Nancy Pelosi is helping to cirulate a letter to discount Dean?

[protect freedom impeach bush now]

If she is she is now just ANOTHER certified spineless
DEM !

HOW DARE SHE TRY TO DECIDE WHAT THE VOTING DEMOCRATS WANT !!

I hope i am incorrect.
I hope she has enough sense and did not do that.

Anyone heard differently ?

this DU thread is where i found out, and the only place
so far -
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=314178&mesg_id=314532&page=

did anyone else see Dean AND did that subject come up ?

OR IS THIS JUST A RUMOR
or COMPLETE BULL SHIT on someone's part?

[ibegurpard]

1. All I heard is that she endorsed Gephardt.

:shrug:

[QC]

2. What does the letter say?

[goobergunch]

I concur. Link, please? [link now posted]

All I know is she supports Gephardt.

EDIT: It looks like the "post number bug" has struck this post...

SECOND EDIT: Link posted...thanks.

[poskonig]

5. Something analogous to 'Dean wants to destroy Israel'

eom

[Skwmom]

49. I'm not a Dean supporter

but that is ridiculous.

[sangh0]

3. WARNING!!!!

This thread is highly speculative

[CentristDemocrat]

6. Dean said in a Wolf Blitzer interview

That she and Lieberman are circulating a letter and trying to get other members of Congress to sign it.

[w13rd0]

16. Actually...

...Wolf Blitzer is the one that said Pelosi was involved, and Dean even said, "and Nancy, if what you say is true..."

[sugarcookie]

25. Yes, you are right

Wolf said it and I don't think Dean knew about it until Wolf told him. I could be wrong...just the impression I got.

[Forkboy]

28. hence the question marks

:eyes:

[Forkboy]

79. WARNING!!!

This thread is correct;

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/09/10/national2031EDT0898.DTL

[Khephra]

4. I pity her office

She's about to get a hell of a lot of emails, letters and calls from Deanies.

:bounce:

[liberalnurse]

9. Damn straight she will.

I'll go to D.C and protest....right outside her office!

[Marlie]

10. She's a Dem that needs to go

She's an insider who, as the DLC, wants no part of Dean. They
want Gephardt or Lieberman, their boys. Gephardt has done an
absolutely dredful job as head of the democratic congress - look
what's happened the past few years yet they want to shave him down
our throats. It's going to be rough sledding for Dean or anyone
not on the DLC's preffered members list. It's sickening.

[JohnKleeb]

11. I think this is all about what Dean said on Israel

:shrug: no opinion on the matter
but I thought I read that Dean had a pretty Pro Israel stance. :shrug: I dont know
Also I thought Dean was DLC and thats not a flame just an observation. On Gephardt he aint my candiate but I thought the DLC's talking point was to be more pro business less pro labor and Gep isnt that. Trying to stay out of a fight and be fair.

[goobergunch]

27. LMAO!

That leaves us with about 30 Dems in the House.

[otohara]

12. I Just Phoned - They Know NOTHING about letter

but thanked me, so the press people could go check it out. Said I was the 3rd caller

[madfloridian]

14. They did not deny it, either. I called CA and DC.

One said they were checking into it. DC office did not deny it.
Both offices are being hit by a lot of calls. We have donated to the DCCC twice lately.

If this is true, I will formally ask that our donations be refunded. They will not cram Lieberman down my throat.

[CentristDemocrat]

15. Could be lying

Or the people at the number you called really don't know anything--still doesn't mean it isn't true.

[liberalnurse]

7. If true...I didn't catch that part of the interview but.....

I want to alert Ohio Deanies ASAP....

Do you think it will be on the Dean web site?

[pruner]

62. someone mentioned it on the blog

but there hasn't been any confirmation as of yet

[montanacowboy]

8. Pelosi IS...

a Bush apologist no matter what you think - remember her daughter made that cute little movie "travels with George" - watch her closely, she is aligned with the spineless dems.

[goobergunch]

23. WRONG

IIRC, she lead the fight against the Iraq resolution in the House.

[JohnKleeb]

29. I thought her and Kucinich colead

that said props to both and another prop for Kucinich for speaking at a rally.

[goobergunch]

32. Kucinich was also a major leader in that fight...

I don't remember exactly, but it was Kucinich, Pelosi, Payne (NJ), and a couple others.

[JohnKleeb]

37. bloody good

:) thanks
They all deserve our thanks.

[Ardee]

40. you are kidding of course?

laugh of the day, thanks for the humor......

[kwolf68]

13. I don't like Dean

But Pelosi needs to back off and do her job as Minority leader and let the people decide.

If the Dems nominate Dean then that's the way our process works. I may not like, but I will respect it and either decide to cast my vote for Dean or opt out of voting Dem.

Either way, its a personal decision we all have to make. Pelosi isn't running...If Dean has issues then we will hear about it from the people he is challenging for the party's nom.

