Message from Chris Heinz

[ChrisHeinz]

Hi Folks,

I have been watching the debate over DNC Chair here at DU for some time. I agree with the assessment that it is the most important that Dems will make over the next two years. I also understand and respect that many here support Gov. Dean's effort. I cannot blame them, given the innovative leadership his campaign for Presidency brought to the party, and because of the efficacy of his term as head of DGA.

Some of you may have seen that I am supporting Simon Rosenberg for chair. A link to my statement can be found here:

http://www.simonforchair.com/press/press_releases/01-11-2005_Endorsements.html

I think the statement speaks for itself. Simon is someone that I have seen put a lot of energy and thought to the long term strategy necessary to rebuild the party. Indeed, I have seen many post noting that he shares many of the same ideas of the Governor, whom I greatly respect and got to know a little after the primary.

Anyhow, I would just say two things:

1) My endorsement is not a signal from John Kerry, my stepfather, who I think has very responsibly removed himself from influencing the process.

2) I have seen many people note policy disagreements with some who are running for the Chair. The war in Iraq is a particularly pointed issue here (it is for me, too), as is a woman's right to choose. These are valid data points. Personally, I am less concerned about the DNC chair's own policy positions, and more concerned about the blocking and tackling we need to improve to win in the future.

I'd love to hear people's thoughts about point 2.

In the end, however, maybe some combination of leadership is best. In the meantime, I am very excited about the prospect of Simon's leadership.

Best to DU,

Chris

[NJCher]

1. I don't even know who Simon Rosenberg is

And I don't even have the motivation to find out. I just want Howard Dean because I know we need a fighter.


Cher

[CWebster]

8. He is the chairman of the New Democrtic Network

The WSJ also is rallying behind him.



With all do respect to Chris Heinz, no thanks.

More of the same what got us here.

[bloom]

16. The WSJ

does not represent my interests. Neither, do I suspect, would Rosenberg.

[eg101]

46. "New Democratic Network" or "New Plutocratic Network" ?

So Simon Rosenberg is supported by the Wall St J?

Gee, I hardly wait to go to work for Mr Rosenberg. Or maybe I could work directly for the GOP, and save going through the middleman?


Thanks tons, Mr Heinz, but NO THANKS!

[Fabio]

223. He wasn't endorsed by WSJ

D. Gerstein, a democratic activist, wrote about Simon's candidacy and the need for change in an op-ed.

[bloom]

298. The WSJ has made it very clear...

to anyone it wasn't clear to before that their newspaper represents "privileged people". See the publishers letter printed last week. She goes into great detail.

People should not expect their editorials (op-ed or otherwise) to represent multiple views. They know what their values are and they are sticking to them.

On the opposite page from the publisher's letter, they ran two editorials supporting our countries use of torture. (None opposing).



See downthread - Even Chris Heinz does not see an endorsement in the WSJ as good for a Democrat. I'm actually afraid he is wrong - that it is the "privileged people" that Democrats think they have to pander to....

(Just like what the heck is Roemer doing with Scaife support. :spank: )

OTOH - here is Chris Heinz trying to drum up support among us for Simon Rosenberg & emailing Will Pitt....:freak: Maybe Dean should compete by coming on here himself. :kick:

[Fabio]

305. What does this have to do with Simon Rosenberg?

If you say the WSJ, show me the article.

[bloom]

327. Here you go- Fabio

In Style with Joe

Monday, December 27, 2004 1:00 p.m. EST

..." Democratic eyes are falling increasingly on Simon Rosenberg as a potential new leader of the Democratic National Committee. He's currently head of the New Democrat Network, which Mr. Lieberman founded and co-chaired along with retiring Sen. John Breaux. Mr. Rosenberg's elevation would be a clear and welcome vindication of Liebermanism.

It doesn't hurt that his group was relatively low-profile in the recent Kerry loss. NDN had originally expected to play a bigger role thanks to the McCain-Feingold reform that shut off the Democrats' soft money spigot. But it was rapidly outshone by the sudden arrival of MoveOn.org and the Media Fund, which raised millions for "independent" advertising in support of the Kerry campaign. Those efforts (especially MoveOn.org's) are now being second-guessed by Democrats as having done more harm than good with their Bush-bashing and conspicuous overtone of Hollywood arrogance.

A campaign aide to Bill Clinton, Mr. Rosenberg created his PAC in 2000 to battle paleolibs in raising money for "New Democrats" who adhered to modern positions on economics and national security. He's increasingly seen as a palatable alternative to Howard Dean (too liberal because of his antiwar stance) and former Rep. Tim Roemer (too conservative because of his anti-abortion beliefs). Speaking at a cattle call in Orlando earlier this month, Mr. Rosenberg talked intelligently about the need to groom new Democratic candidates and operatives who are more in touch with mainstream America. "Republicans are winning with growing regions and groups," he pointed out. "They won in 97 of the fastest growing 100 counties; most of the so called red states are gaining population, the blues ones losing."

Unfortunately, Mr. Rosenberg's biggest obstacle may be memories of NDN's first big battle, in which the group raised millions in corporate dollars to support and defend Democrats who voted in favor of liberalized trade with China. That's exactly the kind of responsible position-taking the NDN was created to encourage and reward -- and which the party's protectionists and union bosses are not likely to forgive or forget. 

--Holman W. Jenkins Jr.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110006077

[Fabio]

362. Doesnt seem like an endorsement to me.

More like an item.

[bloom]

370. You are the one using the word "endorsement" and then arguing about it...

What has been said:

"The WSJ also is rallying behind him."

"So Simon Rosenberg is supported by the Wall St J?"

The publisher of the Wall Street Journal said in effect: "People should not expect their editorials (op-ed or otherwise) to represent multiple views."

The WSJ is not the New York Times. The New York Times presents multiple viewpoints - some of which I agree with and some of which I don't. The WSJ prints editorials that they and the business community which they represent - agree with. The publisher said so herself. Look up last Thursdays or Fridays paper and you can read it yourself.

The editorial (which they claim to agree with or they wouldn't have printed it - re: themselves) said:

Democratic eyes are falling increasingly on Simon Rosenberg as a potential new leader of the Democratic National Committee. He's currently head of the New Democrat Network, which Mr. Lieberman founded and co-chaired along with retiring Sen. John Breaux. Mr. Rosenberg's elevation would be a clear and welcome vindication of Liebermanism.

While not officially an endorsement - considering the source and their stated policy - its pretty darn close.



Are you getting paid by the NDN? You seem awfully caught up in this.

[MsTryska]

408. Mr. Rosenberg's elevation would be a clear vindication of Liebermanism....

hmm....no thanks.



the DNC has been stuck in the rut of err..."joementum" since...well 2000, eh?

[Eric J in MN]

213. Do you have a link to the Wall St. Journal endorsing Simon R.? (nt)

nt

[cosmicdot]

252. how does one become chair of the New Dem Network?

does one set up his/her own tax-exempt political organization as an adjunct to the DLC/newdemsonline (ndol.org), and the Progressive Policy Institute* (ppionline.org/index) - all hyperlinked from the ndol website; then, self-promote it as one would any start-up business; set oneself a salary; declare same as its 'Chair'; get a foot into the Washington, DC establishment door, i.e., get on the acceptable guest spin room guest list as a spokesperson for "the Democratic Party" ...

or something entirely different and more democratic?
I really want that to be so.

- what did he do before NDN?
- where does the start-up capital to set up an organization like NDN originate?
- do we have a right to ask questions?
- do we have a right to know?

Simon Rosenberg is a Henry Crown Fellow of the Aspen Institute - you can visit Aspen's website and draw your own conclusions ... I see it as a corporate elite/conservative think tank ...

Aspen Henry Crown Fellowship Program "2001 High Five Class"
http://www.aspeninstitute.org/index.asp?bid=459

Henry Kissinger is on Aspen's Council of Honorary Trustees
http://www.aspeninstitute.org/index.asp?i=53&bid=1221

another Simon Rosenberg thread
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1478920#1479177


Aspen funding, i.e., David 'Cato Institute' Koch Foundation - "Following the footsteps of their father, a member of the John Birch Society, the Kochs clearly have a conservative bent" wasn't David Koch a Bush** Pioneer?
http://www.mediatransparency.org/search_results/info_on_any_recipient.php?recipientID=716 http://www.mediatransparency.org/funders/koch_family_foundations.htm

*PPI funding, i.e., Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation
the country's largest and influential right-wing foundation
http://www.mediatransparency.org/search_results/info_on_any_recipient.php?recipientID=449 http://www.mediatransparency.org/funders/bradley_foundation.htm


I really think Al From (self-proclaimed DLC "CEO"), Will Marshall (declared "President" of PPI), and Simon Rosenberg ("Chair" of NDN) sailed in on the same boat - mho.

I thought the Democratic Party post-Chicago 1968, had become more grass-root oriented ... and, away from establishment-type-style politics ... guess not.

I agree: "With all do respect to Chris Heinz, no thanks."

[Fabio]

255. It seems he founded it

then went about raising capital for the PAC.
sort of like DFA.

[EFerrari]

343. Hi there, Chris. If you hear Babel here, it's because there are a lot

of kids here and they were left without a net after the election. No one's fault, growing pains.

I myself am not familiar with your pick. Will do some homework.

I am, however, very concerned that the Dem leadership seems to be forwarding Mr. Roemer, whose record on women's health and Middle Eastern policy looks pretty awful.

Thanks for your thoughts,

Beth

[MissBrooks]

374. This whole thing seems curious to me.

Chris Heinz takes time out of his day to tell us that he supports Simon Rosenberg. Even though he knows most of us support Howard Dean?

He gives no real reason for his support, doesn't talk about why not Dean, and he signs onto DU just for this?

Is there any chance that this wasn't him?

I certainly have a raised eyebrow.

[janx]

2. Chris, Rosenberg would be my second choice.

But it's no longer about blocking and tackling. It's about change, and I don't know that Simon represents the change we need.

[MadAsHellNewYorker]

3. Sorry Chris, but Rosenberg is DLC in my book

and the DLC is exactly whats WRONG the Democratic Party. We need to stop trying to be Republican-Lite, and a DNC chair who holds true democratic party principals (like Dean) is who we need in my book.

[Freddie Stubbs]

183. Oh course he is DLC -- He's head of the New Democratic Network

And he's not hiding that fact either.

[mzmolly]

274. dupe

[mzmolly]

275. The New Democratic Network is NOT the DLC gang.

http://www.newdem.org/

[Freddie Stubbs]

313. So, I suppose there are any DLCers on their advisory board, right?

;)

[mzmolly]

317. I haven't a clue, but I'd see no need to form such an organization

if they agreed fully with an existing one.

:hi:

[Freddie Stubbs]

335. Same agenda--different missions

One disseminates moderate policy ideas, the other one works to build a stronger party by assisting candidates who support moderate policy ideas.

BTW, Dave McCurdy, former DLC Chairman, currently serves on the NDN's Advisory Board.

[mzmolly]

276. Why do you say he's DLC?

:shrug: I dunno, his ideas sounded very similar to Deans. It would be my guess he was a Dean supporter LOL.

[Freddie Stubbs]

443. He is the founder of the New Democrat Network

Actually he is a co-founder. The other co-founder is some guy named Joe Lieberman.

[GreenPartyVoter]

4. Hi Chris *wave* Thanks for letting us in on this, but can you give us

a link to some more in-depth info on this guy? (Mind you, I am pretty interested in seeing Howard make a go of it, but would be glad to research other possibilities.)

----------------------------------------------------------
Save our country one town, county, and state at a time!
http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/electionreform.htm#why

[crispini]

17. Here's the Kos piece on Rosenberg:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/12/6/112326/490

[wicket]

151. great piece, thanks for passing it along

n/t

[davidinalameda]

221. fantastic piece

didn't know that much about him

sounds pretty good

sounds like the person we need to lead this party

the party needs a good organizer

[gorbal]

388. Everyone check the above link

Everyone should check the link above to the KOS article. It gives a different take on Rosenberg than you usually hear.

Seriously though, or less seriously. Perhaps Rosenberg would rather run for the head of "Democracy For America" as they seem to have more power these days:P

[Raksha]

429. Thanks for the link to the Kos article.

The most relevant part to me was at the end:

>>As I've said before, my concern with Rosenberg is not substantive, it's stylistic. The guy is really nice. The DNC chair will be the face of the Democratic Party for the next three years (until the 2008 presidential cycle). Do we want a nice guy going up against Mehlman, or do we want a pit bull?<<

As far as I'm concerned, "nice" is a distinct liability these days, NOT a recommendation! I am totally fed up with Democrats who "play nice" and keep on losing elections. We need a pit bull, and that's why I'm supporting Dean.

[Fabio]

431. I think that is the best argument against Simon, too

He would be a stronger candidate if John Kerry had won -- ie politics mouthpiece would have been at the WH and the DNC could have gotten its shit together.

Meanwhile, I do think it is important to keep him involved in the effort.

[dubyaD40web]

5. Thanks for your opinion re: Simon Rosenberg

I, however, am supporting Howard Dean. He's one of the strongest leaders our party has left. Plus, he was against the Iraq war from the begining. Instead of moving more to the center, we need to take 2 more steps to the left and Dean can do that.



http://www.dubyaD40.com

[Goldeneye]

6. I'm open to hearing from other candidates

but I've seen and heard from Howard Dean. I'd feel comfortable with him as DNC chair. Rosenberg needs to get on TV, and show people what he's all about if he wants support.

[Fabio]

7. I found Simons website

it has more info on his bid:

www.simonforchair.com

hope this helps.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

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

[Fabio]

11. LOL

Maybe it is time for Beatty

[wicket]

133. I love that movie!!!

[blm]

10. I would have to hear that Rosenberg intends to expose the GOP control of

most of the media nd most of the voting machines. Those are the only two reasons that the GOP maintains its stranglehold on government.

The media claiming Democrats are out of touch with mainstream America and need to change their platform policies is BS, Chris. They are further conning the American people. I will not trust any DNC chair candidate who parrots that line.

I will support any candidate for chair who understands the reality of the task and will work to expose the REAL culprits and not engage in blaming Dem policies to further amuse the Republican propaganda machine.

So far, I have seen the most awareness from Dean. Rosenberg would have to speak out more forcefully on these issues to satisfy me.

[Generator]

15. Exactly

Dean is the thorn we need. He tells the truth. The scariest thing in America today, telling the truth!

And Dean is smart as a fox. (outfox the Faux!) I think we need him, even as I was almost sure America is not ready for someone like Dean as President-and I commend him for putting the party and what he can accomplish above political personal gain.

[KoKo]

122. Agree blm...good points. (n/t)

[KoKo]

140. Primary Frontloading was a very bad idea. Many of us felt cheated out

of being able to vote for any of the Candidates. Frontloading seemed to hurt the process the opposite of what was intended to do by giving the Dem Frontrunners more time to be organized and pick up extra campaign funds.

Also many states were gerrymandered by the Republicans and their Primaries were held so late that they weren't even important. North Carolina, for instance had a primary just a week before the Democratic National Convention. All of the excitement and momentum was lost for the campaign because of that. This of course wasn't the DNC Chairman's fault that gerrymandering intefered with State Primaries but it's part of the overall picture that the DNC needs to be more organized and focused on what's going on in the states and how it can be confusing and disheartening to Dem voter enthusiasm to have Iowa and NH decide the candidate and not to be able to vote until just before the Democratic National Convention.

Front Loading must go. We need either Regional Primary Elections staggered over a few months or a "Super Tuesday" which is more inclusive and representative of all the states.

[Freddie Stubbs]

336. So far NONE of the candidates for DNC chair has said there things

And I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you.

[Eloriel]

367. Dean most certainly has --

talked about the media consolidation and his thinly-veiled contempt for the media.

He's well aware of the problems with voting machines -- I personally thrust a 50-page report into his hands when he was in Atlanta in August 2003, and when he was in Atlanta again last Friday, I got to ask him about it. He remembered it well, and commented on it. He has talked about the machines and understands quite a bit about them.

[Freddie Stubbs]

373. "Media consolidation" is a lot different than "GOP control of the media"

A distinction you won't hear any serious candidate for DNC chair say.

If he know about problems with the voting machines, why isn't he making speeches about it? :shrug:

[Dr Fate]

422. Huzzahhh!!! CLAP! CLAP! CLAP! CLAP!!!!

Ah- once again, you have crystalized my thoughts to a tee.

Love ya Chris, but I'm w/ Blm!!!

[CWebster]

12. Would this be a reflection of the insiders likely pick?

Most likely, he wouldn't be a traitor to his class, after all.

[Fabio]

13. I dont think so.

It seems institutional support is very much split between Governor Dean and Martin Frost.

[flobee1kenobi]

26. The time for being moderate has passed

The longer we are "moderate" dems, the longer Republicans hold the office
The Democratic party needs to grow a pair and go after the Republican party like thay have done to us for the past 12 years.

We're all here in support-but we're feeling like the party has let us down. Stand up and fight! There's plenty to fight for, we just needs someone who is willing to fight.

[Freddie Stubbs]

174. The 'insiders' don't always agree

Some Democratic Leaders are back Roemer.

[crispini]

14. Thanks, Chris.

I agree with you WRT the DNC chair's policy positions. I couldn't give a bippity-boppity-boo about the DNC chair's personal positions because I don't see that they have a lot of impact either on the candidates' policy positions, or on the Democratic national platform. (Although, not being a DNC insider, I don't really know if that statement is correct.)

I've been a big fan of Rosenberg ever since I heard about the famous Rob Stein "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" Powerpoint (do you know any way we can get a copy of that?)

I also really like this quote from Rosenberg:
''If you're a 32-year-old state legislator and you're a conservative, you get to go through all these philosophical trainings,'' Rosenberg said. ''You get all these organizations that are trying to put you through their leadership institutes. You get all these groups sending you their materials.

''Now, you're a 32-year-old Democratic state legislator, and what you do is you learn how to check boxes,'' he continued. ''You learn how to become pro-choice. You learn how to become pro-labor. You learn how to become pro-trial lawyer. You learn how to become pro-environment. And you end up, in that process, with no broad philosophical basis. You end up with no ideas about national security. You end up with no ideas about American history and political theory. You end up, frankly, with no ideas about macroeconomics and economic policy, other than that it's scary."

(Source: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/12/6/112326/490)

I'd be happy with Dean OR Rosenberg, IMO.

BUT, here is my #1 concern. There is a HUGE grassroots effort around Dean. If the party chooses Dean, it will be considered a signal that they are serious in the committment to the grassroots and that they are serious about the fight.

If the party does NOT choose Dean, I am concerned that this campaign will perceive it as a negative: "not choosing Dean" instead of the more positive "choosing X because of Y."

That's really what I'm worried about WRT the next DNC chair.

Thanks for coming by! :hi: Always nice to see you post!

[Stinky The Clown]

244. Thank you for a thoughtful post!

Mainly the last part, after the link to Kos.

I happen to support Dean "on the merits", but also worry about what a choice other than Dean might mean for the party's chances to win back the grass roots, particularly the left part of the party (who have for years been left **out** of the party!)

[Raksha]

430. You made an excellent point.

>>BUT, here is my #1 concern. There is a HUGE grassroots effort around Dean. If the party chooses Dean, it will be considered a signal that they are serious in the committment to the grassroots and that they are serious about the fight.<<

Right now the Democratic Party needs to send a clear and unequivocal message that it supports the grassroots, and choosing Dean would be a very effective way of sending that message.

[IrateCitizen]

18. I heard Rosenberg on Marty Kaplan's show this weekend...

... and was certainly impressed by his ideas for not just winning elections, but for shifting the attitude of the country back away from the right. I especially liked his promise to help bring along media outlets on the Democratic side, like Air America Radio, by helping to fund them through DNC donors.

As far as STRATEGY goes, he's a guy I could find a lot of upsides to.

However, as far as ISSUES go, the one that I cannot get past is his unflinching support for the war on Iraq. Reading statements he made prior to the invasion just makes me want to :puke:.

Would I seriously object to him as DNC chair, a position mainly about strategy and fundraising? No. Would I object to him setting policy and issue stances for the party? Absolutely.

[blm]

32. Thanks, IC. I didn't hear about Kaplan's show.

If Rosenberg GETS IT about the media, that would be half the battle for my support.

[ChrisHeinz]

39. He Certainly Does

Indeed, he and the NDN introduced me to Rob Stein and his work.

[XemaSab]

236. He makes you want to

vote for Ralph Nader in 2008?

[Justitia]

19. about point # 2...

I think it IS important to know the policy positions of the titular head of our party, it outlines those Democratic values he / she deems a priority.

At this point in time, I think it is MOST important that we clearly define our shared values as a party, with election strategy flowing FROM that, not vice versa (i.e., concentrating on blocking & tackling as a priority over our mission stmt).

When we clearly articulate our shared Dem values we operate from a position of progressive strength, not defensive response, in an effort to "win".

That is why Gov Dean has my vote over the party 'strategists'.

Thanks for dropping by :hi:

[crispini]

36. You wrote:

I think it is MOST important that we clearly define our shared values as a party,

I'd totally agree with your post. However, I'm interested in your use of the word values. It seems to me that posters above are using the candidate's position on the Iraq war as a sort of "values" litmus test.

However, Lakoff points out, this isn't a "value," this is an ISSUE. Lakoff writes: We came together because of our moral values: care and responsibility, fairness and equality, freedom and courage, fulfillment in life, opportunity and community, cooperation and trust, honesty and openness.

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1119-22.htm

IMO, it IS important for us to articulate our shared Dem values, but there is still room for us to differ in our positions on the issues.

[Justitia]

47. "values" versus "issues"

To me, our shared Dem values are like those Lakoff describes, just slightly more defined:

the individual's right of liberty unfettered, the community's responsibility to the furthering of society as a whole, social justice for the individual and in the collective subset of society, etc.

Once we define those democratic values (our mission stmt), then we can apply them to the issues (war, reproductive rights, civil liberties, etc).

