Alright, Dean. The memo. It's time.

[Guaranteed]

Come on. This is REAL NEWS- not made up crap.

He really needs to do something about the fact that the media won't cover this thing. He needs to call THEM out directly- the media AND the Bush Administration. This is garbage.

He has the power to do this. Cash in the chips, Dean. The media will cover him. And it's a twofer. Call out the media on their complicity, and the Bush Administration.

Let's go.

[returnable]

1. Bingo.

I'd love to see it happen. :kick:

[babsbunny]

2. There are many

Dems, former journalists, former Presidents that could be speaking out alot more!

[JRob]

53. so why not call them out?

[Goldmund]

3. I admire your tireless resistance to cynnicism.

Can't say I have the same strength. Or the same illusion, depending on how you look at it.

[Guaranteed]

4. I honestly don't know why he's not already doing this.

He knows. He knows what's going on, here.

Maybe he needs a little kick in the ass. I dunno. Maybe he's just busy. Hard to imagine he's too busy for this, though.

[welshTerrier2]

5. it's not just the media; it's the Dem strategy

if Dean, Kerry, Clinton, Reid, Pelosi et al were pumping out millions of emails to registered Dems and the media refused to cover this important story, the total news blackout could be blamed solely on the MSM ... maybe it's not the way it should be, but the MSM is not going to fight the battle if the Democratic leadership won't ...

with all due respect to the "Conyers 90", the establishment power in the Democratic Party does not want to challenge bush on foreign policy, especially Iraq ... even when the evidence seems pretty clear that bush lied and soldiers died, the Democratic leadership simply refuses to engage the country on this issue ... nice to see them putting political strategy ahead of dealing with the truth ...

even those Democrats who agreed with invading Iraq should object to the corruption of the process ... bush lied to the Congress and manufactured a case for invastion ... these are impeachable offenses ...

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

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

[Guaranteed]

10. I think I maybe halfway understand what you're talking about.

I know the concepts you're referring to with "patriot," and "partisan," and the whole "argument" thing- not sure what the British have to do with this, though.

[Adelante]

16. Welcome to DU, tedstruk!!

:hi:

I see your profile is hidden, so I can't tell if you are as new to DU as your post number indicates, but I thought I'd give you a DU welcome.

[Dr Fate]

25. Exactly. If Kerry, Dean, Hillary, Reid ect would get in the mix...

...it would be in the news.

Some DUers act like Rupert Murdoch is holding guns to their backs saying: "Dont you dare bring up the memo..."

[enough]

6. Yes.

[KoKo]

7. It's not his job...he's an Administrator. It's Congresses job. Conyers

started the ball rolling and now more folks need to sign that letter. So far it was only 88 so call or fax your Congressperson.

Congress was lied to. Dean was not and is not now a Congressman or Senator. Plus this goes to both parties not just the Dems. For Dean to come out ahead of Mehlman and call for some action on the Memo wouldn't make political sense. It would be called "partisan politics based on a "memo" leaked from a British Tabloid. (that's what CNN called it in the little blurb they reported on the memo last week.)

[Guaranteed]

8. I'm not attacking Dean. I LOVE Dean.

But he is our leader. He's the one with the real power to do this. He's the one that, believe it or not, the media takes seriously. They will cover him, if he tells them he wants some time.

Conyers isn't gonna cut it. This is something that Dean needs to use his muscle on. If he's got to cash in some political capital, so be it.

[ClarkUSA]

62. You're offering us a chance to communicate to Dean about our concerns

What's with the criticism about the OP? :shrug:

"He's the one with the real power to do this. He's the one that, believe it or not, the media takes seriously. They will cover him, if he tells them he wants some time.
Conyers isn't gonna cut it. This is something that Dean needs to use his muscle on."

I agree that Dean has starpower as DNC Chairman that he can use. MSM cannot easily ignore Dean. I am very concerned that election reform is falling by the media wayside, too.

[Guaranteed]

11. The thing here isn't even the memo, so much..

Everyone basically KNOWS that they lied.

But the MEDIA. WHY AREN'T THEY COVERING THIS?? THAT is the question that needs to be answered.

It's time. We need to hit them, and HARD.