[davidinalameda]

33. she is still a party leader

and has every right to promote whatever candidate she wants

geeze, it's not like she's the first politician to push a candidate

[madfloridian]

43. Not to circulate a letter to a candidate without his knowledge.

I just talked to his CA office. The letter did say that they believe Israel has a right to exist.

I asked the aide where Dean said they did not. She had no clue.

Dean never said that, there is no reason for this.

[Tinoire]

86. Well- hang around in F/A a little and you'll learn

that for some people, not all, but way too many... the mere whiff of a suggestion that there should be a Palestinian State will get you snowed under accusations that you would deny Israel its right to exist (unless you agree that the Palestinian State should be in Jordan).

If you're brave enough to go where wiser men dare not, mention that you believe in one-state solution where everyone has the same rights regardless of religion or ethnicity and... duck!

The politics of this would make perfect sense if Dean really believes what he said but this business about an 'even-handed stance' is contradicted in earlier articles and how on earth can you have an even-handed stance when you want to quadruple military aid?


As our astute DrFunkenstein put it in this Sept 2 thread

Troubling Article In The Voice About Dean's I/P Stance

"Just so there is no confusion - Howard Dean flew to Israel for several days paid for by AIPAC. When he was there he was given a tour of the region by AIPAC. During his stay, he met with Ariel Sharon and promised - if he were President - that he would raise military aid to fight Palestinians from $1 billion to $4 billion dollars. It was during this AIPAC-led tour that he came to decide that the separation wall was a necessity."
-------------------------------

Dean believes the Bush administration should be giving Israel $4 billion in military aid to fight terrorism, not the $1 billion it proposed last month.

http://www.jewishsf.com/bk030418/us02.shtml

-----------------------
Dean would also quadruple the loan guarantees (currently at $2 Billion):

Last December, Dean told the Jerusalem Post that he unequivocally supported $8 Billion in US loan guarantees for Israel. "I believe that by providing Israel with the loan guarantees...the US will be advancing its own interest," he said. His unconditional support for the loan package, in addition to $4 Billion in outright grants, went further than even some of the most pro-Israel elements in the Bush administration, like Paul Wolfowitz, who wanted to at least include some vague restrictions like pushing Israel to curtail new settlements and accept a timetable to establish a Palestinian state.

http://www.muslimwakeup.com/mainarchive/000119.html

[Sean Reynolds]

17. DEAN didn't say anything about the letter...WOLF did.

So it wasn't as if Dean brought this to Wolf's attention, it was the other way around. Wolf ASKED him about it.

[Khephra]

18. Shit, shit, shit...

I just spent the last five plus minutes trying to transcribe the segement and something weird happened...

All of a sudden my screen refreshed on its own and I lost all my typing.

Fuck!


I'm not doing that again.

Here's some bits...

Dean didn't bring up the letter. It was Wolfe.

Evidently Howard Berman is circulating the letter. Pelosi is with him, Wolfe said.

We'll get the transcript up when CNN puts posts it. We're going to have to. He addresses his Israel/Pal statements in detail, including the fence. He also comment's on Edwards comments on his race statements.

[goobergunch]

22. I hate that...

and now the software won't let you transcribe in one window and post in the other.

:-(

[Woodstock]

19. Dean just said

“The position I take on Israel is exactly the same position the United States government has taken for 54 years.”

[Cocoa]

20. how can she "decide what the voting democrats want"?

Nancy Pelosi can't keep you from voting for Dean if you want to do that.

[madfloridian]

21. Not her alone.

My stance is that the party will not let the grassroots have a decision.

[Cha]

24. Hopefully they won't have a choice but to let "the grassroots"

have a "decision"! That's the topsy turvy I am looking for.

[Cocoa]

26. how?

what can the party do to keep you from voting for Dean?

[madfloridian]

30. How could we vote if he is not the nominee?

If he remains the front runner, but is not the nominee, there is no way to vote for him.

In my mind, it is an underhanded thing to do to any candidate.

[Cocoa]

31. that's decided in the primaries

Pelosi only gets one vote, and by the time it gets to her state it will probably by over anyway.

[Starpass]

34. We need to drive out of the US Congress every fucking Dem

who doesn't think Howard Dean is the Dems answer to God. That will leave a whole full house (and senate) for the repukes to occupy. Several months ago the reports started coming out that they are all scared shitless of a Dean nomination because they feel he will take the whole party down with him. Do they campaign with him or try to distance themself from the "anti-war" person in a society gone nuts on being protected and defended since 9/11. Perhaps the congresspeople are trying to survive. But if they say anything bad about Howard, I agree, drive them out of office and make sure no goddamn Dem gets those seats. Serves them right. And with a whole shit bang of repukes then in Congress, Presidente Dean ought to feel right a home (he's more comfortable with them than Dems--and you will ultimately find that out).

[goobergunch]

36. There are currently...

7 House members that have endorsed Dean
2 Senators that have endorsed Dean

[Starpass]

38. goob-that's overwhelming, I stand corrected

okay we let 9 of them keep their seats.....geez

[madfloridian]

53. Your objectivity is definitely not showing.

You have always been one to look to on this board. Let me explain that I am not a bopper, a deanie, or anything like that. Please allow those of us who support him to do so without insults.

