MyDD :: Frost Withdraws

Frost Withdraws

by ByronUT, Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 03:59:09 PM EST

It seems all over but for the shouting--Chris

Posted on BOR from Frost press release:

STATEMENT OF MARTIN FROST
On Withdrawing from the Campaign for DNC Chair Today

WASHINGTON - Today, former Texas Congressman and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chair Martin Frost released the statement below. Withdrawing from the race for DNC Chair, Frost did not endorse any candidate.

"I am calling my supporters to thank them and to inform them of my decision today to withdraw from the race for DNC Chair. I have also called Governor Dean and congratulated him for running a strong campaign. The challenge ahead for Governor Dean will be to unite the Party, rebuild the DNC and win elections in every region of the country.

"This campaign was never about me or any other candidate. It was about rebuilding the Democratic Party so that we can better present to the nation our strong, hopeful alternative to the dishonest, corrupt and elitist Republican Government that keeps selling out the nation in order to reward its few, privileged friends.

"Make no mistake, Democrats are the party that can best meet America's challenges - challenges like keeping our people safe and winning the war on terrorism, stopping the Republican attack on Social Security, solving the health care crisis, and ensuring that all Americans have good jobs and the opportunity to build a better
future for their children.

"With a strong, unified Democratic Party, a real 50-state party structure, and a commitment to working together and speaking directly to Americans' concerns and values, I am confident that we can and will elect Democrats at all levels and in all parts of the country. I look forward to continuing to play a constructive role in those efforts."

Update: [Byron] Here's more stuff that I'm hearing this afternoon: It does appear as if Dean has wrapped this thing up, however I have received the following information as well this afternoon regarding the other candidates. Rosenberg is "considering his options" while Fowler and Roemer are "still making calls". Also, Karl-Thomas notes that David Leeland has dropped out and endorsed Dean, and Dean has announced 53 more votes.

Tags: (all tags)

Permalink :: 107 Comments :: Post a Comment

Good for Frost (none / 0)

My estimation of Frost just went up a half dozen clicks. It would be a big relief if this meant the DLC was not going to continue stomping on the grassroots majority in the Democratic party.

I hope Dean can put Frost, Roemer, Rosenberg and Fowler all to good use. If we have a unified party in '06 and '08 we can kick butt.

by Gary Boatwright on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 03:42:51 PM EST

Re: Good for Frost (none / 0)

I can think of a good job for Roemer.

Honestly, we have no room for peopel in our party who are employed by right-wing think tanks.

Future Majority / Young Philly Politics

by Alex Urevick on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 03:46:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Good for Frost (none / 0)

that was friggin' awesome. thx.

"into your illusion, i make my intrusion"

by fng on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 03:56:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Good for Frost (none / 0)

Don't count Roemer or the DLC out yet Alex. Roemer is still a respected voice in the Democratic party on national security issues. I would be very surprised if Dean didn't take dramatic steps to mend fences and unite the party.

by Gary Boatwright on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 03:58:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Good for Frost (none / 0)

I'm not concerned about the DNC- but we (the netroots) really need to ride Roemer out of town as fast as we can. We defenitely have room in our party for centrists (yes, even DLC members), but we absolutely must rid ourselves of right-wing moles...

Future Majority / Young Philly Politics

by Alex Urevick on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:03:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Good for Frost (none / 0)

I meant the DLC, not the DNC, my bad...

Future Majority / Young Philly Politics

by Alex Urevick on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:04:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Good for Frost (none / 0)

I respectfully disagree. Roemer has done nothing to deserve getting drummed out of the party. If I had my sites set on somebody it would be Sen. Lieberman for remaining in the Faint Hearted Faction.

What has Roemer actually done that makes him a bigger "mole" then Lieberman? Roemer came out four-square against privatization. That's more then I've heard from Lieberman. I was very pleased when Bayh took himself off the Fainted Hearted Faction list. Lieberman is next in line.

by Gary Boatwright on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:13:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What has Roemer done? (none / 0)

I guess it depends on if it is your ox which is being gored.

And alienating the majority of Democratic Party donors who just happen to be women is my idea of doing something which might be considered a little dicey.

Your mileage may vary.

by nanorich on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:21:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Good for Frost (none / 0)

Well, I can't stand that he brought up 9-11 at the chair meeting, and then brought up a 9-11 widow, then her dead husband, then his severed hand, all to prove he is "strong on security". (I wrote about it here)

JB- is there anything in your book that should disqualify someone from being seen as a real Democrat or progressive? In my book, if you work for a Right-Wing Think Tank, you don't get to pretend that you stand with the Dems or Progressives.

The party doesn't belong to me, but I really have trouble seeing how it should include Roemer...

Future Majority / Young Philly Politics

by Alex Urevick on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:23:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Good for Frost (none / 0)

That's not for me to say. Each state gets to make that decision in their primaries. Right now there are a lot of people over at dkos who are pretty steamed at Salazar for supporting Gonzalez. Unless they live in Colorado, there's not much they have to say about it.