[WilliamPitt]

14. If that's the case

then why did he send out a press release today Blasting Bush and Frist on the filibuster issue?

No, he's in the game. I don't accept this 'He is only an administrator' stuff some have been floating here. He's way more than that, and his natural strengths will help us all.

[Guaranteed]

15. I don't either.

And you know I'm a very strong Dean supporter.

But the situation is just really ripe. If he's gonna do something, this is when he should do it.

We're not going to get a better opportunity to really, really nail them.

[KoKo]

18. So....given your thoughts on this...Dean Speaks out...

and what does he say? Do you think any of the media won't replay his scream hundrends of times so that their viewers think it's more "loony Dean" who can't control what he says making wild accusations based on a British Tabloid report of a "supposed leaked document." (that's how they will phrase it...supposed leaked document to a Tabloid.

So Dean speaks out and what changes? Judith Miller and Howie Kurtz fall over in a swoon that a Democrat has finally challenged Bush on the Downing Street Memo?

What is your scenario? :shrug:

[Guaranteed]

32. He says, "Look at this memo."

"It's real. It was written by (was it Dearlove?) 8 months before the Iraq invasion. It clearly says that the facts are being fixed around the invasion.

"This means that Bush lied. Bush deliberately cherry-picked bad intelligence and pressured the CIA into rubber-stamping an illegal, pointless, expensive and MURDEROUS invasion of a foreign sovereign nation, while we were in the middle of the War on Terror. He soiled our good name and distracted us from the man who attacked us on September 11th, Osama bin Laden.

"AND, not only that, but when this came out, the corporate media deliberately tried to ignore it. Just like when they ignored all of the signs that the Bush administration was lying in the run up to the war. As explosive of news as this was, the American corporate media would simply not cover this because they knew it meant that what Bush did was highly illegal and should get him impeached, and that they were partially responsible."

And he should expand on the media's complicity. That's the real issue, here.

[KoKo]

17. Why should Dean speak up? Kerry is the leader of the Dem Voters...

since he was our Candidate in 2004. Both Kerry (who had to vote for the Iraq War Resolution) and Edwards (who was always for the war..but he could claim he got suckered) should be bringing this forward.

Rumors are that both Kerry and Edwards have an "eye" on 2008. Dean doesn't he's the one who has to make sure that the funds are there for 2006 Dem Candidates and 2008 Candidates. He has "Grassroots" work to do.

I don't remember seeing McAuliff talking about Iraq one way or the other when he was Democratic National Chair. :shrug:

I think it's misguided to look to Dean for leadership on this when it just isn't what he's supposed to be doing.

[welshTerrier2]

19. who should set the non-legislative political strategy for the Party ??

i can see making an argument that Dean shouldn't set the direction on legislative policy ... that should be left to Reid and Pelosi (with tons of input from the voters of course) ...

but who should be setting the non-legislative political strategy for the Party? it seems to me that falls well within the job description for the Party's Chair ... on issues that decide how aggressive Democrats should be about going after bush on news like the UK memo on Iraq, I think Dean should play a strong role in the decision making ...

the other tasks you mentioned, fundraising and grassroots support, are critical also ... but the Chair should set the overall political strategy as well ...

[Dr Fate]

23. They should both speak up. In a joint appearance even.

And bring Hillary, Reid, Obama, Kennedy, Al Gore and any other high-profile, quotable, "celebrity" DEM with them.

[Guaranteed]

33. YES. nt

[returnable]

26. "when it just isn't what he's supposed to be doing."

While that may have been true of McAuliffe and other previous chairs, I thought Dean was supposed to represent a new kind of leadership for the DNC.

That's why so many people supported his push for the position in the first place.

[KoKo]

27. Okay...just for you guys I'm going to get the Job Description of Dem Chair

and who knows you guys might find something there that supports your feeling that Dean Has to LEAD.

But, I don't think so....give me some time to dig it out.

:-)'s

[KoKo]

31. As with all Dem Hierarchy...the nebulous job descriptions are what we

"reformers" need to act upon. Given that our Party structure from the State to National Level is somewhat lacking...(not reponsbile to the Grassroots and not well enough defined to allow some culpability in all our recent losses in elections...here from their site is that the DNC is and what they do.