I have a certain amount of intelligence, two college degrees, and I don't like people insulting my candidate all time. At this moment, I support him.

If at a later date, we change our mind.....let it be our choice.

Your hatred of Dean really shows. If you can find where I insulted another candidate, let me know.

[Tinoire]

35. Pelosi is no liberal and we were warned

though I'd like to see this letter because I am smelling a disinformation campaign here (sorry Dean supporters) to convince people that Dean is even-handed on the Israel/Palestine issue. He wasn't and was starting to take a major beating for this (to include a petition for Clarification of Stance on Israeli-Palestinian Conflict because he was coming across more as a Sharon Hawk than anything else and articles about his hawkishness and philosophical proximity to AIPAC were being printed (complete with quotes from Dean himself). So now, all of a sudden the Hawks are accusing him of being too even-handed?

I don't buy it for a minute. Dean supportes the building of the I/P Wall of Shame which no even-handed person should support. I would like to see Dean grilled on this issue and answer some very-pointed questions before I can believe he changed his position overnight.

Methinks people are very afraid of Kucinich who has consisitently and from the beginning advocated a clear, substantiated, even-handed stance.

Anyway, Nancy is no liberal.


Published on Sunday, November 10, 2002 by CommonDreams.org
Pelosi Win Not A Progressive Victory
by Stephen Zunes

<snip>
The clearest example is her strident support for the right-wing Israeli government of Ariel Sharon, the former general widely considered by the international community to be a war criminal. While Israel represents only one-tenth of one percent of the world’s population and Israeli Jews enjoy the world’s sixteenth highest per capita income, Pelosi has supported sending a full one-third of all U.S. foreign aid to prop up Sharon’s fragile coalition government and to support his occupation forces in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Golan Heights.

<snip>

Late last month, Amnesty International released a thoroughly-documented 80-page report detailing war crimes by Israeli occupation forces during its offensive in the West Bank this past March. This follows up upon a preliminary report issued during the offensive which noted how “the IDF acted as though the main aim was to punish all Palestinians. Actions were taken by the IDF which had no clear or obvious military necessity.” The report went on to document unlawful killings, destruction of civilian property, arbitrary detention, torture, assaults on medical personnel and journalists, as well as random shooting at people in the streets and in houses.

These observations were confirmed by Human Rights Watch and other reputable human rights groups, including Israeli groups like B’Tselem, Rabbis for Human Rights, and Yesh G’vul. In response, Assistant House Majority Leader Tom DeLay introduced a resolution which claimed that “Israel’s military operations are an effort to defend itself ... and are aimed only at dismantling the terrorist infrastructure in the Palestinian areas.”

<snip>

During this same period, as peace and human rights activists spoke out in condemnation of the Bush Administration’s support for Sharon’s offensive – including a declaration by President George W. Bush that the rightist prime minister was a “man of peace” – Pelosi rushed to the administration’s defense, supporting a Republican-sponsored resolution praising President Bush’s “leadership” in the crisis. In throwing her support to Bush, she openly defied the growing discontent within the Democratic Party rank-and-file over the party leadership’s insistence on kowtowing to the Republican administration’s militaristic foreign policy agenda.

<snip>

If Nancy Pelosi is the best the Democrats can do for leadership, there is little hope of stopping George W. Bush.


http://www.commondreams.org/views02/1110-02.htm


--------------------------
Published on Sunday, November 17, 2002 by Reuters
Pelosi Vows to Back Bush if War Comes with Iraq
by Joanne Kenen

WASHINGTON - New House of Representatives Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, a liberal who has been at odds with President Bush on Iraq, pledged on Sunday to support him if the United States goes to war in Iraq.

"Yes, I would support the president," the California Democrat responded on NBC's "Meet the Press" program when asked if she would back Bush even if he opted for military action without U.N. support.

<snip>

She also declined to join in with Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle's comments last week questioning whether Washington has really made progress in the war on terror.

"What is enough? Enough is a guarantee that it won't happen again," she said, adding that "The war on terror is about more than Osama bin Laden."

Questioned several times about her liberalism, Pelosi stressed that she saw her role as unifying her party and developing consensus, not necessarily imposing her own views.

<snip>

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/1117-04.htm

[goobergunch]

39. I/P is a strange issue IMHO

I don't make up my mind on a person just on their I/P stance.

I would also note that Pelosi is a member of Kucinich's Progressive Caucus. http://bernie.house.gov/pc/members.asp

[Tinoire]

42. Thanks! Was not aware of that. Thanks very much

You're right not to make your mind up just on that one issue... It's not my one issue but it is the major issue for me because it says a lot about how a person sees the world and views justice.

On edit: IMO, I/P is one of the major issues out there...