That could change with DFA, Move On and the way the netroots are developing. For now, we get to rely on state primaries. I'd love to see Max Cleland take another run at office in Georgia. It's not my call.

by Gary Boatwright on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:42:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Good for Frost (none / 0)

That's not my question.

My question is this- where in the national party do we find room for folks who work directly for the right-wing think tanks, and thus directly for the right-wing?

If he wants to teach at a Right Wing institution, that's fine, it's a free country. But why should we caucus with the man? And why shouldn't we spread the word that he's working for the enemy when he puts himself in the national spotlite?

They have a place for people like Zell Miller and Tim Roemer, it's called the Republican Party.

Future Majority / Young Philly Politics

by Alex Urevick on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:00:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Second this (none / 0)

"If I had my sites set on somebody it would be Sen. Lieberman for remaining in the Faint Hearted Faction."

Agree. Second the motion.

Witty comment goes here...

by michael in chicago on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:02:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Frost is a good Democrat. (none / 0)

Never any question of that in my mind. I think this was very classy, and I really do hope that I get the chance to vote for Mr. Frost in the not too distant future.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

by boadicea on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 06:27:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Graceful (none / 0)

Very graceful exit...

Future Majority / Young Philly Politics

by Alex Urevick on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 03:42:54 PM EST

"Did not endorse another candidate?" (none / 0)

I don't know about you guys, but that press release looks like an endorsement to me. Looks like not getting the AFL-CIO endorsement made Frost reconsider his running.

by AnotherUnemployedDNCStaffer on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:00:19 PM EST

Re: "Did not endorse another candidate?" (none / 0)

Now I'm even ready to say that Dean is just about inevitable.

Future Majority / Young Philly Politics

by Alex Urevick on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:02:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thumbs up for Frost (none / 0)

Dang. Now I'm scared for Dean -- that job may be a man-eater.

by Bean on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:05:36 PM EST

shouting?? (none / 0)

I remember Iowa...please no.

by DonBinTN on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:07:27 PM EST

Come on down, Chairman Dean! (none / 0)

Knock on wood.

by raginillinoian on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:08:48 PM EST

Who's singing now? (none / 0)

My voice is getting tired.

by Jerome Armstrong on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:10:47 PM EST

fine, i'm singing! (none / 0)

are you happy now?

Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!

by annatopia on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:13:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: fine, i'm singing! (none / 0)

I donno, I keep waiting for Rosenberg to make his move...

(just kidding.)

by nanorich on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:23:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: fine, i'm singing! (none / 0)

Don't kid! Rosenberg supporters have feelings too you know! :(

Future Majority / Young Philly Politics

by Alex Urevick on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:25:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

i like simon a LOT (none / 0)

i hope to goddess that dean makes simon executive director of the dnc.

Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!

by annatopia on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:26:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: i like simon a LOT (none / 0)

Agreed.

I think we shall be hearing announcements soon regarding big offices with windows and expense accounts for both Rosenberg and Donnie.

by nanorich on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:28:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

i hope you're right (none / 0)

the only thing i would like to demand now (as if i have the power to demand anything - LOL) is that the mcmahons STAY IN BURLINGTON and continue to run DFA. i do not want them promoted to the DNC. it's that whole "failing upwards" thing.

rosenberg for executive director!!! come on howard, make it happen!

Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!

by annatopia on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:31:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: i hope you're right (none / 0)

Amen to that!

Future Majority / Young Philly Politics

by Alex Urevick on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:01:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: i like simon a LOT (none / 0)

why?

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.

by Parker on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:29:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

well... (none / 0)

at the risk of taking this thread way off topic, i like simon because he gets it. yes, i know that's vague, but he gets it. i've heard from people all over the country who've worked with simon and universally they sing his praises. i'm talking about people that have worked for NDN, for NDN-funded campaigns, and with simon himself. i literally have never heard a bad word about the guy from people who've worked with or for him.

i do think - and i know you're going to disagree - that he's made a clean break from the DLC. i believe simon fully understands the potential of the netroots, and he's got experience running a large operation on a day-to-day basis. i think he would be a HUGE asset to the dnc.

Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!

by annatopia on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:35:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: well... (none / 0)

No he has no, nor has Rosenberg ever made a statement to that effect.

He still to this day carries out the agenda of the DLC. Rosenberg has big plans about communication strategy but he has never actually done anything like that. So where is this so-called expertise come from?

Botton line there is something I do not trust about him. I noticed that Trippi and all of his blog ne followers have been unusually quiet about the runimations happening in the DNC race these past few days...

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.

by Parker on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:52:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

blog followers (none / 0)

Damn near silent.

"into your illusion, i make my intrusion"

by fng on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:07:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: blog followers (3.00 / 1)

Because we've all gone over this, time and time again, with Parker, and there's no need to extend this diary entry to repeat it...

