Deleted message

[Name removed]

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

[chimpymustgo]

1. Just saw the tape on CNN. Mean, angry, ugly. LOSER.

Dean - and his supporters should think long and hard about Dean's conduct.

After all the positives of your campaign, is this really how you want to go out?

[Raya]

5. Dean is Back to Same Vicious Attacks he used in NH Iowa Earlier 2003

. . then disavowed late in the year calling for an end to negative
campaigning -- Calling Kerry, "in the pockets of special interest" "Slippery Washington Politician" etc

Dean supporter who are indignant at critiques of the good Doctor are either just as hypocritical as Dean or totally missed the 4+ months of vicious attacks by Dean against Kerry last year.

But then, Dean is not being negative, he is just speaking the truth.
(sarcasm)

[blm]

9. He also said on MTP that Kerry was "on the take" from special interests.

Kerry has never taken special interest pac money or corporate pac money.

Lobbyists from environmental and prounion groups donated as much money as other individuals were allowed to donate, 1000 and 2000 dollars at a time. Dean lumped ALL of this money over 19 years to make it appear worse.

Kerry was BOUGHT for 1000 and 2000 dollar donations?

[Eloriel]

11. Yeah, bundled, dear, bundled -- makes a difference n/t

[mistertrickster]

2. The truth hurts, doesn't it? How are we going to claim the moral

high ground on special interests when Kerry is funding this campaign and all his other campaigns with massive infusions of "big money"?

Also, nobody was telling Kerry et al. to tone down their attacks on Dean when he was the frontrunner.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

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

[displacedtexan]

4. Do the math before you claim "special interests"

$600,000 over 19 years of $1000 donations from individuals =
about $30,000 per year from lobbyists.

Thanks for playing. Try again.

[joshcryer]

6. Of course he called Kerry a Republican, but indirectly.

He did it using an insinuation (backed up by factual information) rather than directly.

So, yes, the statement "Dean did not call Kerry a Republican" is just as factual as the converse of that statement. He insinuated it.

Language is a bitch, eh?

[For PaisAn]

7. I agree with you but

you still seem to have no problem with Dean calling Clark a Republican in this statement. Is it OK for Dean to lie about Clark, but not Ok for him to lie about Kerry? Is it also OK for Kerry to make the same dishonest statement about Clark? Clark has NEVER been a Republican. The critique outlined in your post is accurate but not equitable and objective.

[sandnsea]

12. I criticized that

I said many times that I didn't like it when Jeanne Shaheen questioned Clark about being a Republican.

I did, however, say I wanted to know what he thinks about some specific things during the Reagan years since he voted for Reagan. I still do. But just to say "he's a Republican, neener, neener," is stupid and wrong.

[zulchzulu]

8. Desperate Dean proves again he's a divider and will fade out quickly

I saw the video of Dean attacking Clark and Kerry with his half-truths and accusations.

Dean has been taking plenty of money from special interests like Enron, Halliburton and others and can easily be slapped back for his hypcrisy.

All I can say is that I can't wait until Dean drops out.

More about Dean and his own special interest history:
http://www.ilcampaign.org/press/news/national/articles/2004/2004-1-9DeanAccepted.html

[goodhue]

10. agreed

the rank hypocrisy is getting old

[Eloriel]

13. No, Pete, THIS Dean supporter suggests you can't pry them

apart and try to make the first something it's not. As I've said several times. Well, you can try, but you look foolish doing so.

"Turns out we've got more than one Republican in the Democratic race," Dr. Dean told reporters on his campaign bus. "I've always said I thought Wes Clark was a Republican. Now apparently John Kerry has the same financing habits." http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/01/politics/campaign/01TRAI.html?ex=107 ...

To my amazement, many Dean supporters claimed that only the second sentence was operative in his attack on Kerry, i.e. Dean didn't say that Kerry was a Republican, just that he had the same financing habits.

The first sentence is hyperbole (a figure of speech), a FACT which is borne out by two things -- one, the fact that it is obviously and completely and inarguable not technically or factually true, and second, because the second sentence provides the CONTEXT which shows that the obviously factually inaccurate first sentence is meant as hyperbole.

It's NOT that the second sentence is the only "operatble" sentence, but that the first sentence cannot be judged independently -- not if you're being intellectually honest about it. Taking a sentence out of context on purpose is a prime example of intellectual dishonesty.

Here's an example. If you asked me my opinion of Zell Miller and I responded, "Ugh, he's a Republican," would you accuse me of being a liar? I would hope your mental processes wouldn't demand that kind of literal exchange. As a fellow Democrat who knows that Zell Miller still calls himself a Democrat, I'm feel certain you'd recognize my response as hyperbole -- an exaggeration for effect, one that still gets across the message.

I really am having trouble understanding why you're having trouble with this. Except to try to make to make it into something it's not. I just don't think it helps your candidate, frankly.

[RetroLounge]

14. Wahhhhhhhhh.

:cry: