To tell you the truth, I really don't know what to say to that, BR. I really don't. I don't know where your blind opposition to everything that I say stems. It's personally upsetting, because I can devote a lot of thought to a particular post, and you will invariably deride it without ever explaining yourself. In other words, I would like the benefit of the doubt here. Or at least help me out so I don't invoke your wrath every time I write something. In my posts in this thread, where am I wrong? Explain where my assessment is wrong, please. I tried to be perfectly honest. I'm not TRYING TO DECEIVE ANYONE. It's not something I wish to do at all. So when you say things like that I'm just confused. Really confused. Especially compared to trumptman, whose posts are so chock-full of misleading statements, lies, and deception. I know it, you know it. Yet somehow, you never seem to side with my reasoning. Is it personal? Am I stupid here? Where am I wrong? I would like to understand how whatever is it you seem to disagree with makes my statements in this thread wrong.
Maybe he needs more reasoning than "I'm right, the sources are biased, and everyone else is a liar."
Look lay off the rhetoric. It gets tiring and doesn't make a point. Just because you sound anguished doesn't make anyone else feel any differently. Got it? Good.
Are you telling me that when someone is acting in a good ol' boy quasi-racist manner you don't understand who it harms or how it harms others? As I stated and have addressed a number of times now (Shawn's favorite song must be dust in the wind) an endorsement of this behavior harms those working against it. Saying to racists, you can get the benefits, and not renounce your views is "at the expense of others."
The results of racism show up statistically. It is very rare nowadays to be able to point a finger and say "Yes officer that was the man who dragged my brother behind the pick up." Dean is saying those sorts of things don't have to change before these folks support him.
Pick your nose, don't pick a point and obscure my answer to it because I have repeated that point about 3 times.
Nick
How? Voting for Dean will contradict a lot of these people's beliefs because I don't believe Dean has conceded anything to these people except health care and better schools.....which are not just for southern conservatives.
I would be happy if anyone can tell me how Dean is "pandering to southern white male voters at the expense of others."
You have to prove two things: 1) that Dean is actually "pandering to southern white male voters" and 2) that he's doing it "at the expense of others." Keep in mind that the word "pandering" actually has a meaning; it's not whatever trumptman thinks it means.
We must direct all posts to Shawn's requirements. You all got the memo right?
Shawn, please find your glasses. You are having a little trouble seeing past the end of your own nose.
I'll tell you what Shawn. Let's reverse it. How does say, Trent Lott "pander" to the same crowd since no politician would actually say, "Hey I'm a racist." Even Lott just paid a compliment to a former segregationist that had to have the intent read out and understood. If Lott, whom I know you obviously think is racist did not overtly act in such a manner, why do you expect the evidence to be so much stronger for Dean?
Dean isn't going to produce a 5 point plan for tolerating and promoting racists/racism. However the intent behind his statements is clear. If you don't want to see it, that is fine. Go chase your tail.
"The Republican party does not own Fox News or Rush Limbaugh" - anonymous
I'm not anonymous. I'll gladly stand behind my words. You are the liar who would call private enterprises arms of political parties while proclaiming no problem with political parties fund raising to create quasi-private party enterprises.
I know I have to remember the Democratic doublestandard. You know like when Gingrich accepts a book advance it is "buying influence" and when Hillary does it, it is "buying a big expensive house, but not influence."
Likewise when Gingrich is accused of using GOPAC to fund a college course that is an "ethics violation" and when Democrats fund raise to create a supposedly private talk radio network that is "ok."
What Dean is doing is to use a more constructive view on the voters than some imply here.
Dean is not saying: "These people have some values. Lets only focus on those that are the same as ours."
He is saying: "When campaigning in the south the republicans have been succesful in playing on race issues, covering up that the economic issues has a much greater importance on their lifes. Lets talk economy and what the republicans really have done for the gun carrying, truck driving etc lower middle class white male"
He is not talking about covering up issues but removing the covers put there by others.
In his eyes the attitude of the voters can be changed by information while some posters here imply that he just want to conformhis policy to the already existing attitudes of the voters.
What Dean is doing is to use a more constructive view on the voters than some imply here.
Dean is not saying: "These people have some values. Lets only focus on those that are the same as ours."
He is saying: "When campaigning in the south the republicans have been succesful in playing on race issues, covering up that the economic issues has a much greater importance on their lifes. Lets talk economy and what the republicans really have done for the gun carrying, truck driving etc lower middle class white male"
He is not talking about covering up issues but removing the covers put there by others.