Future Majority / Young Philly Politics

by Alex Urevick on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:12:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: blog followers (none / 0)

I don't think he was talking about you Alex. There was a crew. They have been eerily quiet.

"into your illusion, i make my intrusion"

by fng on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:14:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: blog followers (none / 0)

I checked out all their blogs not a word...even Atrios has not chimed in...not a single word, nothing at GadFlyer...very interesting indeed.

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.

by Parker on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:22:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

parker... one more time and then i give up (none / 0)

are you aware that simon was the one who raised the seed money to start media matters? are you aware that simon was the one who pushed for the re-inclusion of the college democrats in clinton's 1992 campaign (remember the college dems were pretty much booted after the vietnam war)? are you aware of the fact that simon pushed for the phoenix group?

oh nevermind.

Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!

by annatopia on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:21:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: parker... one more time and then i give up (none / 0)

I'm not saying I don't trust or have faith in Simon's abilities, just chiming in on the tangent that his supporters, sans Alex, have been quiet of late.

"into your illusion, i make my intrusion"

by fng on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:23:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: parker... one more time and then i give up (none / 0)

Look all I know is that NDN has been funneling money into campaigns of weak assed Dems... the latest victory for NDN ...Salazar endorsing Gonzales...nothing more need to be said. There was a wonderful very strong candidate running Mike Mikes and DNC/DLC/NDN came in and strong armed him out of the race and we are left with this shit.

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.

by Parker on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:25:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

miles... (none / 0)

i was rooting for miles, so i hear what you're saying.

i just think there is more to simon than what meets the eye

Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!

by annatopia on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:54:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a former College Dem (none / 0)

Hey...I was a former national officer of CDA and never got a straight story about '92 (we were always told, oral-history-wise, that it was Al Gore--who college dems supported in '88--that made it happen)... I'm VERY curious to learn the truth. What's your source?

To be clear, i'm not challenging the story at all... it's just something I've heard so many versions of, I'm curious...

by CT Lex on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:53:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

email me off-thread (none / 0)

and we'll talk

Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!

by annatopia on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 08:51:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: email me off-thread (none / 0)

cool.. just did.

by CT Lex on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 09:34:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: i like simon a LOT (none / 0)

The DLC is still a very big player in the Democratic party. Dean and Rosenberg are both going to have to deal with some very determined power brokers. Don't think for a second that reform is a done deal.

Dean has a very long row to hoe when it comes to weeding out the corruption in the Democratic party.

by Gary Boatwright on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:45:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: DLC-who? (none / 0)

Just curious... what's the basis for the 'DLC still swings a big bat' idea?

Simon split with Al From a ways back, and the Clintons aren't actively involved with them anymore.

I'd be more concerned with fence-mending with the Congressional caucuses, considering how vehemently anti-Dean Pelosi and Reid have acted lately (far more overtly antagonistic then the Clintonistas)... what are your thoughts there?

by CT Lex on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 06:20:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: fine, i'm singing! (none / 0)

yup...he is too quiet.

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.

by Parker on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:27:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

too quiet..... (none / 0)

might be a sign of whispered discussions been Rosenberg and Dean....

and a very happy ending for all of us.

by nanorich on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:29:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

oh please please please! (none / 0)

it'll be just like christmas!

Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!

by annatopia on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:37:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: oh please please please! (none / 0)

and Kwanza, Ramadan, and Festivus all rolled up into one.

Future Majority / Young Philly Politics

by Alex Urevick on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:03:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Burnt Orange is reporting that Rosenberg (none / 0)

and Roemer are out....

and Donnie continues to soldier on.

http://www.burntorangereport.com/archives/003213.html#more

(forgive not posting in hypertext)

by nanorich on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 08:11:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: fine, i'm singing! (none / 0)

Anyone remember this one?

"We can...do the impossible..."

(oh how i hate/love that song)

by CT Lex on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 06:13:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Who's singing now? (none / 0)

There has been no vote yet.
No fat lady singing yet.

The insiders still can swing behind other candidates. Although the short list is looking better for reform. Rosenburg would be good, but has many ties yet to the inside the beltway guys.

Sorry to be pesimistic. I does look good for Dean. But Dean scares the pants off those in power. That's why I like him, but also why I won't rest easy until he's official.

Witty comment goes here...

by michael in chicago on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:10:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

thank you, martin frost (3.00 / 2)

i'd just like to say for the record - one more time - that even though i did not support martin frost for chairman, i think he has served the people of texas quite well during his tenure in congress. i do still believe, however, that his way is the way of status quo and that was the root of my opposition to him as chair.

regardless, i thank him for his contributions to the party and hope he will continue to fight for democratic ideals. i truly hope he'll consider running for senator in texas, or that he'll head up a 527 and continue to raise money for the democratic party. whatever he does, moderates like him should be welcomed to the new party with open arms. thank you for the gracious statement, mr. frost.

Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!

by annatopia on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:13:19 PM EST

Re: thank you, martin frost (none / 0)

Very well said annatopia.

by Gary Boatwright on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:15:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: thank you, martin frost (none / 0)

I was under the impression that you were pretty peeved over his Presidential adds.

I have to say that I went into the DNC meeting expecting the guy to be some sort of Republican mole, given the only thing I heard about him was in regards to those ads. I left the meeting thinking he was defenitely down for most of the same causes as me. Could be that it was just a speech, but he convinced me, and I really hope that the guy stays in the arena.

Classy dude.

On the other hand there's Tim Roemer ...

Future Majority / Young Philly Politics

by Alex Urevick on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:18:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

the ads (none / 0)

oh yea, i was pretty peeved over the ads, no doubt about it. but i think everyone has hashed through the ads by now, and while some agree that they were awful, others continue to defend the tactic. and that's fine. we can agree to disagree on that point.

but beyond that, i didn't see martin as a catalyst for reform, and that was the root of my opposition to him.

martin truly bowed out in a classy way, and for that i thank him.

Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!

by annatopia on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:28:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the ads (3.00 / 1)

I myself fall into the later group. Whatever it takes to win, I'm down for it. Well, maybe not anything, but I defenitely didn't think it crossed any lines in this case...

Maybe I'm too Machiavellian, but I'd take the commercials and Frost in the house anyday over no commercials and the right-wing nut who beat Frost.

Future Majority / Young Philly Politics

by Alex Urevick on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:56:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

machiavellian (none / 0)

that might be right. and maybe i'm too idealistic. i can admit to that.

Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!

by annatopia on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:22:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: machiavellian (none / 0)

There's no problem with being too idealistic, except when you're striving for power. Us Dems need to lose the halo and learn how to fight dirty. Maybe this was a self-defeating ad (as the comment below suggests), but in general I'm getting pretty sick of Dems who claim the higher ground when the mud starts slinging.

Future Majority / Young Philly Politics

by Alex Urevick on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 06:47:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the ads (none / 0)

The thing is, the ads didn't work, so that's a not a bargain.

It was a raw deal for the state of Texas as well as the Congressmen who were targeted by ol' Bugeyes. I hope for indictments and a happy resolution to the lawsuit filed about the insane-o redistricting map they crammed down our collective throats.

Don'te get me wrong. The Cult of Bush is strong in Texas, no question about it. But I'm not convinced the way to Democratic resurgency is to sing along with the kool-ade chorus.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

by boadicea on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 06:23:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the ads (none / 0)

The thing is, the ads didn't work, so that's a not a bargai

Well, that could be argued. On the one hand he didn't win. On the other hand he came pretty darned close in a district that was redistricted so bad that Delay and co. were sure that a Dem would never be elected.

on'te get me wrong. The Cult of Bush is strong in Texas, no question about it. But I'm not convinced the way to Democratic resurgency is to sing along with the kool-ade chorus.

I wasn't on their staff, and I don't know what their communications research showed, but I don't think that it was unwise in this case. I'm not saying I like the ad, but would I have advised him to do the same if I had comm research in my hands which showed the add was effective? Probablly so.

Future Majority / Young Philly Politics

by Alex Urevick on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 06:45:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yep, it could be argued. (none / 0)

But there's a lot more fruitful arguments ahead.

I just want to note I'm not buying that the Democrats in Texas have to look like Republicans to get elected.

And if that is the case, we need to take a good look at why that is. Then set out with an eye to the long game.

Integrity. Fairness. Investing in the future with our tax dollars.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

by boadicea on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 07:12:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: thank you, martin frost (none / 0)

There's a difference between being DNC Chair and being a good member of the Democratic party. I believe that we have three strong Democratic contenders to take on Santorum who are all pro-life.

It's like Rummy says, "You go to the polls with the party you have, not the party you'd like to have."

by Gary Boatwright on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:29:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: thank you, martin frost (none / 0)

My beef with Roemer has nothing to do with his Pro-Life stance, it has to do first and formost with the fact that he's a Distinguished Scholar Marcatus Center. I also hated him using the RNC tactic of beating progressives over the head with 9-11, and his bringing up of the widows of 9-11 and her husbands severed hand, which was found six days after the collapse of the tower, was way, way over the top for me.

Future Majority / Young Philly Politics

by Alex Urevick on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 04:54:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Maybe its for the best...... (none / 0)

Bush winning the election really helped the Dem party as his mess will be his mess.

I think we haven't learned the lessons needed to win yet personally. But maybe I am wrong and Dean will save us all.

If on the other hand I am right then at least there will be little to argue about it after we move left and lose massive support.

If Dean is the head of the DNC will you all accept failure in the next cycle as evidence that a move to the left was a bad idea?

by donkeykong on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:08:56 PM EST

Re: Maybe its for the best...... (none / 0)

What the hell are you talking about?