Note to Mods...I cut and pasted freely because the DNC Website isn't under copyright rules that I could find.

........................

Democratic National Committee
The Democratic National Committee is the governing body of the Democratic Party with general responsibility for the affairs of the Democratic Party between National Conventions. The DNC was established in 1848 by the National Convention to "promote the Democratic cause" between the conventions and prepare for the next convention. Now over 150 years old, the DNC is the oldest continuing National Party Committee in the U.S. and inthe world.

The DNC plays an essential role in the Party's affairs and elections. In very general terms, the functions of the DNC include the following:
Planning for the Party's quadrennial nominating convention, including setting guidelines for the selection of delegates;
Issuing the Call for the Convention; Determining the allocation of delegates to the states; Establishing the rules of procedure for the Convention.<'b>

Conducting the Party's Presidential Campaign;


Filling vacancies in the nominations for the offices of President and Vice President:
Conducting the Coordinated Campaign efforts to elect Democrats at federal, state, and local levels; Providing both technical and financial support to State Party organizations and to federal, state, and local candidates.
Formulating and disseminating Party policy statements and programs.

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:LlhWfHDXjLEJ:www.pimademocrats.org/ImportantDemoInfo.html+Duties+of+the+Democratic+National+Chair&hl=en


WHAT WE DO


History of the Party and Committee

Thomas Jefferson founded the Democratic Party of the United States in 1792 and was elected as the first Democratic President in 1800.

The Democratic National Convention established the Democratic National Committee (DNC) in 1848. The DNC is the oldest continuing party committee in the United States and the world.
Function of the Committee

The Democratic National Committee plans the Party's quadrennial presidential nominating convention; promotes the election of Party candidates with both technical and financial support; and works with national, state, and local party organizations, elected officials, candidates, and constituencies to respond to the needs and views of the Democratic electorate and the nation.

Members of the Committee

While anyone who is registered to vote as a Democrat is a member of the Party, there are 440 members of the Democratic National Committee.

The National Committee has 9 elected officers: The Chair, five Vice Chairs, Treasurer, Secretary, and National Finance Chair.

Membership on the National Committee is composed of individuals selected by the Democratic Party organizations in each state (including the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico), the U.S. Territories (American Samoa, Guam, and the Virgin Islands), and Democrats living outside the United States and those Territories listed above (Democrats Abroad).

Each jurisdiction is represented by its Chair and the next highest ranking officer of the opposite sex. An additional 200 votes are distributed to the states and territories based on population, with each receiving a minimum of two additional seats. Each delegation must be equally divided between men and women.

Also seated on the DNC are representatives of various Democratic constituencies and elected officials. These include two U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives, two members of the College Democrats, and three representatives each from the Democratic Governors, Mayors, State Legislators, County Officials. Municipal Officials, Young Democrats, and the National Federation of Democratic Women. Fifty members are appointed by the DNC Chairmen, and approved by the DNC, and are considered "Members-at-Large."

Democratic National Headquarters

Democratic Party Headquarters has been housed in a number of locations in Washington (and in New York) including the Mayflower Hotel and, of course, the Watergate.

Our current Headquarters building at 430 South Capitol Street, SE, in Washington, DC -- the first owned by the Party -- was built at a cost of approximately $6.5 million. The DNC moved into the facility in December of 1984.

The Democratic National Headquarters is shared by the Democratic National Committee, the Democratic Senatorial and Congressional Campaign Committees, as well as the Harriman Communications Center, which provides state of the art media support to Democratic candidates, Party leaders, and elected officials.
http://www.democrats.org/about/function.html

[Guaranteed]

39. He does.

Some people are just scared that he won't do it.

I don't think they should be, though. If they would just get off their butts and get him to do it, we'd crash through a serious barrier that we haven't been able to get past for a long time. We'd get right down to the core of Bush's character.

[calimary]

28. Why SHOULDN'T Dean speak up? He's eminently quotable,

camera-friendly, and uxtraordinarily clever and glib. What he says can be easily remembered and repeated. It DOES draw attention, too, because, FACE IT, he has a certain amount of star power - charisma or whatever. He brings a lot to the table, he can generate heat, AND excitement, AND more fundraising dollars.