In his eyes the attitude of the voters can be changed by information while some posters here imply that he just want to conformhis policy to the already existing attitudes of the voters.
Anders Anders? ? ? You know I have a lot of respect for you but how have modern day republicans "been successful in playing on race issues"??
I would argue that any such move (involving tasteless race mention) actually results as unsuccessful. Statements given by Trent Lott and Rush Limbaugh should make that clear. So again how is it that republicans have been successful in playing on race issues?
I think if Bush had said something about wanting to be the president of XYZ as Dean did as he begins to campain for 04 I think he would get hell for such as he would deserve such hell. I for one would not have such crap come out of the mouth of somebody I would vote for.
I extend this fact to Dean.
Dean can talk education, economy and health care ((WITHOUT)) mention of "guys in pickups with certain flags"
but no Dean decided to get people talking about him. This is nothing more than yet another planned tactic to get cheap press. I for one am not impressed but none the less thankful I can see around this ass named Dean.
We must direct all posts to Shawn's requirements. You all got the memo right?
Shawn, please find your glasses. You are having a little trouble seeing past the end of your own nose.
I'll tell you what Shawn. Let's reverse it. How does say, Trent Lott "pander" to the same crowd since no politician would actually say, "Hey I'm a racist." Even Lott just paid a compliment to a former segregationist that had to have the intent read out and understood. If Lott, whom I know you obviously think is racist did not overtly act in such a manner, why do you expect the evidence to be so much stronger for Dean?
Dean isn't going to produce a 5 point plan for tolerating and promoting racists/racism. However the intent behind his statements is clear. If you don't want to see it, that is fine. Go chase your tail.
Nick
Necessary for proving that Dean is "pandering to southern white male voters at the expense of others" is the following criteria: 1) that Dean is actually "pandering to southern white male voters" and 2) that he's doing it "at the expense of others." That's not something you should disagree considering that the two clauses are taken word for word from your original statement. This is not something I made up, trumptman.
Based on Dean's statements, how is he "pandering to souther white male voters at the expense of others?"
I'm having a very difficult time keeping up with your assertions. Now you claim that Trent Lott's comments and Howard Deans comments are somehow related?
Dean's comment was stupid. It shows his utter ignorance of the South and will probably end up alienating it. Dean is what he is: A liberal New Englander.
It will never cease to amaze me how people actually think someone like Dean can beat Bush, even if he does get the nomination. We haven't a President like that since Carter. Clinton ran on "the third way", which Dean is definitely not doing. He's not moving center...he's moving Left. The Democatic Big Wigs (including the Clintons) are scared to death Dean is going to win. they;re not stupid, Shawn. They KNOW what a Dean vs. Bush election is going to look like and they're no happy with what they see.
Why do you think the Clintons are so pro-Clark? You don't really BELIEVE that Clark is running due to the Draft Clark movement, do you? Calrk and the big boy Dems had this planned for months. Please.
In any case, there hasn't been a successful Democratic President since Kennedy. More to the point, a hard core Leftist Democat hasn't won since Carter.
Yes but in light of all the stupid comments his potential republican opponent has made it makes this entire conversation rather moot.
Necessary for proving that Dean is "pandering to southern white male voters at the expense of others" is the following criteria: 1) that Dean is actually "pandering to southern white male voters" and 2) that he's doing it "at the expense of others." That's not something you should disagree considering that the two clauses are taken word for word from your original statement. This is not something I made up, trumptman.
Based on Dean's statements, how is he "pandering to souther white male voters at the expense of others?"
I'm having a very difficult time keeping up with your assertions. Now you claim that Trent Lott's comments and Howard Deans comments are somehow related?
I'll address this one last time and then leave you to your own denseness.
Hey, Shawn how can you prove that a cab driver didn't pick up someone because they are black? How can you show that you had to wait longer for a seat at a restaurant?
Likewise how do you prove that citizen's councils or confederate flags are racist?
It is more about the intent behind the statements. If you think my reaction is unjustified then so is the reaction of about 8 other Democratic candidates since they said the same thing. If you think that you have to prove how someone wearing a confederate flag might exclude someone black or how someone wearing a swastika might exclude someone Jewish before reacting to their beliefs then you are just ignoring history and likewise appealing only to rationalism for groups of people that ignore it and operate in spite of it.
