I spoke to two friends yesterday who were huge Dean supporters, today they are former Dean supporters. "Yeahhhhhhhhhhhhhh"

I rarely post to respond to people like you and I should have stuck to my policy. You didn't make a very "adult" point in your original post and it made me angry. I responded saying that you were a jerk, and I shouldn't have. however, if you ignore the first line of my post, my point remains.

You can put "with some exceptions" in all your posts, but people are still going to see through that to your gross generalization.

[ January 21, 2004, 07:13 AM: Message edited by: DC_guy ]

One of you needs to start singing the Star-Spangled Banner posthaste.

[ January 21, 2004, 07:15 AM: Message edited by: William1865 ]

Just a note, I thought better of that response that William responded to and edited the entire post. I did write it though, and I deleted it before I saw the quote that William put up. I didn't go back and edit after he did that.

Hey we can all say what we want about Dean and his wife. I still say the Repugs. arrogance and overconfidence will do them in this fall.!!

Well, don't stop posting DC_guy. You'd have to be a bit of an asshat to use Bill Maher as The Authority when making false generalizations about why young people support a candidate. Your response wasn't childish in the least. A small part of it was bitchy, but asshat comments sometimes merit bitchy responses.

You Dean supporters are so lucky. His maniacal tirade, done at this point, saved you. Not only is he unelectable, now you have to question his sanity. And now everyone can see it.

The truly frightening part is how much support he had up until a week or so ago. As far as state of mind is concerned, Dean is the American version of Russian nationalist, Vladimir Zhirinovsky. Dean would be too insane for even the Russian electorate!

What will "save" the Dubya supporters (especially the self-hating sodomites among them)? A non-elected leader who thinks he was chosen by God seems closer to clinical insanity to me.

But such responses are typical from those on the Left, who often resort to name-calling and personal insults when faced with reality. If you can't attack one's position, then attack the individual. Quite common, unfortunately.

Nevertheless, I specifically state "with some exceptions" because there generally are, especially on this board. I guess I shouldn't have expected someone who resorts to name-calling to understand this, though.

Didn't you refer to Dean's supporters as "a bunch of kiddies"? Isn't this name calling? You're contradicting yourself.

I really should quit replying to your pleas for attention, but I just can't help myself.

Oh, as opposed to the RIGHT, who had one of their big pundits (remember Rush) refer to a 13-year old girl as the "White House Dog" when the Bill Clinton was President. Nope, no name-calling there, and has another (Ann Coulter) accuse people who disagree with the right of, to quote the names of her books, "Slander" and "Treason". Nope, no name calling there.

Riiiiiight. . . Paging Kettle. Pot for you on Line 1.

Your homework for tonight, Atlanta, is to research my posts and see just how much I do not like Ms. Coulter and many of her comrades who do nothing but scream BS. Your post is ridiculous.

No, MIB, your post is ridiculous. You said that name-calling is typical of the Left. The clear implication of what you wrote is that name calling is not typical of the Right, which is complete bullshit. There are people on both sides of the divide who are forced by the limits of their intellect to resort to name-calling.

Whether you concede the batshit insanity of Coulter is absolutely irrelevant to your charge. She (and Bill O'Reilly, and Chris Matthews, and Joe Scarborough, and Sean Hannity and Mary Matalin and Peggy Noonan and millions of less famous righties) name call with the best of them.

[ January 21, 2004, 02:05 PM: Message edited by: Skiguy ]

Gee, MIB, that's an interesting method of debate. Maybe I'll have to try it. I'll claim something to be fact and then once somebody debunks it, I'll claim that I was just being sarcastic. They never taught us that in speech class.

Okay, think back to the 1990s, when Newt Gingrich was handing out lists of things to call liberals, including things like "insane", "unpatriotic", and "stupid". Nope, namecalling is not simply a staple of the left, contrary to what you might want people to believe.

I really don't think grown men and women have to be instructed to call libs "insane," "stupid," etc. That's like telling them to call water wet or the sun bright. This isn't rocket science.

MIB, I think your best strategy here is to start singing the Star-Spangled Banner.

Hmmm. Not really.

If it's a choice between a passionately vocal candidate (Dean), a Casper Milquetoast (insert generic Dem name here), or a (insert generic insult here) (Bush), I'm taking the passionate guy...

Or call William chickenhawk, its not rocket science.