He SHOULD speak up. Perhaps he will in a few days. Consider - he's just weighed in on the filibuster crisis, and it's been going on for awhile. He took a little while to speak out against the Terri Schiavo fristians. Perhaps he's waiting to allow it to sink in a little. Maybe the glue has to set for awhile. I don't think he'll remain silent. At least I hope he doesn't. He's got a track record for fearlessness and not pulling any punches with these people. I think that's why so many on our side, even those who didn't support him in the primaries, love him now. Perhaps he's just being cagey and biding his time for the moment. I can't imagine that he'd let something this juicy go by un-noted. Especially when we need his take on it. Hopefully he's just getting warmed up.

Meantime, I'm gonna email the DNC.

BTW - under "Campaigns" here, I found this link:

http://www.democrats.org/contact/

[Guaranteed]

34. Yes. EVERYONE PLEASE EMAIL THE DNC.

http://www.democrats.org/contact/

[KoKo]

35. Well....I give you credit for your "hopefulness." DNC/DLC....oh yeah....

they are really gonna get on Bush's Butt big time! They're just gonna blow him outta the water on that "Downing Street Memo."

No harm in trying...but I tried to tell you...it isn't their job. Their job is raking in the cash from the lobbyists. And if Move On. org. or us small fry help to "pay the postage" for their numerous mailings then they will "throw us a bone." Like delaying the Bolton hearings to allow Dem Contenders/Repug Lite for 2008 to emerge i.e. Biden/Hagel.

But, if you are expecting them to challenge the Chimp after all this time...Dream On....:-(

[LittleClarkie]

46. One could argue that Reid should be the one

but then he's busy with the filibuster issue.

[Dr Fate]

22. It is one of Dean's jobs to talk about what concerns the DEM base.

And the excuse of the "the media will say it's partisan" does not cut it anymore. They say that shit anyway.

[Carolab]

29. The party chair's "job description"

http://www.mydd.com/story/2004/12/15/155219/11

Coming so close...
by Chris Bowers

...yet remaining to far away. Such is Chris Suellentrop's estimation of the evolving powers of the DNC Chairman:
If establishment Democrats still fear Howard Dean, they ought to elect him chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Not because becoming DNC chair would make Dean, as a member of the establishment, moderate his criticisms of Washington Democrats--though that's certainly true--but because Dean would exert far less influence over the future of the Democratic Party as its titular head than he would as a 2008 presidential candidate.(...)

For those looking to move the Democrats to the left or the right, it doesn't much matter who becomes DNC chair in February. The truth is that presidential candidates, not party chairmen, define the policy agendas of political parties.

This is the first point on which Suellentrop's analysis falls short. There will not be any major Presidential candidates influencing the party until at least early 2007, and the party must begin a tremendous amount of work between now and then. Of course the eventual frontrunners for the nomination will eventually have far more control over the Democratic agenda than the DNC chairman, but there is a lot at stake between now and the time when that finally happens. We can't go to sleep from 2005-2006 like we did from 2001-2002.

More importantly, the role of the chairman is changing drastically, something which Suellentrop notes but something which for some reason he does not view as significant:

he job description is changing. The DNC chairman will still be responsible for coordinating the party's daily message, for building the organization that handles the mechanics of electing presidential candidates, and for raising the money that funds that organization. But in the 1990s, one of the chief jobs of the party chairman was to "relate to a group of wealthy donors who financed literally a majority of the party's activities," former DNC national chairman Joe Andrew said. Now that six- and seven-figure party donations are prohibited, the importance of big donors has decreased. In 1996 and 2000, the DNC conducted the functional equivalent of the national TV campaign for the Democratic presidential nominee. The McCain-Feingold reforms put a stop to that, too.

Joe Andrew argues that the days of "chair as business leader, chair as fund-raiser" are coming to an end, and that future chairs will be more likely to play the role of political strategist. He may be right. But up to now, as Andrew put it, "There is no time, at least in the television era, where the national chair has really defined who the party is and what the party is all about."

[Dr Fate]

30. "responsible for coordinating the party's daily message"

Yup. So it it's Dean's job to speak up, according to his job description.

I dont care what his job is technically- he needs to speak up and get this issue some press.