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.

by Parker on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:14:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

hey dude (none / 0)

stop buying into the right wing spin. dean isn't a leftist and we're not moving left.

sheesh.

Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!

by annatopia on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:20:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Why do you buy that "move left" garbage? (3.00 / 2)

Dean is a centrist. Always been a centrist. Has a centrist record. He was pegged as some whacked out liberal by the status quo dems like Lieberman, GOP organizations like Club for Growth and the SCLM in the primaries to stop his rise to the nomination. He was too much reform too quickly for too many.

This fight isn't about right or left. It's about reform for the party. The depth of the reform under Dean is probably exaggerated both by the other side and those who support him. But he stands for reforming the party and will make strides to change how things are done, most likely at the state and local levels.

This isn't about ideology. It's about reforming the party and actually standing up for what the party has always stood for. Moving to the center when the right keeps going to the right is not being centrist. This is why people use terms like GOP-Lite. It doesn't mean being a conservative Democrat. It means chasing the GOP's positions and abandoning Democratic core values and the Democratic base in hopes of winning elections.

This is why Kerry lost. He wasn't significantly different from Bush to many average Americans. There was little contrast. He'd fight a more effective war on terror? More effective? So Bush was fighting an effective war? You see? Dean is not about moving us to the liberal left. He is about standing us up for what we have always stood for. This provides a contrast and puts the GOP on the defensive.

It's not right or left. It's about changing the status quo of continually moving to the center (which is continually moving to the right) and running as appologists for being Democrats.

Dean isn't the messiah. He won't save us. We will save ourselves. Dean is just the start of regaining our party and making ours again rather than the consultants and the insiders.

If we do not make gains in 2006 you see that as a failure? Was Terry Mac a failure? Was Kerry a failure? Your perspective is too narrow. Taking back congress will probably under good circumstances take another couple cycles yet - with Dean or without.

Witty comment goes here...

by michael in chicago on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:25:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Why do you buy that "move left" garbage? (none / 0)

We have not always stood for staying out of wars against evil men like Saddam.

We have not always stood for attacking the moderate democrats.

Democratic wing of the democratic party...
Did you think he meant the center?

by donkeykong on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 06:08:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

"move left" garbage? (none / 0)

So go and fight... no one is stopping you.

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.

by Parker on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 06:10:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "move left" garbage? (none / 0)

The passive agressive death threat.
If you don't agree with me go fight a war and get yourself killed.
Again classic.

by donkeykong on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 07:05:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Back up your argument. (none / 0)

Could you provide some examples to support what you are saying here?

"evil men like Sadam"? I thought we were against the war because it was based on lies about WMD from people looking to settle an old score based on cold war mentalities. Let's be honest: Moderate Democrats, and nearly every other spineless democrat, voted for the war so as to not look weak on defense in the face of a popular president and political climate pushing the war. Didn't know that was a right/left thing. Anyway, now we went to war so Iraqis could vote. If you are going to quote GOP talking points, at least get on the correct page.

re: Democratic Wing of the Democratic party, re-read my post. It isn't right vs. left. It's returning to Democratics values vs. DLC values which try to move the Democratic party toward more Republican-like positions. And don't give me that "Clinton won with DLC positions" as he was politically gifted and had help from Perot dividing the GOP vote.

We will disagree here. You would like to continue the move to the center, which I will continue to contend it constantly moving right and away from Democratic core values.

You suggest that returning to Democratic core principles, and proudly standing for them, will lead to the party shrinking, and more loss. I will suggest to you that the party, following your advice and running to the middle, has shrunken to the minorty of voters in the nation, lost control of all three branches of government, and elected one president (two terms) in the last 25 years. The record suggests we change tactics.

Witty comment goes here...

by michael in chicago on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 09:02:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Back up your argument. (none / 0)

Lets seperate two seperate concepts.

Bush lied about the likelyhood of nuke weapons in Iraq. Bush wanted Iraqi oil to keep using US dollars as the medium of transfer and not Euros. You could argue that Bush wanted to steal the oil but I think he was much more concerned with keeping it on the US dollar to prevent the slide we are now seeing. Saddam also had a history of wanting to drive up oil prices higher than other OPEC countries.
However there were good reasons a Democrate would want Saddam gone.

A) It was common knowledge that Iraq had chemical and to some extent biological weapons (that he already destroyed them was a suprise to everyone).
B) Saddam is much more closely linked to the first world trade center bombing than to the second.
C) Saddam has funded the family relief fund for suicide bombers who attack Israel.
D) Saddam has ordered Chemical weapons attacks. E) Saddam has run massive torture (all american torture reported so far pales in comparison). He tortured his own government officials (although not personally).
F) America was attacked by a terrorist Arab Sunni organization which has a lot of support in Arab countries. America had not yet responded against an Arab Sunni country.
G) The reality is that OIL is a global world wide strategic interest.