I wouldn't give them the pleasure, with all the unpatriotic, U.S.-hating hypocrites in here.

Howard Dean..Prime Time Live...Tonight

Hey Dean Fans out there, Howard Dean and his beautiful wife wink will appear tonight on PrimeTime Live. Howard and Judy Dean will sit down for a candid interview with Diane Sawyer. I heard that Dean was chastised by his campaign manager for that bizarre outburst in Iowa. So, from here on out, we are going to see a more mellow Howard Dean. Yeah right!! I will have to see it to believe it. Check your local listings for times.

[ January 22, 2004, 06:17 AM: Message edited by: Nascar007 ]

What kills me ... if a candidate has no passion, or speaks monotonal (like some say Gore) he is called robotic, boring and has no personality. If a candidate shows passion and enthusiasm, he is chastised as being looney or a whack job, like the media and others are doing to Howard. Oh the hypocrisy!!!

That's Mr. Chickenhawk to you, bub.

Having met William, I can assure you that he's closer to being chicken than chickenhawk... wink

The media should also take some of the responsibility for sustaining the momentum regarding Dean's "infamous speech." While getting ready for work this morning, within the span of 1 hour, they must have shown that same clip of Dean's speech about 7 times! They kept saying that Dean's support in New Hampshire was slipping. It's all just sensationalized news that helps create a negative opinion about Dean.

I don't think there's anything wrong with being passionate and being emotional. I don't think it was an act. I think it came from his heart and he was just being passionate about what he was saying. I think it's odd that the public can be so easily swayed by what the media shows us. I also can't believe people's decision can be swayed by the looks of Dean's wife. :confused:

Unfortunately, I feel many Americans do not take the time to be informed before they cast their vote. Many people vote for candidates based on what the media says and also on how people look.

Dean still has my vote.

I don't much care for Dean, but the centrality of his comical exuberance in Iowa, and of his wife's reticence and homeliness is just another sign that Americans really don't deserve a democracy (or that they deserve what they get from one). Sadly, it means the few of us who pay attention to what does matter are also stuck with what the great mass of shallow morons decide.

From today's Washington Post More name calling so typical of those on the Right.

HEY RAZE, EMPTY YOUR EMAIL BOX!

(I knew if I (1) posted in this thread, and (2), yelled, I may get his attention) wink

OK, DONE DEAL!
DIDNT KNOW IT WAS FULL!

Dean has dug his own grave. The Democrats would be committing political suicide by giving him the nomination in 2004. I am just glad we learned about his personality now than after he was elected to a national office. Do we have any Vermont guys amongst us here at Outsports? Does Howard Dean usually have these emotional outbursts when he is under extreme stress? Has he received any psychiatric treatment for this disorder?

Howard Dean in Thursday's debate, when asked about his now infamous "Yeahhhh!" speech in Iowa:

"I thought I owed it to the thirty-five hundred kids there who came to Iowa to support me." (Emphasis added)

MIB, if you saw Thursday night's Democratic Debate (along with Howard and Judy Dean's interview with Dianne Sawyer on ABC's Primetime Live) in which he addressed the "infamous" (YOUR words) speech in Iowa, you would know that the quote you mentioned above is 1OO% ACCURATE -- with no sarcastic emphasis needed ....what EVERY member of the media who has been blasting Howard for the past three days fails to mention is the ENTIRE audience that he was speaking to on Monday night consisted of his 3500 young, energetic volunteers, all of whom had been busting their butts in Iowa on behalf of Dean's campaign for the past several months.

For Howard to have given a woe-is-me, pessimistic-laden concession speech to THAT AUDIENCE would have been not only inappropriate but an insult to all those young (and I refer to most teens and 20-somethings as "kids" myself with no negative connotation ever intended) volunteers who had worked so feverishly in an effort to garner a victory in Iowa....was Dean a bit "over the top" (quoting his own words during the Diane Sawyer interview)? - probably....but does he have anything to apologize for as a result of being EXCESSIVELY LOYAL (MY words) and expressing his optimism and appreciation in what was perhaps an overly energetic way? - absolutely NOT.