[KoKo]

38. Dr. Fate..you keep ignoring what I ask: "Where are Kerry/Edwards on this?

Why is it less their job to speak out than Howard Deans? They ran for office on "supposed principles." If they were lied to BOTH as SENATORS then why aren't THEY the persons who should be leading the charge?

:shrug: You never answer what I ask..

[Dr Fate]

40. You apparently have not seen my last 4 or 5 threads.

I've been asking for Kerry, Dean, Obama, Hillary, Reid- ANY high-profile DEM to speak out on this- ON TV if possible.

Edwards or Clark would be great too.

I'm not part of the 2008 nomination pissing contest. This is not what it's about for me.

NONE of the celebrity DEMs with "gravitas" have yet to speak up- and its bad strategy.

[KoKo]

41. lol's I posted that you were on "rewind." I don't understand why you

keep including Dean...and frankly Obama is a "junior Senator" it's not up to him to "Take the Lead." But Kerry and Kennedy could do it because they have long experience and stature in the Senate.

It's all about "seniority" and Congressional Rules...gentlemen's club...the only renegade was Paul Wellstone...and you know what happened to him. And...think about what happened to ALL the Kennedy Men besides Teddy?

Don't you get it? Kerry can do it because he's "one of them." They can't "off" him and Kennedy is the last man standing of his era so they would be taking a chance if they try to plane crash or accident him.

These are the two who must lead. Not Howard Dean or poor Obama who just got into his job and doesn't need to haul water for those who can't do it on their own. :shrug:

[Dr Fate]

43. I'll take anyone I can get. Kerry, Dean, Edwards, Kennedy are all fine.

I dont see why Obama or other famous, quotable DEMs are not allowed to have an opinion on this as well.

[lyonn]

67. Why can't Dean come out and back Conyers?

And all the others that signed the letter. After all, he is our DNC leader and speaks for the party right? He is popular on TV. This is a real story that needs press coverage. Prove or disprove it.

[bvar22]

12. Hundred of lies and damned lies.

This MEMO is PROOF of so much more than a single LIE.
It exposes HUNDREDS of bush* LIES.

*The excuse that bush* had bad intelligence is now a PROVEN LIE!

*The Hundreds of times bush* claimed that Congress had the SAME intelligence he had is NOW A PROVEN LIE!

*The Many pre-War claims that he hadn't made his mind up about Iraq IS NOW A PROVEN LIE!!

*The many times bush* claimed Saddam was a threat to the US were NOT mistakes, the statements are NOW PROVEN LIES!!

Hundreds of times (maybe thousands) George bush* stood before the WORLD and willfully and knowingly LIED and LIED and LIED to further his own selfish interests.

Someone needs to make a Video of just a few of these public appearances where it in now PROVEN that bush* was KNOWINGLY and WILLFULLY telling LIES!!!!


I'm with Dr. Fate on this!

Where are the Democratic Leaders on THIS??
Why are they keeping silent ??
Why are they helping bush* LIE??
Their public silence on this ISSUE is an indictment of complicity!!!
They can NOW cover their OWN asses...bush* LIED TO THEM!!

[wiggs]

13. Couldn't agree more

We have been pulling punches for 5 years. In addition, we're trying to win a game that's been stacked against us. We can't play that game anymore; they've spent 20 years rigging the contest in every way possible. In the meantime, we've tried to play politics as usual, one dimensionally, and we are way behind the learning curve. We aren't using all the tools available to us, all at once. At this rate, we are going nowhere fast.

I'm not even sure we can be successful anytime soon, but someone thinking outside the box is needed to get the ball rolling. We have to upset the apple cart.

We need to be aggressive, not passive. Dem leaders) need to take EVERY DAMN OPPORTUNITY to make the point that the administration is out of control. Why certify Ohio votes? Why give Rice, Gonzales, Wulfowitz, et al positions of power? Why not bring forward the Edmons, 9/11, and Abu Ghraib info? Why not stand up and denounce the tactics and policies of this administration for what they are: a danger to everyone of us (with the possible exception of CEO's of global corps).

It is way past time. I say go for it...this is not a problem that will be solved by normal political means by a courageous few working from within congress.

My only admonition: YES: to honesty, frank assessment of politicians, brutal evaluation of administration, maximum ridicule of horrendous policy and of extremists, innovation, all out political pressure, rehashing of outrages lost down memory hole, dissent, protest, marches, spending lots of money for ads that talk directly to people. NO: to GOP tactics of lies, deceipt, smearing messengers, squashing reporting, hiding and twisting truth, revising history, and threats.

[Dr Fate]

20. We are going to Iran? DEMs dont want to be appear soft on defense?

That is the only thing I can come up with.

The base & alternative press has been BEGGING the Top DEMs to speak up for almost a week- so they know about the memo and they know we want them to speak up.

I'm at a loss- it's the only reason I come with as to why they wont even utter a single sentence about it.

"Oh but they are talking about Healthcare & Social Security..." Well, they wont be talking about that stuff AT ALL when Bush starts another fake war.

Keep the faith is all I can tell ya.

[Chicago Democrat]

21. I totally agree.... What should we do about it?

I'm flabbergasted....



So is it 'old news' that Bush totally lied? It was so obvious at the time, people are living in their surreal worlds of lies that sooth the concience as you fill you 20 gallon gas tank in your SUV. They don't want to hear the truth. In my conservative circles its like farting. Its just like in Chile under Pinochet, living with a lie because there is so much blood on the US hands.

[Dr Fate]

24. Monica's dress was "old news" too. It had been in a freezer for a year.

n/t

[Guaranteed]

37. It's nasty stuff, but they need to take this "gas" right in their faces.

:)

[Pharaoh]

36. YES! He must move now before it's too late

They are going for all the chips now............

Howard, Don't fail us now or we are all screwed......

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

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

[Guaranteed]

47. WTF are you talking about? nt

[lojasmo]

51. I'm not going to search around

But you attacked dean for saying something a while back. Of course you misquoted him then said "you knew what I meant"

The upshot is that you were criticizing him for speaking out. It seems that either way, you're calling Dean out for something.

[RandomUser]

54. Dude, what the hell are you talking about?

Bullgooseloony is a Dean supporter, no matter how you try to paint him as a Deanhater. He has a long history of supporting Dean against Clark during the primaries, and still supported and supports Dean to this day. Dodge all you want, it's the truth.

And instead of admitting your wrong about him and apologizing to him, you decide to attack yet another person.

And if you're going to accuse me of stuff, at least try to substantiate your claims. My most recent post about Dean was in support of him. Many of us are trying to move away from old differences in the primaries, while you're busy attacking other Dean supporters.

Are you ready to apologize to Bullgoose yet?

[lojasmo]

59. My reply was to BGL

Why you are replying to my reply to him, I don't know.

No appologies necessary.

[RandomUser]

60. I didn't realize

That no one is allowed to reply to our posts other than the person we reply to. Though I admit, I did at first mistake it for a reply to me, since your other reply was not posted at the time I was writing this reply.

And for what it's worth. Not only did Bullgoose support Dean over Clark during the last primaries. He supports Gore over Clark for '08. And I don't think any the less of him for it.

But at least we cleared up that you were carrying around a bunch of "Clarkies are evil" pictures in your sigline, and I thank you for removing it. It can be a distraction from the words of your posts, and confusion over what you're saying. And I do apologize to BGL for the tangent taken on his thread.

[Guaranteed]

63. You're being overly-defensive.

Chill out.

[lojasmo]

64. Roger, wilco. EOM

[RandomUser]

49. Unbelievable

Your bias against Clark becomes a problem when you allow it to rewrite your ability to perceive reality, as it does in this case when you try to paint Bullgooseloony as a Dean hater and a Clarkie.

Bullgoose strongly supported Dean against Clark during the primaries, and he most certainly does not deserve disparagement from you just because he now likes Clark, too.

Furthermore, this thread isn't even about Clark, so I fail to see why you need to take it on a tangent.

I see Bullgooseloony here as giving encouragement and exhortation to Dean to fight the good fight, not criticism. And I think your disparagement of Bullgoose and your attempt to misrepresent him is inappropriate. If Dean supporters won't stand up for one of their own, then this Clarkie will.

Bullgoose doesn't deserve your disparagment here.

You know, it is indeed possible to like both Dean and Clark. Many of us do.

