Democrats Criticize Dean Attacks on GOP

[Infohawk]

Democrats Joseph Biden and
John Edwards are criticizing party chairman
Howard Dean, saying his rhetorical attacks on Republicans have gone too far.

Dean has said Republicans never made an honest living in their lives and House Majority Leader Tom DeLay ought to go back to Houston where he can serve his jail sentence. DeLay has not been accused of any crime.

Dean "doesn't speak for me with that kind of rhetoric and I don't think he speaks for the majority of Democrats," Biden, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said Sunday on ABC's "This Week."

While discussing the hardship of working Americans standing in long lines to vote, Dean said Thursday, "Republicans, I guess, can do that because a lot of them have never made an honest living in their lives." Dean said later his comments did not refer to hard-working Americans, but rather to the failure of Republican leadership to address working-class concerns.

Responding to Dean's initial remark, Edwards said Dean "is not the spokesman for the party."

Dean is "a voice. I don't agree with it," Edwards, a former senator and the Democrats' vice presidential nominee in 2004, said Saturday at a party fundraising dinner in Nashville, Tenn.

Democratic Party spokeswoman Karen Finney said Sunday, "At times we may have disagreements in our party, just as Republicans have disagreements, but as Democrats we are unified in our efforts to get our country back on track."

Asked about Dean's remark about Republicans and honest living, GOP chairman Ken Mehlman told NBC's "Meet the Press": "I'm not sure the best way to win support in the red states is to insult the folks who live there. I think that a better approach might be to talk about the issues you're for."

The last part I bolded is especially bizarre. How did Dean insult people in red states? This assumes they are all Republican, which is a loser attitude and in which case, who is she trying to impress? They already dislike Dems.

Overall I think this is more wimpyness by the Dems.

They aren't realigning themselves, so they aren't going to win any close elections. If you aren't going to win any close elections and become a majority party, you might as well be a good opposition party and call it like you see it.

 

[Moonbeam]

Dean is a courageous visionary who must be stopped.

 

[Orsorum]

Good. Those comments were completely unqualified and unnecessary.

 

[gsaldivar]

"courageous visionary"... yeah ok. :thumbsdown:

IMHO it's exactly this type of unnecessary elitist rhetoric that cost Dems the margin of moderates that would have given them 2004.

 

[Darkhawk28]

I find it complete disengenuous for anybody to criticize a Democrat for what they say publicly. For the last 20 years, right-wing media and politicians have maligned, slandered and libeled Democrat mercilessly.

In this case, I think Dean was referring to Republican politicians, not the ordinary Republican citizens. Frankly, I'd have to agree with him. There's so much corruption, so much deceit, so much dishonesty, that I find it hard to believe that they did anything totally honorable before taking office.

But the right-wing retards will spin it however they want and the wimpy-assed Democrats will take a pot shot in an attempt to eat one of their own and scamper away like a little puss.

 

[totalcommand]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Democrats Joseph Biden and
John Edwards are criticizing party chairman
Howard Dean, saying his rhetorical attacks on Republicans have gone too far.

Dean has said Republicans never made an honest living in their lives and House Majority Leader Tom DeLay ought to go back to Houston where he can serve his jail sentence. DeLay has not been accused of any crime.

Dean "doesn't speak for me with that kind of rhetoric and I don't think he speaks for the majority of Democrats," Biden, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said Sunday on ABC's "This Week."

While discussing the hardship of working Americans standing in long lines to vote, Dean said Thursday, "Republicans, I guess, can do that because a lot of them have never made an honest living in their lives." Dean said later his comments did not refer to hard-working Americans, but rather to the failure of Republican leadership to address working-class concerns.

Responding to Dean's initial remark, Edwards said Dean "is not the spokesman for the party."

Dean is "a voice. I don't agree with it," Edwards, a former senator and the Democrats' vice presidential nominee in 2004, said Saturday at a party fundraising dinner in Nashville, Tenn.

Democratic Party spokeswoman Karen Finney said Sunday, "At times we may have disagreements in our party, just as Republicans have disagreements, but as Democrats we are unified in our efforts to get our country back on track."

Asked about Dean's remark about Republicans and honest living, GOP chairman Ken Mehlman told NBC's "Meet the Press": "I'm not sure the best way to win support in the red states is to insult the folks who live there. I think that a better approach might be to talk about the issues you're for."