The issues may evolve, but our Dem values will be the bedrock of our party. And yes, while there is room for dissent on our response to the issues, we will approach them through the same sense of purpose, what we VALUE as Democrats.

[DaedelusNemo]

339. Yes... just got done saying something very similiar

My list would be liberty and justice for all, and a commitment to the American Dream - opportunity for anyone willing to make the effort.

[ClarkUSA]

20. Simon Rosenberg would make a good COO

but Dean has my vote for titular Chairman. Thanks for your point 1 disclaimer, but it did seem to me and many others that your stepfather was "influencing the process" earlier when he was advocating his good friend Gov. Vilsack (and earlier, Jeanne Shaheen) to run as DNC Chairman.

As for my thoughts on point 2, I am concerned about the DNC chair's own policy positions, because they must resonate with the Democratic base or the Party will
risk widespread alienation among the very people who are its backbone of support.

BTW, how does Simon stand on election reform? I ask because all the strategy in the world will not allow us to win in the future without it. Or is he ignoring the need for it and just giving lip service to the need for verified voting like so many in the Party leadership?

[henslee]

21. Rosen who? Dean is a rockstar. Dean is trusted. Dean is a fighter

who's recent bounce back from the fabricated Scream sabotage to conquer talk shows and public events was itself an impressive victory. He is a charming and friendly, grass roots hero ahead of his time and right now, grass roots is ready to go mainstream. Lets milk this cow before the milk goes bad! Dean is proven. He recently demonstrated his clout when Dashell needed cash in a hurry -- Just a word from him and Deaniacs reached into their pockets and gave bigtime. And with Dean campaigning for this job, this is a no brainer. In this celebrity obsessed age of zero attention spans, it doesn't hurt to go with the guy who has cult like appeal. Go with the rockstar. They do. We can play the rockstar card, too.

[crispini]

37. LOL, "rockstar."

I love it. I hadn't heard that before. Good post.

[PassingFair]

312. Check this out for some light reading, Mr. Heinz:

http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/deanfordnc

And there are more like it circulating!

Now, show me the groundswell for Mr. Rosenberg.
Oh, that's right, there is none.

The party will be in REAL jeopardy if Dean does not get the slot.
Much money and shoeleather will vanish.
You will find it at work through DFA and MoveOn.

Of course, this is not a threat from a lone, looney poster on a web site, just an observation from a democrat, active in local politics who is calling it like I see it.
Thanks for your interest.

[zann725]

395. It needs to be Dean, I agree. For all the reasons listed above...

He's a Fighter, he has a LARGE loyal Following, he's a "do'er" at the Grassroots level...which is the only way to win this.

And he won't take any guff...AT ALL!

Dean for the DNC!! I second that motion!

[Merlot]

22. I appreciate that you are intersted in our opinions

As for point number 2 - I think it is vitallly important that the DNC chairs policy positions match those of the stated goals of the Democratic Party. I can't take another "I personally don't believe in abortion, but support it" candidate. Who can trust someone like that to stick to principles they don't whole heartedly agree with? And what does it say about the Democratic Party if their Chair doesn't believe in the partys' principles?

I realize this may not be exactly the point you are making in #2, but it is vitial that we have someone who is outspoken on the issues, and strong, giving us a clear direction. That may be why so many here are supporters of Dr. Dean. He is straightforward and gives the impresion he won't back down on issues that are important to us.

We cannot be forever blocking and tackling. We must put them on the defensive. We must have a strong offense, and that will be our willingness to stand behind our principles.

Thank you Chris, for taking the time to listen to us and gather opinions. Although you have stated your preference, I'm glad to see that you still value input.

[LittleClarkie]

126. Actually, it's not that we don't believe in abortion, but support it

It's that we don't believe in abortion for ourselves, but refuse to force our beliefs on someone else, much less legislate our beliefs on someone else.

I support that stance. I appreciated it when I found out my candidate did too. And I bet if we took a poll, we find that there are alot of "personally wouldn't chooose abortion, but supportive of choice" people. I suppose it's too "nuanced" but that is honestly where some of us are at.

Actually, I wish the dialog could be moved to pregnancy prevention rather than abortion.

And I think more should be done to frame the discussion. During Clinton's two terms, there were fewer abortions nationwide than under Bush. There are fewer abortions in Massachusetts than anywhere else (IIRC). What's the secret? Hope.

[housewolf]

200. I support the right to choose an abortion

but not necessarily abortion in and of itself. There's a difference that that I think is important to stress - I/we support the RIGHT, not necessarily the action. Same with the selling of pornography, cigarettes, alcohol, going to church, listening to some particular genre of music, etc - plug in whatever activity you don't personally favor but think other people have the right to.

[w4rma]

23. Rosenburg: "The war was a good idea."

I support Rosenburg as a replacement for the DLC leadership, not as a replacement for the DNC leadership.

http://mars.typepad.com/no_retreat_no_surrender/2004/11/the_case_agains.html

[SOS]

176. Rosenberg

not only supported the invasion of Iraq, but is still defending Bush on it.

From Fox News Channel, speaking to John Gibson:

“The President was resolute and strong in his decision to go to war."

This was said on September 9th, 2004.

While I appreciate Chris Heinz's input here, I can't support someone who backs Bush on the Iraq occupation.

[Generator]

24. Regarding point 2

As I couldn't find Rosenberg's position explicit on the links I looke at:

The war in Iraq is very complex. I'm not sure Kerry or even Dean would be having the troops coming home. But most importantly, there needs to be honest accounting of the reality. Iraq is not improving and appears to be descending into absolute chaos. It's becoming routine-with the death tolls and bombings-and it would be nice if anyone could tell us what we are truly going to achieve-and how many more dead Americans and Iraqis are worth it to us forcing them to have "freedom." Not to mention the financial cost. Ultimately-to take a stand that the troops must come home is going to make sense-and the American people will come to support that. I hope it doesn't take ten years. It really is Deja Vu all over again.

Regarding choice-I don't think the party needs to equivocate on that one iota. Of course it matters what the chair's personal position is-as a woman, I simply will not support anyone that wants to erode my rights.

[AmerDem]

25. Dean has proven he would stand with us through thick and thin!

Sadly, we can't say that about many other so called leaders of this party, your step dad included!

I hope Kerry enjoyed his Christmas party talking with schmucks like Dennis Miller when we the base haven't seen him anywhere since he went back on his word and conceded.

[ChrisHeinz]

30. Well, I cant believe that this gets pen

I was at the party too. It is held every year. JK has known Maria for 30 years. And I havent seen it mentioned anywhere that Bruce Springsteen, Rob Reiner and alot of other committed Dems were there too.

[AmerDem]

40. That's all well and good but

you have to start understanding how we the base, the ones who phone banked, donated money, got as many people to register as possible felt when Kerry conceded hours after John Edwards step out to say they will fight for every vote.

Many here have had enough with this corrupt system. We want real leadership. We want people with guts and a voice to step up and call voting fraud, FRAUD! Many of the leaders that have our party in this mess need to start emulating the actions of John Conyors.

[ChrisHeinz]

44. I know that's how some people feel.

I do.

At the same time, I didn't exactly nap through the election. I consider myself and my opinion as part of the base's too.

[kerrygoddess]

61. Part of the base...

Thanks for the head's up on this Chris and the reminder that you and all Kerry supporters were part of the base.

We all worked hard during this election, regardless of who our initial support went to.

Sometimes I think that people may not understand that those of us who supported JK from the gate feel a profound sense of loss. Yet, we're all still here fighting the good fight.

It's great to see you on here again. Please send regards to your mother and JK from the Kerry "First Blogger".

[AmerDem]

64. I'm well aware of that

understand I'm giving you the opinion of many average everyday people who belong to this party.

I suggest in your travels you let these top party people know just how important the issue of election reform is to our party. This message has to be forced through the MSM filter at every level and every chance possible if we have any hope of taking back this country.

[Q]

160. I suppose anyone in the party can be considered part of the 'base'...

...but the larger 'base' is the working men and women...many just scraping by with jobs that don't pay a living wage and healthcare costs skyrocketing...that is IF they're lucky enough to even have health insurance. Their jobs are being outsourced and downsized. Unions are extinct. Public schools are underfunded and neglected. America is literally falling apart at the seams and the Dem leadership is still in Business As Usual mode.

With all due respect...you may be part of the 'base'...but you're also one of the 'haves' and most of the base consists of the 'have-nots'. When was the last time you had to go without healthcare? When was the last time you had a hard time paying the mortgage or make a choice between paying a bill or buying prescriptions?

It seems to me the Party Leadership is out of touch with the base and has no idea about what's going on out here in the trenches. They make decisions ( like DNC chair) based on political opportunism and playing it safe rather than choosing someone who will fight for the have-nots. They cooperate with the corrupt Bush government or turn a blind eye to some of the most self-serving, anti-democratic legislation this country has ever seen. They don't even bother to go on the record in opposition as Bush and his cronies run America into the ground.

Kerry simply added insult to injury when he ran away from the battle for election reform. And this after he couldn't give a direct answer about his support for an illegal, aggressive war that had nothing to do with the 'war on terror'. He had a chance to lead by example. He simply failed to come through and fight for the people. And now...like the rest of us in the 'base' have to do each and every day of our lives...he must suffer the consequences of his actions. Money and social status can't buy loyalty (except in the GOP).

Thanks for listening.

[seaglass]

360. Do you know how many working class men and women

voted for Bush?

People on this site need to stop excluding others by defining what they think "the base" is - and I notice without fail that those defining the base are always part of the group.

[Q]

399. Nah...I think it's the other way around...

...the 'party insiders' have excluded the base. I think it's absolutely absurd that some Democrats don't seem to know who is in their 'base'. It's as if the New Democrats are being intentionally obtuse about it to give themselves an out when they pander to the phantom swing voters.

I've been a Democrat for over thirty years and the BASE has always been the same...that is until our party started moving to the right in the 90s and suddenly the base became the 'middle class' and the working classes became invisible.

The Dem leadership should just come right and say that they don't want to be the 'party of the people'. That way we can find a party that wants to fill this role and we can all stop pretending.

[henslee]

167. It's ridiculous to make as stink about JK attending a Maria/Arnie party...

Beyond attending for social reasons, CA is an important state for Dem. politics. His presence at the Gov's bash seems to me a good thing. Now if you told me he went on a hunting trip with Scalia and Cheney, I'd worry.

Thought you handled yourself well throughout the campaign. I can only imagine the pressures you've had to deal with. Glad you post here.

[XemaSab]

246. So seriously

There's a lot of debate on DU about whether Kerry is fighting the Ohio election results "behind the scenes." Is this true or a rumor?

[Name removed]

368. Deleted message

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

[arwalden]

369. Oh Brother!

:eyes:

[Name removed]

379. Deleted message

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

[blue neen]

384. Regardless of one's socio-economic status,

losing one's father at a very young age is not considered a privilege.

We'll never forget your father here in PA, Chris. We desperately miss him.

I have just started to research the people who are running for chair.
At this point, I am inclined to support Gov. Dean. He has a vitality and presence that is sorely needed. I also do not support this insane war.

I am keeping an open mind, however, since I know very little about the other candidates. Thank you for your post and for keeping us informed!

[burn the bush]

227. ditto

[noamnety]

27. I'd like more info

I like Dean, but I'm not unwilling to learn more about other candidates. I don't know much about Rosenberg. Chris, maybe you can fill us in here.

1. In his vision statement, he says "If we are to win again as Democrats we must adopt a different and better path and we must do three things and do them well. First is we must create a new agenda, a new vision, a new argument that embraces the very best of what it means to be a Democrat, that makes the word “Democrat” work in all 50 states ..."

What does he mean by creating a new agenda? He summarized that so much that it's coming across to me as his vision is that we need a new vision - but I'm sure he means something much more solid and specific than that; do you know what his thoughts are behind that statement?

2. There is a mention on the site of him working to elect democrats in 12 different states. I'd like to know which democrats he helped support.

[GreenPartyVoter]

28. Excellent questions!

----------------------------------------------------------
Save our country one town, county, and state at a time!
http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/electionreform.htm#why

[peacetalksforall]

29. With respect, since Simon Rosenberg isn't exactly a household

name, I will study. However, support from the WSJ is a grand negative for me.

[ChrisHeinz]

33. Support from WSJ Ed Pages is not a bonus for any Dem.

How can I argue that?

[WI_DEM]

31. I agree with you that policy considerations of the DNC Chair is

secondary. After all as Chair he or she will be representing all Democrats--regardless of how they voted on the Iraqi War resolution. Rosenberg is my second choice--my first remains Howard Dean. I think the party needs a strong wake up call right now. The current chairman of the DNC is a wizard at finance, but in my opinion, he has not effectively been able to coordinate a strong Democratic message in opposition to the Bush Administration. The Republicans are in a much stronger position now in Congress than when he first assumed the chairmanship. I think Dean can coordinate a strong message of standing up to Bush and effectively raise money--especially among the grass roots. He also recognizes that Democrats must start at the bottom and work their way up. His organization, DFA, got involved in races for county commissioner, auditor, insurance commissioner, state assembly, ect--these are where the future stars of the party will be coming from. I also like Dean's emphasize that we can't go on as "Red States and Blue States"--he actually has been saying that for quite a long time.

I also think that the national party has done a terrible job of not emphasizing two important details of the 2004 election which proves that Bush had no mandate: 1) John Kerry received the second biggest vote in the history of politics in this country--approaching 60 million. He received better than 48% of the vote in an election which saw a huge turnout of over 120 million citizens. This country is as divided as ever. Bush got no mandate. 2) Yes, Republicans gained ground in the congress of the US, but look at how well Democrats did in local races. Too little has been said about this, and the "liberal" media in this country just feeds the country the bull about a Bush mandate.

[proud patriot]

34. on point 2

I feel that policy is very important to those willing
to put leather to the pavement .

[ChrisHeinz]

35. Policy is very important

It will drive our energy for change. I just dont think the personal policy positions of the DNC Chair are as importnat as his or her ability to organize and bring folks together. At the end of the day, I believe the Chair should be a facilitator for Candidates and their positions, but not a candidate himself. From personal experience, I think Simon would excel at that. He gave me very precient advise about our efforts on capturing young voters in this election.

[janx]

42. From Dean's announcement today:

But most of all, together, we have to rebuild the American community. We will never succeed by treating our nation as a collection of separate regions or separate groups. There are no red states or blues states, only American states. And we must talk to the people in all of these states as members of one community.

That word—'values'—has lately become a codeword for appeasement of the right-wing fringe. But when political calculations make us soften our opposition to bigotry, or sign on to policies that add to the burden of ordinary Americans, we have abandoned our true values.

We cannot let that happen. And we cannot just mouth the words. Our party must speak plainly and our agenda must clearly reflect the socially progressive, fiscally responsible values that bring our party—and the vast majority of Americans—together.


I agree with you that it's important.

[underpants]

54. The blocking and tackling are the key

It really doesn't matter what your point is what matters is getting it out. Okay so we got "beat" this time ( wink ) but a HUGE operation was put in place and those who oppose W and the words he reads are not going to go away. I can tell you from my own experiences here in Virginia people of every kind (and some Republicans) came out to get rid of Bush. We block and tackled well, especially considering the state of "the team" just a year before but we have to do better.

I am not that familiar with Simon but I will look him up.

ON EDIT- f**k it put me in charge I'll make a complete a** out my self (take them on) and get EVERYONE pissed off and really get this ball rolling.

[CWebster]

55. How can policy not matter?

If raising money is all that matters, than the present party chair fills the role perfectly.

The problem IS the Democrat's mushy sense of identity. How can the chairman not have a sense of that? Isn't that the point of "new ideas"? Who are we? Where do we stand? What can we SELL? Where is our appeal?

I would prefer a direct straight talker who has populous appeal rather than a policy wonk consultant for the corporate class. The fact that he advised the Kerry campaign about appealing to the youth vote--which turned out to be a no-show...well...

If personal positions didn't matter, might as well select a Republican.

[ChrisHeinz]

58. Have to disagree with you on the Youth Vote

we won it 54 - 44

voter turnout in 2000 for ages 18-29 was 41.9%
voter turnout in 2004 for ages 18-29 was 52%
In battlegrounds, turnout was 64%, above the national average in 2000, but slightly below overall turnout (68%)

see below for details:
http://www.civicyouth.org/PopUps/Release_Turnout2004.pdf

[CWebster]

78. But

it was supposed to hinge the election, wasn't it?

Instead of the RR? But then, the Republican base wasn't getting mixed messages all over the place.

Think of how many more there could've been if their was a clear opposition on Iraq.

Positions are the values.

[cestpaspossible]

209. How lame.

He responds with facts that show you to be wrong and you act like he didn't say anything you need to respond to. :thumbsdown:

[w4rma]

245. Agreed. Talking *past* someone doesn't help. Chris's facts about the youth

vote are correct.

[CWebster]

355. GARBAGE

Did you see the youth vote swamp the election? Or was it the Christian Right that has got the Dems scrambling on their values-morals message.

Of course youth is going to go proportionally Dem. That is a given, but they didn't swing the election as anticipated.

[Leafy Geneva]

452. Sorry, wrong again

In poll after poll, Ronald Reagan consistently runs strongest not among his fellow senior citizens or even middle-aged voters. Instead, his popularity rating is highest of all among those who are 18 to 24 years old.

http://www.time.com/time/archive/preview/0,10987,955304,00.html">Reagan's Youthful Boomlet

[Midlodemocrat]

81. A question for you Chris

Is there a particular reason that you are not supporting Dean for this? I am willing to look at Rosenberg, as I don't know much about him, but I am really leaning toward Dean.

[proud patriot]

65. I completely agree with that Chris

I know very little about Simon , and feel
very dedicated to Dean .

I will try and learn a bit about Simon , but
I have to admit what I learn would have to be
pretty fantastic to take my allegiance from Dean.

He's the reason I came back to the Democratic Party.

[ChrisHeinz]

76. I dont think you or I need a change in allegiance.

And I didn't come on the board to change minds. Honestly. Just to explain myself so Simon's announcement wouldnt exist in a vacuum. I got to know and enjoy Gov Dean personally over the last year. I respect him very much, not something I would have said on the eve of the Caucus last year.

hopefully both will have meaningful roles going forward. Indeed, it may not be Simon's time now. I have no idea. But I am proud to support his bid and I am certain he is a great, if underappreciated, backstage leader of the party whose best days are ahead of him.

[proud patriot]

290. Sorry I went out for the afternoon and evening

Allegiance was too strong a word for me to use .

:shrug: I hope we can best utilize the strengths
of our brightest stars

[welshTerrier2]

105. fundamentally wrong

this, i think, demonstrates exactly where we disagree over your second point ... it's a perfect example of how we see the "right" process ...

you stated: I believe the Chair should be a facilitator for Candidates and their positions, but not a candidate himself.

i do NOT believe that the Chair should be a facilitator of Candidates ... I believe the Chair should be a facilitator for the Party's core values and its positions on key issues ... every Democrat with a public voice should fight for our core values and beliefs ... and that includes not just the Chair but all our candidates as well ...

this is the central problem I've had with the Party's approach and I believe it's why we are a minority party ... what you advocate is that we put the "cart before the horse" ... it's backwards ... we need to start with who we are ... and everyone who speaks for the Party must be deeply committed to its central themes and highly skilled in articulating them ...

the Chair is "not the candidate", every single spokesperson for us must be "the candidate" ... because we are not selling a person; we're selling a Party and it values and its policies and its ideas ...

[crispini]

123. Hm, interesting.

Food for thought.

But isn't there room in the party for a high-level strategist? You don't see KKKarl Rove or KennyBoy Mehlman out in front of the cameras much, and Rosenberg would be their equivalent.... Strategist should be focussed on strategy, not values and policy. You can bet your sweet bippy that KKKarl doesn't give a rat's ass about WHAT the Rethuglicans actually DO, he just wants to win.

[welshTerrier2]

144. a couple of points in response ...

first, OK ... if we're going to "hide" the new Chair away and only let him have access to the "smoked filled rooms" where big money deals are negotiated, policies are not as essential ... but that hasn't been the only role of the Chair ... the Chair is also a spokespersion ... a very public spokesperson ... and just what kind of strategy will our "boy genius" develop if they are not selected based on our values and our views on the issues ... shouldn't that be the first ingredient in developing the strategy ???

what you are arguing for suggests that we should define a strategy in the absence of defining who we are first ... do you really want to condone a process that puts the DNC Chair in a back room to come up with a plan to win regardless of what it is we're "winning" ?? is that what's being advocated here? defining a winning strategy rather than defining what we're fighting for first and then determining how to achieve our goals?

if the republican model of victory at any cost is what the DNC plans to peddle, I'll shop my values and issues around somewhere else ... let's hope they don't make that mistake ...

[crispini]

187. Nah, what I'm arguing is that it's not necessarily the job

of the person who defines the strategy to also define the mission.

Isn't the mission defined in the Democratic Party Platform and in the 50 State Party Platforms? By all of the delegates to the party's conventions? IMO, that's the mission. The *people* tell the strategy boys where we wanna go, and the strategy boys figure out how to get there.

And when I'm saying strategy boys, I'm not really saying that this is a "smoke filled room, big money deal" type of thing.

IMO it goes like this: Mission: (Set by us). We want to win the war. Strategy: We'll raise money from the grassroots, listen to Lakoff, etc. Tactics: Deploy money in all 50 states. Etc.

:shrug: Just my thoughts.

[welshTerrier2]

199. i'm trying to understand ... i really am ...

i'm not sure we're on the same page yet ... i AGREE with you that the person who defines the strategy should NOT DEFINE the mission ... that's not what i've been trying to say ... in fact, i'm trying to say almost the opposite ... I agree with you that the mission has to be defined first ...

but that's my point ... are we just going to hire a technician now to fulfill some eventual definition of exactly what the mission is ???

what i'm trying to say is that:

1. our platform process stinks ... it needs to be much more open to the grassroots (i.e. all registered Democrats) ... i don't know enough of the current machinations but i assure you nobody ever asked me to offer my opinion on Iraq ... perhaps certain key things should be defined by referendum ... i'm not sure ... and i also think that many issues I care deeply about are not adequately discussed or even mentioned in the platform ... go read my post on journalism that i wrote earlier today ... not even on the Party's radar ... i don't care if people agree with me ... but it's not even an issue for the Party ... it's crazy ... and exactly where do we go for a lively discussion on "corporatism" ?? i'm sure there is some kind of process in place and that some will defend it ... in the end, if activists feel they don't have a voice (not control but a voice), what then is the measure of the current platform process ???