People who are racist are so at the expense of others. When you ask people to associate with you, you associate with their actions as well.
Well to use the same language my conservative friends on this board love to use all the time, "I love watching everyone froth at the mouth" over Dean's statements.
What's even more interesting is that conservatives are getting "into a tizzy" (another neo-con favorite) over Dean campaigning to some good ol' boys down south, while the reality of Bush's cronyism is at an all time high:
The New York Times reports on a study by the Center for Public Integrity that shows that the biggest contractors in Iraq were also big contributors to the Bush campaign:
Quote:
Executives, employees and political action committees of the 70 companies that received government contracts for work in either Iraq or Afghanistan contributed slightly more than $500,000 to President Bush's 2000 election campaign, according to a comprehensive study of the contracts released on Tuesday.
The overwhelming majority of government contracts for billions of dollars of reconstruction work in Iraq and Afghanistan went to companies run by executives who... gave more money to Mr. Bush than any other politician in the last 12 years....
The report confirms that many if not most of the contracts handed out for work in Iraq were awarded through a process that was inscrutable to outsiders and often without competitive bidding.
While the LA Times reports that the so-called uniter had deeply divided members of his own party in Congress:
Quote:
The ill will could come back to haunt Bush when it comes time to seek additional money for Iraq. Some lawmakers warn that he may have a harder time if he does not give more information and attention to the lawmakers who hold the purse strings. And if he does not heed concern about the cost of reconstruction to U.S. taxpayers, some Republicans warn, Bush will risk losing public support.
"The only way we'll lose the peace is to have a political meltdown at home," said Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) "If you want the American people to keep making sacrifices, you have to show that you have their interests at heart, too."
I don't know, I see the white house as prime for the taking. But, if you guys like we can continue to argue about Confederate flags and what-not instead of the real-world issues that will topple Bush's regime.
I don't know, I see the white house as prime for the taking. But, if you guys like we can continue to argue about Confederate flags and what-not instead of the real-world issues that will topple Bush's regime.
Because, this is all the right wingnuts have. When your "president" destroys the surplus,let's corp. attack the enviroment, let's haliburton profit like its christmas, lies to start a war, loses 3 million jobs, and all adbicates his power to dick cheney and his fevered cabal of warmongers...
All he was saying was that everyone suffers under Bush from the middle-class on down... the economiic issues are important to everyone... even those from the south who don't normally agree with democrats.
He didn't say anyone was racist... didn't say all white men who drive pickup trucks from the south are rednecks...
All he's saying is that EVEN that guy who drives a pick up with a confederate flag sticker on it has a reason to vote Bush out.
Are any southerners going to claim that GUY does NOT exist?
And those claiming that his views towards guns are racially motivated are silly. Rural people hunt... Urban people don't. That's pretty obvious.
Anders Anders? ? ? You know I have a lot of respect for you but how have modern day republicans "been successful in playing on race issues"??
Its not my attitude. I hear Dean say this and you could probably criticise this position (I don´t know enough on the issue). What I am trying to say is that Dean doesn´t say "Ignore racism" like some are trying to say but have another message.
Congressman Jesse L. Jackson, Jr. Praises Dean on Bringing Economic Agenda to the South
"I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slaveowners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood."-- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., March on Washington, August 28, 1963
"White folks in the South who drive pick-up trucks with Confederate flag decals on the back ought to be voting with us because their kids don't have health insurance either, and their kids need better schools too."-- Dr. Howard Dean, DNC Winter meeting, February 21, 2003
Congressman Jesse L. Jackson, Jr., said yesterday, "This year we celebrated the 40th anniversary of Dr. King's famous speech in front of the Lincoln Memorial in 1963. Forty years later, Dr. Howard Dean is reminding us that the great task of uniting the northern black and white urban poor and working class, with the southern black and white rural poor and working class around common economic issues good health care, high quality schools, and affordable housing is the key to wrestling our democracy away from the race-oriented Republican right-wing.
"Democrats were not competitive in the South in 2000, and we have struggled to thrive, and in some instances survive, since Richard Nixon and the Republican Party began using their race-based 'southern strategy' in 1968. The use of race, cultural and social issues have served to distract voters by keeping the focus off of economic issues has been the basic strategy of Bush and the Republicans in the South. That's why they make wedge issues out of prayer in school, the Ten Commandments on public buildings, civil unions, the false allegation that Democrats will take away hunters' gun rights, choice for women, the controversy of having the words 'under God' in the Pledge of Allegiance, and the Confederate Flag. Lest we forget, the Confederate Flag is the Democratic Party's historic contribution to the South, and current Democratic candidates have not been able to figure out how to come to grips with their own historic symbol.
