Dean and Clark Supporters - Natural Allies

[mattclearing]

Considering that there are two big factions here in favor of both Dr. Dean and General Clark, I thought it would be nice to remind ourselves that both are somewhat progressive (certainly compared to the national Dems), both are committed to redefining the Democratic Party in a way not dictated by the Republicans, and both have sensible priorities for both the domestic and international agenda.

It seems there are some people at US News and elsewhere that are interested in stirring up the same old primary wars.

I personally think either General Clark or Dr. Dean would be a fine standard-bearer/party leader, and would hope that supporters of each could support the other, and each other.

Let's not let the other side and their cronies set the agenda for us or pit us against each other.

They are the real enemy. Let's get them.

[liberalnurse]

1. I think this will pass.

I don't even think Clark is aware of the insurgent behavior. I sense he would be dissapointed.

[mattclearing]

3. This particular line of attack might, but they'll keep trying to divide.

I want people to acknowledge that the media are out to make us out to be weak, and pit us against one another.

The biggest unreported story of the last election next to the bogus vote-counting was the strength and determination of the Democratic Party.

They are trying to wear us down and make us feel like losers.

That really pisses me off. I'm not having it.

[robbedvoter]

9. Insurgent behavior? Huh?

[Sparkly]

10. Maybe that's a reference

to the familiar attacks and accusations against Clark that crop up on every thread that carries his name. :shrug:

[mattclearing]

17. Can't seem to bring someone up without bringing out the usual suspects.n/t

[in_cog_ni_to]

63. That's it. That's what she meant.

Surely it wasn't a dig at we wonderful Clark supporters? I thought we all kissed and made up after the primary? What's going on? Is Clark a threat now that Dean is the DNC chair? I am THRILLED that Dean id the new chair and am looking forward to where he takes the party. What's all the bitterness about? :shrug:

[robbedvoter]

73. BS names from Iraq work on DU too? Wow!

I guess watching teevee has its usefulness.

[Clark2008]

61. Yeah, I was wondering about that "verbage," too.

Insurgent behavior?
I'm really tired of people's accusatory tones alleging there is something wrong with Clark's Army. Everyone tells their friends about polls in which to vote, including on DU. Clark wins the polls simply because he has more support in the blogosphere. Period.
Think of it this way, if we're this organized and progressive at this early date, we should be ready to kick some Republican BUTT come 2008. :)

[OKNancy]

2. Here, Hear

I can't add much, except to say that I like both! Each have wonderful qualities and I'm looking forward to the future with renewed optimism.

[mattclearing]

4. Thanks for this.

I think both of them can form the backbone of a renewed commitment to progressive values in national politics.

[Pepperbelly]

5. I supported Clark and when Dr. Dean indicated his interest in the DNC ...

I was THRILLED. As soon as I heard he wanted the job, I wanted him to have it. I was perplexed by all of the Dean supporters who were so hyper and defensive toward virtually everyone else. I suppose it was some left-over bitterness from last year's primaries.

I would have been a Dean supporter had Wesley not run and my support was Wesley was not about his military experience, it was about the FDR values I knew him to possess.

[mattclearing]

6. Totally.

I didn't know what to make of Clark at first, and I personally believe if Dean had dropped the "red-meat-throwing" about three weeks before Iowa, he would have sewn up the nomination.

People wanted to see a kinder, gentler Howard Dean once he became the frontrunner, so to speak, and it never surfaced.

Well, not until it was time to run for DNC chair, anyway.

Now that the primaries are over and General Clark is still committed to progressive causes and politics, I'm excited that both of these people are still on the team and in a good position to impact the direction of the party.

[autorank]

7. Agreed. I'm a Clark supporter and I also supported Dean for DNC

I think Dean is exactly what we need right now, a forceful, sharp spokesman. I hope that Clark starts his campaign in about six months and begins slamming * and company on a regular basis. I'm happy with the Senate leadership and hopeful that Pelosi will find her voice. We're ready to rumble. You're right, let's get them and start now.