The last part I bolded is especially bizarre. How did Dean insult people in red states? This assumes they are all Republican, which is a loser attitude and in which case, who is she trying to impress? They already dislike Dems.

"Republicans, I guess, can do that because a lot of them have never made an honest living in their lives."

Overall I think this is more wimpyness by the Dems.

They aren't realigning themselves, so they aren't going to win any close elections. If you aren't going to win any close elections and become a majority party, you might as well be a good opposition party and call it like you see it.

I think this is a good strategy. Remember at the RNC for the Bush nomination, when you had tens of people come up there and trash Kerry and Dems, and then you had Bush come up there and be nice and compassionate and all? Maybe this criticism could work in a similar way.

 

[Tom]

I'm probably too old to be right, but I don't think the Democrats can succeed by using the tactics of hate, or even if they could that isn't what I want my party to represent.

In the realm of things I think we should do,
1. come up with a reasonable version of a flat tax
2. a public education policy that focuses on students, instead of teacher unions
3. portray ourselves as what we are, the real conservative party, ie, that conserves freedom, justice for all, conserve the land, and our heritage.

In the tradition of Jefferson, FDR, Truman, Kennedy, Carter, and Clinton.

 

[irwincur]

I find it complete disengenuous for anybody to criticize a Democrat for what they say publicly. For the last 20 years, right-wing media and politicians have maligned, slandered and libeled Democrat mercilessly.

Would you care to provide a few examples?




I personally hope Dean keeps it up, because at this point he is only one comment away from potentially sinking the DNC forever. Did Dean bother to notice that people have been leaving his flock in droves over the past six or seven years. The FDR Democrats are dying off, the Unions no longer trust the Dems after NAFTA, Hispanics are leaving by the millions, and even black voters seem to be moving away.

Attacking the Republicans is going to do nothing for the Democrats. Perhaps they need to formulate a new battle plan. Their current one is sixty years old and getting really crusty. Hell, their final rallying cry about Social Security is probably going to topple - it leaves them officially with nothing to stand on. With the death of the European welfare state coming soon to a continent near you - the entire liberal concept of government is in jeopardy.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
In this case, I think Dean was referring to Republican politicians, not the ordinary Republican citizens.

Exactly.

Originally posted by: gsaldivar
IMHO it's exactly this type of unnecessary elitist rhetoric that cost Dems the margin of moderates that would have given them 2004.

Do you know elitist means? Or it just a synonym for bad? This is exactly the OPPOSITE of "elitism." He's criticizing the elite.

 

[Genx87]

I like Dean because with every idiotic comment it pushes the dems further to the left and brings moderates into the republican camp. At the very least it will make them vote against democrats which is a vote for a republican.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

"I think that a better approach might be to talk about the issues you're for."

but but but... then people might not vote for them. Taking a position on a subject is quite dangerous - don't you know? I mean - what about that warm and fuzzy grey area - isn't that much more comfortable? :laugh:

I happen to think dean should continue to spout his nonsense. He's a great vote getter for the Republican party.

<-can't wait for '06

CsG

 

[Moonbeam]

Kerry took positions the public fell asleep. Bush avoided all positions and won the election by pretending to hold the moral high ground.

Time for Democrats to fight the war that is being foisted on them and slime the opposition exactly like they are getting slimed.

The Christo-Neocons have seized power from the Republicans and Democrats and it's time to show them for the sick scum they are.

It is time for rage against those murdering profligate swine who have killed thousands of our troops and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis in an illegal expansionist war that is bankrupting our treasury and creating profound insecurity via the inevitable revenge that will be visited on us because of these bastards egotistical blindness and elitist visions of a one world USA.

If you are not pissed you are sick.

And who gives a sh!t if Dean looses the votes of go along business coddling Democratic garbage. They belong with the Republicans anyway. Half the country doesn't vote because the two sides have nothing to offer them. Let Dean build a party of real Americans who know feel and won't tolerate injustice. Why have toleration for destroyers of our nation. Just because you are fat dumb and blind doesn't mean you get a free ride in your hearse to the grave yard. No, time to know you are part of what is destroying our nation. What the Republicans and coward Democrats have become is a disease that must be destroyed any way we can.

He who sleeps on the road looses either his hat or his head.

There is no hate greater than that of the man who is told who he really is. So Dean will be in for a storm. The real danger is that he too will prove a coward.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Well thank goodness you're not elitist.