2. i would not want someone as DNC Chair who had either made statements contradicting the eventual platform or not being deeply committed to it ... if i'm going to hire someone to implement my goals, i want to know they have a track record fighting for those goals ... perhaps any good lawyer can defend you but i'd sure prefer to have one who had spent a lifetime fighting for the cause that led to my arrest ... when a friend had a "draft problem" during Vietnam, we got him William Kunstler, not Perry Mason ...

the key point is that I believe the Party has not defined who we are ... we are a loose affiliation of policy wonks ... there is no central core from which issues and policies eminate ... and we have failed to sit down with all Democrats to work through the ultimate definition of what we're fighting for ... ABB was the rallying cry; not here's who we are and what we're fighting for ... we have homework to do and staffing up before we do it leads me to believe that those currently in control believe the mission statement has already been written ... if the Party's last platform statement represents the Party's next platform statement, i believe many ABB'ers won't be around next time ... I still hold out hope that a grassroots energy will democratize the Party ... but time is growing very short on this and we're headed for a catastrophy if those in power fail to see this ... so, open all the doors to anyone who wants to participate ... then, and it won't be easy, put it to a vote ... not a vote of Party insiders but a vote of any registered Democrat who wants to vote ... and finally, select people, including the Chair, with a track record of deep knowledge and committment to the positions we espouse ... otherwise, we might be hiring a shoe salesman to sell our ideas ...

hope this is clearer ...

[crispini]

206. Good post.

Re: platform. The platform of each state is defined by the Platform Committee, whose members attend the state convention. Each Senate District (that's state-house senate district, not federal) can elect 1 member to the Platform Committee.

So, bottom line, in order to have input into the platform, you'd need to be a Democratic party precinct chair, or give your input to your local precinct chair who could then take it to the state convention. At least that's how it goes for the state platforms, I'm not sure about the national level platform.

It does seem a bit elaborate, doesn't it? Huh.

Anyway. I have some more thoughts, but I gotta go, so I'll come back later, k? I'm enjoying this conversation. :)

[welshTerrier2]

299. c'mon back and we'll talk some more ...

i'm enjoying the conversation as well ...

and i would welcome others to join in should anyone else have the urge ...

[crispini]

300. Ok, I'm back, finally.

I thought about this whole thread all the way home and through most of dinner, heh. I agree with your post, actually. Here's what I came up with, big-picture style:

I think this discussion revolves around the question: what is the role of the DNC chair?

Is it #1, the guy who embodies the face of the Dem party, who articulates the vision, who connects with the base, a sort of "uber-candidate?"

Or is it #2, the chief campaign strategist and fundraiser, a Karl-Rove-like figure, capable of sneaks and stratagems, a wily pol?

IMO, the reason why the grassroots are calling out for Dean is because they want the DNC chair to be #1, the embodiment of the Democratic party. (Which is why there is some doubt about Rosenberg because of his stance on the IWR and etc.)

Now, certainly, Dean has the right fiery, fight-back attitude which is needed. Certainly, Dean communicates well with a grassroots base of supporters. Certainly, Dean is, as another poster mentioned, a "rockstar." All very good.

However, moggie12 makes some good points in post #262. Is Dean *also* a wily politician, capable of seeing the subtleties and finesse? There, I'm not entirely convinced. There is a certain amount of "the game" to politics, and that's just reality.

I think we need both.

Therefore, I'm going to endorse Dean *and* someone else more of the "pol" variety -- Rosenberg, Frost, whoever. And I'm gonna write a letter to that effect to my DNC members. They'll probably think I'm wack, but what the hell. I think we need a firey leader for the base and I think we need our own Karl Rove too.

There, that was fun! :hi:

(Am I cheating by not picking one? Oh well. I am happy because I feel like -- for me, anyway -- I think I've sort of gotten at the argument behind the argument. I always like doing that.)

:toast: here's to us!

(edited for neatness)

[welshTerrier2]

321. litmus tests and judgment and respect , oh my ...

first, for your consideration, i posted the following (see below) in another thread that referenced Mr. Rosenberg's apparent statement that the "war in Iraq was good" ...

but i've also been doing some thinking about "litmus tests" ... litmus tests often get a bad rap (do people still say rap?) ... the bottom line for me is Iraq ... i went along with ABB just this once ... but looking at the horrors over there, i cannot continue to wear my Democratic Party t-shirt any longer if the party won't call for withdrawal in the very near future ... i have to draw the line somewhere on something and 100,000 dead Iraqis with no hope in sight seems like a more than reasonble place to do so ... if Mr. Rosenberg continues to advocate for the insanity in Iraq, he need not waste his time asking me to help the Party either financially or any other way ... whether policy is or isn't a central component of the Chairman's job, I can't in good conscience work for those who are fighting for more atrocities ... so there's my number one litmus test ... and don't get me started on Dr. Dean's views on Iraq ... i'm not totally comfortable there either but i think there's hope for the evolution of his position ...

your reference to picking 2 Chairs with slightly different roles reminds me of an old Firesign theatre routine ... i won't elaborate unless you're very familiar with them ... anyway, it seems very clear to me that this is the Party's hidden agenda and i don't like it one bit ... and why is that? because anything that smells of "the old guard" smells rotten to me ... i think the politics have been way too conservative and very poorly executed ... the bottom line is that i don't trust the Party's insiders ... i don't believe they will really open up the process ... fwiw, I did not support Dr. Dean in the primaries ... i respect his grassroots efforts but i'm not so comfortable with him that i'm confident shared power will give me a voice ... i think we need reform from top to bottom ... and i think that this is not the time to compromise with some type of Dean-Rosenberg ballet ... you need to throw out the moldy cheese before you put the new cheese in the same container ...

anyway, here was the other post i referred to ... it's basically a response to those who argued that Mr. Rosenberg's pro war statement doesn't matter because policy in the Chair position is inconsequential ...


Title: judgment and respect

the Democratic Party needs some healing ... it needs it badly and it needs it now ...

some have argued that Mr. Rosenberg's "the war in Iraq is good" statement is irrelevant because the DNC Chair is not a policy position ... i strongly disagree but for the sake of argument, let's accept that point ... so, we look past ideology as a requirment for the job ... OK so far ??

but then we look at the message this hawkish statement sends to those who already feel alienated from the Party's platform and many of the issues Kerry ran on ... is it unreasonable to expect the new Chair to reflect a deep understanding of the divide in the Party and be very cautious of statements likely to deepen the rift ??? what is the message to those who feel disenfranchised? is the message and the timing of Mr. Rosenberg's statement reflective of the judgment he plans to demonstrate as Chair and the respect and sensitivity he plans to show for those who don't agree with him?

even if you look past the ideology embodied in Mr. Rosenberg's statement, and I don't, Mr. Rosenberg exercised poor judgment and poor timing in saying what he said ... if these are the strategic skills he brings to the table, ideology aside, i hope we choose someone else ...

[crispini]

375. You made a good point

when you, in effect, question Rosenberg's "pol" skills when you point out "what is the message that this sends to the grassroots."

That's worth considering.

The thing is, I'm not sure that Rosenberg sees the position of the DNC chair the way everyone out here on the internet who is clamoring for Dean does. I think the people who are clamoring for Dean see Dean as the face of the party and the leader of the grassroots.

I think Rosenberg sees it as the master strategist, not as the face of the party. From his website: "What we need at the head of the DNC is someone who can take on Rove, Reed, Norquist and Mehlman. Someone who understands how to defeat the modern Republican machine at its own high-level strategic game.... What we need at the head of the DNC is someone who can take on Rove, Reed, Norquist and Mehlman. Someone who understands how to defeat the modern Republican machine at its own high-level strategic game."

That's what I'm really struggling with here. What's the role of the DNC Chair? I'm not sure I know yet.

[welshTerrier2]

377. resolving the "role" conflict ...

i'd be very appreciative if you would post a response to this post i made this morning:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1488164&mesg_id=1488164

perhaps we could continue our discussion there ... this thread has so many posts it's taking too long to load ...

[CWebster]

356. How can he be another Rove?-

If he may agree with his policies?

[AntiCoup2K4]

258. Actually, Mehlman was on TV a lot in the last year....

As was Terry McUseless. And that will be the case every election year, including the midterms when Congress is up for grabs.

And they are frequent guests on the Sunday talk shows if any major issue (i.e abortion or gay marriage ammendments) are being debated nationally.

And this is precisely why we need a fighter in this position. Terry McUseless was not that person, and I doubt very much that any DLC'er would be. I know Roemer definitely would not after seeing him in action last Sunday.

Sorry Chris, but I gotta go with Dean.

[CWebster]

357. And oddly enough...they were debating the issues...

as if the issues didn't matter. :eyes:

[candy331]

204. Well put Terrier 2, I agree the message has to be a unified message

coming from all. It is just unnerving when you have to guess where a Dem stands. Surely no one agrees on all things just like in any family, members don't agree on everything but they do have a unified front and agree on the main things that holds the family together. If the trumpet sounds and the call is not distinct who will hear and know what the heck the sound of the call is about.

[JerseygirlCT]

354. I'm very concerned about someone, like Roemer

whose policy positions on something as important as women's reproductive rights might influence the strength of his fight. I want to be absolutely, positively sure that those in Democratic leadership positions have my back on issues like that.

Reproductive rights are a litmus test for me. Anyone comfortable with abandoning those is someone I cannot be comfortable with.

[Pastiche423]

38. No More Dem Warmongers!

“The President was resolute and strong in his decision to go to war. He may also have been wrong in the way they executed it”, Rosenberg said.

Dean is the answer, as has been stated over and over again by US Democrat-Oregon.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

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

[txaslftist]

43. "Rosen-who?" Nutshells this bad idea nicely.

Does Howard Dean get no credit at all for the grass roots energy he's brought back to this party?

Sheeesh. Ungrateful f**ers.

[ChrisHeinz]

49. You can do better than that.

Ungrateful f*#kers?

[NewYorkerfromMass]

73. LOL! Welcome to the real DU Chris!

Some people are just looking for rock-stars (aka Dean) to lead the party!
You reasons for supporting Rosenberg are good and I will take a closer look at him.

And I don't care what anyone says, JK is STILL the best in my book, as is your mom, and I (for one) will be reporting for duty if he decides to run again in '08!

[WI_DEM]

138. It's nice that at least Chris can support someone else without

knocking Dean but you want to continue your animosity from the campaign.

[RetroLounge]

228. "continue your animosity from the campaign"

are you surprised? I'm not.

RL

[Name removed]

316. Deleted message

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

[txaslftist]

77. Sure, Chris. I think I can

Out here in the sticks, among the rank and file, we've been complaining about how the Republican party has been taken over by the neocons, who are driving us toward eternal war and damn near fascism, wrapped in a bloody flag. We've also been complaining about how the democratic party has been similarly hijacked by corporate interests and wishy-washy leaders who don't remember their roots in the liberal/progressive 'base' of the party.

Howard Dean spoke to that 'base' during his primary campaign. He energized that base, and brought democratic fundraising FROM that base up to an all time high. In contrast to this fundraising and this effort, the corporate contribution to the democratic party was anemic. That base is against the war in Iraq, and said so from just about the beginning.

Howard Dean has done a lot for the democratic party, and he's done it by moving past 'business as usual' and into the progressivism that is where the party needs to go. He speaks clearly and directly and with enthusiasm about his vision of democracy.

Meanwhile, the party in Washington has seemed so ambivalent about who they are as democrats that those of us in the base hardly recognize them. Why did only Ms. Boxer have the courage to stand up and be counted? Why is the party leadership talking compromise on issues like abortion and choice? After all that has been exposed in terms of failures of intelligence leading us into Iraq, why are the Republicans the first ones talking about withdrawal?

Howard Dean can still effectively mobilize the base of the party and bring in the rank and file with enthusiasm and energy. The reason is because we know him and can identify what he stands for. He's brought people TO the party, instead of driving them to the Greens. He has charisma and energy and PEOPLE HAVE HEARD OF HIM.

It is NOT more important that the Chairman be intent on securing victories. It is more important that he stand for his principles rather than holding on to power no matter what compromise of principles that requires.

Democrats in Washington should be grateful that Dean is interested in the job. Hence my much abbreviated comments.

[janx]

86. Here in my sticks--Colorado--

many people feel the same way you do.

It would be great if more people posted about which specific sticks they reside in.

Where are your sticks?

[txaslftist]

103. I'm in the heart of red-state America...

Lubbock, Texas. The single reddest county in the universe, if you believe what they tell us on R/W radio. I just WISH I lived in Colorado. You guys did a bang up job in your state and local races, and are a true model to be emulated nationwide!

:yourock:

This issue has a lot of primacy for me, because I'm trying to figure out how to purplize a red bastion. Dean gives me hope, Clark gives me hope and some others.

[janx]

125. It was DFA, the DNC, and to an extent the DLC --WORKING TOGETHER

that made the difference in Colorado.

At one point when I was canvassing my neighborhood for Kerry via MoveOn, there were other people from the Kerry campaign competing with me for households! (We wound up coordinating our efforts.)

But gains came at the local and state levels, where the real grassroots were working very hard.

[bahrbearian]

234. YeeeHawwww, from the sticks in Washington State.

Upon Edit,, Ungrateful F**kers.

[AnnInLa]

45. I know ABSOLUTELY nothing about

internal politics inside the Democratic Party. I just know why I am a Democrat. I support anyone who does not advocate a more "centrist" approach to the issues. I support anyone who maintains that we must stand in stark contrast to the Republican agenda. I support anyone who clearly has a Progressive agenda. I support anyone who condemns preemptive military attacks against sovereign nations. I support anyone who truly stands for the equal treatment/repect of every citizen, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, handicap, age or income level. Hmmm, I think I support Howard Dean.

"When you trade your values for the hope of winning, you end up losing AND having no values...so you keep losing." Howard Dean, 2004

[crispini]

48. Here is another thought.

Does the party leadership realize the extent of the decay at the grassroots? My party county chair just laid off everyone in the county office. Why? Because no one will contribute any money to the county party. Why? Because this arrogant annoying person has pissed off every activist in town..... by HORRIBLE mismanagement (I could tell you a billion stories), and by being too moderate, and by not being enough of a fighter.

The old guard Dems are pissed off. The new activists that came into the party for 2004 are pissed off.

Can Rosenberg speak to us, the political geeks, the true-blue old-guard and the new and passionate? Does Rosenberg have the stones and the soul to do what needs to be done to really connect with those of us who get out there and put leather on the ground, who spend our own money on precinct flyers, and who are unbelievably sad, angry, annoyed, and pissed off?

Can he articulate a clear message to the party activists?

Because that's what needs to happen, from our perspective.

[missouri dem 2]

293. I've got to agree.

The Democratic Party is in sad shape and one reason is that we have

leaders who little in common with the rank and file. The last thing

we need is another Washington insider. They win whether we do or

not, Bob Schrum loses another election and pockets 5 million. I

could not support anyone for the DNC head who supports the illegal

and immoral war. Why do 50 million voters refuse to vote? Because

they can't see any difference between voting for Republican and

Republican Lite. We need leaders who reflect Populist values and

will fight for them.

[Bouncy Ball]

411. Crispini

are you talking about who I think you are talking about? THAT person needs to GO.

[GreenPartyVoter]

50. Chris, is Simon interested in the DNC using

ranked voting ballots and holding all primaries on the same day?

----------------------------------------------------------
Save our country one town, county, and state at a time!
http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/electionreform.htm#why

[ChrisHeinz]

56. I cannot answer that

Simon is in favor of clean elections, though I believe the leadership on this issue should originate in Congress and at the state level. I have thought alot about the primary calendar issue recently, and I must say that one thing that scares me about single day primaries is that I believe it would allow the media even more ability to drive the outcome. It would lesson the amount of real voter contact, Q&As, etc, that candidates are forced to give because of the scale of New Hampshire and Iowa contests. Also, to run nationally upfront in the primaries would cost even more money, and could lesson the abilitiy of upstarts/underfunded candidates to win.

just some thoughts.

[GreenPartyVoter]

68. Well I live in Maine and can tell you Clean Elections are a

beautiful thing. :^) As far as same-day primaries, I think using instant runoff ballots will help somewhat in terms of letting people choose their favorite candidate AND their pragmatic choice,

As far as not getting out to be in touch with the voters the candidates can still do that. Just hold the primary at the same time you always hold the LAST one now. :)

The money issue is of course, a concern, but I think it's still worth giving it a shot if we can make it work. Better than having so many voters in one's own party feeling as though they have no power because their primary comes too late, or because they have to agonize between the candidate they want to vote for vs. the "electable" one.

----------------------------------------------------------
Save our country one town, county, and state at a time!
http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/electionreform.htm#why

[Old and In the Way]

70. I agree.

Same day primaries will skew the advantage to the candidate with the most $ and best national organization.

What I would like to see is some of the larger states have their primaries at the front end so we can get a candidate that's reflecting the preference of a larger cross-section of Democrats.

Having Iowa and New Hampshire getting the lead may distort and bias the process against better qualified candidates, IMHO.

[crispini]

74. Yeah, I'd like to see the primary system mixed up some.

It's not fair to those of us whose primary Presidential vote never, EVER counts for sh*t.

[Old and In the Way]

84. How about a lottery system?

That would be an interesting twist and might provide a way to drive more interest locally.

[crispini]

92. Ooooo. I'd go for that.

Sounds like fun! Hang on, I'm putting it in the Crispini party platform.... :P

[ImADeanDem]

201. My idea for the primary schedule...

I think that the order of the primaries in each presidential election cycle should be based on the percentage of voter participation in the previous election cycle. That way, we'd "mix it up," while also encouraging increased voter participation! (I think it's shameful that we get such a small percentage of voter turnout every election.)

[DoYouEverWonder]

185. I think the Democratic primaries

worked pretty well last time, except for them being spread over to long a period of time. However, after June, they could have just cancelled the rest of the primaries and no one would have cared. I think a one or two month window for every state to have their primaries within, would work a lot better.

[w4rma]

63. I don't think anyone running is supportive of same day primaries. (nt)

[GreenPartyVoter]

69. Too bad. A lot of voters at the end of the primary cycle are.

----------------------------------------------------------
Save our country one town, county, and state at a time!
http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/electionreform.htm#why

[ChrisHeinz]

93. I think the best idea i have heard re: primaries

(and I have not thought thru all the ramifications) is that the primaries be held in the five closest states from the previous cycle (ie NH, Iowa, Minnesota, Ohio and New Mexico, I think). I think this would be great to tune up voters with message and organization.

[seaglass]

361. While I like your idea you can't dismiss the financial

implications so easily because that is the key to how it would or wouldn't work. National advertising for how long and at what cost? How well-funded would a candidate need to be in order to gain entry and what candidates might exclude themselves because they won't get a pay-off early in the cycle (the first primaries) to sustain them and help them gain momentum?

[Freddie Stubbs]

177. That would be something for the DNC to decide, not the Chairman

[theboss]

363. With that system, our nominee in 1992 may have been Harkin

I really hate the idea of a single-day primary for many of the reasons Chris listed. The first of which is that it would just kill the chances of little-known and underfunded candidates.

And forgive me if I misspeak, but I think a lot of the people calling for this are Dean supporters. They need to realize that Dean's early support was a historical anomaly. Normally, "underdog" candidates like McGovern, Clinton, or even Kennedy need time to build momentum during the primaries.

[Eloriel]

378. What Dean supports, in case you're interested

When he was in Atlanta and met with supporters last Friday, in advance of the weekend Regional DNC meeting, he mentioned that there's some committee or group exploring various options on how to hold the primary. One option he mentioned was having some of the larger states first -- and he may have said a few other things, but among his other remarks was CLEAR support for methods which allow small, previously unheard of other candidates a voice and a chance.

So I don't know where you stand or where you think Dean supporters stand, but that's where he stands and I stand with Dean.

[theboss]

382. I think some larger states should vote earlier

I don't have a problem with that. But I do think a lot of the sentiment here for a one-day primary or a change to the order is coming from Dean supporters who are still pissed about Iowa and New Hampshire and how they torpedoed Dean.

[fairfaxvadem]

51. Want to like Rosenberg, leaning toward Dean.

I'm sure Mr. Rosenberg is absolutely competent to do the job and clearly has the connections to do the requisite fundraising.

But, as has been commented elsewhere on DU and other blogs, the Democratic Consultant system has to be dismantled, pronto, among other things. Democratic Hill Staffers, when they leave, don't go to labor or other "Democratic" interests, they go work for corporate America (no offense to the Heinz Corp), so we're not even keeping our own people in the fold.

I want a DNC leader who can encourage people to remain in the fold with the rest of us and not profitting off of us first.

I'm just concerned that Rosenberg is not sufficiently removed from the "system" to enforce some serious changes on how the party operates.

Also, there needs to be a lot more work on the state dem party committess. By and large, the state parties are a shambles. You won't win too many more elections unless the state parties get their acts together.

[Old and In the Way]

52. Why I support Dean.

(1) He has name recognition and trust within the rank-and-file.
(2) His credentials for organizing and supporting Democrats running for National/State/Local offices is proven.
(3) He knows how to leverage the internet for fundraising and organizing. I think this may be one of the most important differentiaters in my preference.
(4) Howard's a fighter and he stood up to the Bush machine at a time when few Democrats were rising in opposition.
(5) He's a moderate, in spite of how corporate media might portray him.
(6) He has the experience of running and winning races....he understands that process firsthand.
(7) He's been elected Governor so he has proven executive skills.
(8) He knows that making our voting process transparent and auditable is the most important issue that we need to address...we win in the marketplace of ideas, but we lose when we vote on Republican machines and have our votes counted by Republican partisans.

