The link isn't working.

[I've emailed the link fixers-Sitemonitor]

Wallace: Governor, are you suggesting that bringing up Jeremiah Wright is “race-baiting” and hate and divisive?

No , you fucking moron ; he's suggesting that it's done out of kindness and compassion and understanding and a willingness for bipartisanship ...........

What a jerkoff.............

Here is the youtube version for those that the link fails for - like me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHzyEgtI1F4

Said this before and i say it again:

The Democrats need to Start HAMMERING the Republicans about Robertson/Hagee/Falwel.
We need to remind them that they are mostly being Racist by only getting on a Black pastor, while the others White Pastors get off with not only saying anything but Doing anything.
(like getting caught with young boys, using crank for sex etc.)

Crazy Angry White Man ( Hagee ) hates Catholics and Jews, Only likes Jews because they will help bring about the 2nd Coming, then the Jews will be made into Christians or be sent into hell. McCain loves this man and asked to kiss Hagee’s ring. Does the MSM report on this Noooooooo! But Crazy Angry Black Man ( Wright ) gets tons of coverage. What gives?

Racism, make the Black man look as crazy and as angry as you can. Why not make the White man look just as crazy and angry? Where are Hagee’s clips being played 24 / 7 on MSM outlets?

Racism?

Howard Dean:

"And that’s exactly what it is. Just like Willie Horton was race-baiting so many years ago........there’s a lot of difference between the Republicans and the Democrats on issues, but the biggest issue of all is we don’t use this kind of stuff. We never have used this kind of stuff and we’re not going to start now."

It seems that the Willie Horton ads were first used by Al Gore against Dukakis in the Dem primaries in the late 80s. Gore lost. After that Bush père found them very useful

DL @ 13:

"I’ll tell you, there’s a lot of difference between the Republicans and the Democrats on issues, but the biggest issue of all is we don’t use this kind of stuff. We never have used this kind of stuff and we’re not going to start now."

Someone let Hillary Clinton know...

She said move on but typical of a Obama supporter to play the race card and blame the Clintons.

Have you no shame? Pathetic.

Look, the gop had nothing to run on until wright gave them something.

This is Obama and wright not the Clintons.

OMG.

Dean's going to use the old race-baiting trick every single time Obama gets critiqued for choices Obama has made that reflect his so-called "judgement" he used to brag about.

And the DNC is going to play right along with that silly game, running off all the Reagan Dems they'll need to win in November.

Our party is so screwed.

I can't decide if Dean is being dishonest or just delusional.
Americans tired of divisiveness and race-baiting? Vermont and Mississippi may as well be different planets
There's a reason these douchebags continue to use these tactics in their campaigns. They work.

ConcernedCanuck @ 7:

there’s a lot of difference between the Republicans and the Democrats on issues, but the biggest issue of all is we don’t use this kind of stuff. We never have used this kind of stuff and we’re not going to start now.

Hey, Howard. Have you seen the new Dem anti-McCain ads? You don't do this stuff? Have you been awake through any of the Clinton campaign? What friggin planet are you from?

For Faux to ask Dean about the cropping of McCain's statements was totally ludicrous. Faux has perfected the art of cropping statements from all dissenters. With The DNC ad there is only so much they can put in the ad because each second the ad runs, it cost more. For them to whine about the ad is worse than you whining about it.

Mary @ 16:

OMG.

Dean's going to use the old race-baiting trick every single time Obama gets critiqued for choices Obama has made that reflect his so-called "judgement" he used to brag about.

And the DNC is going to play right along with that silly game, running off all the Reagan Dems they'll need to win in November.

Our party is so screwed.

"Reagan Dems" are the "Blue Dog Dems" who still support Chimpy's imbecilic policies ; they are unnecessary and definitely not needed.

Ronnie Retard is fortunate in a way that Chimpy came along ; he was an absolute horseshit president and a piece of garbage.............

MCMetal @ 15:

getalife @ 14:

DL @ 13:

"I’ll tell you, there’s a lot of difference between the Republicans and the Democrats on issues, but the biggest issue of all is we don’t use this kind of stuff. We never have used this kind of stuff and we’re not going to start now."

Someone let Hillary Clinton know...

She said move on but typical of a Obama supporter to play the race card and blame the Clintons.

Have you no shame? Pathetic.

Look, the gop had nothing to run on until wright gave them something.

This is Obama and wright not the Clintons.

If the GOP has nothing to "run on" outside of the Wright non-issue , that tells you all you need to know about how pathetic , shitty and stupid they are..........

Exactly, and they still lost the reddest House seat in La. .

The gop are not the solution to problems, the gop is the problem.

ConcernedCanuck @ 7:

there’s a lot of difference between the Republicans and the Democrats on issues, but the biggest issue of all is we don’t use this kind of stuff. We never have used this kind of stuff and we’re not going to start now.

Hey, Howard. Have you seen the new Dem anti-McCain ads? You don't do this stuff? Have you been awake through any of the Clinton campaign? What friggin planet are you from?

The anti-McCain ads are race baiting?

KansasCityFaGt @ 18:

I can't decide if Dean is being dishonest or just delusional.
Americans tired of divisiveness and race-baiting? Vermont and Mississippi may as well be different planets
There's a reason these douchebags continue to use these tactics in their campaigns. They work.

It's closer to dishonesty than delusional, but I don't think either is a fair description.

All the candidates and their supporters invoke "the American people" as their base. What they really mean is that just enough of the American people are on their side to be inspired by the words being said to turn out and give them an election win.

The "Americans are sick of business as usual politics that don't change anything" has worked for Obama so far. It's helped him stay ahead of Clinton. "Sick of race baiting" is just a subset of that narrative. And it can work if we hammer it consistently.

...are you suggesting that bringing up Jeremiah Wright is “race-baiting” and hate and divisive?

Not suggesting anything. Calling it exactly what it is. Race-baiting.

Mary @ 16:

OMG.

Dean's going to use the old race-baiting trick every single time Obama gets critiqued for choices Obama has made that reflect his so-called "judgement" he used to brag about.

And the DNC is going to play right along with that silly game, running off all the Reagan Dems they'll need to win in November.

Our party is so screwed.

Ronald Reagan was the first Republican to win the South. Before that, the South had always been a Democratic stronghold.
The "Reagan Democrats" were the same people that used to be called the "Southern Democrats".
They were the same people that supported that Separate but Equal b@llshit back in the 50s.
They were old back when Reagan got elected. They are all dead.

ConcernedCanuck @ 31:

Ron @ 20:

ConcernedCanuck @ 7:

Hey, Howard. Have you seen the new Dem anti-McCain ads? You don't do this stuff? Have you been awake through any of the Clinton campaign? What friggin planet are you from?

For Faux to ask Dean about the cropping of McCain's statements was totally ludicrous. Faux has perfected the art of cropping statements from all dissenters. With The DNC ad there is only so much they can put in the ad because each second the ad runs, it cost more. For them to whine about the ad is worse than you whining about it.

Don't be a moron. I am not whining about the ad. I am pointing out how idiotic Dean's statement is. Partisan "hacks" such as yourself obviously can't see the light at the end of the tunnel if it's your party doing it, eh? Mr. Dean should maybe do some clip reviews of the Clinton campaign since January, and he'll see how the Dems can win an election by being exactly like the Repukes because it works. Need proof? Bush. Twice. Daddy Bush once. Ronnie Raygun.

I just don't think it's right and I don't think it's going to be as successful as it has been in the past. For you to be critical of Dean when he has been successful with the 50 state strategy makes you sound like James Carville.

Ron @ 34:

ConcernedCanuck @ 31:

Ron @ 20:

ConcernedCanuck @ 7:
For Faux to ask Dean about the cropping of McCain's statements was totally ludicrous. Faux has perfected the art of cropping statements from all dissenters. With The DNC ad there is only so much they can put in the ad because each second the ad runs, it cost more. For them to whine about the ad is worse than you whining about it.

Don't be a moron. I am not whining about the ad. I am pointing out how idiotic Dean's statement is. Partisan "hacks" such as yourself obviously can't see the light at the end of the tunnel if it's your party doing it, eh? Mr. Dean should maybe do some clip reviews of the Clinton campaign since January, and he'll see how the Dems can win an election by being exactly like the Repukes because it works. Need proof? Bush. Twice. Daddy Bush once. Ronnie Raygun.

I just don't think it's right and I don't think it's going to be as successful as it has been in the past. For you to be critical of Dean when he has been successful with the 50 state strategy makes you sound like James Carville.

Successful? How so? So far it has only been primaries, and they always have a bigger turnout than elections. If you mean, one of the candidates has adopted Dean's policy, well then that isn't working either if you look at all the polls. It's neck and neck between both parties, changing on a daily basis. It should not be anywhere near close at all. It should be a massive blowout. Is it? Nope. All close enough that machines could possibly "error" a win............again. I wouldn't call any of that winning strategies.

Of course Dean has to adopt the rhetorical stance that the American people are tired of race baiting. That's a good way to frame the issue.

Speaking of framing, let's stop with Wright is just as bad as Haggee. No. Outside of some loopy ideas about the origins of AIDS, we certainly have to see Wright's positions, good and not so bad, and many are good, in the context of an African American man of his generation who has faced racism and has struggled against it. Now what cause of social justice has Haggee ever devoted himself to?

There are those that are silly enough to allow race to govern their mind. They are usually one paycheck from disaster, and need something to make them feel good about themselves. It is our job to save them from themselves.

fastfeat @ 41:

Am I the only one who wonders how that sounded to a typical Fux viewer--their boy Wallace getting called out?

Did the bubbas all go out and shoot some squirrels or slap the ol' lady around?

Any insight here, thugs?

They went out and called their local reverend ; to have a gay sex and meth party ............

Has Mr. Dean been asleep at the wheel through this whole campaign of yours or is he willing to say anything at this point?
Race and racist claims have been an issue from the very beginning of your campaign. It has been classed as a contest between a woman and an African American, while the media pushed this theme by totally ignoring John Edwards. Remember the debate where Obama was sitting between Hillary and John and Obama stated, the race is between a woman, Hillary, an African American referencing himself and then he turned to John Edwards and said, then there's you John... Or we have the instance of the first Hillary supporter saying republcans might use Obama's drug use as revealed in his own book against him, and he is branded racist with people crying he is implying that all blacks are drug users. Or we have Bill being called racist for saying Obama's stance on Iraq is a fairy tale while the Obama supporters cry racism and how dare he imply that a black person can't run for President. Or we have Bill again called racist for mentionning Jesse Jackson's win while CNN discussed the same fact two weeks earlier and Jackson himself said he was not offended nor was it a racist comment. Or we have Jesse Jackson Jr. talking on TV about calling Hillary's teary moment crocodile tears and why didn't he see her crying for the black victims of Katrina? Or we see black Congresspeople saying they are receiving emails to switch their support to Obama or go uncommitted rather than staying a Hillary supporter or others being threatened that their elective positions may be in jeopardy if they are considered to be stopping a black from becoming president. Or the latest video calling a sometimes Hillary advisor racist for calling people 2 names I will no longer repeat, and just in time to get them incensed before they go to your polls on Tuesday.
Mr. Dean where have you been hiding?...wake up! One campaign has used race from the very beginning along with the media pushing it as a woman against an African American totally ignoring John Edwards until he was finally forced to drop out for lack of coverage of his message. We have the introduction of one by Oprah and deemed the second coming of MLK. The media push that 90% vote or Obama, or the dems cannot win without the black vote and they will stay home if Clinton gets the nomination, or claiming one campaign side is always negative while both are equally to blame and t is okay to appear sexist but not racist.....
Where have you been asleep at the wheel Mr. Dean?..........Race and racist cries against the one candidate have been prevalent from the beginning. We now listen to claims of how superdelegates are supposed to, in the eyes of Obama supporters vote the way their constituents do and it would be terrible to rob Obama in those back smoky filled rooms. However, it appears that the Obama camp has no problems with accepting superdelegate support from States who went to Hillary such as Edwards, Kerry, Richardson, the Governor of Oklahoma etc., but it would be wrong for Hillary or others to say that those people are independent and can vote as they choose to?
Please, Mr. Dean, this race has been nothing but race, used as a tool against the other candidate while the one camp claims they don't want race to be an issue. I would call this hypocritical statement the "politics of old" still being employed to gain the White House while claiming to be the politics of the new.....
Sorry Mr. Dean, but WAKE UP!!!!

I tend to disagree that bringing up Wright is race-baiting.

That's attempting to change the subject on a subject that's a change of subject.

Willie Horton was a criminial, Wright a pastor. One could say the Horton commercials was a way of implying all or most blacks are criminals.

However, if you simplify it to fear of the scary black man, they might have a point.

Howard Dean is very much on his game as of late. Hammer anyone that wants to continue the Rev. Wright issue. Dean is correct that as this man has fed his ego he has hurt the American people. I literally turn off any channel that brings up this controversy.
Stay true to what you want in this pivotal election. Do not succumb to these ridiculous tags that they try to pin on Obama.

He is a ONCE in a generation leader that has come to serve the best that America can be.

From Barak Obama's book "Dreams of My Father:"

"Black politicians less gifted than Harold (Harold Washington, 1st Black mayor of Chicago) discovered that RACE-BAITING (by them) could make up for a host of limitations. Younger leaders, eager to make a name for themselves, upped the ante, peddling conspiracy theories all over town: the Koreans were funding the Klan, Jewish doctors were injecting black babies with the Aids virus, etc.

It was a shortcut to fame, if not always fortune; like sex or violence onTV, black rage always found a ready market." (p. 145)

Obama HIMSELF admits "Black politicians" use the false race card and race-baiting to win the support of their fellow AA voters, and they do it falsely, and ON PURPOSE.

Think about that, and whether you can actually win in November if Obama's race-baiting has offended moderate Democrats, who may very well stay home instead.

Howard Dean is way off base claiming any questions about Rev. Wright are race-baiting.

Mary @ 50:

From Barak Obama's book "Dreams of My Father:"

"Black politicians less gifted than Harold (Harold Washington, 1st Black mayor of Chicago) discovered that RACE-BAITING (by them) could make up for a host of limitations. Younger leaders, eager to make a name for themselves, upped the ante, peddling conspiracy theories all over town: the Koreans were funding the Klan, Jewish doctors were injecting black babies with the Aids virus, etc.

It was a shortcut to fame, if not always fortune; like sex or violence onTV, black rage always found a ready market." (p. 145)

Obama HIMSELF admits "Black politicians" use the false race card and race-baiting to win the support of their fellow AA voters, and they do it falsely, and ON PURPOSE.

Think about that, and whether you can actually win in November if Obama's race-baiting has offended moderate Democrats, who may very well stay home instead.

Howard Dean is way off base claiming any questions about Rev. Wright are race-baiting.

When they try to tie one person to the black church with a black pastor who has a connection to Louis Farakan, it is race baiting.

Not really, Ron.

They're questioning Obama's JUDGEMENT in staying associated with Wright for 20 years, donating $22,000 to his congregation in 2006, and exposing his own daughters to a pastor who "humps" the podium , screaming "Clintons RODE us DIRTY" while children are in the congregation.

Would YOU expose your daughters to a pastor who humps the podium during a sermon?

If your answer is yes, then I GET to question your judgement.

It's not about race. It's about JUDGEMENT, which is what Obama said was his very best quality.

Apparently, it's not.

Mary @ 54:

Not really, Ron.

They're questioning Obama's JUDGEMENT in staying associated with Wright for 20 years, donating $22,000 to his congregation in 2006, and exposing his own daughters to a pastor who "humps" the podium , screaming "Clintons RODE us DIRTY" while children are in the congregation.

Would YOU expose your daughters to a pastor who humps the podium during a sermon?

If your answer is yes, then I GET to question your judgement.

It's not about race. It's about JUDGEMENT, which is what Obama said was his very best quality.

Apparently, it's not.

....That's all the good Rev. did? Try coming to an evangelical service sometime, sweetheart, we can top that easy...

General_Rennenkampf @ 56:

Mary @ 54:

Not really, Ron.

They're questioning Obama's JUDGEMENT in staying associated with Wright for 20 years, donating $22,000 to his congregation in 2006, and exposing his own daughters to a pastor who "humps" the podium , screaming "Clintons RODE us DIRTY" while children are in the congregation.

Would YOU expose your daughters to a pastor who humps the podium during a sermon?

If your answer is yes, then I GET to question your judgement.

It's not about race. It's about JUDGEMENT, which is what Obama said was his very best quality.

Apparently, it's not.

....That's all the good Rev. did? Try coming to an evangelical service sometime, sweetheart, we can top that easy...

Righty,O, General.

You got videos all over YouTube of any evangelical preachers humping the podium screaming DID US DIRTY?

Rather histrionic, don't you think?

I must correct a goof I made in my long rant earlier when I said Edwards had supported Obama when I meant to write Kennedy.
Also one other thing and I won't write about it because in this senior Sunday moment I can't remember all the details off the top of my head at the moment, but weren't either some voters in Pennsylvannia or some in that race where the exit polling was so skewed from the results blamed for perhaps being bigots or racists by saying that they did vote Obama when perhaps they didn't and that is why the polls were so far off the final results? I just remember sitting at the time watching TV and thinking if I was a white voter just being accused of something like that I would be furious.

yeah, well said.

nochickenhawk @ 53:

Howard Dean, you have a couple of race baiters in your own house too, Bill and Hillary Clinton. And I read on a couple of other sites that the Clintons have a nuclear option planned for stealing the nomination by forcing MI and FL to be seated.

That's not really stealing the nomination, because it's a long-shot that they could get them seated, and there's no guarantee how the delegates will vote, or that part of the arrangement might be splitting the delegates between the candidates, or even that the nomination will even come to a convention.

Sheeple is an idiotic phrase that implies that a commenter can't be certain his/her point will be otherwise taken seriously.

Of course someone ending a comment with dear is patronizing and like they're talking down to a dumb child.

On the other hand, Rico, "in the privacy of the voter's booth," Americans choose to vote for who they think is the most QUALIFIED and EXPERIENCED, and it has NOTHING to do with the color of their skin.

There are many African American voters who publicly say they're for Obama, in their own social circles, but in the privacy of the voting booth, are voting for Clinton as more qualified, and who don't believe for one second that either Clinton is a racist.

In fact, in Pennsylvania, 40% of the Republican crossover vote was Republican WOMEN voting for Clinton.

So, just because YOU think people do things for racist reasons, doesn't make it so.

foreigner @ 63:

nochickenhawk @ 53:

Howard Dean, you have a couple of race baiters in your own house too, Bill and Hillary Clinton. And I read on a couple of other sites that the Clintons have a nuclear option planned for stealing the nomination by forcing MI and FL to be seated.

Yes, coming from an anonymous source given to the head political writer at The Huffington Post which can't write enough bad press for Hillary as it is.

It's on Raw Story as well. She deserves every bit of bad press from HuffPo and AmBlog to make up for the free ride she gets from CNN, FOX, ABC, Taylor Marsh, TalkLeft, MyDD. . .

No matter what anyone says about Howard Dean, this guy is a straight shooter, and he takes NO bullshit from anyone when it comes to facts and truth.

This pravda network got a little "bitch slapping" from Dean, and I'm hoping the rest of the politicians can be up front and assertive when dealing with this propaganda outlet.

We get all excited when we see a politician call these biased scumbags on issues, and that SHOULD BE the norm.

I salute you Howard Dean. You are one honest, up front, straight talking man. I admire your courage and your wisdom. Keep working for America!!

#70 Mary: "So, just because YOU think people do things for racist reasons, doesn’t make it so."

Sorry to disappoint you Mary but I'm from Pennsylvania, and every single person I've asked who voted for Hillary did so because of racial reasons. So I guess we've a long way to go.

Sorry, that post was for Rico.

What on EARTH was the NAACP thinking when they invited the press to cover Rev. Wright's speech that day, knowing full well that Wright's bodyguards were provided by Farrakhan's Nation of Islam?

Is the NAACP hoping Wright's antics will undermine Obama's campaign?

Were they DARING the press to critique him , so accusations of race-baiting could be made?

Wallace tried to imply Obama is "radioactive", what a fucking putz!!

The more you listen to Wallace spin non issues into front page topics, the more you realize the only way to answer his questions is by a forthright debunking of their idiocy like Howard Dean just did.

Thank you Howard Dean!

Mary @ 50:

From Barak Obama's book "Dreams of My Father:"

"Black politicians less gifted than Harold (Harold Washington, 1st Black mayor of Chicago) discovered that RACE-BAITING (by them) could make up for a host of limitations. Younger leaders, eager to make a name for themselves, upped the ante, peddling conspiracy theories all over town: the Koreans were funding the Klan, Jewish doctors were injecting black babies with the Aids virus, etc.

It was a shortcut to fame, if not always fortune; like sex or violence onTV, black rage always found a ready market." (p. 145)

Obama HIMSELF admits "Black politicians" use the false race card and race-baiting to win the support of their fellow AA voters, and they do it falsely, and ON PURPOSE.

Think about that, and whether you can actually win in November if Obama's race-baiting has offended moderate Democrats, who may very well stay home instead.

Howard Dean is way off base claiming any questions about Rev. Wright are race-baiting.

Honey, could you be any more dense?

Re read what you wrote and reexamine your statements.

Here we have a man who is honest and open about black politicians piggybacking the race card and you take that statement and, without a shred of evidence, use it to smear the man who admitted others have done it.

Guess cause he's black, he must do it it too?

Howard Dean is not way off base, honey, you are.

Sorry, odanny.

I WATCHED Jesse Jackson Jr. play the false race card after Obama got his butt kicked in New Hampshire, sending code words to the AA's in South Carolina.

Based on Jackson's statements, I couldn't possibly vote for Obama, because I saw no tears from him after Katrina. LOL

Talk about DENSE, indeed.

I also WATCHED Barak Obama apologize to Tim Russert for allowing his campaign staff to use the race card, after Russert showed him a 4 page memo listing the way they did it.

Obama himself said it was wrong to do so, and admonish his staff for same.

Next time you call someone "dense," hot shot, make sure you're INFORMED before your own words paint yourself as same.

Mary @ 86:

Sorry, odanny.

I WATCHED Jesse Jackson Jr. play the false race card after Obama got his butt kicked in New Hampshire, sending code words to the AA's in South Carolina.

Based on Jackson's statements, I couldn't possibly vote for Obama, because I saw no tears from him after Katrina. LOL

Talk about DENSE, indeed.

I also WATCHED Barak Obama apologize to Tim Russert for allowing his campaign staff to use the race card, after Russert showed him a 4 page memo listing the way they did it.

Obama himself said it was wrong to do so, and admonish his staff for same.

Next time you call someone "dense," hot shot, make sure you're INFORMED before your own words paint yourself as same.

Do all of us a favor and link to supporting articles, video, etc. Please.

Obviously, odanny didn't watch the first MSNBC debate, nor did he see Jackson (Obama's campaign co-chairman) speak on MSNBC the day after Obama's huge New Hampshire loss.

Odanny is poorly informed with facts of any kind.

Sounds exactly like the adolescent boy I already raised.

Poor thing.

Sending The Same Message

Charlie Rangel and now Howard Dean have told the conservative media to report the news and not create it. For the first time this year, the Democrats appear to be coming from the same script. How sweet it is to see this as the Democrats face the challenge of united their Party before the general election.

This show of unity, or pre-unity, has the potential to destroy any chance the Republicans may have to win the Executive branch in November. With a united Democratic Party, the two to one voting advantage is alive and kicking the butts of the dated Republican Party.

While I am at it, I too will make a plea for my Democratic allies to stay on point by not participating in this witch hunt topic. If need, send Hillary Clinton a message we find any support for this topic a vote for the Republican ideology of anything to win. We must show one face and force the media to talk about the recessive economy and this funky war. By forcing the media to talk about what is destroying our country and killing the innocent Iraqi civilian population, we put the failures of this administration front and center.

Maybe something is wrong with my thinking because I find a lot of truth in Right's comments. We have murdered thousands of human beings in Iraq and Vietnam. Which brings to mind: Why have we not addressed our collective denial?

Joseph

Its about time somebody said that to the Republicans while sitting in their mother house. Agree or disagree with Dean going on their network, but at least he told them to shove it.

FilthyHarry @ 3:

Aren't many ministers, reverends, priests, etc... telling people we're all going to hell if we don't behave every sunday?

This is such a racial issue. The idea that black people may be angry is very threatening to certain people especially because they don't want to think about maybe black people have a reason to be angry, and what it might cost them to make the problem go away.

You know, there are a hell of a lot of white people who are pissed off too.

ConcernedCanuck @ 7:

there’s a lot of difference between the Republicans and the Democrats on issues, but the biggest issue of all is we don’t use this kind of stuff. We never have used this kind of stuff and we’re not going to start now.

Hey, Howard. Have you seen the new Dem anti-McCain ads? You don't do this stuff? Have you been awake through any of the Clinton campaign? What friggin planet are you from?

Kinda hurts when the truth gets shoved back in the face. What I think you are having hard time with is the fact that McCain is on video tape and the facts are right next to him....... Ouch

Dean lied. Democrats use race baiting. We only have to look at Hillary Clinton.

[Deleted. When we get objections to it that quickly, it's pretty easy to see that it's offensive. Sorry. Site Monitor]

foreigner @ 81:

naschkatze Hussein @ 72:

foreigner @ 63:

nochickenhawk @ 53:

Yes, coming from an anonymous source given to the head political writer at The Huffington Post which can't write enough bad press for Hillary as it is.

It's on Raw Story as well. She deserves every bit of bad press from HuffPo and AmBlog to make up for the free ride she gets from CNN, FOX, ABC, Taylor Marsh, TalkLeft, MyDD. . .

Raw Story links to it as well, but that doesn't legitimize it. I read Raw Story several times a day for links to articles all over the web. That article is to be taken like anything from "an anonymous source", written by the way by someone who doesn't like the Clinton candidacy. You don't appear to see CNN like I do. I watch it all the time. I guess you are upset that they finally dared to discuss the Wright issue which isn't perhaps all pro Obama. You don't know how many times I have written to them on their biased coverage of pro Obama anti Clinton. I can name you all kinds of people who speak against her yet maybe only one or two - Begalla and Carville, and one on Lou Dobbs, that come on in her defence. But then again it just goes to show that some people don't like reading anything that doesn't fit with what they already believe in. You love the likes of AmericaBlog which I no longer visit anymore because it is all anti Clinton and almost painful to read through it now, yet you seem to denigrate those who are pro Clinton or even half way reasonable presenting both sides. That is why I continue to like this site. It has a balanced approach for all its readers and even though the comments are one way or the other, the stories presented for discussion seem fair to both candidates. People with a candidate in the race go visit and read at places that already validate how they believe and not to be challenged. It is so much more fun to commiserate and express dislike en masse for someone else than get into facts and real discussions with genuine back and forth dialogue. That's what makes this race no different, and in fact worse, than most of your campaigns of the past.

Interesting point. Consider the fact that Hillary was the "anointed one" until the primaries started. And who deemed her worthy of such praise? The mainstream media can be credited for that. True to form, the Republicans and their good friends in the mainstream media focused nearly everything on Hillary (who can forget that classic question to McCain, as asked by some dried up and probably drunk, white woman, "So how do you beat the b...."? )? McCain laughed it off and so did the media. But, when the script was altered, all bets were off. They want Hillary and if they can't have her, then screw everybody else.

oncall @ 104:

foreigner @ 81:

naschkatze Hussein @ 72:

foreigner @ 63:

It's on Raw Story as well. She deserves every bit of bad press from HuffPo and AmBlog to make up for the free ride she gets from CNN, FOX, ABC, Taylor Marsh, TalkLeft, MyDD. . .

Raw Story links to it as well, but that doesn't legitimize it. I read Raw Story several times a day for links to articles all over the web. That article is to be taken like anything from "an anonymous source", written by the way by someone who doesn't like the Clinton candidacy. You don't appear to see CNN like I do. I watch it all the time. I guess you are upset that they finally dared to discuss the Wright issue which isn't perhaps all pro Obama. You don't know how many times I have written to them on their biased coverage of pro Obama anti Clinton. I can name you all kinds of people who speak against her yet maybe only one or two - Begalla and Carville, and one on Lou Dobbs, that come on in her defence. But then again it just goes to show that some people don't like reading anything that doesn't fit with what they already believe in. You love the likes of AmericaBlog which I no longer visit anymore because it is all anti Clinton and almost painful to read through it now, yet you seem to denigrate those who are pro Clinton or even half way reasonable presenting both sides. That is why I continue to like this site. It has a balanced approach for all its readers and even though the comments are one way or the other, the stories presented for discussion seem fair to both candidates. People with a candidate in the race go visit and read at places that already validate how they believe and not to be challenged. It is so much more fun to commiserate and express dislike en masse for someone else than get into facts and real discussions with genuine back and forth dialogue. That's what makes this race no different, and in fact worse, than most of your campaigns of the past.

Interesting point. Consider the fact that Hillary was the "anointed one" until the primaries started. And who deemed her worthy of such praise? The mainstream media can be credited for that. True to form, the Republicans and their good friends in the mainstream media focused nearly everything on Hillary (who can forget that classic question to McCain, as asked by some dried up and probably drunk, white woman, "So how do you beat the b...."? )? McCain laughed it off and so did the media. But, when the script was altered, all bets were off. They want Hillary and if they can't have her, then screw everybody else.

Are you trying to say the media is in the tank for Hillary and are all anti Obama?

foreigner @ 106:

oncall @ 104:

foreigner @ 81:

naschkatze Hussein @ 72:

Raw Story links to it as well, but that doesn't legitimize it. I read Raw Story several times a day for links to articles all over the web. That article is to be taken like anything from "an anonymous source", written by the way by someone who doesn't like the Clinton candidacy. You don't appear to see CNN like I do. I watch it all the time. I guess you are upset that they finally dared to discuss the Wright issue which isn't perhaps all pro Obama. You don't know how many times I have written to them on their biased coverage of pro Obama anti Clinton. I can name you all kinds of people who speak against her yet maybe only one or two - Begalla and Carville, and one on Lou Dobbs, that come on in her defence. But then again it just goes to show that some people don't like reading anything that doesn't fit with what they already believe in. You love the likes of AmericaBlog which I no longer visit anymore because it is all anti Clinton and almost painful to read through it now, yet you seem to denigrate those who are pro Clinton or even half way reasonable presenting both sides. That is why I continue to like this site. It has a balanced approach for all its readers and even though the comments are one way or the other, the stories presented for discussion seem fair to both candidates. People with a candidate in the race go visit and read at places that already validate how they believe and not to be challenged. It is so much more fun to commiserate and express dislike en masse for someone else than get into facts and real discussions with genuine back and forth dialogue. That's what makes this race no different, and in fact worse, than most of your campaigns of the past.

Interesting point. Consider the fact that Hillary was the "anointed one" until the primaries started. And who deemed her worthy of such praise? The mainstream media can be credited for that. True to form, the Republicans and their good friends in the mainstream media focused nearly everything on Hillary (who can forget that classic question to McCain, as asked by some dried up and probably drunk, white woman, "So how do you beat the b...."? )? McCain laughed it off and so did the media. But, when the script was altered, all bets were off. They want Hillary and if they can't have her, then screw everybody else.