:roll:

 

[ElFenix]

most politicians have never made an honest living. dean at least had a real career before becoming a politico. he's a rarity in that regard. of course, frist was also an MD in a prior life.

 

[irwincur]

And who gives a sh!t if Dean looses the votes of go along business coddling Democratic garbage. They belong with the Republicans anyway.

The Dems will be in trouble then, considering that the majority of businesses give more money to the Dems than Reps. The Reps actually get most of their money from small private donors. You might as well also boot the Unions and the lawyers - the two single largest segments of donations for any side and almost 100% Dem.

Just another misconception that the left tries to sell. In all reality, the Dems are clearly the party of the rich. Look at the Dem leadership in Congress and explain to me why they are worth 20x the value of Reps.





Face it. Choosing Dean was about as foolish as running Kerry in the election. He is a hothead with zero political skill or sense. He even has less control when it comes to raising money and keeping it. He is bankrupting the DNC - just like he did his own campaign.

 

[Infohawk]

I have a hypothetical question for you Republicans. If you guys had the minority party and no real chance at winning the next election, would you bother trying to appease the Democrats? Or would you hope that your party say what it wants to without pandering to Democrats?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
I have a hypothetical question for you Republicans. If you guys had the minority party and no real chance at winning the next election, would you bother trying to appease the Democrats? Or would you hope that your party say what it wants to without pandering to Democrats?

I would hope that my party would take a good hard look at it's policies and stances to figure out why they aren't in-line with what the voters want. I'd also want my party to constantly offer differing opinions or alternatives instead of throwing a fit and just saying "no".

Unfortunately for the democrat's party - their leaders don't seem to want to look inward - they just want to whine and stonewall. They seen unwilling to offer alternatives to proposals they don't like - they just whine.

It's interesting that you seem to want to concede the next election though, info. I have no doubt you are right about them not having a chance - but why so pessimistic? Call your party leaders and demand they get back in touch with voters instead of just saying no.

CsG

 

[Tommunist]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Infohawk
I have a hypothetical question for you Republicans. If you guys had the minority party and no real chance at winning the next election, would you bother trying to appease the Democrats? Or would you hope that your party say what it wants to without pandering to Democrats?

I would hope that my party would take a good hard look at it's policies and stances to figure out why they aren't in-line with what the voters want. I'd also want my party to constantly offer differing opinions or alternatives instead of throwing a fit and just saying "no".

Unfortunately for the democrat's party - their leaders don't seem to want to look inward - they just want to whine and stonewall. They seen unwilling to offer alternatives to proposals they don't like - they just whine.

It's interesting that you seem to want to concede the next election though, info. I have no doubt you are right about them not having a chance - but why so pessimistic? Call your party leaders and demand they get back in touch with voters instead of just saying no.

CsG

at least you came right out and said you were simply talking about the democrats instead of actually answering the question....

 

[1EZduzit]

Sometime the best way to fight fire is fire. ALL corrupt politicans need to get ousted.

Unfortuantely, calling a spade a spade isn't usually smart politics.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Tommunist

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Infohawk
I have a hypothetical question for you Republicans. If you guys had the minority party and no real chance at winning the next election, would you bother trying to appease the Democrats? Or would you hope that your party say what it wants to without pandering to Democrats?

I would hope that my party would take a good hard look at it's policies and stances to figure out why they aren't in-line with what the voters want. I'd also want my party to constantly offer differing opinions or alternatives instead of throwing a fit and just saying "no".

Unfortunately for the democrat's party - their leaders don't seem to want to look inward - they just want to whine and stonewall. They seen unwilling to offer alternatives to proposals they don't like - they just whine.

It's interesting that you seem to want to concede the next election though, info. I have no doubt you are right about them not having a chance - but why so pessimistic? Call your party leaders and demand they get back in touch with voters instead of just saying no.

CsG

at least you came right out and said you were simply talking about the democrats instead of actually answering the question....

reading is FUNduhMENTAL...

Note the first paragraph - I was not talking about the democrats - I said "my party" which certainly isn't the democrats. The other two paragraphs were bringing his hypothetical back to the actual current situation we have.

CsG

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Infohawk
I have a hypothetical question for you Republicans. If you guys had the minority party and no real chance at winning the next election, would you bother trying to appease the Democrats? Or would you hope that your party say what it wants to without pandering to Democrats?

