Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Was Howard Dean a "poor widdle me" disgrace to manhood?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 06:22 PM
Original message
Was Howard Dean a "poor widdle me" disgrace to manhood?
Edited on Fri Nov-02-07 06:24 PM by Sparkly
(DEAN): And I think we can improve this situation. I was very disappointed...

ZAHN: Sir, (UNINTELLIGIBLE), (UNINTELLIGIBLE)...

DEAN: ... with -- particularly Senator Edwards tonight. I thought that that strayed over the line of personal attack that was unnecessary.

ZAHN: And what was it that you objected to the most? He didn't...

DEAN: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) personal...

ZAHN: He didn't, he didn't call you -- out and outright call you a racist.

DEAN: No, he called me arrogant, I thought that was unnecessary.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0311/04/pzn.00.html


Dean is the Democratic front-runner in recent polls nationwide and in New Hampshire, which hosts the party's first presidential primary next month. He has joked about "picking buckshot out of my rear end" in previous campaign appearances, but attacks from his fellow Democrats have begun to dominate headlines and overshadowed his recent policy speeches.

"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,' " The New York Times quoted Dean as saying Sunday during a campaign swing in Iowa.

But Dean's leading rivals have accused Dean of being unable to take what he dishes out.

"That struck me as outrageous coming from Howard Dean, who launched the first negative ads of the campaign who has repeatedly and divisively attacked the Democratic Party, other Democratic candidates and the Democratic leadership," Sen. Joseph Lieberman told reporters Monday.

The Connecticut senator said Dean has responded to criticism with personal insults and invective. "What does he do now that he's being substantively challenged? He goes complaining to the party chairman that we're being mean to him," Lieberman said. "Well, I have some news for Howard Dean: The primary campaign is a warm-up compared to what George Bush and Karl Rove have for the nominee."

(snip)

But Dean campaign spokesman Jay Carson said the former governor's opponents "are throwing everything positive out the window."

"All they do is attack," Carson said.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/12/29/elec04.prez.dean.democrats/index.html


No ordinary person would presume to tell other presidential candidates to stop criticizing Dean. But Gore did. He instructed Democrats to "speak no ill" of anyone in their party. "We can't afford to be divided," he said. Why did Gore deliver that message this morning? Because tonight Dean's rivals will get their last chance to confront him in a debate until nearly a month from now, at which point the Iowa caucuses will be just two weeks away. Gore is trying to stop anyone from stopping Dean.

In case anyone missed the point, Dean underscored it. He thanked Gore "particularly those words that said that the 11th Commandment now also ought to apply to Democrats. As you know, I've been picking buckshot out of my rear end in some of these debates, and we're going up to New Hampshire tonight and see if I do some more."
http://www.slate.com/id/2092275/


Was this different than what our frontrunner is doing now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
maximusveritas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 06:29 PM
Response to Original message
1. Nope; it was the same and it was the beginning of his downfall
He jumped out ahead of the pack and couldn't handle it when he became the focus of the attack from others. It was only a matter of time before his campaign fizzled out and died.
Hillary is obviously repeating his mistakes. Good news for the rest of the candidates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Good luck with that one, sweetie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. How do you think he should have handled it?
His statements about these attacks, by all accounts at the time, rallied his supporters. As I posted elsewhere, it's common leverage for fundraising, as well. ("Help us fight back!") Nothing new then, nothing new now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #4
15. At that time the kind of back-and-forth between Dean and his supporters
was in fact very new. It was the interaction, the empowerment of the "net roots" that defined his campaign and changed American politics. All of the other candidates then--as well as the candidates now, somewhat--tried for the same kind of interaction with supporters and constituents.

That's also why Dean got so much attention (eventually) from the media. The media were no longer the gatekeepers, so they had to cover it as best they could.

Hillary is another (literal) media story. She's fodder to the media because the media stand a lot to gain, monetarily, from her candidacy. She's the wife of a former president. The right wing detests her and loves nothing better than to talk about her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. What does that have to do with the basic premise
Edited on Fri Nov-02-07 07:06 PM by seasonedblue
of the OP? How was Dean's reaction different from Clinton's?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #16
20. Here's one problem:
http://www.examiner.com/a-1025335~Clinton_Says_Criticism_Goes_With_Lead.html?cid=sec-promo

"I don't think they're piling on because I'm a woman. I think they're piling on because I'm winning," Clinton told reporters after filing paperwork to appear on the New Hampshire primary ballot.

"I anticipate it's going to get even hotter, and if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen. I'm very much at home in the kitchen," she said.