As everyone's favorite female Outsporter, GatorJamie, said earlier today in one of her many excellent posts, "If it's a choice between a passionately vocal candidate (Dean), a Casper Milquetoast (insert generic Dem name here), or a (insert generic insult here) (Bush), I'm taking the passionate guy"....here, here GJ!....add to those qualities a candidate who values family above all else (see transcript of Diane Sawyer interview if you missed it) and is LOYAL TO A FAULT to those who stand by him through good times and bad (and isn't afraid to show it, even at the risk of enormous personal and political "humiliation" at the hands of the media who clearly believe that most Americans are only capable of grasping what they are spoon-fed in 30 second sound bites only) and I see a man who was re-elected as governor five times for a good reason and is still deserving of my support.

[ January 22, 2004, 10:24 PM: Message edited by: gamecock ]

Deleted, please realize these remarks were only in jest. I am sorry for my poor attempt at humor.

[ January 23, 2004, 02:57 PM: Message edited by: Denver Fan ]

New Howard Dean supporter here!

I've purposely avoided campaign news until this past week. I didn't want to get emotionally involved in it for over a year, and I really was planning to wait until summer before making a decision. In my first blush look at the candidates I was leaning towards Clark and heavily away from Kerry, with Dean somewhere in the middle. After seeing too much coverage of Dean's "I've Got a Scream", I decided it was time to see what this guy was all about, and I've been reading and watching a lot of political news and C-Span.

Wow. Howard Dean knows his stuff, and speaks passionately and (I think) honestly, and is consistent with his message. I've watched him in town hall meetings on C-Span, the debate, and interviews, and was blown away by his clearly-articulated messages on the economy, unions, taxes, international trade, foreign relations, the Middle East, etc. etc. Not only does he state what he thinks is right, but he clearly articulates what (and how and why) Bush is doing wrong, and campaign positions that Bush did a 180 on when he took office, etc. If Dean is nominated, he could skewer Bush in the debates by speaking simply and honestly and articulately.

I've always been a middle-of-the road kind of guy, and have voted almost equally for Democrats and Republicans during my life. I supported Bush in removing Sadam Hussein from power, but am appalled at the mismanagement of the situation now, and appalled at almost every other position of the Bush administration. Vote for Dean in 2004!!!

[quote]gamecock:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by MIB:
....what EVERY member of the media who has been blasting Howard for the past three days fails to mention is the ENTIRE audience that he was speaking to on Monday night consisted of his 3500 young, energetic volunteers..... [/quote]When you're running for President the audience is the people in the room AND every person watching on television. This is the crux of what Dean hasn't realized. Anger and passion are very difficult emotions to manage; Dean expresses them but has no idea how to channel them into a coherent message that the mass audience at home can digest in a quick sound bite. Unfortunately, that is a necessary skill in politics today, and any candidate that doesn't realize it or chooses to ignore it is doomed to a Dukakis-like lasting public image as a buffoon.


PS - Is it really germane or fair to be critical of his wife's looks? It strikes me as rather shallow and irrelevant......

[ January 23, 2004, 08:01 AM: Message edited by: Munson Man ]

Honestly, I've gotten over this, you should too. "Kids" and "kiddies" are two different things.

And hence, a natural route for some bitter queens to travel.

I think most punks will vote for Howard...

Great pic BillW!

Trying to make Mrs. Dean's looks a relevant topic is just beyond stupid. Very few of our First Ladies were winning beauty pageants in their spare time. Nor were any of our Presidents for that matter. I like that she went on TV to support her husband without the aid of some team of hairdressers and makeup artists. Undoubtedly, Cojo will toothily and creepily critique her appearance on Entertainment Tonight! Amazingly some people do factor this crap into their decision. Add these numbskulls to the People Who Should Be Shot thread.

I have alot of respect for a woman who, as a mother and doctor, is more interested in her children and patients than in the phony materialistic aspects of politics. I like the fact that she's a "regular" woman trying to work and raise a family. And by making her involvement (or lack of) an issue, are we saying that a single man couldn't possibly be President?

And as funny and embarrassing as the Iowa speech may have been, I agree with those who would rather a guy show some authentic emotion than some publicist-controlled automaton.

Right on George! I couldn't have said it any better!

OK OK, you guys, I was just trying to lighten up the thread a little bit, but I am sure had I knocked on anyone else say, for instance, Linda Tripp, some of you would have joined in.

Lighten up, I loved the interview and I am a Dean supporter. I will vote for him if he's the nominee. I think we need some passion in the Presidential character. Bush is soooo boring. Dean is both unbridled and has a real message.