This entire Bin Laden thing revolves around I/P and today's latest tape re-emphasized that. We hardly talk about it in the US where it's become the elephant in the living room but it's big news around the world. Why not here? After 9/11, ADL and ZOA flooded the media with instructions to distance the attack from the I/P conflict and people bought it! The entire war on terrorism, on Iraq, on Afghanistan has to do with this- this is why I can't let it pass :(

[shance]

50. I/P is a sensitive issue because the treatment of the Palestinians

is being censored and has been censored from Americans for years.

[Starpass]

41. Tin--and you think Dean IS???

Then you should ask Howard why every time a reporter asks him about being a Liberal he goes fucking nuts denying it. Well, then you could really look into Howard's views in the past and his working better with repukes than Dems in Vermont and then Pelosi would look like a borderline Commie to you............

[Tinoire]

44. Oh Heavens no!

I never thought Howard Dean was a liberal. Some Dean supporters still aren't on speaking terms with me for having pointed that out since the beginning of his campaign.

No, Howard Dean is no Liberal and I never thought so... His known record is about as Centrist as they get and I would love to see what's in the records he had sealed.

Didn't mean to come across as implying that.

Kerry is much more liberal than Dean when it comes to social issues though he lost me on the whole Iraq/War against Terrorism bit.

If Kucinich doesn't win this, I'm going to be in a lot of moral anguish!

On edit: Ask me who is more liberal, Dean or Pelosi and I shall have to answer Pelosi.

[madfloridian]

46. None of the supporters here think Dean is a liberal.

We feel he is hard to label. I happen to think that is good. I don't like to be labeled myself, as I don't fit in little boxes.

I don't think the members who signed the letter especially have a right to write him and demand he change his views.

[Tinoire]

59. Many did in the early days

I got hammered big time for pointing out that he wasn't liberal... I still have some of those threads book-marked.

Only one his biggest suporters here, who I respect even more highly for this, was able to admit, from day 1, that he wasn't and that he wasn't anti-war. But she was clear that she thought the first order of business after getting Bush out would be balancing the budget and that that was why she was voting for him. Most of the other early supporters were pushing that he was a Liberal and anti-war hence the recent slew of articles from Progressive magazines and papers denouncing him and stating that too many of his (early) supporters were projecting their own desires on him.

You say: I don't think the members who signed the letter especially have a right to write him and demand he change his views. I don't think they're asking him to change his views. Dean's views on this issue have been deliberately murky. At first they were moderately hawkish and this hawkishness was reflected on his official campaign site but the particular web-page was yanked. I can point you also to a slew of posts on the Dean blogs where people were jumping off because of this issue. I, imho, think this really is disinformation at its best and pandering for the 3-5 million Arab/Muslim votes most of which are already going to Kucinich.

Now all of a sudden his views are so liberal that Pelosi and Lieberman are outraged at how liberal they are? I just don't buy it. Will Pitt said I was jaded. I admit it, I am. Years of watching politicians promise us the moon to later deliver nothing is what got me here.

Clinton broke one of his main promises to the Black Caucus and we've never forgotten. It had to do with reversing Bush's policy on the Haitian Boat people - you saw what happened... I just can't believe that easily anymore- rhetoric is too easy and in this case even that changed to quickly.

Here is some of the information I had on hand... Read it and please come back and convince me. I have a lot of respect for your opinion and would appreciate whatever argument you can make because sometimes I really have to wonder what's wrong with me for not being warm to Dean. I would truly like to be.

And kudos for the box thing. None of them fit anyone anymore anyway...
------------------

Howard Dean: Sharon's Man? June 22, 2003 (You should read this one in its entirety)

<snip>

In a major foreign policy speech earlier this year, Dean, while calling for an end to Palestinian violence, did not call for an end to Israeli violence, let alone an end to the illegal Israeli occupation.

And when asked whether his views are closer to the dovish Americans for Peace Now (APN) or the right wing, Sharon-supporting American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), he stated unequivocally in an interview with the Jewish weekly The Forward, "My view is closer to AIPAC's view."

"At one time the Peace Now view was important, but now Israel is under enormous pressure. We have to stop terrorism before peace negotiations," he said.
<snip>

Last December, Dean told the Jerusalem Post that he unequivocally supported $8 Billion in US loan guarantees for Israel. "I believe that by providing Israel with the loan guarantees...the US will be advancing its own interest," he said. His unconditional support for the loan package, in addition to $4 Billion in outright grants, went further than even some of the most pro-Israel elements in the Bush administration, like Paul Wolfowitz, who wanted to at least include some vague restrictions like pushing Israel to curtail new settlements and accept a timetable to establish a Palestinian state.

On the illegal Israeli settlements, Dean seems to be waffling of late. A pro-Dean blog quotes his campaign as calling for the ultimate removal of only "a number of existing settlements." (The link back to the official site was no longer operational as of this writing.) However, in what may signal a softening of his position to woo progressive voters in the upcoming MoveOn.org Democratic "Primary" vote, Dean called last month for "ultimately dismantling the settlements." So which one is it?

<snip>

http://www.muslimwakeup.com/mainarchive/000119.html




****************************

Dean Not Progressive on Mideast

By Ahmed Nassef, AlterNet
June 30, 2003

<snip>


And when asked whether his views are closer to the dovish Americans for Peace Now (APN) or the right-wing, Sharon-supporting American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), he stated unequivocally in an interview with the Jewish weekly The Forward, "My view is closer to AIPAC's view."


"At one time the Peace Now view was important, but now Israel is under enormous pressure. We have to stop terrorism before peace negotiations," he said.


<snip>


Last December, Dean told the Jerusalem Post that he unequivocally supported $8 billion in U.S. loan guarantees for Israel. "I believe that by providing Israel with the loan guarantees ... the US will be advancing its own interest," he said. His unconditional support for the loan package, in addition to $4 billion in outright grants, went further than even some of the most pro-Israel elements in the Bush administration, like Paul Wolfowitz, who wanted to at least include some vague restrictions like pushing Israel to curtail new settlements and accept a timetable to establish a Palestinian state.


On the illegal Israeli settlements, Dean seems to be waffling of late. A pro-Dean blog quotes his campaign as calling for the ultimate removal of only "a number of existing settlements." (The link back to the official site was no longer operational as of this writing.) However, in what may signal a softening of his position to woo progressive voters in the just passed MoveOn.org PAC Democratic "primary" vote, Dean called last month for "ultimately dismantling the settlements." So which one is it?


<snip>


In fact, Dean's alignment with AIPAC and their right-wing politics goes much deeper than aligning with the group’s platform. Last year, he named Steven Grossman, a former AIPAC head, as his campaign's chief fundraiser. Soon after, he flew to Israel on an AIPAC-sponsored junket.


<Hawkish views on Iran and Saudi Arabia snipped>


Ahmed Nassef is editor-in-chief of Muslim WakeUp
http://www.muslimwakeup.com/mainarchive/000119.html
http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=16280

*********************************

Published on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 by CommonDreams.org

Howard Dean: Hawk in Dove’s Clothing?
by Stephen Zunes

((Hated snipping this one also))

<snip>

In his major foreign policy address to date, a February 17 speech at Drake University in Iowa, Dean blasted the Bush administration’s foreign policy regarding Iraq and several other areas, but – when it came to Israel and Palestine – the former Vermont governor declared that, while the United States should become more engaged, he did not have any fundamental objections with President George W. Bush’s policies. Dean called for an end to Palestinian violence against Israeli civilians, but he did not call for a cessation of Israeli violence against Palestinian civilians. Similarly, there was no call for an end of the Israeli occupation, for Israeli compliance with UN Security Council resolutions, or a withdrawal from Israel’s illegal settlements in the occupied territories or even a freeze on the construction of new settlements.

The liberal wing of America’s Jewish community is represented in the views of Americans for Peace Now (APN), which supports negotiations with the Palestinians based upon the principle of land for peace, that is, Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories in exchange for security guarantees. The conservative wing is represented by the America-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which supports the policies of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his government’s ongoing occupation and colonization of Palestinian land seized in the 1967 war, repression of the Palestinian population, and refusal to negotiate with the Palestinian leadership.

When asked by the Jewish newspaper Forward late last year as to whether he supported APN’s perspective, Governor Dean replied "No, my view is closer to AIPAC's view."

<snip>

Dean also appears to reject the widespread consensus among Israeli peace activists and Middle East scholars that Palestinian terrorism is a direct outgrowth of the 35-year Israeli military occupation. Instead, Dean seems to argue that terrorism itself is the core issue. He also rejects calls by APN and other liberal Zionist groups that Israel’s requested $12 billion loan guarantee be linked to an Israeli freeze on constructing additional illegal settlements on confiscated Palestinian land, arguing that such aid should instead be unconditional. Pushing for such a dramatic and unconditional increase in financial support for the incumbent government just before Israelis went to the polls in January was widely seen as a not-too-subtle endorsement of Sharon’s re-election.

By the time Dean would become president, Israel could have a different prime minister. Despite his recent election victory, Sharon’s government is not likely to last very long and new Israeli elections could take place within a couple of years. Israeli opposition leader Amram Mitzna, who could become the next prime minister, takes a far more moderate position toward the Palestinians than does Dean. For example, Dean opposes Mitzna’s call for Israel to unconditionally return to peace talks with the Palestinians. One could therefore envision a situation where a President Dean, being even more anti-Palestinian than the Israeli government, would – instead of pushing both sides to compromise for peace – end up pressuring the Israelis to harden their position. Israeli peace activists fear that electing someone like Dean as president of the United States could end up sabotaging a renewed Middle East peace process.

<snip>

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0226-04.htm
--------------

Here were some previous DU discussions I had bookmarked:

Howard Dean supports building the "fence" (Wall) in the West Bank

Jewish Democratic Council seeks to change MoveOn's website (Dean reaction)

Dean on Israel
-----------------
-----------------

On edit: After writing all of that, I read MadFloridian's post #57

about calling and being concerned about that letter and them not being able to define what in Dean's position offended them...