[mattclearing]

15. Absolutely.

One thing I liked about Terry McAuliffe was that he pulled no punches on knocking President Bush. It was clear he didn't like him, didn't like his agenda, thought he was crazy, and wanted to kick his ass back to Texas.

Dean feels exactly the same way, only moreso, and with a better grasp of why and how to combat them and ultimately beat their asses.

[autorank]

68. Dr. Dean opens up a can of whup ass. Oh Yeah!

[Sparkly]

8. I agree

Neither deserves to be attacked, and I'm sure Republicans would relish reheating the primary wars. Let's not give them the satisfaction.

I think they're threatened by both men.

[mattclearing]

16. And they should be.

The last thing they need is sensible sounding Democrats taking swings at Bush's loony policies.

Bush's policies require constant suspension of disbelief to survive. If someone is constantly interjecting common sense into the equation, and gets heard, they don't stand a chance.

[Cha]

72. Me, too..agrees ..that "neither deserves

to be attacked"..by Dems for bob's sake!

We're fighting the most wreckless, cruel, manipulating, dirty bunch in the history of mankind..and we're fighting about this or that Dem who doesn't reach our specifications of perfect?

btw..lieman isn't a Dem.

[Adelante]

11. I support Clark

I supported Dean for DNC chair with no hesitation.

There's less of a disagreement than the media and a few negative DUers would have us think.

[mattclearing]

14. I absolutely agree.

It's important to repudiate and disregard those who would attempt to sow dissension in the ranks, so to speak.

That's one reason why I go crazy when people whine about CNN and the Washington Post. Like, that's what you get for watching/reading bad news coverage.

I encourage everyone to turn off the tv, and tell your friends to do the same. All the news you need is on the Internet.

[marcologico]

12. If you mean "natural allies" knocking out Kerry to clear a path for Dean,

who supposedly isn't running (wink wink nudge nudge), I don't think so.

But that isn't what you meant at all, is it? (wink wink nudge nudge say no more)

[mattclearing]

13. My point is that we're on the same side.

I like Kerry too, and think he is a fine asset to the Party. He took a shot, though. The presidency is too important to give people second chances at it.

Even if you don't believe in the election fraud issue (and I do), Dean predicted the kind of thing we experienced on Election Day, and the fact that we were woefully unprepared shows that Kerry didn't understand the playing field.

It reflects on his judgement.

But I digress. Like I said, we're all on the same side. That was my point.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

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

[mattclearing]

23. When has Dean ever been involved in smear campaigns?

Please, enlighten me.

[marcologico]

26. Ever hear of KOS? n/t

[mattclearing]

27. and...?

You're going to have to be a little more specific. Is this about the blogger thing? You can't be serious.

[marcologico]

30. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

Another that's been openly exposed is mydd (or whatever it's called) but it's pretty clear that the payola flows freely to many and many a Deano-friendly internet outlet, Alternet being a good example of fact-free Dean propaganda. See this thread on the subject:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1573117&mesg_id=1573117

And let's not forget Dean's sneaky websites, discussed here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1493112&mesg_id=1493112

[mattclearing]

32. Both of these threads are dubious at best.

On edit, I originally stated in the subject line that they were locked, but that was just due to the fact that they were archived. My message text below is untouched.

And only reading the subject lines on the first one involves no reference to Dean.

The second one is a group of people called, "The Dean People" that had no known links to Dean other than their name.

Sounds like you have an axe to grind here, but little evidence. Kinda makes me wonder what your real issue is with Dean.

It's obvious you're for Kerry, but the only thing Dean did to Kerry was point out the same inconsistencies on the war that Bush did later on. It was an obvious vulnerability.

Maybe if Kerry had made the correct decision and stood up for it rather than backing the war as establishing national security credentials, he wouldn't have been so easily attacked by Dean and Bush.

I've made my peace with Kerry over his begrudging support for the war. How about you make your peace with Dean over whatever it is that you really don't like about him. The stuff you've given so far is insignificant.

I repeat: You can't be serious.

[marcologico]

34. Neither is locked. Both are archived. And if that's not evidence,

this is not a rational discussion. So what else is new.

[mattclearing]

35. Try responding to the rest of it. Nice try, though. n/t

[marcologico]

38. Nothing to respond to but your opinion, but I'll answer your question:

Yes, I'm serious.

[mattclearing]

39. If you're serious...

You might want to consider changing your signature line.

[marcologico]

43. I'll change it when the '04 election has been investigated and litigated

according to a fair standard of justice. So far it hasn't.

[mattclearing]

45. I can respect that.

I still think if Kerry had taken the Diebold factor seriously we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Instead, you'd be flaming me because Dean was confirmed Secretary of HHS.

[marcologico]

40. As far as Iraq goes, Dean's position was indistinguishable from Kerry's.

And here's a quiz for you to take if you think I'm kidding:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1546727&mesg_id=1546727

[mattclearing]

44. You keep referring me to your earlier posts.

I don't have time to fact-check your posts.

If I misrepresented Kerry or Dean's position on the Iraq War, don't you think their supporters would have called me on it by now?

This thread was intended to be positive.

You keep grasping at straws trying to knock Dean on the day he has been elected DNC chairman.

I'm still wondering why you're so upset with Dean.

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

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

[mattclearing]

48. Looked. Even then, you are still linking to your earlier posts.

You are wasting my time.

Once again, what is your beef with Dean?

Feel free to back it up with a link to anything but yourself.

A simple sentence will do.

[marcologico]

50. No links to posts in that thread, just to sources. And here they are again

just for you:

Answers:


1. __K__ "We cannot be deterred by letting America be held hostage by energy from the Middle East. If I am President, we will embark on a historic effort to create alternative fuels and the vehicles of the future – to make this country energy independent of Mideast oil within ten years."

Source: http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2004_0227.html


2. __D__ "I think in some ways, unfortunately, the terrorists have already won."

Source: http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040129-115023-8966r.htm


3. __D__ "I will expand our armed forces' capacity to meet the toughest challenges -- like defeating terrorism, countering weapons of mass destruction, and securing peace -- with robust special forces, improved military intelligence, and forces that are as ready and able to strengthen the peace as they are to succeed in combat."

Source: http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/002698.html


4. __D__ "During the past dozen years, I have supported U.S. military action to roll back Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, to halt ethnic cleansing in Bosnia, to stop Milosevic's campaign of terror in Kosovo, to oust the Taliban and al Qaeda from control in Afghanistan. As President, I will never hesitate to deploy our armed forces to defend our country and its allies, and to protect our national interests. And, as President, I will renew America's commitment to the men and women who proudly serve our nation."

Source: http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/002698.html


5. __K__ "I think there has been an exaggeration," ___ said when asked whether President Bush has overstated the threat of terrorism. "They are misleading all Americans in a profound way." ___ said he would engage other nations in a more cooperative fashion to quell terrorism. "This administration's arrogant and ideological policy is taking America down a more dangerous path. . . . I will make America safer than they are."

Source: http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040129-115023-8966r.htm


6. __D__ "We need a global fund to combat weapons of mass destruction -- not just in the former Soviet Union but around the world -- that is much larger than current expenditures. Our administration will ask Congress to triple U.S. contributions over 10 years, to $30 billion. . . . We urgently need to strengthen these programs in order to defend America."

Source: http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/002698.html


7. __D__ "The capture of Saddam Hussein is good news for the Iraqi people and the world. Saddam was a brutal dictator who should be brought swiftly to justice for his crimes. His capture is a testament to the skill and courage of U.S. forces and intelligence personnel. They have risked their lives. Some of their comrades have given their lives. All Americans should be grateful. I thank these outstanding men and women for their service and sacrifice."