I'm sure Rosenberg may be a good DNC chair....but I think Howard Dean would be a great one. Electing Howard would send a reinvigorating signal to the Party faithful and get us focused on the 2006 midterm elections. I think Howard would be a tremendous asset for us as we reset our sites on taking back Congress.

[TabulaRasa]

57. Yeah

Dean seems to be the best of the candidates I've heard. At the very least, I won't have to look at some namby-pamby turd for the next few years.

[candy331]

210. And to add # 9 to your post Old and in the Way

# 9 Dean didn't quit, He truly was supposed to be dead as far as politics was concerned. He was surrounded by enemies both in and outside the party(inside even more so) the scream was to be the dagger driven in his heart for the death knell. The man either has to be a fool or he really cares about the future of this country and I have not seen any evidence that he is a fool so the other must apply.
I really don't want Dean to run for chair because he will be hamstrung by inside party leaders and would be leaders. I do not believe(if he gets it) he will be effective in that position because too many insiders are status quo and afraid to buck the repugs and repug lites.

[TabulaRasa]

53. We need an intelligent, strategic-minded person

who wants to wage a Shermanesque war on the Republicans and to make their role in American politics negligible. Sorry, but this dude doesn't sound like such a person. Even though Dean might have the passion, he doesn't seem to have the political intelligence to wage such a war. Is there any candidate that meets my description?

[crispini]

59. Oooo. Could we get both?

Seriously, I've heard this bandied about somewhere before. Have two chairs, each in charge of different things. Possible?

[TabulaRasa]

97. I think the two qualities have to be in the same person

The passion has to drive the strategy. A strategic mind without passion can't do it. How would Dean and Rosenberg interact... it doesn't seem like a workable proposal. And plus, I don't think Rosenberg is such a strategic mind. His ideas about cultural infiltration are good, but kind of obvious.

[crispini]

143. Well, I honestly don't know about Dean and Rosenberg,

but I have to disagree with your point that "the two qualities have to be in one person." Just on principle.

Imagine the passionate pol (we'll call her A) who is the candidate... gives great speeches, in touch with values, knows programs and issues, really good at firing up the base. She's the gas in the car.

"A" has a political strategist on her campaign (we'll call her B) who is the planning person. "B" is the one who crunches the numbers, thinks about the demograpics, considers WHO is out there and HOW to reach them, and is in general, a sneaky strategic type. I'm thinking now of a certain project manager I know who could play her customers like a violin. She always knew how to finesse. She could play "the game."

IMO they're two WILDLY different skillsets, and are highly unlikely to coexist in the same person. But, if you get A and B working on the same team... POW!

Just my two cents... that was fun, I hadn't thought that out before. :D

[WI_DEM]

60. doesn't have the political intelligence?

He has won many elections. He has raised a ton of money. He has influenced the grass roots in this country. He has brought many who have never been in politics, into the process. If Howard Dean were not running for DNC who would be paying attention?

[Justitia]

71. And THAT question nails it!

"If Howard Dean were not running for DNC who would be paying attention?"

Ladies & Gentleman, I think we have our answer.

[TabulaRasa]

91. I agree with everything you said

but when I say political intelligence, I don't mean winning elections in Vermont and getting liberals excited. I'm talking about people who know propaganda. The Democrats need to learn how to fight Republican propaganda, play the media, and all their biases, craft a message that appeals to working, white Americans, without pandering. Republicans know how to play the media. They know how to appeal to working Americans. Sorry, but I didn't see Dean playing anyone ... he got played by the media. He lost an almost insurmountable lead, and the guy who won against him wasn't exactly a political genius, either. He was a national laughing-stock for a month. Yes, I agree the corporate media was completely unfair to him. But I'm sick of complaining about unfairness. We need to stop complaining and start winning.

[Justitia]

95. in consideration of your comments, WHO do YOU suggest? -eom

[TabulaRasa]

102. Sorry

I was actually asking other people to suggest. Does anyone know of a candidate who has such an outlook and qualities? If so, I'd probably support him. As I said, Dean is my choice for now ... even though I think he's less than perfect. Sorry if I offended you.

[txaslftist]

106. Bill Clinton?

Oh yeah...

nevermind.

[Justitia]

110. not offended at all

just wanted to know who you thought should get the job out of our current crop of candidates. You answered it.

Sometimes people are just not happy with any of the choices and I understand that, but it's simply not practical. It's kinda like not voting because "none of them ring my bell".

Here are our choices, now the question is - "which is the best choice?"

[TabulaRasa]

137. I only know

Dean, Rosenberg, Vilsack, and Roemer. It's no contest for me, from these candidates. I'm hoping there's someone better that I haven't heard of. I don't like Clinton. I really think he got lucky in having two really crappy candidates to run against. He certainly doesn't understand the media and propaganda. Let me give you an example. For a while, the media's big story was the Uranium-Niger 16 words. Bill Clinton called into Larry King for Bob Dole's birthday, and said something like, "every president makes mistakes", about Bush's lie in the state of the union. Now, either he was sabotaging Kerry, or he didn't understand that the media are so lazy, they are looking for an excuse not to cover a contentious story. A prominent Democrat saying "it's no big deal", was just the excuse they needed. The story was completely dropped (I believe) the next day. Now Bush, on the other hand, knew that if he denounced the Swift Boat story, the media would drop it ... so he denounced 527s generally, and the story went on far longer than it should have.

[RetroLounge]

242. Ding Ding Ding

"If Howard Dean were not running for DNC who would be paying attention?"

Exactamundo...

RL

[stellanoir]

62. Best Sheryl Crow imitation possible here. . .

"Run baby, run baby, run baby, run. . ."

But first do not forget to address that tiny little issue of election reform, without which I daresay, that our democracy is irretrievably lost and we are truly suffering under taxation without representation once again.

I simply hate it when that happens.

Kudos to your step dad. What a rip!

All the policy wonks in the world can't influence who does the counting and just how the votes are counted.

So we must rectify this as our first and foremost agenda, but the task is truly daunting.

[thedailyshow]

66. I wouldn't mind Rosenberg being DNC chair but

I would also support Dean as being DNC chair with Rosenberg hired as a consultant. I think that would be the best scenario. Rosenberg has excellent ideas, but he doesn't have the presence on the TV circuit that Dean does. Just my take on it.

[caligirl]

67. After a phone conference with Professor George Lakeoff

yesterday, I felt a chill down my spine as I was made aware the extent to which the GOP goes to train all its people in disseminating the correctly framed message out, using framing for policy strategy, strategic use of framing to reshape the thinking of the voting public and MSM. Such as Bush's use of Junk Lawsuits. DNC might use 'high quality government' and put out their own msg about being the "Responsible Party" as opposed to the mommy party.
The GOP spends $400 million a year on training centers for this.

Whoever is DNC Chair has to replicate this systematic use of linguistics to get the DNC back in the drivers seat. They cannot just use the other sides frames. We have to have our own, that includes values to policies and values to language in communicationg what we stand for. Training is extensive, costly and has to be a priority.

Right now I think Dean is the only one showing an appreciation of this.

[crispini]

72. Nuh-uh, Rosenberg TOTALLY gets it.

Read this:

http://www.simonforchair.org/about_simon/key_commentary/dnc_chair_role.html

Best bit:

"Finding someone who can take on Bush on TV is not the biggest or most important part of the job of chairing the DNC. Terry McAulifffe has repeatedly said as much, and the Republicans have clearly recognized this in their recent choices for chair of the RNC. We already have dozens of national leaders well-equipped to take on the GOP each day. They are named Clinton, Kerry,.....

What we need at the head of the DNC is someone who can take on Rove, Reed, Norquist and Mehlman." AMEN, brother!

[NewYorkerfromMass]

82. Excellent post crispini, best in the thread- it nails the essentials

this is exactly what we need. Chris's endorsement just nails it for me. Rosenberg can be chair and Dean is free to do other things.
Rosenberg EXACTLY gets it.

[caligirl]

89. Enjoyed the article and others at the link. Thanks, it was great reading.

[crispini]

135. Thanks!

although was mostly a linky... and I can't believe something I started off with "Nuh-uh!" got an "excellent," but I'll take it. :7

[Missy Vixen]

75. Hi Chris, nice to hear from you

I am worried about the "blocking and tackling" as well, but as a woman, choice is paramount. I can't support any DNC chair candidate that does not support my right to control my own reproductive organs.

I hope that everything is going well for you and your family, and again, thank you for being at DU!

Julie

[Justitia]

79. ATTN CHRIS: A question for YOU, please

What I am wondering.....

Why NOT Howard Dean???? :think:

[Cheswick2.0]

85. He's not as electable as Kerr...er Rosenberg

Can you see what is happening? This is the party machine choice. This is the guy the big money people want.

[Justitia]

88. but WHY?

Ches,

WHY? WHY?? WHY??? :cry: (frustration)

[janx]

90. NO!

Not again..?! :wow:

[txaslftist]

112. You tagged it!

"It's not our party. It's their party."

Not anymore it isn't. If you can't drive, get out from behind the wheel.

[JNelson6563]

96. Think about it friend....

Just think about it.

Julie

[ChrisHeinz]

98. I like Dean.

You wont see me bitching and moaning if he gets the job. Personally, I would love to have a young, visionary person in charge. Especially one of Simon's caliber.

[Justitia]

104. I really want to understand

as I believe you have insight to the workings of certain circles.

I'm not being flip, but are you saying that you would choose Rosenberg over Dean because Rosenberg is younger and more visionary than Dean?

I think we have all given you lots of reasons Rosenberg would not be our first pick.

I want to understand why Dean would NOT be your 1st choice.

[ChrisHeinz]

116. I dont think that it is smart

for me to do in a public forum. Sorry, I have seen my posts refectled elsewhere on conservative blogs. But for the life of me, Duers, I am for Simon Rosenberg, not AGAINST Howard Dean.

[Justitia]

128. I understand what you are saying, but,

there are probably ways to phrase it that are not confrontational.

For instance: I do not support Rosenberg as I believe he mistakenly places too high a priority on election strategy over clearly communicating traditional Democratic values and how to concretely apply them to issues that are undoubtedly of importance to Americans everywhere.

See? Now, why NOT Dean?

[moggie12]

262. I am politically incorrect, so let me take a shot

Speaking for myself, the way I would "phrase" objections to Dean as DNC chair are as follows (and they will sound "confrontational", unfortunately):

1) He shoots his mouth off all the time: For example, I think one of the reasons he lost Iowa was that he said, just a few days before the primary, that he wouldn't "pronounce Osama Bin Laden guilty before a trial". Was this statement noble, in accord with Constitutional principles, etc., etc.? YES!! Was it stupid to say it out loud where all the reporters could hear you (especially when the country was caught-up in delusional war-fever induced by Bush's flag-waving?) YES. Oh Lord, YES!! Karl would've creamed him with that remark, arguing that Dean would be "soft" on OBL. And still will....

2) Dean ain't no political genius. Joe Trippi, however, the man behind Dean, was -- particularly in his use of the Internet. The two men weren't on speaking terms by Iowa and the campaign imploded due to, among other things, lack of an effective field organization on the ground in Iowa (too many outsiders involved, not enough Iowans). What is so great about having the guy who came in third in Iowa run the Party's political apparatus? I'm just not getting it.

3) Idealistic young people in orange hats jumping up and down make old fogies like me nervous. I was once a wide-eyed, idealistic young person myself, but then I grew up. I know a few things now -- at age 45 with a house, a job, and two kids -- that I didn't know back when I could still wear short skirts.

(Note: For those of you wanting to argue back that there was a DLC-orchestrated campaign to do Dean in, please go ahead and do so, but we've probably had this discussion before in another thread. The same reasons apply to the DNC Chairmanship as apply to the Democratic nomination.)

That said, strangely enough, it's a damn shame that I just wrote that because I actually believed in a lot of what Dr. Dean stood for. For example, I think he's dead-on right that the Party is too beholden to Wall Street and the high-tech industry -- it's a travesty that the Party is not taking a stand, for example, against excessive stock-option expensing, letting the hedge fund industry cowboys run wild, etc. Still, you can't separate the person and the issues, and Dr. Dean, in my opinion, would do more harm than good as DNC Chair.

[Midlodemocrat]

163. After reading your replies to the questions posted here

and the thoughtful post/link by Crispini, I am inclined to think that Rosenberg might well be the best man for the job and for that, I thank you for bringing this to DU.

[SCRUBDASHRUB]

247. Hey, how about YOU for DNC Chair, Chris?

Handsome AND articulate?



:crazy:

[Cadence]

391. Just so you know, a lot of us have had our posts

reflected on conservative blogs. I know it's slightly different for you because of the position you're in, and I can understand your need for reticence. I hope that you will exercise your still protected first amendment right and continue to offer up opinions and spark debate. I know a lot of us are interested in what you have to say, even those that are disagreeing right now.
Thanks for all your work during the election. Keep fighting!

[hopein08]

168. That's my problem...

Would a "young, visionary person in charge" get the respect of party veterans and even the older generations of voters? That seems like it could be a problem, just like the younger people not giving as much respect to someone who has been around a lot longer and might be considered too influenced in political circles.

I've heard discussions that the DNC may use a Chair and a position that would be more day-to-day, grassroots type stuff. Maybe Rosenberg as a young visionary could work with Dean or someone like him. Best of both worlds?

[Cheswick2.0]

220. You like Dean

First of all you should. He put aside the justifiable resentments about the dirty tricks your step fathers campaign played in Iowa and he busted his ass to get Kerry elected.

But I'll bet it is not a coincidence that you showed up just after Dean announced he was running.

PS... I didn't know people had different calibers. I suppose you might also say Simon is "top drawer" and "Cream of the crop"?

[burn the bush]

257. bingo

[mzmolly]

302. In all fairness, Chris Heinz endorsed Bob Graham for VP before his stepdad

picked Edwards.

I really think he speaks for himself? :shrug:

[JI7]

309. yes, i remember that

remember all the threads which thought Edwards will not be picked because of what Chris said. even though Chris himself made clear he is speaking for himself. many thought it would be Bob Graham or someone else known for foreign policy/national security type issues.

of course we saw later that Chris was telling the truth. in fact Kerry's final choices for VP were all people who are known for domestic issues rather than foreign policy/national security.

i think Chris is a moderate and probably more in line with his late father John Heinz than with Kerry. and he will have opinions of his own which differ from JK.

[welshTerrier2]

80. hello Chris ... i disagree with you ...

specifically i disagree with your second point ...

2) I have seen many people note policy disagreements with some who are running for the Chair. The war in Iraq is a particularly pointed issue here (it is for me, too), as is a woman's right to choose. These are valid data points. Personally, I am less concerned about the DNC chair's own policy positions, and more concerned about the blocking and tackling we need to improve to win in the future.

i'm currently working on an essay for DU (nowhere near ready) called "Men versus Memes" or something like that ... the basic idea will be to highlight that the republicans put forward policy themes while the Democrats put forward candidates who espouse policy themes ... perhaps it is the ultimate weakness of a big tent approach but it seems like the broad theme that "Democrats don't stand for anything" either has, or is, creeping into the public consciousness ... i think underlying that view is that, as a party, we are not able to concisely and consistently articulate a clear vision ... perhaps our next nominee will take a very different position on the use of military force than Senator Kerry did ... and so, our platform, and our Chairman, will be whistling yet another new tune ... furthermore, that tune is often out of touch with many in the Party ...

and that's the point ... will we select a Chair only based on "blocking and tackling" and then send that Chair out to debate the republican Chair without a deep commitment to the views he will espouse? the disconnect is a recipe for disaster ... we need to "have it out" as a party and agree on the big themes of the role of government, simple right and wrong, the limits of free markets, the protections of civil liberties, foreign policy and the use of our military ... we cannot continue to allow centralized control of defining who we are ... we cannot shift in the wind as each new candidate comes along ... our process needs to be more open ...

what's absent is not that we don't each have deeply held beliefs; it's that we don't have an open process of crafting them into a platform ... actually, more than just a platform but rather a philosophy ... and in this context, we cannot allow the next DNC Chair to be viewed in the narrow context you've defined ... to be sure, the "blocking and tackling" role must be an absolutely critical ingredient in the selection process ... but to not "put the raisins in with the flakes" (OK ... perhaps that's not my best analogy), I'm afraid the Democratic Party will only be able to offer Americans half a box of cereal ... we always seem to do the process backwards ... let's define who we are before we start hiring staff ... the same goes for future candidates ...

the bottom line to this is that we need the total package ... the bottom line to this is that the position you advocate is at best a "half measure" ... there is no reason to not demand excellence and vision in the next DNC Chair ... and that excellence includes not just the mechanics of a bureaucratic CEO but a deep commitment to our values and the skills to passionately and articulately convey them ... and those values cannot be limited to the narrow values defined from the top ...

these are very dangerous times for the Democratic Party ... i believe we really are at a crossroads ... i've written many times that the strong "ABB" support both the Party and Senator Kerry received should not be expected in future elections ... I deeply believe there is a strong undercurrent of "we went along with you this time but you'd better start being more responsive to the grassroots" ... I think the Party has to react NOW and I am seeing no effort whatsoever to chart a new course ... your own effort here notwithstanding, where is the forum for ongoing dialog? without immersing you in all my arguments about the Party's hawkish position on Iraq, i'll merely refer you to the post I made on the subject last night:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1484127&mesg_id=1484127

for your consideration, I'll also point you to another post I made today on the mass media:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1485713&mesg_id=1485713

these are the kinds of discussions we should be having among the grassroots and "those in charge" of the Party ... I have a very strong sense that what's written and debated hear on DU and in other forums is being followed by the DNC, but the deafening silence of their response is a major part of the problem ... where the hell are they?

maybe the anger wouldn't be quite so high, or the policies they choose wouldn't be quite so alienating, if they sent a few Congressmen and Senators around once in awhile to "have it out" with us ...

anyway, sorry for the long rant ... i'm out of work and have way too much free time ... i hope you understand that many of us are very angry at the Party and that we don't feel like the Party is at all responsive ... that's never a good recipe for progress ... and hearing you advocate for a "blocking and tackling" solution seems to turn its back on fighting against the nightmare in Iraq, the increased control of corporations and big money in our democracy and the ebbing to the right by the Party as a whole ... the core requirements of the Chairman's job are no doubt as you have defined them ... but what good will that be if it continues the dangerous alienation of the grassroots activists ??

[moggie12]

83. One question

I am open to the idea of Simon Rosenberg as the DNC chair.

I have one question, however. Did you see Amy Sullivan's piece in the Washington Monthly about the relationship between certain consultants and the Party? Does Simon Rosenberg have any thoughts on how we can wage better campaigns? I mean, not just in regard to competing in all states, but in terms of mounting aggressive, effective contests? My personal opinion is that if we don't start hiring better consultants, we might as well run Disney characters as candidates.

If Mr. Rosenberg will work to break up what appears to be a "cronyistic" monopoly among consultants with a record of failure, I'm all for him.

Thank you for affording me the opportunity to get some information.

[cali]

87. I agree that the DNC chair's policy positions

are not as important as his ability to develop a winning strategy. But to do that he needs to be able to inspire activists within the party. Dean does this. Simon Rosenberg strikes me as a thoughtful, smart guy, but I doubt he has the ability to rally dems the way Dean does. We need a leader. As a Vermonter, I can state with confidence that Dean will set an agenda and work until he achieves it.

[Me.]

94. IMHO

Truly Chris, thank you for sharing your thoughts with us, however, for myself, Howard Dean is the man, who we need. He is a humanist, a strong man who isn’t afraid to state his beliefs and stand by them. Even when the inconvenience of his truth meant he had to stand alone. Few dems stood by him and certainly no pugs. We need leaders who aren’t afraid to tell the truth, and stand up to those forces who will try to destroy them for doing so. How long are the dems going to “go along to get along”? How many of them are going to vote for Gonzales and Chertoff, even though they know that men who believe the Geneva Convention to be quaint or that an arbitrary round-up of Muslims is acceptable, are not men who should be placed in these positions of power much less be able to affect the civil liberties of innocent citizens? Who, of the dems, stood by Barbara Boxer?

Crispini is quite right. If the dems vote in someone who thinks bowing to the whims and will of people who want to take our rights, health care, and pensions away, it will be telling. If they put in someone who doesn’t believe that a woman’s right to choose is essential and that our environment shouldn’t be ravaged, they will lose any of the remnants of support I still have for them.

These are crucial times, our Constitution is being savaged, our economy is on a down slide and a corrupt administration is allowed to govern by stealth. Unless the dems start to stand by our traditional principals, we are all lost and republican lites such as From, Lieberman and others of their ilk, will sell what is left of our party out and there will be nothing left of what we used to recognize as the democratic party.

Finally, an endorsement from the WSJ would make me concerned about any dem who received it.

[shirlden]

99. The party

is dying at the local level. I live in Franklin County (Columbus) Ohio and our Dem Chair was very much a part of the vote scam here. He is just another Repug Lite afraid to lose whatever miniscule power he still possesses in a state that is rapidly going bright red.
We need someone who will drive the battle at the grass roots and Dean will do that.
Today is my 69th birthday, and I am mostly deaf, so the idea of running for any office is out of the question. But my heart is strong and I will back any person who will fight to the end for my party and my country.
Sorry, Chris. You have my respect but not my backing.

[shirlden]

100. The party

is dying at the local level. I live in Franklin County (Columbus) Ohio and our Dem Chair was very much a part of the vote scam here. He is just another Repug Lite afraid to lose whatever miniscule power he still possesses in a state that is rapidly going bright red.
We need someone who will drive the battle at the grass roots and Dean will do that.
Today is my 69th birthday, and I am mostly deaf, so the idea of running for any office is out of the question. But my heart is strong and I will back any person who will fight to the end for my party and my country.
Sorry, Chris. You have my respect but not my backing.