"Normally, rather than directly confronting poor and working class white southerners with a strong economic agenda, Democrats have tried to imitate Republicans on many of these social issues. It is good that we have a candidate offering hope to the South with an economic agenda. It is Dr. Dean who is reminding us that the combination of poor and working class blacks and whites, north and south, united in coalition around a common economic agenda of jobs, health care, education and housing will constitute a winning strategy in 2004," concluded Cong. Jackson.
Congressman Jesse L. Jackson, Jr. Praises Dean on Bringing Economic Agenda to the South
"I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slaveowners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood."-- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., March on Washington, August 28, 1963
"White folks in the South who drive pick-up trucks with Confederate flag decals on the back ought to be voting with us because their kids don't have health insurance either, and their kids need better schools too."-- Dr. Howard Dean, DNC Winter meeting, February 21, 2003
Congressman Jesse L. Jackson, Jr., said yesterday, "This year we celebrated the 40th anniversary of Dr. King's famous speech in front of the Lincoln Memorial in 1963. Forty years later, Dr. Howard Dean is reminding us that the great task of uniting the northern black and white urban poor and working class, with the southern black and white rural poor and working class around common economic issues good health care, high quality schools, and affordable housing is the key to wrestling our democracy away from the race-oriented Republican right-wing.
"Democrats were not competitive in the South in 2000, and we have struggled to thrive, and in some instances survive, since Richard Nixon and the Republican Party began using their race-based 'southern strategy' in 1968. The use of race, cultural and social issues have served to distract voters by keeping the focus off of economic issues has been the basic strategy of Bush and the Republicans in the South. That's why they make wedge issues out of prayer in school, the Ten Commandments on public buildings, civil unions, the false allegation that Democrats will take away hunters' gun rights, choice for women, the controversy of having the words 'under God' in the Pledge of Allegiance, and the Confederate Flag. Lest we forget, the Confederate Flag is the Democratic Party's historic contribution to the South, and current Democratic candidates have not been able to figure out how to come to grips with their own historic symbol.
"Normally, rather than directly confronting poor and working class white southerners with a strong economic agenda, Democrats have tried to imitate Republicans on many of these social issues. It is good that we have a candidate offering hope to the South with an economic agenda. It is Dr. Dean who is reminding us that the combination of poor and working class blacks and whites, north and south, united in coalition around a common economic agenda of jobs, health care, education and housing will constitute a winning strategy in 2004," concluded Cong. Jackson.
You may be debating politics but you fail to notice the pass you give Dean because he is your guy.
Some people could use some integrity.
Fellowship i
And yet the passes made to Bush are the size of Mac trucks compared to this linguistic baffo. I fully expect conservatives to do their best to support their man even though they "fail to notice the pass" they give Bush...Iraq, Plame, Debt.
The problem is everyone is not looking at this from a macro point of view. It's the larger picture, not the miniscule debate over a word choice or phraseology. It's about framing the issue and not coming to stupid conclusions.
You are correct that for many of us Dean is our man. Therefore, it is our responsibility to make sure that his statements don't go misrepresented or taken out of context. Many on this board are eager to point out any folly on the Democratic side simply because we're currently holding the president's feet to the fire. That is not to say our candidate shouldn't also be held to higher standard, he is. Far and above.
If you're going to somehow conclude that Dean is a racist, then that's your conclusion to make. I don't think he's remotely a racist. I think he's a Democratic nominee trying to make some headway into the South. Did he choose the wrong phrase? Yes. Yet, I find it somewhat ironic that your systematic dismissal of Dean is based on speech when our own president has made gaffes that inspire awe amongst those on both sides of the isle.
Comments
Originally posted by ShawnJ
To tell you the truth, I really don't know what to say to that, BR. I really don't. I don't know where your blind opposition to everything that I say stems. It's personally upsetting, because I can devote a lot of thought to a particular post, and you will invariably deride it without ever explaining yourself. In other words, I would like the benefit of the doubt here. Or at least help me out so I don't invoke your wrath every time I write something. In my posts in this thread, where am I wrong? Explain where my assessment is wrong, please. I tried to be perfectly honest. I'm not TRYING TO DECEIVE ANYONE. It's not something I wish to do at all. So when you say things like that I'm just confused. Really confused. Especially compared to trumptman, whose posts are so chock-full of misleading statements, lies, and deception. I know it, you know it. Yet somehow, you never seem to side with my reasoning. Is it personal? Am I stupid here? Where am I wrong? I would like to understand how whatever is it you seem to disagree with makes my statements in this thread wrong.