__________________________________

Now, to be fair, these comments appear in the article somewhat out of context. Clinton was probably ASKED by a reporter whether she felt she was being "piled on" because she was a woman. At the same time, though, the folksy, stupid quip about the kitchen was just over-the-top pandering.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #20
24. Tweety's taking credit for the kitchen bit,
since he pretty much put those words in her mouth yesterday. I don't think that's over the top pandering, she's using a well worn Truman phrase to her own advantage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:21 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Was Tweety even there?
From the link I posted:

Her campaign reacted strongly to what it called "piling on." One fundraising e-mail it sent out called Clinton "one tough woman" and decried the "six on one" nature of the debate criticism. Clinton herself referred to the "all boys club of presidential politics" in a speech at Wellesley College Thursday.

Clinton spoke to reporters outside the office of New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner, who has the sole authority to set the date for the state's primary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #25
28. I don't know what you're pointing out.
It was a six on one debate, well less Kucinich, Biden and Richardson. but plus the moderators. Of course they're going to pump up Hillary as a strong woman, she IS a strong woman. There wasn't anything wrong with what she said at Wellesley, it was a typical 'glass ceiling' speech that was completely appropriate in it's context.

Tweety arrogantly thinks she overheard him talk about the kitchen part.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #20
27. The comparison is limited to attacks on a frontrunner, and the frontrunner responding
in a way others complain is complaining.

(Dean, too, was accused of pandering.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #27
31. Candidates all object to attacks.
:shrug:

The complaint about the "boys' club" though, was one that many women in particular didn't like. She's having problems with her message. I don't know if her campaign has gotten too overconfident or what, but she is sending very mixed messages, some of which aren't very pleasant (as in the cliche kitchen references).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. I haven't seen polls on that.
I thought it showed strength, not self-pity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:55 PM
Response to Reply #32
37. You've probably seen this already:
Clinton's advisers, speaking on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to discuss internal matters, said there is a clear and long-planned strategy to fend off attacks by accusing her male rivals of gathering against her.

The idea is to change the subject while making Clinton a sympathetic figure, especially among female voters who often feel outnumbered and bullied on the job.

As one adviser put it, Clinton is not the first presidential candidate to play the "woe-is-me card" but she's the first major female presidential candidate to do it.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071101/ap_po/on_deadline_clinton_1

_________________________

There's more at the link.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #37
38. Yeah.
That's how the campaign decided it's most advantageous to respond (according to an anonymous source to Ron Fournier). :shrug:

Clearly, people also had a problem with the way Dean chose to respond. This isn't unusual.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maximusveritas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:15 PM
Response to Reply #4
23. He should have responded to the criticism in addition to just pointing them out
Edited on Fri Nov-02-07 07:15 PM by maximusveritas
When you just call out an attack or criticism as unfair without actually responding to it, you create the impression that you are trying to avoid the criticism. That's what Dean did and what Hillary is doing now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alphafemale Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 06:31 PM
Response to Original message
3. It was a disgrace for someone that wanted to be a "Leader"
No whiners allowed.

Period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 06:32 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. How was it "whining?"
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alphafemale Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. In your own words "poor widdle me"
How is it not whining?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. I asked a question.
My answer to the question is NO.

("Poor widdle me" was a quotation of others here.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. She did a sneakily good job of setting the tone, didn't she?
Well done, sparkly.

Way to go.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
incapsulated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 06:43 PM
Response to Original message
8. Kick for those with selective memories.
;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oasis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #8
18. It serves to underline the fact that Edwards hasn't departed from his mudslinging tactics. (eom)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. That's the truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
9. You don't want to throw Hillary into the same boat with Dean..
another front runner who started whining and lost his hold on the lead. History begins to repeat itself, huh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lligrd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 06:48 PM
Response to Original message
11. Dean Brought Up Valid Voting Records And Candidate
statements. Those are valid in a campaign and are not personal. Unfortunately, when opponents can't find valid points to use against another they often resort to personal attacks as they did to Dean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 06:50 PM
Response to Original message
12. Oh, there is so much I can say about someone in NH and who skipped Iowa
and was campaigning there and badmouthing Dean.


But correct me...wasn't that 4 years ago?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
incapsulated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #12
17. You are completely missing her point
This has nothing to do with insulting Dean.

It has everything to do with people who accuse Hillary of being a whiny bitch, playing the victim card when EVERY front runner does the same damn thing.

And every time they do it, all the supporters of the other candidates call them whiners.

Except now, they claim she is playing the "gender card" too.

There was nothing wrong with Dean and there is nothing wrong with Hillary.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. No, I got her point. You do not get my point.
2008 was foreordained, all the pieces were in place then, and are in place now.

Effing Democrats want us to vote, but the votes did not effing matter then nor will they now.

The system was set up to hold the place for 08.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #17
22. You are so wrong
Edited on Fri Nov-02-07 07:13 PM by depakid
There's a LOT wrong with Hillary- far too much to be mentioned.