Somethings are not adding up...

[goobergunch]

45. Story from the London Telegraph

Mainstream Democrats believe that Howard Dean, the current frontrunner in a field of nine Democrat candidates, is too liberal to win over the American heartlands in the first election since the September 11 attacks. The other candidates have failed to make an impact after a summer on the stump.

In Congress, the two most senior Democrats, the House of Representatives' minority leader, Nancy Pelosi, and the Senate's minority leader, Tom Daschle, have both privately supported Clark.

"Howard Dean can beat up Bush on Iraq and do well among ordinary Democrats," said one Democrat official, "But he can be dismissed as a weak-kneed liberal. Wesley Clark can say the same things, but there isn't the same comeback. He would be a strong candidate and a credible opponent for Bush on national security."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/08/24/wwes24.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/08/24/ixnewstop.html

That's the only story I can find that's even close to relevant.

[madfloridian]

48. I think they are doing it for us. Defining our candidates.

I resent that very much. I asked her aide, and though she said little.....I could tell that is the issue.

[frank frankly]

47. The establishment must be broken

Dean's response today on Wolfowitz Blitzer's show was excellent.
This is a human who can handle this.
He gets better and better.

[madfloridian]

51. Her office could NOT define what he said that offended them.

They do not really know his stance, nor do they care. Our own party will destroy his chances.

I was liking Clark, but now I have a lot of "used" feelings. They have no intention of Dean succeeding.

If Clark is forced on us, I will not vote for him. I am angry, not just because they wrote a letter to Dean, but because they are shoving Clark into this.

I like Gephardt, I like Graham. But I can not bear having them manipulated into the position of nominee.

This is the type of post that gets slammed all over, so go right ahead. After talking to Pelosi's aide for about 10 minutes, I could see it in my mind. I now know what is going on.

[Tinoire]

61. Huh? What letter to Dean?

I highly resent those tactics (as you know) but wasn't aware of any such letter? Please link or tell ... Thanks!

[madfloridian]

68. Wolf brought it up today.

During the Dean interview. Dean appeared not to have received it yet. It makes no real sense to me in the terms of what he said and has said. I will read your links in the other post.

I think it vital that someone be "even-handed", and I would hope he would. Maybe have his own views, but be able to use tactics to benefit both.

There are loads of posts on it at his site today, pro and con.

[Tinoire]

74. Thanks! I'll surf his sites when I get home!

This is... disconcerting.

Peace

[Tinoire]

64. Now this is very curious...

could NOT define what he said that offended them

I may be hard on Dean about a few issues but this is despicable...

I now know what is going on. For the last few weeks, I've had the same sinking feeling that "They have no intention of Dean succeeding.". My theory is probably twice as cynical as yours...

I'm really sorry. Don't give up!!

[tjdee]

65. That doesn't make any sense, Pelosi endorsed Gephardt.

Why in the world would Lieberman be pushing Clark and not himself?

Why do you have to bring Clark into this at all?

Is Dean a poor judge of character? He likes Clark a lot.

[madfloridian]

67. Whoa, someone told me that locally.

I don't understand it either. This is such a confused mess. I do know that a letter was written, the aide says they will *probably* make it public....who knows.

I like Clark, too. I asked the aide if the party overall was wanting Clark to be the frontrunner. There was no "I don't know" just silence.

I just don't know. I just suspect. This person is a Clark supporter and military, the one who told me.

[madfloridian]

71. The aide said Lieberman's signature was not on the letter.

Maybe I heard wrong.

[KaraokeKarlton]

54. The tougher things get for Dean, the more he thrives

The more he is attacked, the stronger he will get. He won't crack under pressure. In fact, the more pressure put on him, the better he will get.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

52. I Didn't Read The Entire Thread

but imho, if you are a true liberal Nancy Peolosi is your kind of representative....


She's way to the left of Dean and all the Dem presidential candidates except DK and AS....


Peace
Remember Our Fallen Countrymen and Women Tomorrow


on edit-Pelosi's batting 100% at www.adaction.org

[David Zephyr]

55. Pelosi and Gephardt Made a Deal for Minority Leadership.

She's keeping her word.

I'm a Dean supporter and I like Nancy Pelosi.

She obviously made a deal with Dick and she is keeping her word.

Gephardt can not win the California Primary. It's foolish to even think that Pelosi even thinks so.

Dean has been on top of all California polls of the Dem candidates consistently.

Dean came to California and stood with Gray Davis. He's the only one that did this.

My dear friend told me last night, "before Dean stood with Davis he had already won my head, now as a Californian and a Democrat, he has won my heart."

Pelosi will give Gephardt lip service. This doesn't bother this Dean supporter.

Wait until the media showcases the crowds that Dean will draw here in Los Angeles at the end of the month.

I'm a major Dean supporter.

I also am a major Pelosi supporter.