Are you trying to say the media is in the tank for Hillary and are all anti Obama?

No, what I am trying to say is that the media had it one way and it is not going the way they planned. The Republicans wanted and still want to run against Hillary. Therefore anything that can be done to make Hillary a more viable candidate for the Republicans works best for the media and the Republicans alike.

correction:.....is notin the White House

Obama on Meet the Press today:

"My father is from Africa. It's in my DNA to bring people together."

Anybody have any idea what the he** that means?

BOOOYAH!!!

CoIntelPro against DIVISIVE DEMS. @ 111:

the media will alway have the strongest attack for the democratic frontrunner. a couple of months ago it was hillary and theya attacked her ankles and cleavage and sighing and skirts and blouses and chats in diners.

now that Barack is leading, his church is attacked, his non-existant islamic faith(that he's hiding from us until he gets into the white house), the weather underground guy who went to jail when Barack was eight....

the principle is the same: attack the dems. destroy them if they win the WH.

Agreed, but I think they have more fun slamming Hillary.

The Obama campaign is the champion of race baiting. He reaps what he sows.

oncall at # 108 wrote:

No, what I am trying to say is that the media had it one way and it is not going the way they planned. The Republicans wanted and still want to run against Hillary. Therefore anything that can be done to make Hillary a more viable candidate for the Republicans works best for the media and the Republicans alike.

Excuse me but the media is having it exactly as they planned - a race between a woman and an African American. That has been it from day one. One day on CNN Gloria Borger was in a discussion on Wolf Blitzer's show and the topic came up of not vetting Obama, and she made the comment, and these are not her quotable words but as close as I can get - That it is our job to boost them up until they get the nomination and we will have plenty of time to tear him down later. They have thrived on the racist rants especially when they were thrown at Bill Clinton, and all the polling and exit polls discussing African American voting patterns and are white voters racist if they don't vote Obama? So the media hops on the Wright bandwagon on TV because it can't be totally ignored and Obama supporters complain. You know some people seem to think Obama can do no wrong. In my opinion, I always love the way that people think Republicans feel Clinton would be better to run against than Obama. To me that is so crazy - they should be afraid of Hillary. She is not considered as to the left as Obama is, she has many main stream middle american thoughts for the good of Americans not just democrats, and in all honesty what else are they going to do - rehash Lewinsky again in desperation? People are complaining about health care, education, home loss, loss in income - I would lay odds that if you worry about people being in a private voting booth and not voting for Obama because he is black, then I would say there are a lot of mainstream republicans who would go in that booth and vote for her over McCain without saying so. Sorry, but that is my gut feeling. Obama will be much easier to class as inexperienced, polarizing and not attracting the blue collar worker, and of course wright will come up again and again no matter what you wish for and also, there is still that video out there of Obama saying in 2004 that he would not be running on a national ticket in 08 because he felt he wasn't qualified to run for the Presidency. All the republicans have to do is show that over and over and you have Obama denying that he is ready to be President in 08 right from his own lips.

Pimp

foreigner @ 120:

oncall at # 108 wrote:

No, what I am trying to say is that the media had it one way and it is not going the way they planned. The Republicans wanted and still want to run against Hillary. Therefore anything that can be done to make Hillary a more viable candidate for the Republicans works best for the media and the Republicans alike.

Excuse me but the media is having it exactly as they planned - a race between a woman and an African American. That has been it from day one. One day on CNN Gloria Borger was in a discussion on Wolf Blitzer's show and the topic came up of not vetting Obama, and she made the comment, and these are not her quotable words but as close as I can get - That it is our job to boost them up until they get the nomination and we will have plenty of time to tear him down later. They have thrived on the racist rants especially when they were thrown at Bill Clinton, and all the polling and exit polls discussing African American voting patterns and are white voters racist if they don't vote Obama? So the media hops on the Wright bandwagon on TV because it can't be totally ignored and Obama supporters complain. You know some people seem to think Obama can do no wrong. In my opinion, I always love the way that people think Republicans feel Clinton would be better to run against than Obama. To me that is so crazy - they should be afraid of Hillary. She is not considered as to the left as Obama is, she has many main stream middle american thoughts for the good of Americans not just democrats, and in all honesty what else are they going to do - rehash Lewinsky again in desperation? People are complaining about health care, education, home loss, loss in income - I would lay odds that if you worry about people being in a private voting booth and not voting for Obama because he is black, then I would say there are a lot of mainstream republicans who would go in that booth and vote for her over McCain without saying so. Sorry, but that is my gut feeling. Obama will be much easier to class as inexperienced, polarizing and not attracting the blue collar worker, and of course wright will come up again and again no matter what you wish for and also, there is still that video out there of Obama saying in 2004 that he would not be running on a national ticket in 08 because he felt he wasn't qualified to run for the Presidency. All the republicans have to do is show that over and over and you have Obama denying that he is ready to be President in 08 right from his own lips.

Well, Gloria Borger was admitting what everybody knew. No surprise there.