Unlike Dean (and very much like her husband) she speaks out of both sides of her mouth and wants to have it both ways on issues, policies- and who she associates with and takes money from.

That they both were attacked is far less relevant than the reasons why they've been attacked.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
incapsulated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #22
26. You are making this into a comparison of Dean and Hillary
As candidates.

Instead of the FACT that they both complained about being under attack as front runners.

Which was her only fucking point but god forbid she brings up Saint Dean in the same sentence as Hillary? Please.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #26
29. Exactly.
The only comparison I'm making is as frontrunners, under attack, and when they respond, others complain that they're complaining. (People like, for example, Lieberman. And now it seems this is a board full of Liebermans.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 08:06 PM
Response to Reply #29
40. Fair enough- from the horse's mouth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 06:52 PM
Response to Original message
13. Time to get out some poor little me files....you think? That was 4 years ago.
I have so much to say, and so much info, and so many things.....let me get started.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 06:55 PM
Response to Original message
14. Senator Clinton has to be careful.
Obviously, she's going after the female vote. That's to be expected. But there's an overconfidence on the part of her campaign now, I'm convinced. She's contradicting herself too much.

Hillary Clinton is nothing like Howard Dean except that they both got attention from the media (for different reasons).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #14
30. The only comparison and point of discussion
is their status as frontrunners; the fact that frontrunners get attacked; the fact that frontrunners respond to attacks by saying "Look, they're attacking me;" and the fact that other people act all shocked about that and say they're complaining or being weak.

The only difference is that Clinton is also accused of playing a "gender card" and being "poor widdle me."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #30
33. But you must admit that the "gender card" makes for one
huge difference!

She shouldn't have to proclaim politics as a "boys' club" at her alma mater or anywhere else. If she's the strongest and wisest candidate, gender shouldn't matter, and she should not complain about the "boys' club"--she should just present her policies clearly and forthrightly, and--to get back to stupid cliches--let the chips fall where they may! ;-)

To hell with the "boys' club" and to hell with "the kitchen."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. Candidates all have different ways of appealing to voters.
This was a way to appeal at her all-women alma mater, and I think it was a statement of pride, not self-pity; strength, not weakness.

Obama appeals to black voters by highlighting his race and heritage.

Dean caught hell for appealing to guys with confederate flags and pickup trucks.

Male candidates appeal to "Nascar Dads."

Christian candidates appeal to Christian voters.

Southern candidates appeal to southerners.

Veteran candidates appeal to veterans.

Why is this SUCH a big deal when it's a woman appealing to women?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:51 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. Because some of us, Sparkly, don't find it appealing.
I admire Senator Clinton very much, but I don't like this kind of pandering. She's a strong and competent woman, and she shouldn't have to do this. I'm sure you've seen other people here at DU who are turned off by it as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. That's okay.
It's a decision from all of their campaigns. My point is it is the SAME THING, and there seems to be a double standard at work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
incapsulated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #33
39. "all-boys club of presidential politics"
It isn't an all boys club, the presidency?

Jesus, I've never seen so many women ready to jump down another woman's throat for pointing out the FACT that she is trying to go where no woman has been ALLOWED to go before.

"In so many ways, this all-women's college prepared me to compete in the all-boys club of presidential politics"

Burn the Witch!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 08:42 PM
Response to Reply #39
48. I hope you don't include me in that category,
because I'm not willing to jump down her throat. I just think she's making some mistakes in her campaign right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 09:09 PM
Response to Reply #48
55. And I think that's a perfectly valid point of view.
If you're right, perhaps she'll be a "victim" of her campaign's strategy -- who knows? I guess time will tell.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
illinoisprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 08:07 PM
Response to Original message
41. Her playing the victim could bury her in the GE.
the debate exposed her in several areas but, the victim act was a fatal mistake. the gop can really run with that one and it could bury her if she is the nominee.
Seriously. They could take it to make her look weak and whining.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #41
43. Lieberman said that about Dean.
Do you think he was right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 08:13 PM
Response to Reply #43
44. I think you misjudge historical support of Dr. Dean nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #44
46. Not sure what you mean.
Would you please clarify that for me?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #46
47. You're acting like the majority of people felt that Dean was a good candidate and...
ran a strong campaign. I think looking back, most people would say that he did not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 08:43 PM
Response to Reply #47
49. He was in the lead.
Edited on Fri Nov-02-07 08:43 PM by Sparkly
He did have a strong organization.

And consequently, many of the things we see now we saw then. The media called him the probable (if not inevitable) nominee, other campaigns accused him of acting like it was over before a vote was cast, others attacked him in debates, he complained about that, they complained about his complaining, etc. etc. etc...