This does not bother me at all.

Peace.

[Woodstock]

56. Pelosi did sign the letter - this from Dean's blog

I called Nancy Pelosi's office in California and the woman who answered the phone read me the letter. The letter was originated by someone else (probably Lieberman - LOL - I didn't ask) and just signed by Pelosi and I guess 12 others. Actually, it is rather obnoxious. It is addressed to Gov. Dean and does basically accuse him of wanting to change our position towards Israel, paints all Palestinians with the broad brush of sponsoring terrorism and denying the right of Israel to exist, and almost makes it sound like Dean is in danger of being on the side of the terrorists.

Now, that being said, Nancy Pelosi has been doing a GOOD JOB in Congress leading the Democratic Party. She even got a "Democrat with Backbone" award from Dean Nation a while back (I emailed and complimented her). So be respectful if you write or call. She may have just made a mistake. Lets not be guilty of the same tactics as the DLC - eating our own.

Call her CA office and ask them to read the letter. Maybe I'm wrong about it being obnoxious.

415-556-4862

Alta in Iowa

[madfloridian]

57. I called and am still concerned.

I asked the aide just what part of Dean's stance they were criticizing. She did not know. I got the impression the letter originated in her office. I was told Lieberman's signature was not on it. She mentioned a Berman and several others I am not familiar with.

I have listened to all he has said on this issue. The part she read from the letter twisted what I heard him say on two appearances.

I do not feel good about this being done.

Oh, she was not aware Dean's wife and children were Jewish. She was surprised.

[w13rd0]

60. Moneymakers and backroom deals...

...but you know what, when it is said that it's time for us to take our country back, we're not just talking about taking it back from Bush, we're also talking about taking it back from the entrenched moneymakers and backroom dealers. We need to kneecap the people that think they can decide for us. It's a primary, and I demand my damn vote. I already had my vote not counted by that junta in the USSC, I will NOT permit my vote to be denied by a bunch of Washington junkies dressed up as jackasses! Oh, I mean donkeys. I don't necessarily trust the London Telegraph, but if that story is true, that's bullshit. I think someone out there is afraid of their moneytrain getting derailed...

[nomaco-10]

58. JAYSUS, everytime I get on this website...

I end up spending the rest of the evening writing e-mails. Now I'm going to write Lieberman to ask him to drop out and Nancy Pelosi to shut the fuck up.

[CWebster]

63. Nancy Pelosi has always been a big money whore

No explaining neccesary.

[Pepperbelly]

66. Why is not supporting Dean somehow treason?

I mean, has someone coronated him and I didn't get the memo?

Geez... :eyes:

[madfloridian]

69. Now that was just silly.

It shows you have not read all the thread.



I just put this to irritate you. ;-) Long live the king!

[Pepperbelly]

70. of course I didn't read the thread ...

:eyes:

What? You want blood too?

Just seemed more outrage over someone giving Dean hell. I clicked over because it's so amusing to watch folk hyperventilate if someone isn't on the reservation. In fact, I saw one person today who posted a thread saying that he/she was taking a second look at Dean because of different factors. Hard to find a nail in here when they started looking to crucify.

[madfloridian]

72. Read the thread about the letter.

Incidentally I support 3 candidates right now. Don't put me in that category of Dean is worshipped. I am a little too mature for that!

[Pepperbelly]

75. you gotta be kidding...

Try to unravel that mess when my puter locks up on threads over a hundred posts?

No way. I would be re-booting/reconnecting after each post.

I'll just take sarcastic potshots from time to time. :D

[unfrigginreal]

78. I've noticed!

I'll just take sarcastic potshots from time to time.

[CWebster]

73. coronation...

Like the backroom manuevering that put chimpy on the throne?


What if it was Enron--what if Ken Lay said do my criminal bidding or I pull my support? Instead we have powerful American-Israeli interests supporting an apartheid state that is causing deep division and unrest in the ME impacting on our country's security. These powerful interests are corrupting our Democracy and handicapping our ability to progress in the interests of future security, stability and peace.


God, how I am hate them.

[ShaneGR]

76. This is never going to happen, PERIOD

She's the House leader. She'll never take a side that badly.

[madfloridian]

83. Look at my post below.

:hi:

[UnapologeticLiberal]

77. This is upsetting

I like her a lot, and I am really disappointed that she is involved with this.

[wrkclskid]

80. Let me see

A good Democrat, a very liberal democrat would like to see Howard Dean take a different stance on an issue, she signs a letter requesting as such. And the problem? Oh wait, the problem is that it was Dean. If she had written a letter to Lieberman saying she would rather him not be so hawkish she would be getting flowers thrown at her feet! Please, if Pelosi is not enough of a progressive for u, see u at the Marxist reading club.

[farmbo]

81. Pelosi may as well be sending out blast faxs for Karl Rove

As I understand it, this was not a discreet letter to Dean with some polite criticism. It was a smear letter, released (or leaked) immediately to the press, behind Dean's back, as part of Lieberman's daily attacks on Dean. If she signed it, it is an unprecedented disgrace and, frankly, she needs to resign.