Maybe he needs more reasoning than "I'm right, the sources are biased, and everyone else is a liar."
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
Look lay off the rhetoric. It gets tiring and doesn't make a point. Just because you sound anguished doesn't make anyone else feel any differently. Got it? Good.
Are you telling me that when someone is acting in a good ol' boy quasi-racist manner you don't understand who it harms or how it harms others? As I stated and have addressed a number of times now (Shawn's favorite song must be dust in the wind) an endorsement of this behavior harms those working against it. Saying to racists, you can get the benefits, and not renounce your views is "at the expense of others."
The results of racism show up statistically. It is very rare nowadays to be able to point a finger and say "Yes officer that was the man who dragged my brother behind the pick up." Dean is saying those sorts of things don't have to change before these folks support him.
Pick your nose, don't pick a point and obscure my answer to it because I have repeated that point about 3 times.
Nick
How? Voting for Dean will contradict a lot of these people's beliefs because I don't believe Dean has conceded anything to these people except health care and better schools.....which are not just for southern conservatives.
Originally posted by trumptman
Maybe he needs more reasoning than "I'm right, the sources are biased, and everyone else is a liar."
Nick
Because I'm wrong, Fox News is not biased, and a lot of here don't think you're a liar, respectively. I'm willing to concede the first one!
Originally posted by ShawnJ
I would be happy if anyone can tell me how Dean is "pandering to southern white male voters at the expense of others."
You have to prove two things: 1) that Dean is actually "pandering to southern white male voters" and 2) that he's doing it "at the expense of others." Keep in mind that the word "pandering" actually has a meaning; it's not whatever trumptman thinks it means.
We must direct all posts to Shawn's requirements. You all got the memo right?
Shawn, please find your glasses. You are having a little trouble seeing past the end of your own nose.
I'll tell you what Shawn. Let's reverse it. How does say, Trent Lott "pander" to the same crowd since no politician would actually say, "Hey I'm a racist." Even Lott just paid a compliment to a former segregationist that had to have the intent read out and understood. If Lott, whom I know you obviously think is racist did not overtly act in such a manner, why do you expect the evidence to be so much stronger for Dean?
Dean isn't going to produce a 5 point plan for tolerating and promoting racists/racism. However the intent behind his statements is clear. If you don't want to see it, that is fine. Go chase your tail.
Nick
"The Republican party does not own Fox News or Rush Limbaugh" - anonymous
I'm not anonymous. I'll gladly stand behind my words. You are the liar who would call private enterprises arms of political parties while proclaiming no problem with political parties fund raising to create quasi-private party enterprises.
I know I have to remember the Democratic doublestandard. You know like when Gingrich accepts a book advance it is "buying influence" and when Hillary does it, it is "buying a big expensive house, but not influence."
Likewise when Gingrich is accused of using GOPAC to fund a college course that is an "ethics violation" and when Democrats fund raise to create a supposedly private talk radio network that is "ok."
Nick
Dean is not saying: "These people have some values. Lets only focus on those that are the same as ours."
He is saying: "When campaigning in the south the republicans have been succesful in playing on race issues, covering up that the economic issues has a much greater importance on their lifes. Lets talk economy and what the republicans really have done for the gun carrying, truck driving etc lower middle class white male"
He is not talking about covering up issues but removing the covers put there by others.
In his eyes the attitude of the voters can be changed by information while some posters here imply that he just want to conformhis policy to the already existing attitudes of the voters.
Originally posted by Anders
What Dean is doing is to use a more constructive view on the voters than some imply here.
Dean is not saying: "These people have some values. Lets only focus on those that are the same as ours."
He is saying: "When campaigning in the south the republicans have been succesful in playing on race issues, covering up that the economic issues has a much greater importance on their lifes. Lets talk economy and what the republicans really have done for the gun carrying, truck driving etc lower middle class white male"
He is not talking about covering up issues but removing the covers put there by others.