One thing Hillary Clinton has not done, though, is suggest that Dean (as DNC chair) ought to tell the other candidates to stop attacking. For what it's worth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 08:11 PM
Response to Original message
42. America doesn't want a Victim-in-Chief
...


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #42
45. Given that this is routine for frontrunners,
are they all "victims," then?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 08:46 PM
Response to Original message
50. What Zahn referred to, Sparkly...and you know it well....
was the Governor Dean was battered for these words. I got battered the other night by beaconess and others for presenting people who stood up for him.

I find your post divisive because you picked that topic. I am going to quote what Dean said, and how the others so sassily reponded...all so smart. All so clueless about what he meant.

What Dean said. which he had been given ovations for all year:

"I intend to talk about race during this election in the South. The Republicans have been talking about it since 1968 in order to divide us, and I'm going to bring us together. Because you know what? White folks in the South who drive pickup trucks with Confederate flag decals on the back ought to be voting with us because their kids don't have health insurance either, and their kids need better schools too."


How Clark responded, knowing full well what was meant:

The two southerners in the Democratic race, North Carolina Sen. John Edwards (search) and retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark (search) of Arkansas, also protested. "Some of the greatest civil rights leaders, white and black, have come from the South," said Edwards. "To assume that southerners who drive trucks would embrace this symbol is offensive."

Clark said, "Every Democratic candidate for president needs to condemn the divisiveness the Confederate flag represents."


Edwards carried it further:

"The last thing we need in the South is somebody like you coming down and telling us what we need to do," Edwards told Dean in the debate. "The people that I grew up with, the vast majority of them, they don't drive around with Confederate flags on pickup trucks." The audience of Bostonians applauded. Nobody pointed out that the sentiment Edwards had just expressed was the most common rationale for flaunting the Confederate flag. Nor did Edwards betray any chagrin when moderator Anderson Cooper recalled Edwards' recent comment that Democrats should "reach out to people like Zell Miller," the Democratic senator from Georgia who has just endorsed President Bush for re-election. If Dean's outreach to people with the Confederate flag decals makes him a racist, does Edwards' outreach to Miller make Edwards a Bush man? Or is outreach just part of politics?


And Kerry:

Sen. John Kerry (search) of Massachusetts contended that Dean's "pandering" to the National Rifle Association (search) gave him an inroad to "pander to lovers of the Confederate flag."

Dean's comment was reported in story about Kerry's criticism of Dean's record on guns. The senator claimed that Dean was an NRA favorite who opposed a 1994 law that banned assault weapons to civilians.

"I would rather be the candidate of the NAACP than the NRA," Kerry said in a statement


Gephardt:

"I don't want to be the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks," Gephardt said in a statement. "I will win the Democratic nomination because I will be the candidate for guys with American flags in their pickup trucks."


Sharpton:

Candidate and civil rights activist Al Sharpton (search) — who has accused Dean of having an "anti-black agenda" — said he was "surprised and disturbed" by the Confederate flag remark. "If I said I wanted to be the candidate for people that ride around with helmets and swastikas, I would be asked to leave," Sharpton said.


That was what Paula Zahn was interviewing Dean about. Sparkly you should have picked something else to use.







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 08:54 PM
Response to Reply #50
51. I remember that well.
The answer to the question in my subject line is: "NO." I hope I've made that clear. I'm not criticizing Dean.

The point isn't about that particular controversy; it's about the inevitable response to the inevitable attacks on the frontrunner. Lots of people have no problem acting like Liebermans now -- with the added accusation about a "gender card."

The attacks are expected and aren't really any surprise, and similarly, the candidate's response to them should be expected as no real surprise. Both are part of the process.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #51
52. I don't give a damn if you criticize him. Don't you get it?
What was started in 2003 has been completed. Hillary will be president, Dean is silenced, has still been subjected to ridicule and threats of being fired.

Now what I want to know is was Clark really the anti-war candidate? Or was there another reason.

This is the 2nd post in less than a week bringing this issue up of Dean and the flag. I was talked to in that thread like I was a fool.

Now that Dean is silenced....now that all is in place...what I wanna know is.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #52
53. I'm really not interested in discussing the particulars of all that.
My post is limited to one point only. If you don't want to revisit all of the 2003/2004 primary season, let's not do that. (If you do, start another thread for it.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #53
54. Since this is the 2nd post on the topic....
I really might start one. You started this thread with three iddy biddy words that did sound like an insult.

You did not have to do that.

If we are going to revisit every iddy biddy thing Dean did or said in 03 04....then others can play that game as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-02-07 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #54
56. Didn't see the other one.
I used the term on purpose -- because the phrase "poor widdle me," words like "disgrace," and gender issues are precisely the point I'm debating.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 04:14 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC