Daily Howler: Dean an "Undisciplined Nightmare"

[tishaLA]

Here's what Bob Somersby has to say...

When did Dems become so easy, that they can’t demand leaders who are tough and not-stupid? And are we wrong, or are bloggers starting to pander to the fire-breathing Dem herd? We cringed at this fawning from Kevin Drum, who surely understood his slick edit:

DRUM (6/11/05): What was it that Howard Dean said about Republican leaders? Oh yes: "A lot of them have never made an honest living in their lives."

But Dean didn’t say that “about Republican leaders.” He simply said it about “Republicans”—in fact, by clear inference, about Republican voters. Here’s what the firebrand actually said—and yes, it was totally stupid:

DEAN: The idea that you have to wait on line eight hours to cast your ballot in Florida, there's something the matter with that. Well, Republicans, I guess, can do that, 'cause there's a lot of them that have never made an honest living in their lives.

That’s an amazingly dumb thing to say, especially given the strength of the underlying issue. But for some reason, many Dems seem to think they can’t insist on tough and not-stupid, and pandering to “the base” has started on-line. Drum knew what Howard Dean really said. Good grief—do we faintly hear him saying it? Can you make it out, readers? Hey rubes? <snip> In an amazing series of gaffes, Dean keeps refusing to draw the distinction. Our view? Your party chair can be as smart as your radio hosts. You have a right to insist on tough leaders—and on leaders who refuse to be stupid. Daily Howler

[CatWoman]

1. man

that horse ain't gonna get no deader.........

[Larkspur]

2. Disappointed in Bob. He must have drunk the DLC kool-aid

George Lakoff had the right response to this flap -- Dean's comments were taken out of context of his entire speech and everyone in attendence kew that Dean was referring to Republican lawmakers, not voters.

Anyway, my mother had harsher language for Repukes than Dean did. She called them the Party of Big Business and Fat Cat Plutocrats, and she would have agreed with Dean that the Republican powerbrokers have not made an honest living.

[Karenina]

6. Fuck you, B.S.

:evilgrin:

[BurtWorm]

8. He has never liked Dean.

:shrug:

I don't look to Daily Howler for intelligent analysis of Dean's "gaffes." For some reason, Somerby doesn't care to read Dean's remarks as kindly as he reads Gore's/Clinton's. For instance he ignored the "a lot of" in the phrase "a lot of Republicans." He also ignored the fact that this was a joke made to Democrats, much like Gore's "union lullaby" joke made to a union crowd.

But I'm not going to hate Bob Somerby for having his head up his ass about Dean (and Joseph Wilson).

[smartvoter]

3. Yawn. This is getting old. nt

[FreedomAngel82]

4. It is

We need a yawn smiley.

[BlueIris]

9. So old.

And, there's no yawn smilie?

[Debi]

25. We do have this one...

:boring:

[ConservativeDemocrat]

5. Somersby has a point, but misses the larger one...

It is absolutely true that Drum was spinning for Dean, putting in a qualification to Dean's statement that didn't exist. We're all P.O.ed when right wing pundits do that for the Republicans, so it's hypocritical to have selective outrage on this particular doctoring of the record.

However, Somersby misses the larger point, which is this: Dean is right. The GOP is the White Fundamentalist Party, and the American people know it. It's not amazingly dumb to tell people the truth. In fact, this attitude of trying to skirt the truth is what has gotten Democrats into this mess in the first place. And I find it ironic that Somersby, who is one of the original bloggers outlining the prevarications of the press, is now advocating that we continue this losing strategy.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[gratuitous]

11. Yeah, Somersby missed the point

I don't think Dean was talking about Frist or DeLay or Hastert -- though I don't have any evidence that any of those three have actually done an honest day's work in the last three or four years, and neither does The Daily Howler.

Maybe Dr. Dean was talking about other Republican leaders such as George W. Bush, who seems to have become a millionaire without so much as doing any actual work throughout his adult lifetime, and having spent a substantial portion of it in haze of illegal narcotics and alcohol.

In any case, Dean is just using Republican tactics against them: Set up a straw man argument, turn a narrow fact into a gross overgeneralization, and beat them over the head with it. How many of us have been called looney tunes, out of touch traitors, frustrated hippies, blame America firsters, or any of a number of other encomiums that might conceivably be applied to a few people who agree with us on an issue, but certainly doesn't apply to the whole of (for example) the folks who were against the invasion of Iraq?

Is turnabout no longer fair play? Did the Republicans repeal that, too?

[Internut]

19. He quoted Dean

"The idea that you have to wait on line eight hours to cast your ballot in Florida, there's something the matter with that. Well, Republicans, I guess, can do that, 'cause there's a lot of them that have never made an honest living in their lives."

Correct me if I am wrong, but when he says "Republicans, I guess, can do that" he is talking about the previous sentence - meaning "wait in line eight hours to cast your ballot in Florida". It is pretty hard to spin this into "Republican leaders", since Dean is clearly talking about voters standing in line, not the leadership.

[Larkspur]

24. Look at the WHOLE speech and that entire paragraph

Dean was addressing voting irregularities and Republican lawmakers intentionally setup Democratic discricts, specifically minority and poor districts so that these voters would get frustrated and not vote.

[Internut]

27. You did not address my question -

when he said "Republicans, I guess, can do that" - what was the "do that" that he was referring to?

[Proud_Lefty]

46. Dean was talking about the leadership

He was saying that the people can't take off 4 to 8 hours to stand in line, and the leadership, many of whom haven't worked an honest day in their lives, don't understand or care what a burden this is on people with other obligations, work, families, etc. He didn't say the Republican leadership, but if you listen to entire speech, you understand the true meaning completely. I also heard him clarify to Wolf Blitzer that he would never imply such a thing about the voters, of course on deaf ears. Great journalism, Wolf!

[ElsewheresDaughter]

7. eat your baby

[BlueIris]

10. Huh? nt.

[Mass]

12. Getting really old.

[Guaranteed]

13. Hey, thank Bob! nt

[Kahuna]

14. Bob is right. Dean paints all repubs with a broad brush. He never..

distinguishes between the voters and the elected repukes. That is just careless and STUPID. What purpose does it serve to insult all republicans voters unless you want them to never consider voting for any democrate....ever!

[CatWoman]

16. !

You want to hold Howard Dean accountable for what he says, fine. How about holding Bush accountable for what he does?

1. Sending our troops into harm's way without sufficient and proper armor.
2. Cutting veterans' services and budgets when it is needed most.
3. Not allowing our returning dead to be photographed and honored openly.
4. Failing the sick and afflicted while enriching the drug industry.
5. Selling the sweat of America to the highest corporate bidder.

The list is long and ignored. I understand you are much too busy trying to teach Howard Dean how polite society functions.

I want someone who will stand up not stand down. I want someone outspoken and outrageous and out there, for me. I want someone on my side, not on my back for more money. I want someone who fights, not folds at the first sign of fake indignation.

To paraphrase my good friend Titus: You whiny Democratic Leadership wussies - get down off the cross and use the wood to build a bridge to get over it! We love Howard Dean!

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/printer_061005Y.shtml

[Kahuna]

17. Cut the crap! You've seen me on these boards for a few years

now. You KNOW that I condone nothing done by the chimperor. bush's bad behaviour is no excuse for Dean's bad behaviour. Or yours.

[CatWoman]

18. I'm not cutting anything -- I will continue to drive my point home

as an "Dean needs to learn tact" enthusiast, surely you can bear yet another "tactless" person.

I'm not saying you're waving the flag for Chimpy.

What I am saying is Dean gets in the face of those who do.

And that's a good thing.

You see how much he's raised in the past week? Eloriel has a thread going in this forum.

I'll shout it from the fucking rooftops if I have to -- especially when someone comes along with that "Dean doesn't play nice" crap.

My post was to draw attention to the fact that there are other major, pressing issues to be "outraged" about.

[KittyWampus]

36. It's Not About Tact Or Playing Nice. It's About Making Valid, Worthwhile

points that resonate and don't need to be interpreted so everyone knows what Dean REALLY meant to say.

You can be forceful, in your face and pointed without being sloppy.

For instance, Dean pointed out that the Bible mentions helping the poor 3000 times but it doesn't mention gay marriage once. Gay marriage is a GOP issue.

Now THAT'S a bullseye.

Why not be honest when Dean misses the mark?

How can he improve his game if noone gives him realistic feedback?

[CatWoman]

42. And YOU keep missing the point

feedback or no, the bottom line is HE STOOD UP TO THOSE SCUMBAG MOTHERFUCKERS AND THREW THE TRUTH IN THEIR FACES.

Like it or not, we have a chairman who is not afraid to take the battle to the beast.

[Tom Rinaldo]

21. I somewhat differ

If you think of virtually any Republican campaign, 3 out of 4 statements about Democrats are broad brush smears of the entire Democratic Party, no distinction made about Good Democratic voters vs. Bad Democratic leaders. The Republicans use a carefully honed guilt by association means of denigrating Democrats. They deionized the word "Liberal", and then they use it as a constant adjective to preface "Democrat" so that the two fuse in the subconscious of listeners as a virtual cuss word. The Republican Party frequently says that Democrats fail to honor traditional family values, that Democrats are out of touch with main stream America. Republicans coined the phrase, "bleeding hearts" for Democrats and Liberals. Democrats became the Party of "Tax and Spend", of "Big Government", of "Red Tape", of "political correctness", of stifling bureaucracies and quotas, of failing to defend our Nation. The Republicans have a bumper sticker: "Keep America Free, Vote Republican", what does that say about Democratic voters? The Republicans whole sale negatively brand Democrats ALL OF THE TIME.

Then someone like Bush will offer a way out of the disgrace of being a Democrat in that 4th of four comments I referred to above. He will appeal to "patriotic" Democrats, or "reasonable" Democrats, or "traditional" Democrats to break with their misguided leaders by supporting his "all American" policies. That is the only way todays Republican Party says anything good about any Democrat, if you vote with us maybe you're OK after all.

This has gone on so long and so effectively and has been so well orchestrated by the Republican "noise machine", their Christian Right salesmen, their off the scale right wing talk radio, that there no longer is any effective counter balance to their rhetoric. All but their wildest statements now barely raise an eyebrow.

So maybe Dean was not precise enough in his language to knock it out of the ballpark by all possible criteria, but you won't score many runs in baseball if you don't step up to the plate willing to swing. Remember there was a time when the Democratic Party was associated with the "working man" and the Republicans with the "fat cats"? I saw a statistic quoted by Joe Klein in Time Magazine; "Bush beat Kerry among the white working class by some 24 points". If that doesn't frighten us we are doomed. It's gotten to the point where people have to be reminded why we even bother to have a Democratic Party. The Republican Party has become Walmart, offering something for everyone while selling out the long term interests of average Americans and most people can't even see it.

We have to rebrand the Republican Party as being the party of privilege in America. That is what Dean is trying to do. At least someone is trying.

[xxqqqzme]

29. rethugs=walmart

great post.

BTW, I couldn't agree more catwoman!

[CAcyclist]

38. Hear, Hear!

Or is it here,here?

Great analysis!
:toast:

[Tom Rinaldo]

39. Too late to edit but I meant "demonized" the word Liberal. Ooops n/t

[MODemocrat]

35. Rush Limbaugh said nearly the same thing about democrats

My husband and two of my friends heard him; so where's the outrage at him? Too many things are being taken out of context, with a word or two being left out, or a few key words added here and there.
I will not vote for any of the pansys who are trying to distance themselves from Dean. You go Howard :thumbsup:

[cajones_II]

43. we don't have to worry about "republican voters"

We NEED to be something different, different enough so that swing voters AND newly energized non- voters (40% of registered Dems don't vote-because they are sick of Republican lite I imagine) have a reason to vote for us again.

Pansy ass pussyfooting never gotthe job done anywhere

[ElectroPrincess]

15. What a maroon! Thanks, I'll never visit that place. :P /eom

On Edit: No, Bob is an idiot. (IMO of course :P)

[Pepperbelly]

44. Bob is not an idiot ...

he is lucid and his site a remarkable resource.

[fob]

20. Hey Bob, it's not, IN FACT, A CLEAR INFERENCE as you state it.

Let's break it down for you Bob.

DEAN: The idea that you have to wait on line eight hours to cast your ballot in Florida, there's something the matter with that.

That's clear enough. He's talking to Democrats so the "you" in that first sentence are democrats. Specifically the voters who had to wait in really long lines to vote due to a myriad of reasons.


Well, Republicans, I guess, can do that, 'cause there's a lot of them that have never made an honest living in their lives.

For this one it's the segue that makes it a tad confusing. Let's do this one in 2 parts and see if I can CLARIFY the INFERENCE for you, Bob.

Well, Republicans, I guess, can do that,

This is playing off the earlier comments regarding democratic voters who had to wait in long lines. So here Dean is talking about republican VOTERS who DON'T have to wait in long lines because...


'cause there's a lot of them that have never made an honest living in their lives.

See that part in BOLD Bob? That's where Dean makes the change between the republican VOTERS who seem to have no systemic problems with voting and the REASON they have no problem voting. The reason is the republican "leadership" that have never made an honest living in their lives, who clear the way for their particular bloc of VOTERS to VOTE as FREELY as possible. For examples of this repugnican leadership in action, Google "katherine harris and election 2000" or "kenneth blackwell and election 2004". Also see how repugnican districts got more/newer/better machinery compared to their urban, democratic counterparts.

So, NO, Bob, the inference you've drawn is not as clear as you hold it out to be.

[Internut]

22. You know, I hate to tell you this, but

clear syntactic analysis of Dean's statement does not support what you said above.

"The idea that you have to wait on line eight hours to cast your ballot in Florida, there's something the matter with that. Well, Republicans, I guess, can do that, 'cause there's a lot of them that have never made an honest living in their lives."

This is what the statement clearly says, if you untangle it:

1. Dean thinks it is a problem when "you" (Democrats?) have to wait in line eight hours to cast a ballot in Florida.

2. Dean guesses that for Republican voters (not leaders - since leaders never stand in line to cast ballots, whether Democratic leaders or Republican leaders) it is not a problem to "do that" - that is, to stand in line for eight hours to cast a ballot in Florida.

3. The reason why Dean guesses it is not a problem for Republican voters is "'cause a lot of them ... have never made an honest living in their lives".

There is really no way to spin this into any statement about "Republican leaders". Dean goofed with that statement. He should admit he misspoke and continue on. If he did that, the whole thing would have gone away in half a day. Instead, it goes on and on.

[Larkspur]

23. Dean was addressing voting problems and Republicans voters didn't

have the same problems as Democrats, specifically minority and poor Democrats, who lived in districts where voting took 8 hours. That was because Republican lawmakers setup voting irregularities to SUPPRESS the vote. Ding! Ding! Ding!

[Internut]

26. You were trying to analyze Dean's sentence

I pointed out that Dean's sentence cannot possibly be analyzed to refer to "Republican Leaders". That's all. He was referring to Republican voters. It just can't be spun - it is very clear. It was not a very smart remark.

By the way. You know those long lines in Florida or Ohio? Guess what - they were not 100% Kerry voters. Somehow I have a feeling that there were at least a couple of Bush voters in those lines - don't you think?

[Tom Rinaldo]

30. So what if there were Bush voters in those lines

That only matters if the people running the local elections are committed to an every vote counts rather than a winning at any cost standard. These precincts don't exist in a disconnected vacuum. They have long voting records and registration rolls that are public record. It is not hard to predict that if a certain precinct always votes two to one for Democrats, that suppressing the vote in that precinct by 50% across the board, yes including Republican and Democratic voters, will mean Kerry would lose two votes for every vote lost by Bush. That is the charge being raised. Vote suppression does not have to be laser accurate (only knocking out Democratic votes without effecting a single Republican vote, in order for it to be effective in influencing an election.

[Internut]

32. That is correct, and completely irrelevant to

Dean's statement. Dean basically said "Democratic voters work, so it is hard for them to stand in line for eight hours. For Republicans it is no problem, since they don't work."

You really have to contort the words in order to try to interpret Dean's statement in any other way. That was not a smart statement to make.

[fob]

28. NO. The reason that Democrats have to stand in long lines and

Republicans DON'T is systemic discrimination such as scrubbing the voter rolls, sending old equipment to Dem districts and increasing the ratio of VOTERS per machine in Dem districts versus Repub districts. When Dean discusses the CAUSE there is NO REASON to believe he's still talking about the same VOTERS because they are in no way part of the reason whether they have a long or short wait. The CAUSE of the problem is easily identifiable as those REPUBLICANS who control the process, the leadership, the Secretaries of State, the Governor's, etc.


This is not spin, it's perfectly logical. Dean did not "goof", he told the truth. He doesn't need to say he "misspoke" when the MSM is taking the qualifier out of the statement. And I hope it goes on and on and on, along with his more recent comments until those repukes with any capacity for thought left pull their collective heads out of bush*s ass.


And did you really mean for "republican voters" to exclude "republican leaders", now that's a stretch. And the whole "leaders don't stand in line to cast ballots, Dem or Repub" is a shiny straw man. They in fact do stand in line, I've seen plenty "on the spot" bits where the Pol is waiting to cast their ballot and they hold it for what seems a million pics before finally dropping in the box. The PROBLEM is the rank and file VOTERS and the systemic disenfrachisement of democrats to a much greater, coordinated degree than repukes.

[Internut]

31. Look, all I did was a clear analysis of Dean's statement -

what you're telling me is what he SHOULD have said. I am telling you what he DID say.

As for the leadership standing in line to vote - I don't think so. They are whisked to the head of the line, stand there for 10 minutes with their ballot in their hand for a photo op, then drive away. There is no way in the world that they would stand in line to vote, even for half an hour, much less 8 hours - and that goes both for D or R leaders.

[fob]

33. You are too literal. There are people that vote by mail, was Dean

excluding them? There are people in wheelchairs who sit in line, maybe they were immune from this criticism? There were democrats, like me, who voted in 15 minutes including the parking time, does that mean NO democrats had trouble voting?

YOU were the one who interjected that leaders don't stand in line and now you offer a qualifer. I'm saying Dean's statement did what you did, he made a GENERAL statement and offered a qualifier. Those who take the pieces as black and white are changing the meaning, not I.

[Internut]

34. Dean's statement translates exactly to:

"Democratic voters work, so it is hard for them to stand in line for eight hours. For Republicans it is no problem, since a lot of them don't work."

[fob]

37. No, it doesn't.

[Internut]

40. Argument by assertion.

Let me put these two statements side by side:

"The idea that you have to wait on line eight hours to cast your ballot in Florida, there's something the matter with that. Well, Republicans, I guess, can do that, 'cause there's a lot of them that have never made an honest living in their lives."

"I think that waiting in line for eight hours, like they did in Florida, is a problem. I guess Republicans can stand in line for eight hours, because a lot of them do not work."

If you don't think the two statements are equivalent, please explain what you think the "can do that" in Dean's statement refers to. And if you do agree that the two statements are equivalent, please tell me where he refers to Republican leaders as opposed to Republican voters. Dean, as well as his listeners, knows very well that neither Republican nor Democratic leaders stand in line to vote.

[janx]

41. Quotes taken out of context are extremely malleable.

Make of it what you wish. ;-)

[Pepperbelly]

45. Bob is not a moron or a kool-aid drinker or any other name you might call.

His site is a profoundly useful website and a tremendous resource. His analysis is genuinely on-point and correct in most instances. Yet people here disagree with a remark and are ready to have him walk the plank.

If you disagree, that is your perrogative but for my money, Bob is one the good guys. Knee-jerk namecalling does not contribute to ending the fascism nor does attempts to bully people into some sort of group-think.

[DemBones DemBones]

49. You're right. We don't need group-think and we should not dismiss an ally

because he criticizes something the chair of the party said. Never criticizing leaders is a Republican trait.

I think Dean was correct in saying that some Republicans have never worked/ never had to work, though he said it rather badly. Trust fund babies tend to be Republicans, as Howard Dean, who grew up in that milieu, living on Park Avenue, going to an exclusive country club, would know better than any of us. I'm not a Dean fan but I do give him credit for working as a physician and for being a Democrat. I doubt many of the kids he grew up with and went to prep school with have worked real jobs, much less are Democrats.

It's a sad truth that Dim Son can "misspeak" 24/7 and no one pays any heed to his garbled comments but Democrats have to be very cautious in their public comments or face criticism from all quarters.

[Pepperbelly]

50. Yep ... a term of art put not artfully. nt

[cestpaspossible]

47. Dean hasn't hesitated to say he could have spoken better.

That's good enough for me.

[Pepperbelly]

51. Yep

and at the same time, all of us know how sharp Doctor Dean truly is. What I don't understand is whether the remarks were prepared. If they were, I suspect a first draft.

[meppie-meppie not]

48. me thinks the baby protests too much!

[Larkspur]

53. You mean this baby?

[JTHC]

52. Effective? Polarizing?

Well, I've been cruising the internet Left and Right trying to gauge the general feeling about Dean's recent performance, and let me just say--there isn't one.

It looks like there are four distinct camps right now:

(1) Dems who hate it--say that Dean is divisive, etc.
(2) Dems who love it--say that Dean is a fighter, etc.
(3) Repubs who hate it--say that Dean is a meanie, etc.
(4) Repubs who love it--say that Dean is helping, etc.

So at this point, Dean has somehow, some way, managed to polarize both parties and create four different opinion groups. So he's either doing something very right, or doing something very wrong. Either way, I guess we'll find out in the next election.

I guess I belong in a fifth group--I haven't made up my mind. Results matter. I'm no political expert, so for all I know, Dean may have struck upon a genius series of moves that puts his party on top. He can get criticized for 12 months straight by every talking head out there, but if he gets the results, that's what matters. (of course, if it doesn't work...)