[ChrisHeinz]

109. Happy BDay

Thanks for the input

[Old and In the Way]

111. I tend to agree with your assessment.

It really isn't about moneyraising. I think Democrats proved that in the last election cycle. We do open our pocketbooks and did nuetralize the big donor fundraising that Republican's specialize in.

What we need to concentrate on is the state/local Democratic organizations, starting last week. I can visualize Howard making trips to every state and working to rebuild the organization and rekindling the enthusiam that is sorely needed. We gotta fix the foundation before we worry about the rest of the house....

[Name removed]

101. Deleted message

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

[ChrisHeinz]

107. I can honestly tell you

I have no idea who JK wants. All I know is that I have been a member of NDN for 3 years, and it's been an amazing experience, largely because of Simon's leadership.

JK has been in the ME for about 2 weeks.

And dont care for the suggestion that I am a mouthpiece. Not really a family trait.

[welshTerrier2]

129. fair enough but ...

I appreciate your presence here and thought that the speculative criticism of your motives was most unfortunate ... this should be a marketplace of ideas open to everyone who wants to participate and no one deserves that kind of unsupported criticism ...

however, i also think several strong criticisms of Mr. Rosenberg were made in Cheswick's post and think it would be useful for you to respond to them ... many of us are deeply concerned about the Democratic Party's "corporatism" and perceived move the right ... if that's what Mr. Rosenberg envisions as the Party's direction, he'll find very little comfort in this neighborhood ...

[Name removed]

190. Deleted message

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

[welshTerrier2]

202. i guess i don't understand the criticism ...

enlighten me here ...

if i'm reading where you and Cheswick seem to be coming from, the allegations are that Chris Heinz is somehow doing something you object to ...

either it's that his timing is intentionally intended to coincide with Dr. Dean's announcement or he's really representing Senatory Kerry rather than himself or perhaps he's exploiting his celebrity ... or, of course, some combination of the above ...

but what's the problem ??? doesn't he have a right to do that ... even if he were totally dishonest, shouldn't the ultimate issue come down not to who he is, whom he represents, or the timing of his post but rather the arguments he made versus the arguments made against him ???

am i missing something here ?? frankly, i thought Chris really failed to defend many of the criticisms of Rosenberg that were thrown at him ... he certainly ducked all the arguments that were values and issues related ... it seems to me that attacking him rather than his message just wasn't helpful at all ...

yes? no? sort of? i'm all ears ...

[JNelson6563]

249. Likely just taking issue with the

aw shucks, for no reason in particular I thought I'd come plug my guy routine.

Not that it matters really. I dounbt even one person posting at DU has a vote or influence on that vote. It is rather telling though, if nothing else.

Julie

[welshTerrier2]

268. ahhh, the timing thing ...

well, Julie, if the timing of this thread had a strategic component to it, i wouldn't be at all surprised ... so i don't disagree with your hypothesis ... but, not to belabor the point, i just don't see any real problem with it ...

in fact, i'll go even further to say that i wish all of the "big people" in the party got their butts in here immediately before every important vote ... how cool would that be? frankly, i'd like them to hear from all of us right before they vote ...

while they are free to come here whenever they want to to peddle their ideas, it also gives us an equal opportunity to peddle ours ... is the timing suspect? i'm not really sure it matters ...

as to "none of us has a vote or influence anyway", how disturbing is that ... that's been one of my themes throughout this thread ... I think that anger against those running the show will only grow as more and more people try to become more active and feel that they don't have a voice ... that's why, even though i didn't vote for him in the primaries, I'm strongly supporting Dr. Dean for DNC Chair ... i think a major reform movement is needed and it has to be a process that links those on the inside with those on the outside ... improved communication up and down the line needs to be job number one!! ... every Democratic office holder should participate in these online forums on a regular basis ... they do it with their local districts, why not in their "e-districts" ??

[Boredtodeath]

139. Maybe you can honestly tell us this then?

Why do all the Washington insiders keep repeating the same mistakes?

It's obvious that Rosenberg has been around this party for a long time - first as part of the DLC, then after his turning out with Al From, to the NDN.

We need a massive shakeup in this party. In case you hadn't noticed, we've been losing our butts since 1994.

Why would anyone condone doing the same thing over and over and expect a different outcome?

We keep using the same "leaders" who want to run the same candidates, even though they are proven losers. (See Erskine Bowles.)

How many times are we supposed to sit back and allow the party leaders to encourage known losers to keep potential winners out of the race? How many Senate seats do the Clinton Buddies have to cost us before we "get it?"

[newsguyatl]

108. ouch

:hi:

[ClarkUSA]

141. Where Simon stands on election reform, Chris?

What are his plans, if any, to affirm the necessity of verified voting and openly call for transparency in the voting process?

[Lorien]

261. That's a MAJOR issue

If a prospective Chair doesn't have plans to seriously address verified voting, he's not worth anyone's consideration.

[ClarkUSA]

344. Second time I asked, Lorien, and NO RESPONSE YET

Wonder why? Enquiring minds want to know, Chris Heinz/Simon Rosenberg.

[crispini]

115. Oh, Ches, you just don't like anyone

whose name is not spelled D-E-A-N. :) C'mon, didja read more than two pages into the Rosenberg website? This article's really good:

http://www.simonforchair.org/about_simon/key_commentary/internet_politics_participation.html

"Some Thoughts on Internet, Politics and Participation"

(snip)

"In the new model candidates can have direct one-to-one iterative relationships with their supporters. The idea of a "message" in this model becomes something much different. For what citizens now expect is not to be fed something fully developed - a message - but they expect to be able to participate in the development of the value system and community of the campaign itself."

Sounds like "listening to the grassroots" to me.

[Cheswick2.0]

161. oh crispini and you will fall in line with anything with Kerry written

on it. Congratulations in staying true to form.

[crispini]

191. LOL, no, no.

:loveya: anything with Olbermann written on it! :evilgrin:

Seriously, I haven't made up my mind yet who I'm gonna lobby for. And I don't really think that my two cents is gonna make a lot of diff anyway; the DNC members are people who have opinions and independent thoughts, and I'm just a peon. :shrug:

[DaedelusNemo]

340. BINGO! Voter participation in policy discussion is key to the future.

I'll support this guy if he will put that infrastructure in place, regardless of his policy. If we have to we can get rid of him later, and keep that infrastructure. It is a historic step forward in itself.

I'm very serious. Forums where voters and candidates talk back and forth is the next development for politics to undertake. It puts us on the path to more representative democracy. It is the politics of the 21st century, if we're all very, very lucky.

Chris, it seems you perhaps understand this, since you not only post here from time to time but listen and reply as well. I cannot express strongly enough what a priority this is and i hope ya'll fully get it over there.

I think we need a whole system of forums, but there should be at least one attached to the DNC, and it should most definitely include the platform delegates - year round, along with others. The DLC, the DFA and any other 'caucuses' within the party should have theirs as well, and they should all interlink significantly while retaining their own developments of opinion.

Of course, if Dean will do that i'm just as much for him. No one has given me any solid reasons to think otherwise. Perhaps you could register under a smurf and give us the politest possible version? ;) On the other hand, we might be better off with Dean as outriding spokesman, not so busy with machinery.

[DaedelusNemo]

341. AND it gives the party an instant image-update!

The party of the people, the party of the grassroots, the party of representative democracy. Good position to be in.

[txaslftist]

117. Gedang....Thank You Again, Ches!

[NewYorkerfromMass]

118. Nice way to build bridges. No wonder we keep losing.

and I see the green light is on to chase Chris out of here.
Great job. Let's just divide and alienate so that we're working from an even weaker position. :eyes:

[newsguyatl]

120. it's not about building bridges

it's about severing ties that've bogged us down for so long.

good for you cheswick!

[kerrygoddess]

124. Sometimes you have to build new bridges

Sometimes you have to build new bridges, before you severe ties. Otherwise you may end up over your head in more muck than you are already in!

[NewYorkerfromMass]

127. Al Gore would beg to differ

amongst others. It is indeed about building bridges and bringing people together.

[Cheswick2.0]

165. apparently the party has royalty

some one got my post deleted.

[newsguyatl]

203. are you even kidding me?

...why am i NOT surprised ches? :eyes:

[ClarkUSA]

154. Cheswick is the reason "we keep losing"?

Gimme a break. What purpose does "building bridges" have in this thread? Cheswick was expressing some honest opinions. We are divided and alienated on this issue. So what? Let's discuss things!

[Cheswick2.0]

184. LOL, bull...my post is not why we keep losing

but if you would like examples of why we lost this time I can give some examples.

"I voted for the 87 million before I voted against it"

"If I had it to do again I would vote for the IWR again"

......to say nothing of the dramatic folly of all the military imagery at the convention, which made an intelectual experience Senator look like a GI Joe joke.

Then there was the inability of the campaign to respond to the swiftvet liars and the mistake of asking Move-on to take their add off. WTF was that all about? Move=on took off their AWOL add and the bush camp continued the Swiftboat adds.....way to fold like a cheap suit JK campaign.

Rosenberg, from what I have read looks like someone who wants to move right to find bigger and better "investors", all the while throwing a bone to grassroots. Ugh

[cestpaspossible]

215. Since it was deleted there must have been something wrong

with it. LOL

[NewYorkerfromMass]

385. Indeed, an ally comes in here and you throw down a gauntlet

like he is the enemy.

RE: Kerry's flaws, Yes, he was made to seem untrustworthy, some of his very own words did not help- and I do believe they succeeded in implanting seeds of doubt just enough to lose him some critical votes. But I do not regret his choice of front and centering his Vietnam service. I look at it as a sort of preemptive strike on the Swift Boat Liars which he knew was coming. Look at it like this: Kerry built his image up in a way that he was working form the advantage and they had to do the work to tear it down. Little did anyone know they would get away with actually lying about him.

[kerrygoddess]

119. Maybe you should do a little research

Checking out the NDN, it's evident that they have some good ideas. And clear their ideas for reclaiming the Hispanic vote are not about moving right on choice - http://www.newdem.org/hispanicproject/!

Worth taking a look around - http://www.newdem.org/

[wicket]

121. whoa, uncalled for!

[incapsulated]

131. That is totally unfair

Chris has as much a right as any of us to post here and not have his motivations questioned because of who he is related to. He already stated that he is not representing Kerry in his position and you are basically calling him a liar.

I disagree with his choice for Chair, I am for Dean more than against Rosenberg (although I have serious problems with him), but I'm not going to discourage Chris or anyone else from posting a view different from my own.

[Name removed]

214. Deleted message

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

[cestpaspossible]

217. LOL

But congratulations to whoever got my post deleted.

LOL YOU ARE THE ONE WHO GOT YOUR POST DELETED

No one else is responsible for your words and actions but you.

Try taking responsiblity for yourself.

[Cheswick2.0]

251. oh stop, rofl

you know exactly what I mean.

[incapsulated]

281. See...

I didn't alert on you. But you insinuated that I did.

Just like you insinuated that Chris was a liar by stating that he was speaking for Kerry when he said he wasn't.

Think before you post and maybe they won't get deleted so often.

[Name removed]

364. Deleted message

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

[NYCGirl]

132. Good on you, Ches.

Some of us (and perhaps not all Deaniacs, either) may be a little underwhelmed that Mr. Heinz chose to show up here not even and hour and a half after Dean announced to tout his guy. Perhaps tomorrow might have been better. (And I have a joke on timing running in the family that I'll just repress.)

[txaslftist]

150. Sheeesh, NYCGirl.....

I hadn't even noticed or thought about the timing.

At least Ches is doing some critical thinking, and so are you.

Coincidence? Oh yeah, sure.

Well, at least we know now who the established party's anointed is.

[Name removed]

155. Deleted message

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

[NYCGirl]

173. Word. NT

[mrgorth]

113. Hey, that's great Chris

more of the same.

[wicket]

114. I agree about point #2

There needs to be a massive restructoring within the party. I'm looking for where they want to lead the party, this is much more important to me than if I disagree with the choice on one or several issues. I want a party leader who is not going to give up on certain parts of the country as "lost causes" and will run a national campaign. But at the same time will also emphasis organizing at the local, grassroots level.

Thanks for checking in with us! :hi:

[pamela]

130. Can Rosenberg get your stepfather elected in '08?

If so, he has my support.

[kerrygoddess]

134. 2nd That!

[Amaya]

136. Honesty, I don't know much about Simon

Can you give me some history on the man?


By the way, thanks for dropping by :hi:

[rabid_nerd]

142. Retracted...

Let me explain.

The DLC New Democrats are no longer new and need replaced.

Those that came in from 1992 have done what they came in to do (reform welfare, balance the budget, reinvent government) and the Bruce Reeds and Al Froms and Simon Rosenbergs that are weighing the party down like dead weight from the 92-2000 era need to realize it's time for the party to pass the torch.

In addition, Simon's candidacy is woefully inadequate in stature, as is unfortunately Fowler's. With this cycles unique situation, we need someone similar to Rendell's stature and (forgive the pun, Governor) "weight" behind our Chairman's words as we wade without a figurehead, as your father's failure leaves us without one.

The DLC New Democrats have gone from the Clintonesque building bridges of compromise in the early 90s to burning bridges with our base since 2000, with the DLC attacking fellow Democrats with vile remarks and backstabbing.

The original premise of the DLC New Dems was inspired. But power corrupted.

A rebranding needs to take place, and at the same time, a wholesale change of party policy and structure wouldn't hurt - we are woefully inefficient.

Simon is not the guy up to that job.

Councilman Herb Riede
Correspondence Secretary
Pennsylvania Young Democrats

On EDIT: italicized inserted Some content struck...

Rosenberg and the NDN is not the DLC, I give on that. But I still hold to the premise that "New Coke", er uh, "New Democrats" is not a national brand driven enough to be worthy of chairmanship.

Mea Culpa... The NDN is not the DLC.. New Dems are not New Dems...?
http://dailykos.com/story/2004/12/9/143724/624

[NewYorkerfromMass]

146. BS: "attacking fellow Democrats with vile remarks and backstabbing"

Link us all up with proof of that. You are spreading BS here.

[rabid_nerd]

175. My target on that is primarily Al From - Rosenberg not so much

To me it's guilt by association, unfortunately.

From has poisioned the well of anything labeled "New Democrat", "DLC" or "Blue Dog" or "Centrist" until he's gone, much like Rove/Bush has turned off many Republicans' on "Compassionate Conservative" and "Centrist"...

Al From is what's wrong with the Democratic Party - not Simon Rosenberg - I will state than plainly here.. I will admit that my avoidance of Rosenberg is the proximity to From.

But I am doing more research at the moment and I will retract my remark about Rosenberg, because there is "rivalry" between the NDN and DLC...

[htuttle]

145. His support of the Iraq War is a deal stopper for me

Sorry, but he appears to think it was still a good idea, and that tells me he JUST DOESN'T GET IT.

:shrug:

Don't worry. I don't get a vote on this anyway...

[Walt Starr]

147. Yup

I'm with you there.

I'm watching closely as I feel like I won't be a Democrat any longer after this one is done.

[ChrisHeinz]

148. Neither do I.

I am signing off for now.

Interesting debate. Thanks to those who participated.

[GreenPartyVoter]

149. Thanks for stopping in Chris! :^)

----------------------------------------------------------
Save our country one town, county, and state at a time!
http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/electionreform.htm#why

[incapsulated]

153. Thanks

You've actually managed to create a really good discussion thread on the subject of the Chair, even if most disagree with your choice.

:hi:

[ChiciB1]

285. Neither Do You What??

You signed off with this message. What does it mean? Did I miss a post somewhere or are you saying you're NOT going to be a Democrat anymore??

[Pirate Smile]

289. I think that was that he doesn't get to vote for DNC chair either.

htuttle: "Don't worry. I don't get a vote on this anyway..."

ChrisHeinz: "Neither do I"

[LSK]

159. oh he does does he???

That tells me he JUST DOESN'T GET IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

152. PA needs you in 06....

I know this is off topic but, as a PA resident and moderate Republican who supported John Kerry, I respectfully request that you consider running against Rick Santorum in the 06 Senate campaign. Please consider it. Thank you.

[benfranklin1776]

162. Or against Melissa Hart in the Fourth Congressional District.

She needs to get on with her life's work, as Coach Noll of the Steelers used to say.

[IStriker]

277. I second that or...

take on my congressman, Tim Murphy, please.

[CWebster]

358. Fitzpatrick

What he put Ginny Schrader through was a crime.

[Freddie Stubbs]

376. Eastern Pennsylvanians won't go for someone from far outside of their

district moving on to run for Congress. Look at what happened in the Lehigh Valley last year.

[IStriker]

387. Sorry to be some dumb, but who is Fitzpatrick? A congressman?

[Freddie Stubbs]

436. Freshman GOP Congressman from a suburban Philly district

[IStriker]

448. Thanks. If he's a freshman, that's why I never heard of him...

Since they haven't got a track record, I don't know any of new ones in the PA delegation. Who was the congressman before him? He isn't Toomey's replacement, is he?

[Freddie Stubbs]

449. He replaced Jim Greenwood

Toomey was replaced by Charlie Dent.

[sandnsea]

156. Leaning to Wellington Webb

The DNC chair is out in front of the country, a big part of our image. For that reason alone, Simon is the wrong choice. As is Donnie Fowler. I like Wellington Webb. He seems to have the fighting spirit, best direction to take the party, understands the west, law enforcement background, understands national economic policy as it relates to local jobs, but doesn't want to abandon the base. I understand supporting Simon, he's done a great job in alot of areas. I just think Webb would appeal to Democrats and Independents across the spectrum and all over the country, and we desperately need that right now.

[welshTerrier2]

181. hmmm ... interesting ...

i watched that debate on Saturday ... i was also very impressed with Wellington Webb ...

need to know much more though ...

[DaedelusNemo]

342. Wellington performed well, needed better script /nt

[Old and In the Way]

157. Chris, Question for you.

Sorry to hijack your thread, but I think your posting presence here is a very valuable connection to those who set the agenda for the Party.

One thing I know you are aware of is our broken trust in the electoral process. To me, there is no greater danger to our democracy then the majority giving up on the idea that we can drive change through the ballot box.

So, my question is this. Since we think there was a lot of systematic fraud committed in 2004, why won't the Democratic Party conduct an indepth canvassing of the voter's preference for President? Why not poll Ohio and Florida as well as selected precincts around the country and see if our polling matches the exit polls or the reported results? Preferably, this would be in the form of a notarized affidavit.

It's not so much sour grapes as understanding if we truely lost or not. If we lost, so be it, we got work to do to convince Americans that we are the Party with a better vision for this country. If we won, well....we have more evidence to drive reform on the process before 2006.

As it stands now, secret ballots cast on Republican machines, overseen by Republican partisans, and reported by a Republican biased media is a recipe for totalitarian rule for generations to come.

Such an undertaking would signal the base that the Democratic leadership is serious about proving whether we have a flawed system...or not.

[LSK]

158. i would have to read up on Rosenberg but Dean excites people

I have been I guess depressed or uninspired since our losses last November. But hearing that Dean is officially going for the DNC Chair (read the headlines on yahoo today), that has really excited me again. And I am sure it excites a great number of people. The DNC needs a serious shot in the arm and Howard Dean is the man to do it. Someone else getting the post over him will dissappoint a lot of people and turn off a lot of people.

We need to energize people right now and Dean can do it.

[H2O Man]

164. Respectfully

the press release that I just linked to was a generic statement. It was not particularly specific, beyond saying that Simon Rosenburg's friends like him, and that he will do a good job. I suspect that very few candidates would run an ad that didn't say something like this.

It is perhaps a nice introduction. Could you give us more information? It is clear that the person for this position should have "good organizational skills." And that they will "want to rebuild the democratic party" and "win elections."

Can you tell us what you believe he will be organizing around? Let's not talk about "Hispanics." That is not an issue. The war in Iraq is an issue. For a father like me, with sons ages 17 and 21, the idea of a draft is an issue. The points raised in Robert Kennedy's "Crimes Against Nature" are issues. Jobs and the quality of public education are issues. Address these, and I would hope Hispanics and every other group will join the organized effort to improve America -- as democrats.

Thank you for your consideration.

http://h2oman.blogspot.com

[H2O Man]

260. PS:

I am troubled to find that your message was brought here on the day that Howard Dean made his announcement. I think that it is the type of thing that politicians do, and that it is part of politics, etc.

But the democratioc party must, in my opinion, move beyond politics. I am suggesting that at some point, people in the political and economic leadership positions must move beyond their exclusive circles, and communicate with common folk. I believe that in a very real way, that is part of what you are doing by posting here today. And so, while I mention the political aspect, I'm going to shift gears, and talk to you as a human being from the grass roots.

Your friend Simon is reportedly a supporter of the war in Iraq. Dean is an outspoken opponent. You seem like a decent man. Your family seems decent. But we can't pretend that what is happening in Iraq, or in America, touches you in the same way it does "common folk." Likewise, you have had life experiences we will not. I know and appreciate that.

But Chris, I have two sons, 17 and 21, and when that draft calls, it calls the poor and middle class. It's been since WW2 that the wealthy have had their children participate in the war in any meaningful numbers. While John Kerry is the exception, George W. Bush is the rule.

I know a kid who died in Iraq. He went to school with my boys. The biggest piece of him that was returned in a casket was his hand. I am not willing to sacrifice my boys for that war. Let's be frank: we were told it had to do with WMDs, and they simply weren't there.

So if Simon is in support of the war, let Simon do what Simon says. And lets get those people that support Simon and the war to put up their kids. Is that an ugly way to think? Sure. Middle class and poor have been subjected to this ugly thinking for some time.

I spoke to my nephew recently. A big Dean supporter. College-educated. Computer "expert." I'm proud of him. Never got in troule as a kid, good athlete, a credit to our family. In fact, Chris, he's a credit to society.

But when he was going with a friend to buy a pizza, in the community he lives in, the police pulled them over. My nephew is brown. His name is a common American name; he's lived in this state his whole life; he has worked here, gone to church here, etc etc. But he was held for hours and hours and hours while the police "checked." Checked what? Well, that he wasn't dangerous. He is young and brown. Now, he's not Arab, not Muslim, but he's in his 20s and he is brown. So he is suspect. If it happened once, or twice, or even just a dozen times to young men like him, I wouldn't mention it. But it does happen to him, his brothers, and many others. All the time.

So can you understand why my family, democrats for generations, supports Howard Dean, who opposes the Bush "policy" in Iraq ? And what does your friend offer, that might offer a promise to improve our day-to-day life?

Thank you for your consideration.

http://h2oman.blogspot.com

[mzmolly]

304. I wasn't aware of Rosenbergs position on Iraq waterman.

Your post is quite thought provoking.

[H2O Man]

371. Hello, mzmolly!

This thread is taking so long to "load" today, that I'll try to respond to your message from here ..... I used the word "reportedly" in regard to his support for the Iraq war, because there are numerous posts that note that SR has spoken out in support of the invasion.

If in fact this is not true, I hope Chris H tells us here. There are a few options:
{1} Simon supports the war, though he may think the current US method of attack/occupation needs fine-tuning.
{2} He supported it when it initially occured, because like many Ameriucans, he believed the WMD lies. But in the months afterward, he realized the Bush administration betrayed the public trust, and he has been an outspoken critic for many, many months.
{3} He was a supporter, until John Dean announced yesterday. Since then, he has begun to rethink his position.

It would be wonderful if Chris would respond to these serious questions. I'm not looking to attack him or his position. I would like clarification, so that as a father and uncle, I can properly evaluate his (Chris's) position. If I do not hear a response, I will know that Simon's camp recognizes this is a weak point. I lean toward Dean, but respect Chris enough to keep an open mind .... for a few more hours. (grin)

http://h2oman.blogspot.com

[mtnsnake]

166. Here's an article profiling Rosenberg, if anyone wants to read about him

It's just one article, so I hope I've picked one that gives a fair assessment of the man. The article originated in NY Times Magazine:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/12/6/112326/490

[madfloridian]

169. A nice post.

Chris's post was nice. I think Rosenberg and Dean are friends, anyway, and they would not want the dissension.

Actually I am not at all sure the party is ready for the change Dean wants.

This paragraph from his announcement is a challenge to the party, and I don't think they are ready.

SNIP..."That word -- 'values' -- has lately become a codeword for appeasement of the right-wing fringe. But when political calculations make us soften our opposition to bigotry, or sign on to policies that add to the burden of ordinary Americans, we have abandoned our true values."

[Name removed]

170. Deleted message

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

[NewYorkerfromMass]

178. Chris has been a Democrat for at least 3 years

as he says above, and it is irrelevant anyways. Would you so readily dismiss a recent defection like Jim Jeffords?

[hollowdweller]

266. 3 years?? He's entitled to his opinion but it doesn't carry any more

weight than anybody else to me then.

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

180. Yes, but he represented PA in a bipartisan manner and

as a lifelong PA resident who remembers his hard work for the people of PA, he was a great Senator. By today's hard-right-wing standards he would be considered a Democrat...maybe even tagged "liberal" by the zealots.

[JI7]

171. i always thought Joe Lockhart would be great for DNC Chair

of course he isn't running for it so it doesn't really matter right now.

[grasswire]

172. hi Chris

My best wishes to all your articulate extended family!

Now I'm going to be blunt. The Democratic Party is at great risk simply because its alleged leadership does not have the confidence of its membership. The seeming betrayal of voters on November 3 and its aftermath may have seemed expedient and necessary to JK, but incalculable damage was done to people who had already suffered immeasurably in the aftermath of election 2000. To ask for the trust and SACRIFICE of millions of citizens and then to disappoint them so bitterly has put JK in a position where he will likely never be trusted by Democratic voters again. Democrats are in a bad mood. This was the most critical election in our lifetimes. It was flubbed, and the recent comments of Cam Kerry that we should all be "forward looking" do not set well.

I don't think that JK should assume that he has any influence with Democrats. Most of us (apparently) supported him wholeheartedly, but will not do so again. While we adore your mother, we do not trust her husband to serve our interests and to understand that we are in the fight of our lives, not just for Democratic values but for our future as Americans.

And so it really doesn't matter to many of us who your family endorses for DNC chair, except as the opinion of any other Democrat. I mean no disrespect to any of you. I honor the time you have spent campaigning and wish your family the very best of futures.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

179. Howard Dean for Chairman!!!

[Pirate Smile]

292. Please, just speak for yourself instead of using the "we" word.

[moggie12]

182. From another perspective

As you know, we all speak as individuals here on DU. Therefore, I'm sure you realize that "Grasswire"'s comments above represent his or her own individual viewpoint.

Me personally, I thank you for taking the time to post on DU, solicit input, and explain your support of Simon Rosenberg.

Have you been called a "freeper" yet???

[grasswire]

188. welcome to DU, Moggie

I should have welcomed you sooner -- it looks as if you're going to be a very active member of DU.

[moggie12]

198. Thanks for the welcome

And yes I'll probably be an active member (since I have a very big mouth and lots of opinions and my husband is tired of listening to me yell at the TV set).

[bling bling]

283. Nice.

Nice, another completely uncalled for and inappropriately placed backhanded slap at other DU'ers. I don't think I have ever seen a post by you that doesn't have that type of tone to it. Just saying.

[moggie12]

310. I get upset by sweeping & in this case inappropriate statements

Okay, the "have you been called a freeper yet?" was out of line but I stand by the rest of my statement. Did you see what "greenwire" said to him?? It was "greenwire's" remarks that were uncalled for and inappropriate. First, he/she told Chris Kerry that his father-in-law has put himself in a position where he "will likely never be trusted by Democrats again". Says who? Did he/she do a poll of Democrats? Every Democrat I've talked to (in real life, not on DU) is perfectly fine with Kerry's actions -- not every Democrat sees it as cowardly not to contest the election based on what we can/can't prove went on in Ohio given the nationwide vote margin. "Trusted" is a rather strong word to be used in regard to the Democratic Presidential candidate when seen in this context. We should all speak for ourselves and not put words in other people's mouths. One person's "letting us down" is another's "wisest course of action under the circumstances".

It was the ugly tone to the post that set me off, however. In the heat of the moment did the poster forget they were talking to a human being? What else can explain the statement, "And so it really doesn't matter to many of us who your family endorses for DNC chair.... Wow, talk about cold. I bet Chris Heinz can't wait to come back on DU and talk to us again.

Yes, it's a 'democratic" underground and everyone can say what they want. If some DU posters want to vent, I guess that's what this is here for. That should mean I can, too. When I get upset by DU posts, it comes out sarcastically and that's a failing of mine. If you've looked around on DU, however, sarcasm is not unheard of. Nor is much worse.

Again, maybe you said this in the heat of the moment, but you made a broad generalization about me without a factual basis. How many of my posts have you read? I think I'm up to about 200 or so now. I'd bet more than half were posts that said "great" or "I agree with that". I admit I reacted badly to being accused of being a freeper early on (mainly because of the foul-language and insults that accompanied it) but the majority of my posts have been of a positive nature. When I disagree, most times I do so in a respectful, reasonable tone. If there is a way through the DU administrators for me to give permission to you to do a search on "moggie12" posts I will gladly do so -- you can read all 200+ of them for yourself and then you can make an informed judgment.

[bling bling]

324. I appreciate your response.

Chris Heinz has been visited this board for a long time, though he doesn't post very often. I assume he has a pretty good understanding that this board consists of people who feel very passionately about their beliefs and speak openly about their views. However, I do agree with your point about people making broad statements as though they speak for everyone.

It's also true that most of my viewings of your posts were the negative ones from a week and a half or so ago when you first joined. Thanks for your thoughtful response. Nice to meet you and I look forward to running into you on other threads from now on. :)

[moggie12]

372. Well, if you're going to be so nice and open-minded about it,

I guess the only thing for me to do is to try to keep a better lid on my sarcastic tendencies. And now that I'm sitting here looking at my original post again, perhaps I should also try in the future to address my concerns directly to the DU poster whose comments I take issue with. I'm also looking forward to running into you on other threads, as you so graciously said of me, and pray to God it's not when I've lost my cool and made some sarcastic comment (as that would be extremely embarrassing).

[moggie12]

315. Here's two threads where I made a lot of replies today

1) "Why do working class Americans vote for Bush" in Gen'l Disc: Politics

2) "Screw You America - This is funny" in General Discussion

[last1standing]

186. I'd like to say "thank you" to you, your mother and your stepfather.

You all ran a good campaign and worked hard. I wish things had turned out differently, but this is the reality we're stuck with.

As for point #2. It's very important to have a DNC chair who can speak with personal conviction about the core beliefs of our party. Without that we get nothing more than a strategist. We've had plenty of strategists in the party lately and very few clear voices of conviction.

The chair is not only responsible for strategy, he is instrumental in recruiting candidates throughout the country. I would like to see someone in that position who will bring us closer to our roots, not take us along a path even further to the right.

I'll be supporting Howard Dean as I've heard his message, and I've seen him in action. I can not think of anyone who would stand up and make me more proud of being a Democrat, and I believe that is the kind of person he would recruit.

But once again, thank you for everything you and your family have done. It is appreciated by many.

[LittleClarkie]

194. I second that. I continue to support your stepdad in whatever he does next

Thank you all for everything you've done.

[paulk]

189. I've been leaning toward Rosenberg -

because I think he has the most experience at doing the things the DNC chair actually does -

Campaign strategy and fund raising. I don't agree with him on some issues, but I really don't see the DNC chair as a policy position.
Rosenberg, I think, gets it on the media - and also understands that we need to move toward a more grassroots/local organization. He was one of the first to see the potential in the Dean/Trippi use of the internet to raise money. He has shown a real ability to reach across ideological lines. He understands how important the Latino community is going to be in the future.

Dean would be good for getting out there and bashing Bush - but I think he would be more effective at that as head of his own organization - the DFA.

[robbedvoter]

192. It's not like we have a vote. In this or anything. Our voting days are

over.

[lwin]

193. Rosenberg is a better choice than Dean

IMO, choosing Dean would further polarize and fracture the Dems at this point. Simon has the skills and a game plan to unite the party and give all participants a voice.

I in no way question Dean's true blue intentions, nor any of those who support him. I wish I could say I was treated with the same respect. So many of the ones I've met have a "It's the DFA way or the highway" attitude, and think that they're somehow superior Dems because they've supported Dean. Some threaten to quit the party if he doesn't get chosen, and predict a fiery death for the Dem party. I love the passion, but ripping apart your fellow Dems has to stop. Save that for the Republicans.

Whoever wins the DNC is going to need the support from ALL Dems, and best reach out to be inclusive. That goes for Dean, Rosenberg, and all the other candidates.

[DoYouEverWonder]

195. Is it true

that Simon Rosenberg still supports Bush's War on Terror and the Invasion of Iraq?

If he does, then I am sorry, I could not possible support someone who does.

Mr. Rosenberg sounds like an ambitious and bright fellow and he has good ideas about ways to improve the whole process, but I fear that putting someone who is of the DLC mindset will cause a split in the Democratic Party.

There are a lot of angry, upset and bewildered Democrats right now who don't know or understand what is going on. Sad to say, we haven't had much for leadership lately and since the election, we have been left pretty much to our own devices. Many party activists just gave up and went home, I'm sure many will never work on another campaign again. Others redirected our time and energy into researching and uncovering the ways the election was rigged and the votes padded. We had high hopes that we could change the outcome but of course we know how that turned out.

Now we are beginning to see the start of a major movement away from the Democratic Party. In its place, people from all different persuasions are moving to unite in the one thing that ties us all together, our opposition to Bush and his misadministration.

If the Democratic Party wants to represent the direction that at least 50% of the people in this country are heading in, that would be great. If not, then move over and get out of the way, because we are fed up and if the Democratic Party just wants to be a kinder, gentiler version of the Republicans, then they no longer represents us.

From the sounds of it, Simon Rosenberg would just be more of the same old, same old and that's just not going to work anymore. Like Miss Frizzle from the Magic School Bus says, it's time to take chances, get messy, make mistakes. It's the only way we are ever going to change anything.

PBWY
DYEW

[IndianaGreen]

197. Yes, Rosenberg is the Democratic version of a neocon

they are the neo-liberals of the purposely mislabeled "Progressive" Policy Institute. They also support such anti-labor gems as NAFTA and FTAA.

[Me.]

222. Here. here!

Great post.

[CrazyConspiracyGuy]

348. a major movement away from the Democratic Party?

Does everyone understand exactly what the role of spoilter entails? I would not suggest it unless we do.

[DoYouEverWonder]

352. Then you don't understand how many people

in this country feel that neither the Democrats nor the Republicans represent their interests anymore.

I have no desire to split the party or spoil anything, but I no longer feel that the current crop of Democratic leadership are much different than their colleagues on the other side of the isle.

If the Democratic leadership wants to go in the direction of becoming more like Republicans, then a split in the party is inevitable and may in the long run be best for everyone.

[ChiciB1]

196. Chris... Thanks for the Input

I was an extremely strong supporter of your step-father since FOREVER, however my feelings are becoming more mixed. I will ALWAYS be a Democrat and I suppose I will try to support whoever is selected. However, I have to say that I'm from the Liberal side of the Party.

I'm also very upset at how low-key the Democrats in power have been. Barring an all out attack on El-Smirkle-Roy, I want someone who will step up to the plate and knock us a Homer! I'm so tired of the Wishy-Washy and the RICH! It's "We The People" for me and not someone who simply wants to "play the game!"

But then REALITY hits and says that "playing the game" is almost all that's left! It's really a shame!

Where Have All Flowers Gone???

[burn the bush]

205. just tell Kerry his chances for Pres in 08 has been defeated by his

very responsible decision to desert us in 04. We don't want a cut and run man, thanks

[bigwillq]

207. Chris, Thanks for posting the info link

It's good to read up on other potential candidates for DNC chair.

I am supporting Howard Dean, always been a big fan but it's nice to get an idea of the other options.


Thanks for keeping us informed.

[OhioBlue]

237. this may be really naive

but, how do we know that it is really CH? Do the moderators verify when someone high profile posts as themselves? Just curious.

[Vektor]

208. Hi Chris,

Thanks for stopping in! Your voice of reason is a welcome one.

[Vektor]

224. Delete :duplicate

[graywarrior]

211. Oh, I dunno. I think I'm an inch close to abandoning the dem party

Same old same old. Nobody listened to any advice from the people. Self serving career politicans, etc. Think I'm done.

[IronLionZion]

212. Simon struck me as kind of a pro-war Republican type

but I support you and your opinion holds water. I'll take a second look at him. I'm a strong Dean supporter but would be interested in a dual leadership where Dean is the public face and someone else runs the day to day organization. Simon Rosenberg could be the latter.

[CWebster]

216. So, if it isn't about policy so much as strategy and raising bucks...

Dean raised funds via the grassroots as a direct result of message.

With no policy to promote how does one raise funds? Of course corporate funding increases in relation to lack of (D) message.

The strategies speak for themselves.

And, funny that all the things Dean does without fanfare have to be trumped up as new ideas from the New Democrats.

[Zhade]

393. "Of course corporate funding increases in relation to lack of (D) message"

This is SO damn right, it should be an axiom at this point.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

218. Anybody who's for that war can go fuck themselves.

As in, go fuck themselves.

[Zhade]

394. Indeed.

It's one thing to have been "fooled" (yeah, right) when the IWR came up for a vote (funny how a good number of Dems WEREN'T "fooled").

It's totally another to STILL support it.

[Bouncy Ball]

412. Hey how is Oscar doing?

[A-Schwarzenegger]

426. He's curled up in his hat asleep.

Wasnt that all before you even joined?
Or are you somebody else?

[Bouncy Ball]

432. Eh

it was a bit before I joined (I wasn't always this person). But it was mentioned in the lounge as being the funniest lounge post ever and a mod found a link to it and I spent about an hour reading every post, tears rolling down my face and my stomach hurting from laughing so hard.

Thanks for that, I loved it. Oscar is famous.

[roguevalley]

219. we will never win if we barter away our principles for something

as nebulous as 'approval' by the 'majority'. The majority is us and when we signal that we are something other, we lose. I would, as Emeliano Zapata said, "Die on my feet a free man that live on my knees as a slave."

its time for the damned party that I love and despair of to remember that. Principles define us. We can't sell them out because the beltway madison avenue number-crunching too young to know what we were all about, forgetting our heritage of progressive humanity say we can win otherwise. Get a book about us and our party and read it. Remember mother jones and John sullivan and FDR and Harry Truman and Thomas Jefferson. They are who we are. Not the other crap.

[Lostnote03]

238. "NoooMas"

.....Ask your parents if I can have my money back please, I have utility bills to pay!!!I was a supporter of JK from when he was in third place in the primaries!!!....Dennis Kucinich is the ONLY political animal addressing the concerns of our country in a Visible manner and I will Not, repeat Not be swayed by the "realpolitick" of the pampered elite again....Go join the military Chris and volunteer for Iraq, there you will find my nephew that has seen TWO of his friends DIE....Maybe then your wall street pick for the DNC Chair will carry a little weight.....Best Wishes

[missouri dem 2]

323. Here is a few Truman quotes for you:

Richard Nixon is a no good, lying bastard. He can lie out of both sides of his mouth at the same time, and if he ever caught himself telling the truth, he'd lie just to keep his hand in.
Harry S. Truman

I never gave anybody hell! I just told the truth and they thought it was hell.
Harry S. Truman

Why, this fellow don't know any more about politics than a pig knows about Sunday.
Harry S. Truman

[lojasmo]

225. How does one qualify or quantify the ability to "block and tackle"?

Especially in the face of Rosenberg being opposed to a woman's right to chose, and in favor of this ghastly travesty of a war?

Is there any evidence that Rosenberg's ability to "block and tackle" is better than Dean's?

[Fabio]

230. Who said Simon Rosenberg is pro-life?

He is pro-choice.

[lojasmo]

235. Crap....sorry, I was thinking about Roemer. N/T

[Vektor]

226. Thank you, Chris, and please note...

...many of us here at DU and in the world do still support your stepfather, and appreciate and admire what he has accomplished in his life. I apologize for the disrespect and well, to be frank, outright abusive behavior some have shown you regarding this matter. Regardless of what one's political opinion, nobody should feel entitled to debase somebody's parent to them. Please disregard any of the negative attacks you have been hearing, and know that many of us think JK is doing a great job. Badmouthing your stepfather to you is beneath contempt. I'm sorry you have to be subjected to it.

[muse]

333. Vektor and I are a team on this. What Vektor said.

[Vektor]

350. Thank you...

...nice to see some sanity around here.

[Andromeda]

229. If you want someone to block and tackle,

then I think it's imperative that Howard Dean be the next Chair of the DNC.

I can appreciate your loyalty to your candidate Mr Rosenberg but we need a fighter, a REAL fighter, to get our party back.

The Democratic Party is in deep trouble and we need a strong leader to stand up to the elitists who have weakened our party and rendered the Democratic Party ineffectual in winning elections when running against Republicans.

Howard Dean is a grassroots leader who represents the PEOPLE, Chris, and the people know and trust him enough to the job because since losing the primary he hasn't stopped working and fighting for Democrats.

What I am afraid of is that the next leader will just be business as usual like Terry McAuliffe who was good at raising money but he was part of the problem and not the solution. We need somebody who not only can raise money to help Democrats win, we need somebody who represents the spirit of the Democratic Party and someone who understands the hopes and dreams of the average person.

Howard Dean is that leader.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

231. If one is the chair and is getting donations from defense companies and

companies that lobby to outsource (which is a mixed bag of fiscal accountability and effectiveness since private orgs have even more ability to hide work product that federal agencies) then the POLICY positions ad back door deals made with party chairmen is relevant.

I favor Dean because Dean has demonstrated you can take the case directly to the people and be competitive on a national level.

Major corporations will never give to Dems at or near the level they give to repubs...the only way for this party to compete with Republicans is to return it to it's mission to represent the underdog against the powerful.

You don't get there by pandering to the powerful.

The AFL CIO can no longer pick up the slack nor can other unions due to right to work laws.

[MADem]

232. My view of the role of chair

I know a lot of folks like the idea of Dean as chair, and I'd be happy with him myself--I just love the man, I think he is smart, forceful, honest and no nonsense. However, I think he might be wasted in the role.

The best chairs are the ones who will put their noses to the grindstone, spend three hundred days a year on the road, visiting every district, precinct, village and town, hustling and rustling up cash money, and getting every single son of a bitch on the same page to achieve victory in national contests.

Too much personality is sometimes not a good thing--hell, Terry McAuliffe is kind of geeky, but that is why he has been effective (getting rid of a shitload of debt, getting the new building, etc.)--he appears to genuinely love to play the part of second banana and cheerleader, and that IS part of the role. But it is really ALL ABOUT THE MONEY. No money, no honey. You can get the rich contributors to part with their money with a dynamic speaker, like Dean, but he doesn't have to be Chair to help out in that regard.

Also, CHAIRS DO NOT RUN FOR ANYTHING, at least not while they are chairs, and unless your name is George Herbert Walker Bush, you don't run around unsuccessfully trying to get a nomination for VP, even, while you are a sitting chair--it is rude, it is just NOT DONE. Which makes me wonder if Dean wants to just do it through the 2006 cycle...and that might not be good for the party in the run up to '08. It would benefit Dean, though, for another run in '08, because he would have all of the contacts at the most local level (it's what GHWB did, talk about 'Bar's' Christmas Card List notwithstanding, and it helped him enormously when he ran for the Presidency). I know Dean has said he has no plans for a run in '08, but no plans does not equal not running.