I will no longer contribute to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee if this is how they use their resources...to attack other Democrats, with whom they have minor tatical disagreements.

Welcome to the Democratic circular firing squad.

[madfloridian]

82. "unacceptable for the U.S. to be `evenhanded' " quote from letter.

From the letter according to SFGate:
SNIP....""It is unacceptable for the U.S. to be `evenhanded' on these fundamental issues," the letter said. ....."


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/09/10/national2031EDT0898.DTL

This concerns me greatly. Directed toward any candidate, it would concern me.

[janekat]

84. Dean's a loose cannon...

...sorry but you do NOT say that sort of thing when you are running for Prez. He has no self control. If he hasn't already blown it with that comment he will slip up again soon.

Sorry folks - but he should know better.

[madfloridian]

85. Please explain what he said so out of line.

What comment are you referring to? The approach to being evenhanded in dealing with the I/P situation?

How is that different than what we have done before?

[farmbo]

87. Sorry...being evenhanded is not being a 'loose canon"

That is all he suggested. It is NOT a change in our policy since Clinton: of being an "honest broker" in the peace process.

Bush and the PNAC fundies have tilted the playing field so far in Likud's favor since 2001, they have made peace impossible.

[madfloridian]

88. janekat, did you read the article I posted?

Maybe it will better explain his stance.

[janekat]

90. He needs to be more careful...

My complaint is not really what he said but the fact that he is "blowing it." I don't really disagree that much with what he said.

You have to be very, very careful when you speak about Israel. He cannot win if he keeps on putting his foot in his mouth ESPECIALLY if he ticks off Jewish constituents. He has a baaaad habit of doing that.

[madfloridian]

92. Something is very wrong with that statement.

How about just letting him evolve who he is? Perhaps we are tippy-toeing too much?

[DemBones DemBones]

89. It all sounds like a tempest in a teacup to me.

Democratic House members, all of whom already endorse another candidate and most of whom are Jewish, take issue with Howard Dean's comments on the I/P situation.

"Last week at a rally in Santa Fe, N.M., Dean said an "enormous number" of Israeli settlements must go to make progress in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. "It's not our place to take sides," he said. "

On Blitzer's show, Dean talked about this:

"But he acknowledged that saying there should be an "evenhanded policy" toward the Israelis and the Palestinians may have been a poor choice of words."

"I have since learned that is a sensitive word to use in certain communities," he said. "So perhaps I could have used a different euphemism. But the fact of the matter is, at the negotiating table, we have to have the trust of both sides."


So Dean said something that was seen as too easy on the Palestinians, not sufficiently supportive of Israel, and some pro-Israel Dems are reacting with a letter asking him to watch his mouth.

It just does not seem like a big deal to me. And I don't see that it will hurt Dean.

What concerns me more is that Dean has previously spent time in Israel talking with Sharon and described his position on Israel as "close to AIPAC's," suggesting he's more pro-Israel than I think is safe. Worse yet, he's gone from saying that to talking about an "evenhanded policy" and getting rid of an "enormous" number of Israeli settlements!!! Talk about flip-flopping!

For a guy who's been campaigning for a year or more, Dean doesn't seem secure and settled in the positions he takes on issues. Yes, some evolution of views is okay, but he's wobbled more than I can tolerate. If Kucinich were acting that way, I'd be backing off on my support of him.

His own flip flopping will hurt Dean more than the letter Pelosi signed.

[DemBones DemBones]

91. Or a loose cannon in a teacup!

Howard has foot-in-mouth disease, i guess.

[CWebster]

93. What--that he would dare to suggest that he will not stoop

at the altar of Israel, my country right or wrong, obviously an expectation of every good Democrat? This is an outrage!

I have to wonder about you so-called progressives who would prefer to bash a viable centrist with the broadest appeal--who does possess progressive leaning and grassroots support--only to ultimately enable an even less progressive choice.

Being on the Left all my life, and coming from a Leftist family (my mother just revealed she joined the Communist party, although she changed her registration back to Dem from Ind to vote in the primary) - I am beginning to lose tolerance for the highly ideological but self-destructive dreams of those who would rather burn in hell than violate their utopian fantasies.

[Mairead]

95. It's more the way he said that he WILL bend the knee at the Zionist altar

Now, 'evolving' on some issue is fine...but people usually use some other word to describe a change that happens overnight. What we seem to know is that Dean (a) described himself as being 'close to AIPAC'; (b) took a whirlwind trip to Israel on Sharon's nickel (ours, really, but let's not quibble); (c) didn't meet with Palestinians; (d) promised Sharon more money --lots more money-- than Sharon had even thought to ask for...and now he makes an offhand comment about 'evenhanded' and you're wondering why we don't fall at his feet?

Why would an avowed 'leftist' want to support someone like Dean?

[CWebster]

94. Care to discuss Kucinich's position on Choice?

....