I would hope that my party would take a good hard look at it's policies and stances to figure out why they aren't in-line with what the voters want. I'd also want my party to constantly offer differing opinions or alternatives instead of throwing a fit and just saying "no".

Unfortunately for the democrat's party - their leaders don't seem to want to look inward - they just want to whine and stonewall. They seen unwilling to offer alternatives to proposals they don't like - they just whine.

It's interesting that you seem to want to concede the next election though, info. I have no doubt you are right about them not having a chance - but why so pessimistic? Call your party leaders and demand they get back in touch with voters instead of just saying no.

CsG

What the voters want is what they got, massive deficit spending and endless war and their paycheck going to China. F%ck what the voters want, give people who don't vote a reason to.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
What the voters want is what they got, massive deficit spending and endless war and their paycheck going to China. F%ck what the voters want, give people who don't vote a reason to.

If you actually believe that, then what does that say about the dem's policies? If people willingly chose what you claim - obviously the alternative was worse - no?

Time for the dems to regroup and revamp. Start fresh with ideas.

Oh well, I'm sure it'll be ignored...

CsG

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Infohawk
I have a hypothetical question for you Republicans. If you guys had the minority party and no real chance at winning the next election, would you bother trying to appease the Democrats? Or would you hope that your party say what it wants to without pandering to Democrats?

I would hope that my party would take a good hard look at it's policies and stances to figure out why they aren't in-line with what the voters want. I'd also want my party to constantly offer differing opinions or alternatives instead of throwing a fit and just saying "no".

So it sounds like you'd consider the change your views route. I sort of agree with this, see below. However, my hypothetical doesn't allow for fundamentally changing positions (since it's not realistic for the Dems). In this case, would you prefer your guys to call it like it is or pander?

It's interesting that you seem to want to concede the next election though, info. I have no doubt you are right about them not having a chance - but why so pessimistic? Call your party leaders and demand they get back in touch with voters instead of just saying no.
CsG

Well you've apparently missed the countless threads where I've talked about the future of the Democratic party, including one right after the election. I guess I'll repeat myself:

The Democrats have two viable strategies for 2008:

A) abandon social issues (like prochoice) and get some of the religious fundamentalists on board to save some economic policies.
B) abandon the economic issues, go all out against the christian fundamentalists, and get fiscal conservatives on board.

Neither of these is going to reasonably happen. Hence Democrats will lose until there is a major population shift in this country.

Barak Obama / Hillary is just another losing strategy like Kerry was. MAYBE if we got another Carter / Clinton red-neck imposter we would have a shot, but at this point I doubt it.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Infohawk
I have a hypothetical question for you Republicans. If you guys had the minority party and no real chance at winning the next election, would you bother trying to appease the Democrats? Or would you hope that your party say what it wants to without pandering to Democrats?

I would hope that my party would take a good hard look at it's policies and stances to figure out why they aren't in-line with what the voters want. I'd also want my party to constantly offer differing opinions or alternatives instead of throwing a fit and just saying "no".

So it sounds like you'd consider the change your views route. I sort of agree with this, see below. However, my hypothetical doesn't allow for fundamentally changing positions (since it's not realistic for the Dems). In this case, would you prefer your guys to call it like it is or pander?

No, not change your views in the sense of compromising core ideology.

It's interesting that you seem to want to concede the next election though, info. I have no doubt you are right about them not having a chance - but why so pessimistic? Call your party leaders and demand they get back in touch with voters instead of just saying no.
CsG

Well you've apparently missed the countless threads where I've talked about the future of the Democratic party, including one right after the election. I guess I'll repeat myself:

The Democrats have two viable strategies for 2008:

A) abandon social issues (like prochoice) and get some of the religious fundamentalists on board to save some economic policies.
B) abandon the economic issues, go all out against the christian fundamentalists, and get fiscal conservatives on board.

Neither of these is going to reasonably happen. Hence Democrats will lose until there is a major population shift in this country.

Barak Obama / Hillary is just another losing strategy like Kerry was. MAYBE if we got another Carter / Clinton red-neck imposter we would have a shot, but at this point I doubt it.

Well, it looks like I have more faith in the democrats than you. *shrug*

CsG

 

[Infohawk]

So Cad, if you wouldn't want your party to shed core values and you recognized they had no chance of winning, wouldn't you prefer the representatives to just speak their mind and not worry about offending those that they disagree with?