Who knows, Dick "Go Fuck Yourself" Cheney could stick out his cloven hoof and trip Jumping Jim Jeffords or Pat Leahy on a steep stair in the Senate, and Vermont could need a new Senator. It would be nice to have a doctor on the Hill who actually understands, definitively, that HIV/AIDS is NOT transmitted by sweat or tears (Bill Frist 'isn't sure'...would you want that cat killer operating on you?). I just see Dean in a role beyond cheerleader and fundraiser. I see him as defining policy, not selling it to the hinterlands, not herding and cajoling local operatives, and that rubber chicken circuit is a HUGE part of the job, if you want to be successful. And I think he'd be bored to tears with the Price-Waterhouse end of the job....it's way too much about cash, because that is the way our system operates, and not enough about ideas, which is Dean's greatest strength.

I know absolutely nothing about Simon Rosenberg, and maybe that's a good thing for right now. I don't even know what he looks like. America likes to get to know their new Mystery Date, and it will give him media opportunities that an old hand might not get. I'll have to do some reading ahead of the vote on Feb 12. I hope like hell he is cool on camera, doesn't have bad teeth, a whiney voice, or irritating quirks, is quick on the uptake, can keep cash coming in greater than cash going out, and doesn't get easily pissed off, because he HAS to be VERY good with the media whores on the television, otherwise he just won't cut it. He also needs an even (sunny would be too much to hope for) disposition and a quick, engaging wit. We sure as hell do not need a total WONK--a little wonkiness is fine, but we need someone who can appear to be halfway normal. We need someone who can connect with both the blue state base and those struggling bastards who gave it their all in the red state wastelands. If he has that full skill set, he'll be OK, I guess.

[Cookie wookie]

233. Howard Dean represents the kind of

rational change that is essential if the Democratic Party is to survive.

[noamnety]

239. I still want more info

The kos article was good stuff.

Whether or not I end up personally wanting him in that specific position, whether or not I agree with his position on the war, I'd like to hear more about him, since he's clearly got a large influence on the party no matter what specific job he is doing.

It carries some weight with me that you endorse him, but the endorsement (as I touched on in my earlier post) is too generic for me to get a real sense of him. In other words, make us see the same vision that you see - make us as excited as you are.

[Name removed]

240. Deleted message

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

[David Zephyr]

241. Nice Message Chris, But I'm With Dean and Wish You Were, Too.

Millions of us who had supported Howard Dean came to support John Kerry in his quest to rid this nation of the tyrant that sits in the White House. We failed.

I have not once since the election pointed blame to John Kerry. If we lost it was not because John wasn't good enough, it was because he never figured that Karl Rove and the Bush crowd could and would be so wicked and malicious and unethical.

It's time for someone who recognizes the Republicans for exactly who they are, what their long-term agenda is and who is not afraid to point it out to the American people.

I'm sick of compromising. The DLC and compromise has resulted in nothing but loss after loss nationally.

I welcome your willingness to support Howard Dean as Chair should he win that position.

The treatment that Howard Dean received in Iowa by the Gephardt and Kerry clandestine attacks were unworthy of those two men.

Unity and purpose and spirit will be the fruit of our Party led by Governor Dean.

It's time.

[hollowdweller]

267. If he was a middle income lifelong democrat he would be a Dean man

[lojasmo]

243. I predict that without Howard Dean as chair

We will suffer defeats in 2006 and 2008 that make 2004 look like a walk in the park.

I'm lukewarm about Rosenberg, probably would support him second in line to dean, but I'm so dissafected with the way the establishment keeps pushing candidates down our throats....I'll be very disappointed if they pull a "people for jobs and growth" on dean again.

[quaker bill]

248. I respectfully disagree

with your conclusion. But I respect the consideration you have given the topic.

I do agree, contrary to much often posted here, that the answer lies less in a carefully formulated and articulated series of policy positions and more in the mechanics of getting the job done.

Here is where we may part company.

There is a stark image difference between the Democratic and Republican parties at this point. Unfortunately, it is they that have the image of being fighters. I understand that this has less to do with reality than it does perception, but it is real none the less. Democrats "negotiate" Republicans "go to war".

However, a common misconception is that this impression arises out of the anti-war movement. That is a convenient rationalization, but it is simply wrong. Actually, the anti-war movement is a part of the Democratic party that stands up for what it believes and uses strong rhetoric to express it. The impression arises on a much broader front.

The bottom line of 2000 and 2004 is you can be "right" on all the issues and still end up on the short end of the electoral vote count.

What we need is the spirit that emboldened the language and the position of past generations of Democrats. Yes, this may not always sound "inclusive" on first blush, but if it is true to our principles, it will hold up over time.

Here is why I support Howard Dean. He has the intestinal fortitude to stand for what he believes even when faced with strong opposition. He can project an image of a party that has found it's soul and is prepared to fight for it's convictions. This is exactly the image we need.

Think of the recent leaders of the "republican revolution". These men were not "shrinking violets". These men spoke in an unencumbered fashion, often with ideas I found and still find offensive. My taking offense did not slow them up in the least. They now run the country.

I don't propose that we go out of our way to give offense. Only that we be true to our principles even when it ruffles a few feathers. It is an image thing, part of getting to be in charge is acting like you already have the job.

[SCRUBDASHRUB]

250. Chris Heinz's Post #148: Is he saying he won't be a Dem. much longer?

Am I reading this right? It's his response to Walt's (I believe) post #147.

Walt Starr (1000+ posts) Tue Jan-11-05 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #145

147. Yup


I'm with you there.

I'm watching closely as I feel like I won't be a Democrat any longer after this one is done.


Alert Printer Friendly | Reply | Top



ChrisHeinz (33 posts) Tue Jan-11-05 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #145

148. Neither do I.


I am signing off for now.

Interesting debate. Thanks to those who participated.

[Fabio]

253. Looks like a response to 146

#146 ie I dont get to vote


heinz replies in 148...neither do i

[SCRUBDASHRUB]

259. Oh, OK. I was confused. Didn't think he'd switch parties. Duh on me.

[ChiciB1]

287. Well, I asked the same question...

and I'm not so sure it was an answer to 146. Could be, oh maybe I need to check the TIME of the post.

[lady lib]

254. Hi Chris! I'm honored that you've taken the time to post

and respond to our comments here at DU. I hadn't heard of Simon Rosenberg, but I'll read up on him. Thanks.

[MADem]

256. Joe Trippi is on Hardball with his pick for Chair

His pick is Simon Rosenberg. He said what I did--Senate or another run in '08 for Dean. Interesting.

[proud patriot]

291. Really , that's good to know

very interesting

[dionysus]

263. no dice

enough of this insider money-changer bullshit... get some real change in there like Dean and we can progress from serial election losing crap and take it back to the people this country is founded on. Get the rich people's money out of politics, and their rich friends who espouse and fund that, and then finally WE THE PEOPLE WIN. You're not a politician, and please don't try to sway my opinion. Cause... you won't. There must be someplace warm you can play tennis...

..and Trippi endorses him... hmmmmmm

[catbert836]

264. Hi Chris

are you gonna run against Santorum? I need to know.

[politicasista]

265. Hey Chris, How you doing!

Ignore the haters. Thanks for all the hope you and your family gave us. Tell you're mom, stepsisters, and stepdad hello. :hi:

[Tinoire]

269. The war in Iraq is a deal-breaker. Going with the Progressive PDA, Dean!

That's something I couldn't overlook for love or money & I doubt many anti-war activists will.

Howard Dean is a Centrist who understands the base, knows what makes it tick, and is willing to represent it. I wasn't a huge fan of his but he's definitely people over corporations and vigorously denounced this war.

Dean vs Rosenberg will show us what kind of support is more important to the party establishment- the people's or the corporations. Putting Rosenberg, a former free-trade lobbyist, as head as the DNC, sends a clear message about the Party's new values.

As Andrew Lazarus points out, the GOP didn't become ascendant by moving to the center. They did it by making enough Americans enthusiastic about moving to the right—and further and further right.

It's too bad the Democratic Party doesn't realize that, if it really means to oppose the Repubiblican Party, its only chance is to make enough Americans enthusiastic about moving to the left—and further and further left.

Howard Dean can do that by raising the money from all the right places and making sure the DNC is as beholden to the people as he was during his campaign. Pro-war, pro-NAFTA, pro-corporation, Lieberman-protege, Rosenberg can't.

For blocking and tackling- you don't get much better than Dean.


The latest from the Progressive Democrats of America (you know old style Democrats not ashamed of the 70% anti-war faction):

DEAN FOR DNC CHAIR

By Steve Cobble
PDA Political Advisor
www.pdamerica.org

On Wednesday morning, November 3rd, even as George W. Bush was claiming victory,
Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) launched two bold “fight-back” initiatives:

(1) PDA immediately joined the “Ohio vote count” fight, which led to the historic
January 6th challenge by Rep. Conyers, Rep. Tubbs-Jones, Sen. Boxer, and friends;
and
(2) PDA launched its own “Draft Dean for DNC Chair” effort along with Grassroots for
America and PDA board member Pam Paul who was instrumental in connecting PDA with
the Dean netroots and the current Dean staff.

PDA’s leadership also sent a letter to Governor Dean encouraging him to run, and to
keep the energy alive that the Dean, Kucinich and Sharpton campaigns had injected
into the 2004 campaign. Just last week, PDA was introduced to the DFA’s January
MeetUps, so we could continue to work closely together for change. (And it was at
PDA's founding convention in July, of course, that PDA brought together Dennis
Kucinich, Howard Dean, John Conyers, & Barbara Lee in Roxbury, MA to help keep
progressive grassroots energy alive for the future.)

Now we are on the verge of helping “the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party” to
take a giant step forward by electing former Vermont Governor Howard Dean as the new
Chair of the Democratic National Committee next month.

The importance of this potential victory can not be overstated. Electing Governor
Dean as Chair of the DNC will be a victory for reform, for the internet, for small
donor fundraising, for volunteer action, for antiwar politics, for standing up and
fighting back, and for progressive values.

Howard Dean is the only candidate running for DNC chair who is a progressive
reformer, opposed the war in Iraq, raised millions and millions of dollars from
small donors, has both held executive office and practiced internet-based “netroots”
activism in his campaign, and who believes in change from the grassroots/netroots
up.

Howard Dean is not afraid to fight back when the GOP cheats, slanders, and distorts.
Howard Dean can handle the TV disinformers, the talk radio thugs, the Freeper
punks, and whatever Swift Boat-type liars the RNC drags out for their next round of
dirty tricks.

And amazingly, even though the Democratic Party is overwhelmingly opposed to the war
in Iraq (especially the way the Bush cabal has handled it), pro-choice (particularly
when the next Bush Supreme Court appointee will put the right to choose in
jeopardy), ready to defend Social Security (the FDR rock upon which the New Deal
Democratic Party was built), and solidly for universal health care (an area where
Dean had marked success as Governor of Vermont) only Howard Dean among the current
serious DNC candidates is on the “Wellstone side” of all these issues.

Oh, one more thing. When Howard Dean became Governor of Vermont in 1991, it was a
red state. In the previous president election, a Bush had defeated the Democratic
nominee from Massachusetts 51-48%. But since Howard Dean became Governor, Vermont
has gotten bluer and bluer. Which makes Governor Dean the only candidate running
for DNC chair who actually led his state as it switched from red to solid blue…

When the netroots first began pushing “Dean for DNC”, one party hack was anonymously
quoted attacking the idea, saying that it would be as “bad” as when Ron Brown ran
for DNC Chair. Well, that's interesting disinformation. I was on Ron’s campaign
for Chair, and here’s what happened:

*Ron Brown won, defeating 4 serious opponents.

*The Democrats held the House and Senate in ’90 & ’92.

*Bill Clinton won the Presidency in 1992.

If that’s our template for the next 4 years, the party hack’s comparison is not an
attack, it’s a compliment!

Dean for DNC. It’s the next step for reformers. And PDA is ready to roll…


http://www.pdamerica.org/articles/news/dean_by_cobble.php
===

In the last four years, the leadership of our party has left a long trail of election failures, primarily because they have abandoned the principles and traditional values of our party and ignored the needs of the grassroots. Progressives want leaders who are willing to admit errors, learn from them, and make changes in strategy and message as signs of their commitment to responsibility. Progressives want party leaders and candidates who act with the best interests of every voter in mind. For these reasons, PDA believes that a principled, passionate, pragmatic, socially progressive, and fiscally conservative leader, such as Howard Dean, must be chosen as the next DNC Chair. Such a leader is vital if our party is to head in a new direction. Such a candidate will create an environment where Democrats can both win national elections and regain the respect of their base. PDA supports the progressive grassroots choice and promotion of Howard Dean for DNC chair. PDA will work diligently to amplify this promotion and is committed to supporting Howard Dean directly if he chooses to seek this position. PDA is proud to be a part of this effort and will continue to support progressive candidates for positions at all levels across this great nation. PDA challenges you and the Democratic Chair Committee members to do the same.

[Zhade]

396. DAMN STRAIGHT, Tinoire!

"Dennis Kucinich, Howard Dean, John Conyers, & Barbara Lee" - man, to have been there!

Being pro-war is the line for me. I set aside that principle to vote for Chris' stepfather, but no more. Similarly, I will not budge on workers' rights, human rights, a woman's right to self-sovereignty, and a few other essential positions.

It'll be interesting to see what the party does with the DNC chair.

[femme.democratique]

270. ChrisHeinz, have you ever considered running for office?

I think you'd do quite well.

[Idioteque]

280. That would be awesome...

...maybe to get the seat back from Santorum?

Chris's dad was a kind, thoughtful, old school Republican in the mold of Teddy Roosevelt and Ike Eisenhower. Rick Santorum is full of hate and is not fit for John Heinz's seat.

[zulchzulu]

271. Yo Chris! It's Joe from Madison...on our thoughts...

You have to stop by again...your wit and sense of humor are greatly appreciated.

I've been going back and forth with the idea of Howard Dean putting his efforts with Democracy for America and also wanting to be the chair for the DNC. Lately, and I believe this is my final perception, is that he would be better suited to work exclusively with Democracy for America and let someone like Simon Rosenburg get the DNC chair instead.

I've had conversations here at DU with people who are die-hard Dean fans who feel the same way about Dean putting all his efforts with DFA...perhaps they also want Dean to run again in 2008. Either way, as long as DFA is part of the blocking at tackling for the win(s) as you mentioned, it's all good.

Having heard interviews by Rosenburg on the issues, he appears very qualified and would be a good fit.

As for JK, I'm still doing my site www.kerrysupport.com and am working on editing a documentary about the race...I'd love your input...

[rodeodance]

279. Hi fellow Madtown person

[MoonAndSun]

272. Welcome Chris, I just finished reading all of the posts up to now..

As you know by now, DU is where we let it all hang out, the good, the bad and the ugly.

Although I do not support Rosenberg for DNC chair, I respect the fact that you came here to start a serious discussion of this matter.

I am supporting Howard Dean for the DNC chair. I have been behind him since he was one of the few Dems to speak out against this war from the beginning. Howard Dean, Dennis Kucinich and Robert Byrd were one of the very few leaders to have the courage to do this. And he is not afraid to call out bush* and his brain, Karl Rove, or anyone else for that matter, who he feels is leading our country down the toilet.

Howard has my total support, but I want to thank you again for your input on this very important subject concerning the future of our party.

Again, thank you for stopping by, please do so more often. And my best wishes to you and your family in what ever endeavors you all embark on.

MoonAndSun



:)

[mzmolly]

282. What a decent/kind post.

I am proud when a Dean supporter like yourself respectfully disagrees.

Thanks.

:hi:

[txaslftist]

406. Yeah, I get it that you're for Dean...

as long as you don't support him to actually be the president. 'Cause "anyone who thinks the world is not made safer by the removal of Saddam Hussein has neither the judgement nor the vision to be president."

'member?

[mzmolly]

273. Dean is my first choice, Rosenberg is my second. I'd be pleased with

either man.

Dean is a great choice for obvious reasons, but he did become a polarizing figure in the primaries and that may hurt his chances.

Thanks for your thoughts Chris.

Both Dean and Rosenberg have very similar ideas and both men are good choices.

[trillian]

278. I'm with you, Chris.

Rosenberg is the best fit for the job. He has related experience and can hit the ground running with virtually no learning curve.

Dean is a better fit for elective office. I'd love to see him run for Senator.

[marcologico]

284. The closer I look the worse Dean looks. The venality of his surrogates

and their phony websites goes beyond unethical. It's what I'd expect from Rove or Reverend Moon. I honestly think a guy who would engage in these tactics or (giving him the maximum benefit of the doubt) not step in to condemn them is not a guy who will put the party's or the people's interests ahead of his own.

p.s. Chris this being the internet quite a few folks have drunk the Koolaid so don't expect to have much luck reasoning with them.

[Idioteque]

286. I support Dean for DNC chairman...

...but I would be perfectly fine with Rosenberg. I believe most deaniacs agree with me. Don't lump us all with the vocal minority that hates anybody that isn't Gov. Dean.

We should be happy... Dean vs. Rosenberg is a win-win situation for the party.

[Cheswick2.0]

294. what websites would those be?

you're funny

[Name removed]

297. Deleted message

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

[Cheswick2.0]

301. no I don't get the idea

and I have never seen a website like that, so I would like the addresses.

[Name removed]

308. Deleted message

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

[Cheswick2.0]

329. in other words you just made this all up

and can't back it up. Thanks for playing.

[Old and In the Way]

366. As a Kerry supporter in the primaries and the GE and 2008 if he so

chooses to run, you are totally offbase with your remarks about Dean and his supporters here.

One reason why Dean would be so good as DNC chair is precisely because of the energy and passion that his supporters would bring in rebuilding the Party foundation and growing the base.

[mzmolly]

306. *I* need the addresses. And, I need proof that Dean is involved with said

websites, because if he's not (which I'm certain he isn't) your point is moot.

Your saying at the very least, Dean should spend time condemning every website he doesn't approve of? Should Kerry? How bout everyother candidate that ran for office?

[sellitman]

314. Thanks for stopping by

Although I disagree with your assesment and will continue to support Dean I am glad you are posting here and would encourage you to make this a habit in 2005.

Thanks for the info too! :dem:

[mzmolly]

319. Welcome Sellitman! I think you replied to me instead of the thread?

:hi:

[marcologico]

320. Dean has never denied exploiting the internet for campaign purposes and in

fact he's proud to take credit for being an innovator so I'm completely confident that these are NOT rogue sites.

[mzmolly]

322. I don't think I've read many posts as ridiculous as this. LOL

Interesting choice of words *exploiting the internet* considering every other candidate running for office followed suit when they noted how successful using the internet was for campaign purposes.

In addition, Trippi was the internet guy, not Dean. Dean does'nt sit around creating websites, but some of his supporters do. Unusual? NO.

I'm still waiting for those links BTW. :hi:

[marcologico]

325. Check your bookmarks.

Look it's nothing personal but I don't feel like hijacking this thread in a big flame war over Dean's websites.

[mzmolly]

328. Don't make accusations you can't back up. I have no issues with

your not supporting Dean, but the reasons you noted are ludicrous.

If you don't support Dean because - for example, the media made him polarizing, then I say fine. But not to support him for using the internet and then claiming he creates derogatory websites in his spare time is a bit nutty.

No offense.

[marcologico]

330. mzmolly just for you I'll put a post together and start a thread ok? n/t

[seaglass]

365. I've read enough of mzmolly's posts to doubt VERY much

that she would be actively involved in websites that you suggest.

Others here I wouldn't doubt but mzmolly is extremely fair-minded.

p.s. Kerry supporter here so don't be doubting my motives for posting this.

[JI7]

381. i agree about mzmolly

she is very fair minded everyone. and i supported Kerry also.

[Melissa G]

288. Hi Chris, thanks for posting. Pro choice is a minimum requirement

Smart enough to oppose Iraq war is a likely requirement. Utterly committed to verifiable transparent elections is critical. Whoever is DNC chair needs to know there is no playing field to level unless the election FraWd probability is solved.
The other major issue is a Free Press that really reports the truth not one that is solidly owned by defense contractors with the only alternative being Fox...what an alternative. DNC Time, Talent and Treasure must start going into these issues Now. Yesterday would be better.
Welcome to DU :hi:

[peacetalksforall]

295. Should the Party avoid splitting up?

If yes, then that is the starting position for many discussions, including the Chair.

I think if it turns out that Rosenberg and Dean end up being tops in the run they should talk to each other (with perhaps a third) and democratically work something out.

If the Dems feel urgency in not losing years and decades of progress, they need to come together by tomorrow.

To reach the country club set and the K-Mart (if they are lucky) set, the Dems may need to join hands (by tomorrow).

I still haven't studied Rosenberg - there are some sweet and sour comments and links above. I am extremely against killing and executing.

Maybe there should be a co-chair or a tri-chair. That would really spin the spinners. They wouldn't know who to attack first.

If two or three could agree on Fresh and Restorative and non-right wing approaches with an emphasis on freedom-peace-progress and prosperity - I'd be blissful.

The trouble is that there is a little more to it all - the real foe is the entity Eisenhower warned us against and it crosses parties and omits secret sub-governments and is firmly entrenched in Tri-Laterals. Councils, and Societies.

[peacetalksforall]

296. I see nothing wrong with your post or your timing.

[Name removed]

307. Deleted message

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

[Fabio]

311. Are you being serious??

:wtf:

[Freddie Stubbs]

318. How do you know that he is staff for his stepfather's campaign?

Does the campaign even have any staff anymore? :shrug:

[Generic Other]

303. I appreciate being invited into the dialogue no matter who wins

This is what democracy is all about.

No one ever asked my opinion before. And to be courted by Dean and Heinz in one day makes me feel as if my party leadership thinks I count.

:)

[Barney Rocks]

326. I disagree with Chris---

I want Dean to lead our party. I will support him 100%--and I can hardly wait for the dawn of a new day and a new Democratic party under his fantastic leadership.

With his direction, we will once again have a party that will fight for our ideals and stand up for what we believe. The party of FDR and JFK can be reborn.

When I found out Dean had a chance for the job--it is the first time that I have been happy since Nov 2. I am not going to desert him for a DLC candidate--and I could care less that the "pundits" are telling us that the more "moderate" choice would be better.

Since when have the pundits EVER steered us the way we REALLY should go? We all know that they are not on our side.

DEAN all the way!!!