The democrats who voted with Bush did so partially due to political factors but also because spreading democracy used to be a democratic party thing.

Attacking that with half logic is not ready for prime time.

by donkeykong on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 09:56:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

We agree on Point 1 (3.00 / 1)

But Point 2 could apply to any number of nations in various forms.

"Sadam was a bad man" is an easy argument. There are hundreds of bad men leading nations.

The war was sold on lies. The American people and congress would, in my opinion, not have supported going to war based on the premise that "Sadam is a bad guy."

Many of the points you site to support "Democratic" reasons are flawed:

Points A,B,D are 10-15 years old, and often were carried out with the full knowledge, materials and support of our government. Sadam had been contained after the first Gulf war.

The sponsorship of terrorism you mention in points C and B are financial in nature, and as such puts him in with a wealth of company, many of whom are among our allies, in financially sponsoring terrorism - something that can be shut down without the use of warfare. War as a last resort is Democratic.

Point F seems to encourage our use of force to bully position in the Arab world through attacking a Sunni based government. Last I checked, being a bully and attacking a country that wasn't involved in 9-11 wasn't all that Democratic.

Point G supports the claims that this was a war for oil, something that would not have been supported by the mainstream Democrats or Republicans regardless if oil is a strategic resource. Sadam wasn't a threat.

The democrats who voted with Bush did so for political reasons first and foremost or in reaction to Bush/Condi/Cheney's talk of a mushroom cloud. Spreading of Democracy was not on the table at this point in time. Bush was on record as being against nation building and made not promise of such for invading Iraq. IMO you're way off on this point.

Feel free to continue with your half logic...

Witty comment goes here...

by michael in chicago on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 10:34:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm confused (none / 0)

On what issue is Dean notably "Left" on?

Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.

by Carl Nyberg on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:45:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm confused (none / 0)

Anti-war is a left position.

I am not refering to anti being lied to. Or anti incompetent coward commander in chief.

I am talking about anti war because of an inability to see why a rational person would choose to go to war against Saddam Hussain.

by donkeykong on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 06:01:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm confused (none / 0)

So why aren't you there now?

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.

by Parker on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 06:07:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm confused (none / 0)

Classic.

by donkeykong on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 06:09:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm confused (none / 0)

Well, you are so gun ho from some one else's kid to die... put you own life where your mouth is.

Besides telling us how to live, think, marry, pray, vote, invest, educate our children and, die, the GOP has done a fine job of getting gov't out of our lives.

by Parker on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 06:11:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm confused (none / 0)

Agree with you or go fight in a foreign war...

Big tent anyone?

by donkeykong on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 07:33:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What, you fight? (none / 0)

Nope, that would actually require you doing the honorable thing...and goodness knows, we wouldn't want any of the Fighting 101st Keyboards actually doing anything which involves personal risk.

Better to let some black, brown or poor white put him or herself in harms way for your vanity.

Sure we have a big tent, pal...but you clowns no longer run the show.

by nanorich on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 08:08:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What, you fight? (none / 0)

No they seem to be doing very well.

My position is that there are times where the right thing to do is to free the oppressed.

I assume your view is the opposite.

Granted that is a very safe view for you to hold. Totally ungrounded in reality but safe.

Kinda like the "human shields" who lined up when Bush was going to bomb Bagdad (then left without dying) but where were they when Saddam was bombing the Kurds? Exactly. Its easier to oppose war against the reasonable than it is to oppose it against the unreasonable.

Thats the problem with modern liberals. True liberals oppose the greatest oppression not the easiest to oppose. If we were TRUE liberals then maybe I would sign up for that. But it seems lately we have been marching to the tune of the anti-American guilt brigade.

Bush is an idiot. Bush has stolen at least one election. Bush loosened the legal restrictions on torture and tightened the restrictions on free speech. And he uses Christianity as an excuse to do it all. Lets oppose Bush.

But Saddam was much much much worse.

Freeing the Iraqis from Saddam is a genuine acomplishment. You may disagree with it but for a Dem to attack other Dems for supporting it? Dean lost me there.

by donkeykong on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 08:40:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What, you fight? (none / 0)

Was it worth it? Was it worth $200 Billion and counting? Was it worth 1,500 American lives and who knows how many tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis? Was it worth losing our moral leadership in the world? Was it worth the division in this country? Was it worth the budget deficit it has added to? Was it worth diverting money from things like heath care for children or public education?

If so, why not invade every dictatorship we feel opresses their people. Why not Africa where there is genocide? Why not North Korea? Hell, why not just stop supporting the Saudis or Pakastan?

You have a circular argument that is molded to fit your needs.

Witty comment goes here...

by michael in chicago on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 09:20:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What, you fight? (none / 0)

Was it worth it?
Yes for the Iraqis. Maybe for the Americans

Was it worth $200 Billion and counting?
Could have been.

Was it worth 1,500 American lives and who knows how many tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis?
Yes. More people died from drunk driving in the same time frame, if you want to get excited fight Coors and Miller.

Was it worth losing our moral leadership in the world?
Losing our moral leadership has been a fundtion of George Bush as an individual. Clinton could have fought the same wars and never had a problem. Losing our moral authority is the biggest loss from the bush presidency.

Was it worth the division in this country?
Yes. If we have power and don't fight evil with it then we are evil.

Was it worth the budget deficit it has added to?
I think that again is Bush. Clinton could have done it and ballanced the budget. The world would have paid a share with Clinton.

Was it worth diverting money from things like heath care for children or public education?
The vast majority of Iraq would think so. Yes I know they hate us. We hate the French but we know deep down that they did the same for us.

by donkeykong on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 10:03:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

OK, Answer the second half (none / 0)

Why Iraq and not the others?

Witty comment goes here...

by michael in chicago on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 10:15:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: OK, Answer the second half (none / 0)

Lets do the others. Seriously if we threatened Cuba we could get them to convert without killing anyone. Just announce that after Castro dies of natural causes we will kill any non-democratically elected leader who takes his place.

We should have leaned on Iran to not black list 3/4 of the candidates. Iran is a democracy on paper except that their election commission can actually refuse candidates if they don't like them. In the long run Iran will be a democracy because once they relax just once their government will be democratic.

Countries like North Korea are hard because they have very large military forces and no strategic value.

But we should woop up on African anti-democratic forces as they have no military power to speak of. Syria, Eygpt etc.

If we are serious about it and PRAGMATIC we could free a lot of the world for not very much effort.

by donkeykong on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 10:30:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

OH, I get it. (none / 0)

Democratic principals should not be based on values or core beliefs, but instead on pragmatism rooted in who's ass we can kick. I'm so silly thinking spreading Democracy had altruistic and patriot undertones that were self sustaining.

Cuba: National sponsored, publicly no less, policy of assisination of leaders we oppose. Very Democratic. Good role model too for others to follow.

Iran, a theocracy in practice, will eventually relax its governement. Could you point me to the Surah in the Koran that notes that the prophet was just setting down guide rules that could be relaxed for political purposes? That might slow down western style Democracy a bit.

North Korea might fight back. Democracy isn't worth that.

Africa: We can kick there ass so they are ready for Democracy. How very Democratic!

Witty comment goes here...

by michael in chicago on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 11:24:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: OH, I get it. (none / 0)

If the Dems chose not to be men of action then whenever the country wants men of action it will elect Republicans.

That is what happened in 2004.

Sorry but America has times in its history where the people want a leader who is comfertable killing peole and not saying s/he is sorry.

That being said it is ALWAYS better to be pragmatic.

by donkeykong on Wed Feb 02, 2005 at 03:16:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I prefer others (none / 0)

I rather the Democratic party be men of principles. Actions flow from principles. Too often "men of action" act first and think about the results later. Bush is a man of action, not principle.

Witty comment goes here...

by michael in chicago on Wed Feb 02, 2005 at 09:33:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Don't feed the troll (none / 0)

Donkey Kong is troll. I don't know why you waste your time with this nonsense.

by Gary Boatwright on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 06:34:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Don't feed the troll (none / 0)

Cause it's fun to shoot fish in a barrel.

Witty comment goes here...

by michael in chicago on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 09:04:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

why inappropriate? (none / 0)

How old are you dk?

Why is it inappropriate to expect war supporters to volunteer?

Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.

by Carl Nyberg on Thu Feb 03, 2005 at 06:26:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm confused (none / 0)

Expain to me how Dean is anti-war?

Has he called for a complete withdraw of troop immediately?
Has he suggested we should cut and run?
Has he suggested that, now that we are there, we should shirk our duty to see the job finished?

No to all of these.

Dean was against the invaision for reason that once again proved to be correct. There were no WMD. Sadam was involved in 911. Sadam was not a threat. The world is not safer now that Sadam has been captured.

I believe the latest polls showed that the majority of Americans thought the Iraq was wasn't worth it.

There are plenty of evil dictators in the world. Should we invade all their countries? If not, than why Iraq? No rational person choses to go to war when they face no real threat.

So am I irrational? Or do you refuse to see the futility wrought by a bunch of lies?

Witty comment goes here...

by michael in chicago on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 09:11:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

typing too fast: correction (none / 0)

Dean was against the invaision for reasons that once again proved to be correct. There were no WMD. Sadam was not involved in 911. Sadam was not a threat. The world is not safer now that Sadam has been captured.

Witty comment goes here...

by michael in chicago on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 09:13:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: typing too fast: correction (none / 0)

I would argue that the world is safer. If every country in the world were a democracy I think it would be very safe. Every country that moves towards a democracy makes the world safer.

by donkeykong on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 10:05:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Do you have a GOP talking point (none / 0)

subscription?