Source: http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/002698.html


8. __K__ "You've about 500 troops here, 500 troops there and it's American troops that are 90 percent of the combat casualties and it's American taxpayers that are paying 90 percent of the cost of the war," he said. "It's the wrong war, in the wrong place at the wrong time."

Source: http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/090804Z.shtml


9. __K__ "I do not fault George Bush for doing too much in the War on Terror; I believe he’s done too little. Where he’s acted, his doctrine of unilateral preemption has driven away our allies and cost us the support of other nations. Iraq is in disarray, with American troops still bogged down in a deadly guerrilla war with no exit in sight. In Afghanistan, the area outside Kabul is sliding back into the hands of a resurgent Taliban and emboldened warlords."

Source: http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2004_0227.html


10. __K__ "I think there has been an exaggeration," ___ said when asked whether President Bush has overstated the threat of terrorism. "They are misleading all Americans in a profound way." ___ said he would engage other nations in a more cooperative fashion to quell terrorism. "This administration's arrogant and ideological policy is taking America down a more dangerous path. . . . I will make America safer than they are."

Source: http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040129-115023-8966r.htm


Extra Credit:

11. __K__ "George Bush has no comprehensive strategy for victory in the War on Terror – only an ad hoc strategy to keep our enemies at bay. If I am Commander-in-Chief, I would wage that war by putting in place a strategy to win it. We cannot win the War on Terror through military power alone. If I am President, I will be prepared to use military force to protect our security, our people, and our vital interests. But the fight requires us to use every tool at our disposal. Not only a strong military – but renewed alliances, vigorous law enforcement, reliable intelligence, and unremitting effort to shut down the flow of terrorist funds."

Source: http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2004_0227.html

[mattclearing]

52. You said their stance on the war was indistinguishable.

So how come Howard Dean attacked the Democrats in congress at the DNC Winter meeting in '03 for launching an unprovoked war against Iraq?

That seems to be a pretty big difference in opinion.

Those quotes don't address it, now do they?

At some point, you will admit that Kerry sold himself out because he thought no one would take him seriously if he didn't vote for the war.

Howard Dean looked at the facts, made a decision that he could live with, and stood up for it.

And Kerry's talk of "giving President Bush authority to enforce the UN resolutions" are crap.

If you read the IWR, it says basically that it would be nice if Iraq complied, but regardless, President Bush is free to invade.

Kerry voted to go to war, and then bitched about how it was done.

You'd think he'd know that Bush was the one in charge of that war, and everything Bush touches turns to shit, and factor that into his decision.

But no, he still voted for it, and then feigned ignorance about how badly George Bush would "fuck it up."

Kerry knew exactly how bad Bush was going to fuck it up. We all did. But he gambled that no one would take him seriously if he didn't vote for the war.

I'd take him a lot more seriously if he stood up for the right thing instead of making a crass political decision and insulting the voters' intelligence.

That vote for the war resolution was the number one thing hurting him in the campaign, with the swift boat liars coming in a close second.

So I'm sorry if your feelings are hurt, but he blew it.

Dean did the right thing for the right reason and was denied political office.

Kerry did the wrong thing for the wrong reason and was denied political office.

I have a feeling Dean sleeps better.

I gotta go, but it's been nice chatting. Ta.

[marcologico]

55. Let's call it a flip-flop for political gain.

Dean supported the Iraq war, capturing Saddam ("The capture of Saddam Hussein is good news for the Iraqi people and the world"), expanding the US military, and policing the world. He said all that and more in his December 15, 2003 speech:

http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/002698.html

Any later shaving for political advantage was just that. Too bad it didn't work out the way he hoped.

[mattclearing]

58. I'm talking about February 2003. You know, right before the bombs fell?

It happened right here in DC a few blocks away. It was a huge deal. I'm sure you remember.

[marcologico]

60. Double flip-flop.

Quite a trick.

[mattclearing]

62. Whatever man.

:D

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

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

[marcologico]

71. Exactly what do you mean by "You think no one knows your game?"

Just curious.

[mattclearing]

47. Oh, and another thing...KERRY didn't predict it. n/t

[Adelante]

28. Now *that's* funny

And a new one on me.

[Capn Sunshine]

70. oops. delete

[frustrated_lefty]

18. Wayyyyy back in the primaries

Clark and Dean supporters (on this forum, at least) came to respect and appreciate one another. I've seen nothing which would or should change that.

Now, Gephardt and Kerry's campaign tactics....that's a separate issue. But, as far as I know, there is no bad blood at all between the Clark and Dean people.

FL

[mattclearing]

19. Totally.

And that Gephardt stuff, when he was whining about being the son of a milkman, meanwhile playing hardball politics in the backroom, throwing Osama commercials at Dean.

Talk about no respect. Eyebrow boy lost all credibility in my opinion.

[Adelante]

29. There's bad blood plenty

There's no sense denying it, even if it is between a relatively few Clarkies and a relatively few Deanies.

But it shouldn't stop us from working together when interests combine, such as currently supporting Dean for DNC chair, as so many of us do.

The biggest pitfall is revisiting the primaries of '04. If we can keep that at a distance, we're not bad off at all.

[mattclearing]

49. Apparently some of us can't let it go.

:D

[Tom Rinaldo]

20. Another Clark supporter who openly backed Dean for DNC Chair

From the first moment Dean expressed an interest, I thought he would be best for our Party, and I said so continually and I say so now. I never would have thought so if I didn't believe that Dean would work hard to bring us all together as a potent fighting force.

It never was about 2008 for me, no matter how much I want Clark to win the nomination. I know that the odds are against any individual pulling it off, even whoever the front runner happens to be at any given time. There are too many uncertainties to pick a winner, and I would have welcomed Howard Dean in the 2008 field, because he may well have been my second choice, and I would have felt honored to support him as our Presidential candidate, and I feel honored to have him leading our Party now.

Neither Clark nor Dean are Two Dimensional like the media attempts to peg them. We are a full spectrum Party prepared to address all of our nation's pressing needs, both at home and abroad.

[mattclearing]

21. He has certainly become a motivating factor for the grass roots.

The DNC chairmanship is the logical place for a person of Dean's talents and appeal. He is a fighter, and a rabble rouser. Just the kind of guy you want to rally the troops.

[YvonneCa]

24. Thank you for the positive perspective, tasteblind.

I totally agree. I've supported Wesley Clark and John Kerry, and I think Howard Dean is the BEST choice for DNC Chair. We Democrats MUST be united NOW. We have a lot of work to do.}(

[mattclearing]

25. I'll YYYEEEEAAAARRRRGGGHHHH to that. n/t

[Mark E. Smith]

31. Amen.

My dream ticket for 2008 is Clark/Richardson, with Dean running the party.

Pretty unbeatable if you ask me.

[mattclearing]

33. Pretty solid, but I'm not sold on Richardson yet.

I don't know much about him yet either. Time will tell. :)

[YvonneCa]

36. Any thoughts on...

...a Gore/Clark ticket in 2008?

[mattclearing]

37. I like Gore...but...

Once again, not unlike Kerry, he did something that I have an issue with that seemingly prevented him from taking the White House.

Particularly, rather than asking for a statewide manual recount of Florida, and pledging to abide by the results, he asked for a selective recount of 4 Democratic leaning counties.

Inarguably, the right thing to do would have been to demand a statewide recount. It would have been fair. Instead, Gore went along with the advisors that told him to pick and choose counties, and yet still call out to "count every vote."

That goes to judgment. After the race was over, he vowed to "let 'er rip," and really say what he meant.

Personally, I would rather he have said what he really meant when he still had a chance to be President.

The faux irony that a statewide recount would have favored Gore is not lost on me either.

As with Kerry, I'd rather not take another shot with someone who missed once.

People often say, "Nixon did it."

My response to that is always, "Yeah, and that turned out great."

[YvonneCa]

53. Is it possible that...

...those who missed once (such as Gore and Kerry) would be a better choice? I am, by no means, an expert on politics; but I can think of several reasons why Gore or Kerry could lead a very strong Democratic ticket in 2008:

1. I've read that Vice President Gore did not recount the entire state because the money was not there to do so, and he also believed that for the good of the country he should withdraw and throw his support behind the new administration. I agree with you that he should have recounted the entire state, and that this would have made all the difference. I think this issue goes more to planning, than judgment. I believe he knows this and would handle it correctly in 2008.

2. Gore and Kerry still have a broad base of support, including supporters who believe they won their election.* Who could be better to educate the American public about election reform than a candidate who was most affected by federal election shortcomings? Both could make a compelling case during the 2008 presidential campaign.


3. Because of their experience in 2000/2004 both seem less likely to be mislead by those around them, and MORE likely to "let 'er rip" in a second campaign. I do believe that both have "learned", and would really say what they thought a second time around. I've been reading Al Gore's speeches for the last couple of years, and they are FANTASTIC!



*And now as I'm watching Howard Dean at the DNC on C-Span..The DNC is supporting the Ohio Investigation on Election Fraud.:party:

[mattclearing]

65. Yeah, I saw Gore speak at Constitution Hall last year for Move On.

It was about the Patriot Act, and he was great.

Maybe you're right about learning from the first time around.

They'd have to fight through the primaries again, that's for sure.

And I'll support whoever we put up there against the other side.

I have my doubts, and these mistakes that Kerry and Gore made are big mistakes, game-losing mistakes.

But hey, no one knows the kind of pressure these guys are under, and they are the ones putting their friends, families, and reputations on the line for the cause.

I can only respect and applaud them for that.

We shall see.

[YvonneCa]

66. Yes..

...we shall!:-)

[liberalnurse]

74. Hello....what are you thinking?????

Asking for a statewide recount was not a legal option in Florida. The only way that could happen is if the Governor or Secretary of State agreed to a full state recount.......We all know that they had all the cards in that game.

[Vincardog]

41. Any thought on

... A Clark/Boxer ticket in 2008?

[mattclearing]

42. I'm more interested in 2006 at this point.

And 2008 is irrelevant if we don't get to the bottom of the voting machines.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

51. Yes they are! They are the two anti-establishment Democrats...

who want to bring about the second coming of FDR! We need another FDR right now to save us from *!

[mattclearing]

54. Abso-smurfly!

I'd settle for anything at this point. Another FDR sure would be nice though.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

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

[Tom Rinaldo]

57. Can't you give this a rest today?

Dean just was elected Chair of the DNC. A one day truce at least would be appreciated. You made many of your points already upthread. Let Dean supporters be proud for whatever reason they want for a day at least.

[marcologico]

59. Gladly. n/t

[Clark2008]

64. Thank you, Tom.

I have no problem with Dean as chair - in fact I suggested it as long ago as the late spring/early summer of 2004.
Any problems I have here are with a few of the usual suspects who cannot let a Clark thread pass without a flame. Some are Dean supporters, some are not.
However, today is Dean's day and I agree with you that his supporters should be allowed to party. :party:

[ananda]

67. Go Democrats!

With Dean in charge of the DNC, I am confident that he will infuse strength, character, and life into the Democratic party and that he will inspire confidence in Dem leaders, including Clark.

Go Dems!


Sue

[Quixote1818]

75. Everyone have a drink on me! Dean and Clark folks together at last.

:toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast:

[CalebHayes]

76. Here is why I was a Supporter of Clark not Dean... Nam.

Dean was Skiing. Clark was fighting.

[Ashamed_American]

77. I love 'em both.

It should be all about finding that common ground and fuse together to fight the real enemy. There is a lot at stake here. The party is a tad divided and the country is terribly uninformed. We have the ammunition needed to do the job. Actually we always have. Now we just might have the guy who is bold enough to pull the trigger.

Lets stand as one and get the fatheads out of the White House!


www.BlackEyedSundays.com