[Fender]

331. Chris Run Against Santorum

Chris run against Rick Santorum in 2006 so we dont have to see his face no more.

[TheDonkey]

332. Why can't my posts this popular. I am encouraged by what the NDN is doing

Rosenberg seems like an intresting mix between new innovative thinking and the need of a moderate sounding argument for Democrats.

I watched the few commercials that the NDN had created for the 2004 campaign and I was very pleased. They were hopeful, values based commercials that explained why being a Democrat was reasonable and necessary.

NDN hasn't made as big of a splash as Move-on.org but I believe they are headed to a future that might make a bigger impact than Move-on. I def. don't agree with all his policy remarks but I'm more intrested in how he can build a better party infastructure (that is what I expect in a DNC chair).

I'm definetly looking forward to more debate between the candidates for the party chair.

BTW, Chris, you should definetly think about running or becoming more involved in politics. We could use someone with your intellegence and charisma out front for us!

[sonias]

334. Thanks for stopping by Chris

You started a wonderful thread here. A lot of really good posts. Took me a long time to catch up on them all.

I'm backing Dean but like you and others have said, we don't get a vote. So really the only purpose of this discussion is to continue to frame the debate on where our party is going and what we stand for, and what the DNC chair can do to help us get that message out. Anybody can do fundraising. That's not even a serious qualification now. Systems are in place and anyone can do that.

I am very concerned about the DNC chairs policy positions because that is exactly the kind of leadership the party needs right now. Someone to frame our message about our Democratic party values. We need strong opposition to the bu$h administration policies and it needs to come from our party first. Our Democrats in Congress are still too scared about losing their seats to wage a real opposition campaign on any bu$h policy or appointment. And it's not just the numbers game. Yes I know we don't have control of any branch of government. All the more reason to be the opposition party. What have we got to lose. Get our message out and don't waver from it. That's exactly what people say they like about bu$h. Once he says something he sticks by it, even if he's wrong. Which of course he usually is. Americans just remember that one position he took, right or wrong, and see strength in his sticking by his guns. Arrogance is an American trait, and we need to play that game too.

I also agree with earlier posts that if Howard Dean wasn't in the race, no one would even be paying attention to the DNC race. It would all have been done behind closed doors. We have a once in a lifetime opportunity here to make a major course correction for the Democratic party. I hope that the DNC sees the wisdom of letting lose the Howard Dean big dog of war (the grassroots army). Bring it on!

Sonia

[Sleepless In NY]

337. Hey Chris

Like Dean the most. By the way think you could ask your step dad to make some noise about D.C. having to pick up the inaugural tab out of their Homeland Security Funds? Doesn't seem very fair or very wise, does it? "U.S. tells D.C. to pay inaugural expenses
City will divert funds from homeland security projects" http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6810085

Also after the big deal about the 87 billion dollar vote, it did pass, and the troops still don't have the necessary armour. Think he might mention that in the coming days too?

Would be nice to see the Democrats stand up for some of these issues..loudly..dontcha think?

[eSTIV]

338. One 'NO' vote for Dean

I would much rather see him on the ticket somehow than let him get sucked into the machine.

CLARK/DEAN '08
DEAN/CLARK '08

either way.

or

CLARK/KENT '08
DEAN/MARTIN '08
ROWAN/MARTIN '68

whatever

[angel54321]

345. To Chris Heinz

I too saw Simon Rosenburg on C-Span and he was one of the choices I was looking at as well. Tell you what. If you can get Mr Rosenburg to say he will take on Karl Rove anytime, any place, get in his face, get the Dems united for ANY cause... UNITY is what I am talking about,and mean it... then he just might make a good leader. I am swaying toward Howard Dean too. He's got the balls and could get less what others think IMO.

Chris, people are PO'd that we Dems have been labeled everything under the sun and rarely does one stands up for us. Thats why you saw alot of happiness and thank yous on here Jan.6th for Reps Conyers, Senator Boxer, Mrs Tubb-Jones. I cried with joy!! Thats our party!! They get it!! We need to restart at the grassroots level. I love my Party, but its been beatin like an abusive wife for too long. Its time to stop the abusive violence and bring our Democratic Party back home where it belongs. Thank you for your post, Chris and will be looking forward to hearing from you again.

[radfringe]

353. Here! Here!

big claps for you! :thumbsup:

...people are PO'd that we Dems have been labeled everything under the sun and rarely does one stands up for us.

if Dem party doesn't stand up and fight for itself then why should I think they will fight for me?

every once in a blue moon we have a Dem standing up -- then either he/she backs down, apologizes or left dangling in the wind...

meanwhile the repugs -- close ranks, send out the choir and echo chambers to get their message massive media coverage....

and where is the Dem response? uhhh, ohhh gee we're sorry.... we want bi-partisan cooperation... grovel grovel grovel

[Catchawave]

359. Very well stated Angel, I support your comments! -nt

[merkins]

346. Heard Rosenberg on the Majority Report a while back

and he sounded oh so nuanced in the droning dialect of the beltway consulting cabal I could only think of him as an Al From-Lite spinoff.
Its Howard Dean for me or fording the river to a third party.

[radfringe]

347. whoever ends up as Chair - needs to confront "values"

Since Reagan the republicans have packaged themselves as the protector of "values" (moral and/or family)

The term "values" is a warm/fuzzy one. However, beyond saying the word - the republicans have failed to define what they mean by values.
They just sling it around and every one nods and snuggles up to a flannel blanky...

In my book - saying you support "values" is not enough -- what are those values? Hitler had values -- he valued the idea of a master race. Stalin valued complete control. In Rowanda and Bosnia -- ethnic purity was valued.

Dems need to force the GOPers to define what they mean by "values" and come out with their own definition of values.

I've had my encounters with various GOPers, who wave the word around, and have asked them what they mean by values. The response is usually "Well ya know, family values"

When pressed to further define it and to be specific -- they can't do it.

Having values is one thing -- but what are they? Are they the same as your next door neighbor's values? And how are these values being promoted/supported by the government? Should government even be involved in defining values and imposing their definition on YOU?

[Stockholm]

349. How can anyone supporting the war be running for the Chair? n/t

[Zhade]

397. Do you REALLY want the answer to that question?

Because I think this thread would easily double in size!

[MADem]

351. Howard Dean, future junior Senator from Vermont???

Jumpin' Jim Jeffords is 70 years old. He's an independent. His term expires in '06. Who's gonna fund his reelection? The Democrats??? I should think they'd want a registration shift before they start shovelling buckets of cash his way. I sure as hell would--charity begins at home. Who's gonna put up a stiff opponent? The GOP. Count on it--I'm sure they've already scoped out a few "populist, everyman" candidates who can make a strong showing.

If Jeffords steps down, it's Dean in a walk, if he wants it. And that's good for America.

[Freddie Stubbs]

450. Bernie Sanders manages to raise enough money to get reelected

every two years, and he is also an independent. And he has the exact same constituency as Jeffords (the entire state).

[Ramsey]

380. Rosenberg my second choice

After Dean. I'd be happy enough with him. He has split off from the DLC, which has had a losing strategy in my opinion, and seems focused on the progressive ideals that I think as a party we need to reinvigorate ourselves. I do worry that he isn't enough of a bulldog (no worries in that area with Dean :-) )

As for point two, I have to strongly disagree. We should not under any circumstances be considering a candidate for head of the DNC whose personal policy positions are at odds with some of the most fundamental tenets of the party platform, whose ONE qualification is that he sat on the 9-11 panel. Such a person is irrevocably damaged goods and cannot possibly stand up to the RNC and the Republican leadership with any credibility. Roemer, who is anti-choice, pro-Social Security dismantling, and currently a fellow at a right wing think tank, would be an a huge mistake. Frankly I am appalled that Nancy Pelosi is supporting him. Why, just because he was on the 9-11 panel?? Being pro-war-lite didn't get us anywhere this past election, any more than generally being too Republican-lite has gotten our party anywhere for the past 3 election cycles.

We need a truly dedicated reform candidate from outside of the establishment. I'm sorry, but the current powers that be had their chance and they've failed. I am ready to win some elections. Dean has the right idea - to take our progressive values to the WHOLE country.

[AuntiBush]

383. Hi Chris!

Thanks for giving us something to think about. I visited the link http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/12/6/112326/490 re Simon Rosenberg. Good bio/desciption, but here's the deliema I believe our party is having here...

How to combat the "ulta-conservative-rich-corporate-run-think-tank-fundamental-philosphy." These are issues all us need to approach very carefully.

In other words, do we really have to be "just like them" to beat them?

Half of us certainly want a down-to-earth representative, that not only can relate to "all of the people," and "tell it like it is." Period.

Simon sound "good," don't get me wrong, but again, the Democrat party has historically held the majority of Congress and the White House for quite a long time. Look was F.D.K. did during his record breaking 4 terms. Times were much like today.

Personally, I believe most will grow so tired of being Bushwacked, we'll get back into office with 2006 coming up. My own state of MD has a Repub in the Gov seat, now, but in 2006 he's out of here. Trust me on that one.

If anyone seen NJ's new Gov yesterday, it was packed with powerful punches, ovation after ovation and he wasn't elite so to speak. They are one ticked off state that's not bowing to any neo-con issues and they mean business.

Today on CPAN, Kennedy packed powerful punches himself. So, I think our party is coming back like never before. My vote for the chair is HOWARD DEAN because he's down-to-earth "but" I don't like the right-wing swing either way. That's when we lose who we are.

Maybe Simon would be good in a conservative district, and can bring in Dem votes, but as a chairman, we need a guy that is a true Democrat...

[KerryReallyWon]

386. Hi Chris!! I am very supportive of....

Rosenberg. I hope you are well. We met in Miami in the early days. I want to continue to work for JK
Thanks for the post.

[Lororia]

389. About Point 2

Candidate Kerry lost my homestate for the same reason that Gore lost it...while a Democratic Senator won.

The Republicans run local campaigns that succeed in reducing the entire election to one or two hot button issues. Asking around, I found that the Republicans were running different types of local campaigns for the national election based on what was important in that state. People in my state voted "guns and butter". They voted for a Democratic senator because he was perceived as someone who would help the working people of the state and because he stays completely out of hot emotional and religious issues. But, despite a campaign that indicated the contrary, the Democratic candidate (Kerry this time instead of Gore) was perceived as someone who would fight to take away private ownership of guns. I saw bumperstickers to the effect that Kerry would take away guns. It's such an emotional issue here that the insinuation is all that is necessary to sink a candidate.

The other 2 issues were abortion and religion. The Republicans have "married" themselves to Christianity to the point that it's almost like voting against God for some folks to vote Democratic.

The national Democratic campaign failed to fight the things that were locally important issues like this, and so, despite union endorsements, Kerry lost, in part I believe, because he didn't connect at these local levels. The GOP had local professionals, such as doctors, in radio commercials talking about how they were having to leave the state because their insurance was so high due to people winning excessive malpractice suits. Things would get worse under Kerry, they said, and the commercials ran a lot. You're going to lose what few doctors you have, they said!

There were no Kerry commercials with the same kind of local or emotional appeal disputing the lies that the GOP laid out as facts. The same thing happened with Gore....radio ads, etc boring it into people's heads that there guns would be taken, their rights denied, etc. No Gore ads ran hitting his support of unions and what he would do to help the working poor, single mothers, and disabled people seeking medical care. The strong religious message intrinsic to liberal platforms weren't pressed, such as charity and giving and helping.

I think the Democrats are losing some states because of a failure to respond to strong local campaigning that connects to emotional issues for the the people of that region. Kerry might have won here with radio ads, etc, that hit key emotional issues simply and directly, with a consequence connected to it for failure to vote for him. Here, it could have been unions and a simple refutation that Kerry wasn't going to take away guns.

I hope the next presidential campaign recognizes this simple tactic and goes to war with it.

[merh]

390. The main criteria for DNC chair is that they recognize that

dems live in red states and they stop ignoring us, especially in the presidential campaigns. Dean has said he will reach out to the red states, what is Rosenberg's position?

[Cheswick2.0]

401. you can be sure that if Dean said it Rosenberg did too

however, how reaching out to the red states takes shape is what matters.
I trust Dean to run a grassroots organization. As I learned during the primaries and campaign, anyone can talk like Dean but usually what they say is nothing more than clever and meaningless imitation. It's kind of like when your parrot talks.... the words sound right but the parrot has no idea what it's talking about.

[merh]

405. I trust Dean to do what he says he is going to do. I don't see him

as a man of empty promises. I think the energy that brings to the party cannot be matched by any other in the running for the post. If they could, we would have heard about them by now. I have never heard of Rosenberg.

[Freddie Stubbs]

402. That is what New Democrats are all about

Realizing that we cannot win by simply pandering to the liberal wing of the party. We need to reach out to moderates, especially those living in red states.

[merh]

403. I disagree, moderates are not the issue.

There are progressive, liberal members of the Democratic party that are forgotten and not courted. In the South, folks may be liberal, but they have a tendency to not vote for someone who doesn't take the time to ask for their vote.

I have no desire to see the party shift to the center. The left is fine, we don't need to adjust to become more appealing to a moderate or a repug lite. We need to act like we care about the members of the parties in the red states and ask for their help during campaigns.

[Freddie Stubbs]

440. There aren't enough members of our party in many red states

If we are going to make any progress there, we are going to have to expand our number of supporters.

[merh]

442. Yes they are. But members of the other party court them and

lie to them about the "values" of their party. As I said, in the South most people aren't going to vote for a candidate that doesn't ask them for their vote, let alone for a candidate that won't waste his/her time or money coming to the state to campaign.

[CWebster]

404. Yes those corporate inside the beltway types

really know what it takes to connect, don't they?

I guess that is why they take their cues from the success of Republicans?

[Freddie Stubbs]

441. Every DLCer is an "corporate inside the beltway type?"

Tell that NC Governor Michael Easley, DE Governor Ruth Ann Minner, AZ Governor Janet Napolitano, NM Governor Bill Richardson, KS Governor Kathleen Sebelius, NY Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, and VA Governor Mark Warner.

These DLCers know what it takes to connect, and none of them works 'inside the beltway.'

[Name removed]

392. Deleted message

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

[Zhade]

398. This is the type of thing the party needs to hear.

Even if the stuff about the Bonesman deal is wrong, the fact that anyone can think it possible shows that the party is in grave danger of extinction.

Again, I am sorry for your loss, and infuriated at those - like Rosenberg - who mock it by supporting this massive war crime.

[Vektor]

400. S&B?

B&S is more like it.

The fact that anyone can even "think it" shows their SANITY is in grave danger of extinction. Next thing you know, they will be accusing Kerry and * of drinking goat's blood together from a silver chalice, by a tombstone, in the graveyard, in the light of a full moon, while wearing druid hoods like something out of fucking "Spinal Tap".

I think we are all a little old for this Dungeons and Dragons "dark majique" crap.

[Zhade]

409. Yeah, yeah, and Oswald shot Kennedy by himself.

Look, I'm not saying Zanti's right. In fact, I do not believe the "Bonesmen deal" CT myself. But I think you're out of line calling Zanti's sanity into question. The loss of a child is going to make ANYONE very distraught.

I still believe the party should realize that there is this level of distress and anger.

[Vektor]

423. Not what I did...

I never singled anyone out, nor did I make an attempt to discredit anyone's loss. I made a sweeping statement that it may not be a rational conclusion for anyone to get too wrapped up in these S&B theories.

It does stand to reason though, that making vicious claims about another person might open one up to scrutiny or at least an incredulous response from other posters. I feel for anyone who has lost a child, but I and many others are losing patience with the wild theories and scapegoating that goes on on here sometimes, from many people.

I make no effort to combine the two...I'm approaching them as two separate issues. If someone has indeed suffered a loss of this magnitude, that is tragic and my heart goes out to them.

Separately, accusations of secret S&B plots, from anyone, might not be doing any good.

See PM. :-)

[Zhade]

437. Fair enough.

NT!

[Vektor]

438. OK

:-)

[bloom]

407. One thing is - I know a lot more about Simon Rosenberg

than before Chris Heinz started this thread.


So... It's been good for something. :)

[ChrisHeinz]

410. Thanks.

I hope people realize that I did not come on here to change minds about Simon versus Dean. As a longtime member of the community, and has someone who admires what Gov Dean has done these last 24 months, I simply didnt want my endorsement to be in a vacuum.

People would rip me even more if someone had posted my endorsement and I not owned up to it and explained it.

Now, more pressing issues. The ceiling of my apartment just fell in and water is leaking from the apartment above.

Awesome. I love NY

[bloom]

413. You're welcome!

It may very well be that Rosenberg will get the chair and it will be good to know what he is about.


I had the ceiling in my studio fill with water a couple months ago - from a broken pipe. Good luck with that.

:)

[welshTerrier2]

415. damned republican landlords !!!!

buckets and trash bags ... and a shop vac for the rugs ... and take some pictures !!

oh, and call your insurance guy if you have one ...

[IndianaGreen]

420. You should come to Indiana, we are flooded

and many of our National Guardsmen are deployed overseas instead of being home bagging sand bags!

[angel54321]

439. No mind changed here because I still dont know and

you haven't changed my mind about Simon versus Dean at all. I will keep watching the debates and look again at Mr Simon. Before you posted, he was a verrrrry close second to Mr. Dean to me. I just need to see that spark, that fervor that is so needed for us Dems!! Do you see that in Simon?

FYI, I am a moderate Catholic and voted for JK. Kinda funny being on this forum where lotsa leftys post. Gotta love them though :crazy:
Some of them crack me up!

Hello to your mom and bros and JK for us too :hi:

[Freddie Stubbs]

444. You need a house

I'm sure that you can find a nice home in Allegheny, Beaver, Butler, Lawrence, Mercer, or Westmoreland County. ;)

[Bouncy Ball]

414. Hi Chris

I'm a Dem in Texas and just wanted to say that I think Kerry is a good man and I am still heartbroken (and probably always will be) over the election.

If you would, please tell your family there are a lot of Democrats out here who feel this way.

(I'm supporting Dean for chair, but I appreciate you posting here! The war support is a deal-breaker for me....)

[ChrisHeinz]

416. I am having dinner with my mother and bro tonight.

I'll pass along your well wishes. JK doesn't get back from the ME until tomorrow. Thanks.

In the meantime, my post-race depression was a very effective tool for weight loss.

:beer:

[janx]

417. I have to say --

Your mother was absolutely wonderful during the campaign, Chris. Really top-notch! She came across (even through the filter of the media) as a very genuine and caring woman.

[Jax]

418. Completely agree with janx here

Your Mom is incredible. I so wanted to hear her voice as First Lady.

She is sharp, smart, she is a great speaker, she really listens. I hope we hear ALOT more from her in the future. She is incredibly refreshing. More Teresa Heinz Kerry please.

Jax

[MelissaB]

428. I'll third that

from deep in the South (Alabama). There are some progressives here, too. ;)

From everything I read about your mom, I wanted her in the WH just as badly as I did JK, and I'm still trying to get out of this funk after the election.

[Bouncy Ball]

419. My post-race depression was a very effective tool for weight gain.

Which I am now working off.

LOL.

[GreenPartyVoter]

425. Say hi to your mom for me. I REALLY like her! :^D

-------------------------------------
Would Jesus love a liberal? You bet!
http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/

[Dr Fate]

421. I want someone solidly opposed to Bush/media.

I dont want any "me too" Democrats representing me anymore.

It may be silly to some, but I wont touch any DEM w/ a ten foot pole who agrees with Bush on two huge issues.

Thanks for your input, Chris!!!

[Skittles]

424. HOWDY CHRIS

I just want to say thanks for posting in the DU, especially now when we are feeling pretty down following the re-selection of Bush, the tsunami disaster and the loss of our beloved Khephra.

We appreciate your posts. And may I add I'm a HUGE fan of your mom's - SHE ROCKS!!! :hi:

[ChrisHeinz]

427. Thanks

[graywarrior]

433. Let us know what you had for dessert,

I have post election dessert disorder which I relieve by purging every time I see George on tv.

[sistersofmercy]

434. No offense but I like Dean for the position

In fact Dean is doing a meet-up here tomorrow and I will probably attend.

[graywarrior]

435. Agreed. Time for some In-Your-Face politics.

[SonofMass]

445. Let's get together and help Chris get a star!

[bloom]

446. He may already have one

I believe that he mostly posts under another name.

I'm sure he appreciates the thought though. :P

[Zhade]

447. Um, I think he can afford one of his own.

What, you think the rest of us come from rich families?

[cindyw]

451. I am ashamed of how some here have responded to Chris.

It took a lot for him to come here and share his opinion, especially in the face of the Support Dean or Die attitude here. It was that attitude in the primary that added to my choice to support someone other than Dean along with history as Governor.

There are many of us who did not support Dean in the primary, but respect him as a man for his enthusiasm. While we may be outnumbered in this thread, I suspect it has more to do with the attacks a stand against Dean often bring. The constant suggestion that anyone who does not support Dean is a right winger is not appreciated either.

I have no idea who I support for DNC Chair, but I know that the attacks on Chris are unwarranted, especially given the considerable time he put in campaigning for us the in election.

As for Point 2, I honestly am not sure. I suppose it depends on whether the persons policy positions would influence what they block and tackle on. Mostly I do not understand what the DNC Chairs job is. I suspect that many here think it is the next best thing to being President. I am exceedingly unhappy with Dems who hold so called "centrist" positions and then use the idea of bipartisanship to go along with the President for the sake of progress. What I would like in a leader is someone who takes a stand on what the party stands for and puts the resources of the DNC behind those issues.

I don't know if this is part of what the DNC does, but I would like to see them sponser ad campaigns outside of elections. There should be commercials all over TV explaining the implications of Bush social security plans. I would like to see a commercial all over the news highlighting Bush "flip-flop" on Gay Marriage Amendment. Those who voted for him for that reason must know. This is what I would like to see in leadership of the DNC. I would like them to act more like a party promoting ideas and protecting accomplishments rather than a campaign organization. Can you tell me how Rosenberg would do in this manner?