Do you think Iraq will actually move toward Democracy if there were not 150,000 armed troops there? Will it remain when we leave?

There has been more terrorism in the world last year than ever. The world hates us. To Islam this is looking more and more like a holy war. This makes us safer?

We'll disagree on this one.

Witty comment goes here...

by michael in chicago on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 10:17:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Do you have a GOP talking point (none / 0)

How many troops do you think are in Afghanistan?

If we limit our exertion of power to installing democracy then yes it will last.

The majority of people in Iraq want a government that is fundementalist by our standards but still not likely to start wars and run amuck.

Look at the Palestinians they are doing well with democracy. Course it elects Hamas but they will probably keep the democracy because even Hamas succession is best handled without killing people.

by donkeykong on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 10:34:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

OK.... (none / 0)

Afghanistan is doing so well that the President can't leave the capital without an armed escort and then only barely. This is the nation that sponsored directly those who attacked us, yet we are not nation building there, but instead in Iraq, a nation that was contained, not a threat and didn't attack us. Good plan.

And a fundamentalist government in Iraq wouldn't be a threat to our security, especially in light of that fact that it would fall into line with Iran in opposition of the US and its policy? Iran? Remember them? Now there's a model for Democracy.

And boy those Palestinians sure are doing well. That peace process is going swimginly with little terrorism there.

Witty comment goes here...

by michael in chicago on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 11:16:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: OK.... (none / 0)

What you say in jest is actually true.

Iran is a model for democracy ON PAPER.

Irans system is fundementally built on democracy but with the ruling powers able to filter out who can join. Kind of like Communist china (which is a democracy but only within the communist party).

In Iran it is 12 people who bar candidates from running. If 12 moderates were in the guardian council then Iran would be a democracy. Iran is currently very similiar to england which is a MONARCHY on paper (queen has almost all the powers of president but never uses them).

If as a party we focused on DEMOCRACY we could have a very effective foreign policy.

by donkeykong on Wed Feb 02, 2005 at 03:23:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

what were we trying to achieve? (none / 0)

What was the primary objective of U.S. Iraq policy?

Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.

by Carl Nyberg on Thu Feb 03, 2005 at 06:23:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Maybe its for the best...... (none / 0)

Whoosh! Look at all those replies...

Way to be on message, everyone! (during the primaries, staying on message was never a slam dunk for us)...

by CT Lex on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:55:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Dean (none / 0)

I think that it is now inevitable that Dean will be the DNC Chair. This isn't like in Iowa when Dean had all the endorsments but still lost, this time the people endorsing Dean are the voters in the race for Chair. Fowler, Rosenburg and Roemer are the only opposition left, but I think that Dean will emerge with a huge landslide victory in 2 weeks and have a large mandate to change the party and move it in the right direction.

Max Friedman

by Max Friedman on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:33:30 PM EST

TX Dem Party Chair Endorses Dean (3.00 / 1)

Texas Democratic Chair Charles Soechting has endorsed Howard Dean for DNC Chair:

Dear Fellow DNC Members:

It's no secret I think we need a major shakeup at the Democratic National Committee. For too long, the DNC has treated Texas like an ATM machine, raiding our most generous donors for millions of dollars while we struggle to remain competitive here in state and local races.

We need to change this attitude in Washington. And that's why I'm supporting Gov. Howard Dean for DNC Chair. He believes in a 50-state strategy, which is the only way we will ever Take Back Texas -- and our country.

Gov. Dean's message of mainstream values is all about helping the people we fight for and represent improve their lives. His political career is all about change. And he agrees with me that our party must change, too -- not to forget our principles, but to fulfill them.

Many of you may have heard by now that former Congressman Martin Frost is dropping out of the DNC chair race. Martin ran a strong and clean campaign that made all Texas Democrats proud.

Now I hope you will join me in giving your enthusiastic endorsement to Gov. Dean to lead our national party in the years ahead. I'm convinced that he is the best candidate to reflect our commitment to securing our future, balancing the budget, providing health care to every eligible child, protecting the environment, and making sure
America looks, once again, like America.

Sincerely,
CHARLES E. SOECHTING
Chairman, Texas Democratic Party

by ByronUT on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:44:19 PM EST

does not compute (none / 0)

But Dean's a Northeastern liberal...?

Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.

by Carl Nyberg on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:46:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: does not compute (none / 0)

I'm not surprised... I had heard a week ago that Dean was Soechting's second choice (after Frost).

by ByronUT on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:47:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: does not compute (none / 0)

I wonder who is going to push Dean over the top here in announced endorsements.

by Jerome Armstrong on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:48:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: TX Dem Party Chair Endorses Dean (none / 0)

Nice, thanks for the updates.

by Jerome Armstrong on Tue Feb 01, 2005 at 05:47:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I thought California was the ATM? (none / 0)

And what exactly is an "ATM machine", anyways? An Automated Teller Machine Machine?