. Given a choice, most Americans would rather vote for something than against it...but you seem to want that vote to be for your vision of the democratic party.

    That's not why I vote. It's not even a conderation on my docket -- and in this case, I am first planning on voting against something - Bush. God and the fates willing, I'll also get to vote for something, or someone. I hope it's Dean. If it's not, then I'll still be voting for my country and against Bush.

    Your lifeboat's too small, slacker. A lot of people will drown if you're the one picking and choosing who gets in.

    •  Again, you're ignoring... (none)
      the "certainly" part of the comment.  If he can't "guarantee" who they will vote for, why is he saying, basically, that it "certainly" wouldn't be for any of the others?

      Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

      by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 12:01:16 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Re: Again, you're ignoring... (none)
        You're basing your whole argument on semantics, On one comment offered up during a flurry of other questions. Tell me that makes any kind of sense.

        Well, God love the fools and Irishmen! Of all the things Dean has said that have people up in arms, his opinion that his supporters "certainly" won't vote for a Washington pol, pushes you over the brink?

        Jeez, Slacker, get out much? You don't like the guy, fine. don't vote for him in the primary. But to equate your dislike of his lack of verbal finess as a democratic nominee into he's going to bring down the democratic party is just a little too juvenile for anyone old enough to vote.

        I certainly won't vote for a washington pol, come next November, but I will vote for anyone that can give GW a bus ticket back to crawford, in spite of them being a washington pol.

        This is the straw that broke the camels back for you, I get it. But man, it's really no reason to butcher your entire camel herd and that's what you're proposing, becasue maybe, just maybe a new herd will be defect free.

        Wow, and I thought mad cow disease only infected bovines. Eaten any ground up beef lately, slacker? Or just bitter brew?

  •  Trippi emailed me... (none)
    of course it was a mass email, but I thought the title funny:

    "How Far We Go is Up to You"

    LMAO!

    Alan, Maverick Leftist Just say NO to Howard Dean!

    by SlackerInc on Wed Dec 31, 2003 at 01:12:39 PM PST

  •  Slack, what a shocker! (4.00)
    Slack,

    Where ya' been?  We've been `round and `round on this very story here.

    Yeah, I know, this one "pushes you over the edge."  Big deal.  You hate Dean and now you have an "excuse" not to vote for him and to rip him (and his supporters) yet again.

    Good for you.

    I'll explain this  s  l  o  w  l  y  so you understand...

    Dean has many regular Democratic supporters.  People like me who think he is the best candidate in the race and is the candidate most likely to defeat Bush.  We are also the group of supporters most inclined to support ANY Dem nominee (yes, even Joe Lieberman) over Bush.

    Dean also has groups of supporters who are either:

    a) Greens who voted for Nader last time but are taking a more pragmatic approach to this election;

    b) independents who do not have a party affiliation;

    c) formerly disaffected voters -- some with dormant party affiliation and some with no affiliation -- who have been turned off by the electoral process in the past but have been reinvigorated by Dean and his campaign;

    d) disaffected Republicans;

    d) young people who are new to electoral politics and voting.

    Dean rightly said that these people will not necessarily vote for a Democratic nominee who is not him, no mater what he says or does.  Period.  That is a fact.

    Glad you finally found an excuse to profess that you won't vote for Howard Dean.  A casual reading of both your post history and your diaries will provide all the proof anyone needs that you have hated Dean from the outset and were merely looking for some excuse to post that you won't vote for him were he to become the nominee.

    This is as about as newsworthy as the Pope making a speech about the Catholic Church's opposition to abortion.

  •  rules for the site (none)
    Slacker,

    Did you catch that Kos said no trashing of Dean and Clark?

    Why are you not complying if you got the word?

    Don't you believe that a community has a right to set its own standards?

  •  Re: Dean has gone TOO FAR! (none)
    let's go through your post, and see if we can remove some fuzzy thinking.

    "His almost daily gaffes (from "America won't always have the strongest military" to his bizarre appeal to the Confederate flag)"

    china has a population of over 1.2 billion people.  india has around 1 billion people.  assuming they get their economic houses in order and do more to empower their citizens they'll both become hugely powerful.  and along the way they'll have the economic might to dwarf the american military.

    so i'd suggest that america work for a world where might does not make right.  that it works with other nations to build a fair framework of international laws and that it lives by them.

    white voters in the south do not, by a strong majority, vote for democrats.  why?  this needs to change, and dean is one politician who is trying to change that.

    "and flipflops (Medicare, Social Security, NAFTA...) are enough to make any sensible Democrat who hasn't "drunk the Kool-Aid" cringe."

    nice smearing there.  dean doesn't want to repeal nafta, he wants better protection for labour and the environment.  this is not a new democratic position.  it's what clinton wanted when he signed nafta.

    "So I suffered through all his smears against not only his campaign rivals but all "Washington Democrats" that he all but calls traitors to the party.  These are--mostly--good men and women who have fought for years for the environment, for the rich to pay their fair share, for labor, for equal rights for all.  But Dean trashed them all and implied that they weren't real Democrats, that he alone represents "the Democratic wing of the Democratic party"."

    you mean like zell miller?  you mean tom daschle who pushed for that energy bill?  you mean the democrats who voted for doma?  or the dmca?  or a host of other noxious bills?  and oh hey, how about the 2002 election where the democrats stood for...  what exactly?  they were like casper.

    "So, Dean's an insufferable, holier-than-thou hypocrite.  What else is new, right?  I mean his denouncing Bush's secrecy and  Cheney's secret energy task force--when he has secret records and a secret energy task force of his own--is one of many clear indications of that."

    dean's records are mostly open.  he's sealed some as nearly all governors do.  and it would seem he's been far too open with his records as some personal correspondence was found and published by the boston herald.

    as far ashis energy task force, all the participants were known - in contrast to cheney's task force.  and dean's stated reason for closing certain sessions related to confidentiality that seemed fair enough.  obviously it's a complex issue that will be hard to turn into a soundbite, but do you as a blogger have more or less intelligence and depth then the average journalist?

    apparently about the same
    .
    "Dr. Dean also implied that many of his supporters, particularly young people, might stay home in November if another Democrat's name ends up on the ballot.

    "I don't know where they're going to go, but they're certainly not going to vote for a conventional Washington politician," he said."

    well i hate to break it to you, but i will stay home if some of the candidates are nominated.  lieberman and gephart (and i'm from the midwest).  i saw a picture at lieberman's campaign hq with a big "hippie deanies stay home."  i'm not a hippie, but if lieberman is the best america can do then fuck it, i ain't bothering to vote.

    "and give money to Democratic candidates who are in tough races across the country."

    you might look to the dean campaign website then.  we already raised $50k for leornard bosewell who rove&co are targetting.

    "Then I'll hold out for '08, for a respectable Democrat as nominee, who won't hold the party hostage to his personal ambition."

    that's nice.  so you're saying that even if your guy endorses dean, you won't vote for dean.  so you're essentially saying that dean is right; that while an endorsement is important, it doesn't mean that dean's supporters will follow along like mindless automatons.

    "So I implore all of you who have already shown the sense not to support Dean, to join me.  We need to mount an effort at a kind of counter-insurgency, to "take back" the party for the REAL Democrats who work hard in the trenches for progressive change and put the party's interest ahead of personal pique."

    yeah, great work so far.  a republican president, a republican house and a republican senate.  and if you recall, lieberman was sitting on the fence about voting to impeach the LAST democratic president.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site