But your dislike of Clark doesn't give you the right to revise the history of another Dean supporter who continues to support and encourage Dean.

There are Dean and Clark supporters on DU who would like to build bridges and get past old differences. And then there are those Dean supporters who attack other Dean supporters for liking Clark.

When you start accusing those who supported Dean against Clark during the primaries of being Clarkies, then you know your hatred of Clark is having an effect on your ability to perceive reality.

Whether you wish to join us on the other side of the looking glass, where its possible to like Dean AND Clark is up to you. But you shouldn't go around attacking Dean supporters just because they like Clark (I'm taking it as a given that you'll probably dislike Clark supporters who like Dean anyway).

Take my words for what they're worth, or feel free to ignore them altogether (which I suspect you might well do).

[lojasmo]

52. This post has nothing to do with clark

Nor does my post. Furthermore, I don't despise clark. I despise the behavior of some of his supporters on this site and on other sites.

[RandomUser]

55. Like I said

Some of us are trying to move past old differences, others thrive on hate and discord.

Edit to add: If your post has nothing to do with Clark, then the pictures in your post seem to tell a different story.

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

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

[RandomUser]

58. I didn't alert on you.

I probably should have though.

[Al-CIAda]

44. .

[jarnocan]

45. sounds like a good idea and here is a petition

"http://www.democrats.org/contact/
"By invading Iraq, the president of the United States has greatly undermined the war on terrorism." -Richard Clarke"

Sounds impeachable to me; http://www.petitiononline.com/UKMemo/
"1. Lying to Congress about the evidence supporting the case for invasion
2. Conspiring with Blair to mislead Congress and Parliament about the evidence of Iraq's purported threat
3. Knowing about Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's diversion of funds earmarked for the Afghan conflict to preparations for the upcoming Iraqi conflict
4. Directing the falsification of evidence supporting the case for invasion
5. Sending a letter to Congress claiming that Iraq gave aid and comfort to al-Qaeda when that evidence was false "

[Andromeda]

48. All for it, BGL...

I think it'll happen. The closer to the 2006 elections the more Democratic talking points and anti-Republican rhetoric you're going to hear and I think it's going to be the Perfect Storm.

He's got to hit them hard and I've every reason to believe that he will.

[demo dutch]

50. No one is really interested including the DU community in REALLY doing

something. It's been 10days!
I have seen the DU posts and they are getting little feedback
I posted some suggestions, and basically got "zip" feedback
see link
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3635770&mesg_id=3635770

The petition has 584 signatures, that's a joke!

Sorry but my conclusion is that basically everyone sits around and complaints but in the end does "Nothing"

I am close to sitting back until I see some serious commitment from the citizens of this country to really "take back the country"

[Lydia Leftcoast]

56. The entire Congressional and Senate Dem delegations

and every Dem elected official should be jumping up and down and pointing at this memo.

That's what the Republicans would be doing if someone had put out a memo implicating Clinton in lying to get the country into a war.

What's wrong with those wusses?

[ClarkUSA]

61. Great idea! How do we best contact Dean?

I'd like to hear about election reform, too. That should become a constant refrain coming from Dean, considering his high-profile position as DNC Chairman and
his major celebrity status in the media will give any issue he promotes instant visibility.

Thanks, Bull Goose Loony, for seeing the big picture that speaks for most of us on this thread (except for the occasional disgruntled cultist). I don't see how trying to give good grassroots suggestions to the DNC Chairman can be considered disloyalty by some hard-core partisans. Didn't Dean say he wanted to hear from us and get ideas?

[SheepyMcSheepster]

65. indeed, someone needs to speak up and make the MSM cover this

[wiggs]

66. An idea: connect the dots with niger uranium letter and "fixing intel"

We have 1) a memo saying that the facts and intelligence were being fixed, and 2) a forged letter saying Nigeria is supplying uranium to Iraq, and 3) a state department loose cannon who is accused of tampering with intelligence and information

Why can't someone in the opposition party or the media just SAY IT?

Somone in the administration, Bolton perhaps, forged the Niger letter. It can't get any easier or clearer than that.

It's not even that important to know it's true. There's been enough lying, deception, and dishonesty for us to strongly suspect it's true.

SAY IT! Let them prove it's not correct.