In his eyes the attitude of the voters can be changed by information while some posters here imply that he just want to conformhis policy to the already existing attitudes of the voters.
Anders Anders? ? ? You know I have a lot of respect for you but how have modern day republicans "been successful in playing on race issues"??
I would argue that any such move (involving tasteless race mention) actually results as unsuccessful. Statements given by Trent Lott and Rush Limbaugh should make that clear. So again how is it that republicans have been successful in playing on race issues?
I think if Bush had said something about wanting to be the president of XYZ as Dean did as he begins to campain for 04 I think he would get hell for such as he would deserve such hell. I for one would not have such crap come out of the mouth of somebody I would vote for.
I extend this fact to Dean.
Dean can talk education, economy and health care ((WITHOUT)) mention of "guys in pickups with certain flags"
but no Dean decided to get people talking about him. This is nothing more than yet another planned tactic to get cheap press. I for one am not impressed but none the less thankful I can see around this ass named Dean.
Fellowship
Originally posted by trumptman
We must direct all posts to Shawn's requirements. You all got the memo right?
Shawn, please find your glasses. You are having a little trouble seeing past the end of your own nose.
I'll tell you what Shawn. Let's reverse it. How does say, Trent Lott "pander" to the same crowd since no politician would actually say, "Hey I'm a racist." Even Lott just paid a compliment to a former segregationist that had to have the intent read out and understood. If Lott, whom I know you obviously think is racist did not overtly act in such a manner, why do you expect the evidence to be so much stronger for Dean?
Dean isn't going to produce a 5 point plan for tolerating and promoting racists/racism. However the intent behind his statements is clear. If you don't want to see it, that is fine. Go chase your tail.
Nick
Necessary for proving that Dean is "pandering to southern white male voters at the expense of others" is the following criteria: 1) that Dean is actually "pandering to southern white male voters" and 2) that he's doing it "at the expense of others." That's not something you should disagree considering that the two clauses are taken word for word from your original statement. This is not something I made up, trumptman.
Based on Dean's statements, how is he "pandering to souther white male voters at the expense of others?"
I'm having a very difficult time keeping up with your assertions. Now you claim that Trent Lott's comments and Howard Deans comments are somehow related?
Originally posted by SDW2001
Guys, this isn't a pissing contest.
Dean's comment was stupid. It shows his utter ignorance of the South and will probably end up alienating it. Dean is what he is: A liberal New Englander.
It will never cease to amaze me how people actually think someone like Dean can beat Bush, even if he does get the nomination. We haven't a President like that since Carter. Clinton ran on "the third way", which Dean is definitely not doing. He's not moving center...he's moving Left. The Democatic Big Wigs (including the Clintons) are scared to death Dean is going to win. they;re not stupid, Shawn. They KNOW what a Dean vs. Bush election is going to look like and they're no happy with what they see.
Why do you think the Clintons are so pro-Clark? You don't really BELIEVE that Clark is running due to the Draft Clark movement, do you?
In any case, there hasn't been a successful Democratic President since Kennedy. More to the point, a hard core Leftist Democat hasn't won since Carter.
Yes but in light of all the stupid comments his potential republican opponent has made it makes this entire conversation rather moot.
Originally posted by ShawnJ
Necessary for proving that Dean is "pandering to southern white male voters at the expense of others" is the following criteria: 1) that Dean is actually "pandering to southern white male voters" and 2) that he's doing it "at the expense of others." That's not something you should disagree considering that the two clauses are taken word for word from your original statement. This is not something I made up, trumptman.
Based on Dean's statements, how is he "pandering to souther white male voters at the expense of others?"
I'm having a very difficult time keeping up with your assertions. Now you claim that Trent Lott's comments and Howard Deans comments are somehow related?
I'll address this one last time and then leave you to your own denseness.
Hey, Shawn how can you prove that a cab driver didn't pick up someone because they are black? How can you show that you had to wait longer for a seat at a restaurant?
Likewise how do you prove that citizen's councils or confederate flags are racist?
It is more about the intent behind the statements. If you think my reaction is unjustified then so is the reaction of about 8 other Democratic candidates since they said the same thing. If you think that you have to prove how someone wearing a confederate flag might exclude someone black or how someone wearing a swastika might exclude someone Jewish before reacting to their beliefs then you are just ignoring history and likewise appealing only to rationalism for groups of people that ignore it and operate in spite of it.