[ January 23, 2004, 11:26 AM: Message edited by: Denver Fan ]

Bill W., you punk rocker, that picture is great. It's Black Flag that Dean is fronting, correct? Howard Dean and Greg Graffin of Bad Religion: Separated at Birth? Hmmm.....


Greg Graffin, major woof. Love those hairy forearms.

And I stumbled across this site that has remixes of Dean's yell etc. The computer I'm on at work doesn't have sound, so I'm going to try and listen to some of them tonight.

[ January 23, 2004, 11:53 AM: Message edited by: Jim Allen ]

CNN question of the day is this: Are the media unfairly characterizing Howard Deans' post Iowa caucus rally? Currently, 59% yes, 41%no. Put me down in the yes camp. Personally I am so sick and tired of hearing this played over and over and over and over, I could throw up. wink

Anyone see the clip of Bush stumping (I think in New Mexico) last night on the PBS NewsHour? He was jabbering away about "democracies don't breed terrorists" (ah Tim McVeigh, Red Brigades and Baader Meinhof, we hardly knew ye) in that wind-up toy way of his, and his hand seemed robotically stuck in a spastic "thumbs up" jerk. It seemed way more nuts than Dean's pep rally.

Jim, I don't know who the band HD is fronting is ... It could well be early Black Flag, I never found Greg Ginn all that memorable-looking.

I should be knocking the more conventional biz-as-usual elements of Dean's record more often, so here we go:
Dean's defense of Vermont polluters (Counterpunch)

Dean Goes Nuts - Dean Remixed - YYYYEEEEEEAAAAHHHHHHRRRRRR

I'm probably in the minority here--I know I am among even my Democratic friends--but I don't really see Dean's speech as anything more than a bit energetic or rousing. So the guy shows some human emotion--so what? So the guy doesn't want to come across as a wooden board (Gore)--so what? I'd much rather have a president that once in a while can act a little goofy or actually show unscripted emotion.

On the subject of Dean's wife, who cares what she looks like? If we're going to act like probably most people in society and criticize her for looking like a female Grim Reaper, then we are as superficial as those whom we chastize for being so.

Let's not rail about people who base acceptance and love on one's looks, only to act that way ourselves. That's hypocrisy.

I'm sorry, I'm sorry, Im' sorry! Leave it alone. I apologized, haven't we all stated something we regret?

I went back and deleted my previous post, I hope you can all forgive me.

No, DenverFan, we're all Stalinists here. Your show trial will commence shortly, your execution to follow. Sorry, that's just the way it has to be.

I understand the conventional political reasons for doing so, but I'm disappointed that Dean trotted out his wife like a show pony just because people wanted him to. I hate politicians that parade their families around so they can claim to be family men etc. Apparently, Dean did a Diane Sawyer interview with his wife that was all warm and fuzzy and soft-lit and his poll numbers apprently creeped up as a result. Yikes.

[ January 23, 2004, 03:50 PM: Message edited by: Jim Allen ]

Jim, we live in Amurrika, not those free-loving Scandinavian countries--lots of people (women?) get weepy seeing a penitent hubby cuddled up in soft focus with his wife. It's just so...infantile. I actually heard a woman say on some show (was it on C-SPAN?) that she was voting for John Edwards because he had decided to have children after he lost his first child. HUH??? What does that have to do with ANYTHING?

I'm actually warming to Dean's deranged scream. Hell, he got blown out, and he needed to let off steam. Plus he was with over 3,000 young people, and what's more liberating than a primal scream?

You're right about W, whose moronic thumbs-up is never going to get highlighted because the media are so far up his ass they feed off his small intestine! And someone needs to tell dumb-bunny-a that a hell of a lot of democracies have produced terrorists, including our GOOD OLD U.S. of A!

I was wondering if anyone had any comments about this article appearing in this weekend's Washington Blade.

Here are a few paragraphs:

I agree with MIB on what he said about Dean's speech.
It really was no big deal and it's getting played out like he went into a gangsta rap number or something.

and "primal scream"???? I wouldn't even characterize it as that. It was consistent with the rousing, crowd inspiring numbers that all of us have seen in rallies and black churches. How was what Dean did any more "violent" than that?

Look... many in the media decided long ago to pigeonhoile Dean as a "violent, unstable" loon just one tick away from going postal.
They are simply gonna wait and search for anything to fit into their pre-supposition and then play it relentlessly.
Is that good journalism? No. Is that reality? yes.