People who are racist are so at the expense of others. When you ask people to associate with you, you associate with their actions as well.
Nick
What's even more interesting is that conservatives are getting "into a tizzy" (another neo-con favorite) over Dean campaigning to some good ol' boys down south, while the reality of Bush's cronyism is at an all time high:
The New York Times reports on a study by the Center for Public Integrity that shows that the biggest contractors in Iraq were also big contributors to the Bush campaign:
Executives, employees and political action committees of the 70 companies that received government contracts for work in either Iraq or Afghanistan contributed slightly more than $500,000 to President Bush's 2000 election campaign, according to a comprehensive study of the contracts released on Tuesday.
The overwhelming majority of government contracts for billions of dollars of reconstruction work in Iraq and Afghanistan went to companies run by executives who... gave more money to Mr. Bush than any other politician in the last 12 years....
The report confirms that many if not most of the contracts handed out for work in Iraq were awarded through a process that was inscrutable to outsiders and often without competitive bidding.
While the LA Times reports that the so-called uniter had deeply divided members of his own party in Congress:
The ill will could come back to haunt Bush when it comes time to seek additional money for Iraq. Some lawmakers warn that he may have a harder time if he does not give more information and attention to the lawmakers who hold the purse strings. And if he does not heed concern about the cost of reconstruction to U.S. taxpayers, some Republicans warn, Bush will risk losing public support.
"The only way we'll lose the peace is to have a political meltdown at home," said Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) "If you want the American people to keep making sacrifices, you have to show that you have their interests at heart, too."
I don't know, I see the white house as prime for the taking. But, if you guys like we can continue to argue about Confederate flags and what-not instead of the real-world issues that will topple Bush's regime.
I don't know, I see the white house as prime for the taking. But, if you guys like we can continue to argue about Confederate flags and what-not instead of the real-world issues that will topple Bush's regime.
Because, this is all the right wingnuts have. When your "president" destroys the surplus,let's corp. attack the enviroment, let's haliburton profit like its christmas, lies to start a war, loses 3 million jobs, and all adbicates his power to dick cheney and his fevered cabal of warmongers...
You have to change the subject...
He didn't say anyone was racist... didn't say all white men who drive pickup trucks from the south are rednecks...
All he's saying is that EVEN that guy who drives a pick up with a confederate flag sticker on it has a reason to vote Bush out.
Are any southerners going to claim that GUY does NOT exist?
And those claiming that his views towards guns are racially motivated are silly. Rural people hunt... Urban people don't. That's pretty obvious.
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
Anders Anders? ? ? You know I have a lot of respect for you but how have modern day republicans "been successful in playing on race issues"??
Its not my attitude. I hear Dean say this and you could probably criticise this position (I don´t know enough on the issue). What I am trying to say is that Dean doesn´t say "Ignore racism" like some are trying to say but have another message.
"I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slaveowners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood."-- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., March on Washington, August 28, 1963
"White folks in the South who drive pick-up trucks with Confederate flag decals on the back ought to be voting with us because their kids don't have health insurance either, and their kids need better schools too."-- Dr. Howard Dean, DNC Winter meeting, February 21, 2003
Congressman Jesse L. Jackson, Jr., said yesterday, "This year we celebrated the 40th anniversary of Dr. King's famous speech in front of the Lincoln Memorial in 1963. Forty years later, Dr. Howard Dean is reminding us that the great task of uniting the northern black and white urban poor and working class, with the southern black and white rural poor and working class around common economic issues good health care, high quality schools, and affordable housing is the key to wrestling our democracy away from the race-oriented Republican right-wing.
"Democrats were not competitive in the South in 2000, and we have struggled to thrive, and in some instances survive, since Richard Nixon and the Republican Party began using their race-based 'southern strategy' in 1968. The use of race, cultural and social issues have served to distract voters by keeping the focus off of economic issues has been the basic strategy of Bush and the Republicans in the South. That's why they make wedge issues out of prayer in school, the Ten Commandments on public buildings, civil unions, the false allegation that Democrats will take away hunters' gun rights, choice for women, the controversy of having the words 'under God' in the Pledge of Allegiance, and the Confederate Flag. Lest we forget, the Confederate Flag is the Democratic Party's historic contribution to the South, and current Democratic candidates have not been able to figure out how to come to grips with their own historic symbol.
"Normally, rather than directly confronting poor and working class white southerners with a strong economic agenda, Democrats have tried to imitate Republicans on many of these social issues. It is good that we have a candidate offering hope to the South with an economic agenda. It is Dr. Dean who is reminding us that the combination of poor and working class blacks and whites, north and south, united in coalition around a common economic agenda of jobs, health care, education and housing will constitute a winning strategy in 2004," concluded Cong. Jackson.
http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/002084.html
Originally posted by chu_bakka
Congressman Jesse L. Jackson, Jr. Praises Dean on Bringing Economic Agenda to the South
"I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slaveowners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood."-- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., March on Washington, August 28, 1963
"White folks in the South who drive pick-up trucks with Confederate flag decals on the back ought to be voting with us because their kids don't have health insurance either, and their kids need better schools too."-- Dr. Howard Dean, DNC Winter meeting, February 21, 2003
Congressman Jesse L. Jackson, Jr., said yesterday, "This year we celebrated the 40th anniversary of Dr. King's famous speech in front of the Lincoln Memorial in 1963. Forty years later, Dr. Howard Dean is reminding us that the great task of uniting the northern black and white urban poor and working class, with the southern black and white rural poor and working class around common economic issues good health care, high quality schools, and affordable housing is the key to wrestling our democracy away from the race-oriented Republican right-wing.
"Democrats were not competitive in the South in 2000, and we have struggled to thrive, and in some instances survive, since Richard Nixon and the Republican Party began using their race-based 'southern strategy' in 1968. The use of race, cultural and social issues have served to distract voters by keeping the focus off of economic issues has been the basic strategy of Bush and the Republicans in the South. That's why they make wedge issues out of prayer in school, the Ten Commandments on public buildings, civil unions, the false allegation that Democrats will take away hunters' gun rights, choice for women, the controversy of having the words 'under God' in the Pledge of Allegiance, and the Confederate Flag. Lest we forget, the Confederate Flag is the Democratic Party's historic contribution to the South, and current Democratic candidates have not been able to figure out how to come to grips with their own historic symbol.
"Normally, rather than directly confronting poor and working class white southerners with a strong economic agenda, Democrats have tried to imitate Republicans on many of these social issues. It is good that we have a candidate offering hope to the South with an economic agenda. It is Dr. Dean who is reminding us that the combination of poor and working class blacks and whites, north and south, united in coalition around a common economic agenda of jobs, health care, education and housing will constitute a winning strategy in 2004," concluded Cong. Jackson.
http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/002084.html
Dammit Chewie, you beat me to it
It should not be done for any political figure. Some of you here have no real desire for integrity as long as you view life as a football game.
Those of you here that do this make me sick. Think outside of a "party" for once.
You guys are blind sheep and the politicians know it.
Fellowship
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
People that wash over what Dean said and defend it would never do such a thing for Bush. The double standard is as clear as it can be focused.
It should not be done for any political figure. Some of you here have no real desire for integrity as long as you view life as a football game.
Those of you here that do this make me sick. Think outside of a "party" for once.
You guys are blind sheep and the politicians know it.
Fellowship
We're debating P O L I T I C S !
Originally posted by Northgate
We're debating P O L I T I C S !
You may be debating politics but you fail to notice the pass you give Dean because he is your guy.
Some people could use some integrity.
Fellowship i
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
You may be debating politics but you fail to notice the pass you give Dean because he is your guy.
Some people could use some integrity.
Fellowship i
And yet the passes made to Bush are the size of Mac trucks compared to this linguistic baffo. I fully expect conservatives to do their best to support their man even though they "fail to notice the pass" they give Bush...Iraq, Plame, Debt.
The problem is everyone is not looking at this from a macro point of view. It's the larger picture, not the miniscule debate over a word choice or phraseology. It's about framing the issue and not coming to stupid conclusions.
You are correct that for many of us Dean is our man. Therefore, it is our responsibility to make sure that his statements don't go misrepresented or taken out of context. Many on this board are eager to point out any folly on the Democratic side simply because we're currently holding the president's feet to the fire. That is not to say our candidate shouldn't also be held to higher standard, he is. Far and above.
If you're going to somehow conclude that Dean is a racist, then that's your conclusion to make. I don't think he's remotely a racist. I think he's a Democratic nominee trying to make some headway into the South. Did he choose the wrong phrase? Yes. Yet, I find it somewhat ironic that your systematic dismissal of Dean is based on speech when our own president has made gaffes that inspire awe amongst those on both sides of the isle.