There is an unfortunate fact of life for Hilllary, and that is she has very high negatives. The Republicans eat that stuff up and love it. The media thrives when the Republicans or any 527 run "negative" ads because it propels a story that does not have anythning to do with the issues. Maybe today people would vote for Hillary if in a private booth, but let's imagine it goes down to the convention and Clinton is the nominee. At that point and for three months the MSM will have regurgitated every slime attack against Hillary such that very few middle of the road Republicans would even consider a vote for her, and I know the same thing could be said about Obama, but it will be harder for the RNC to get away with it. I think you are putting to much faith in the "middle of the road" Republicans. How many times did people say, it can't happen again, and damn if it did not happen, George Bush got re-elected (I know there is a lot of argument out there about that, but I will not go there now).

So what if Obama said he did not intend to run because he did not feel he was not experienced enough? Let's look at other President's with little experience. JFK, Abe Lincoln, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton,and one I hate to mention, George W. Bush. John McCain's experience? Pretty easy. Sat in Congress for decades and has become a right wing tool. Obama can easily say that the tenor of Washington was so toxic that to get more experience there would be like becoming indoctrinated in a cult.

No matter who gets the nomination, the Republicans should be afraid - period.

"America is more important than the Republican party and that’s the lesson the voters are about to teach the Republicans."

Amen.

I completely agree that this Wright thing is racially-motivated or something along those lines, because otherwise there should be as much of an uproar over Hagee. I'm sorry, but it boggles my mind that a man who calls the church of 77 million Americans and a billion human beings "the great whore" and blames Katrina on the sins of New Orleans is largely ignored. As a Catholic, I don't know what offends me more: what he said or the lack of any kind of anger over it. Apparently anti-Catholic bigotry is perfectly okay and still all-American. This is why I hate the GOP.

Comment 124
"So what if Obama said he did not intend to run because he did not feel he was not experienced enough? Let’s look at other President’s with little experience. JFK, Abe Lincoln, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton,and one I hate to mention, George W. Bush. John McCain’s experience? Pretty easy. Sat in Congress for decades and has become a right wing tool. Obama can easily say that the tenor of Washington was so toxic that to get more experience there would be like becoming indoctrinated in a cult."

Sorry, but bringing in other inexperienced Presidents is not quite the same as someone running who says they themselves are not qualified to be President on videotape. Maybe I do have too much faith in everyday working Americans, but then perhaps as an outsider I think of your country as a whole and not these personality conflicts of who is always right or wrong or are they far enough to the left, or trying to explain that someon'es lack of experience is okay because other President weren't so qualified either. Most if not all of those were Governors who ran a State weren't they?
See, maybe I am too old to get over the fact that the President of the US is an important job and one which affects my country and every other part of the world. Maybe this time it might be nice to have someone enter the Oval Office who doesn't promise more dreams and hopes of change that we all listened to around the globe 8 years ago and got nothing for it in return. Perhaps we could hear about how change is going to be accomplished with the Republicans now in office still getting away with House and Senate rules blocking practically anything the Democrats want to push in Congress? Aren't those rules the President can't touch so how will that change? What exactly will Obama change? How can he change anyting unless there is a Democratic majority in the House or Senate and that you can't promise. So in effect, all it is is more hopes and promises with no real promise of fulfillment like 8 years ago. I will say he is a great inspirational speaker who knows when to lower and raise his voice and especially raise it when inspiring change and dreams and promises at the end just before he leaves the stage. I have noticed that before but it was funny as I was writing one of the posts above this afternoon, CNN was playing a clip of Obama today and the TV was behind me and I listened as I typed. It was obvious that when the talking points of education, health care etc were over and he went into the part of why he was running, the voice got louder and louder until he finsihed with asking them to vote for him on Tuesday to be President then the thank you and exit off the stage. Like I said, he has inspirational speaking down to an art form. However, doesn't a President do more than speak to his American constituency? Doesn't he have the most important job in the world? Why is it automatically assumed that an African American is automatically more qualified than a woman because of either his race or her gender or one's baggage is more dastardly than the other's? Why is it so important to listen and run your beliefs about the possible candidate by what the republicans tell you they are feeling? Is this down to republicans telling you who to pick and you are ready to believe them????

but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, Governor Dean?

Post 129 wrote:
"Okay, so with experience as a qualifying factor, the two people best suited for the presidency would be Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush. They’ve both served one term, made mistakes they’ve probably learned from, and are eligible to run again. So if “experience” is so important, why not them? They’re the only ones alive who have the relevant experience of being president. Because honestly, there is no other job like it that could prepare you adequately. Decades in Washington as a politician or the wife of a politician sure don’t qualify as “experience” to me. And if Hillary has more than just being Bill’s first lady, that would be kind of illegal wouldn’t it?

You are once again pointing out the straw man that Obama supporters put out that experience doesn't matter because no one can practise to be President. Excuse me but we all know already no job is comparable to practising for the Presidency but some experience in life, can help prepare you better than others. Then you trot out that decades in Washington or wife of a President don't matter to you. Of course they don't because your candidate doesn't have as much as even that. Being a Senator in a state legislature and then running for the House and losing - wonder why he lost? Or perhaps running a race for the Washington Senate against an imported slightly off balanced Alan Keyes is worthy of instantly being able to run the US and influence the World? Sorry, but you can be happy with the most important person in the world having very little to fall back on yet claiming that the other candidate has little to fall back on too, but that is somehow worse.

foreigner @ 132:

You are once again pointing out the straw man that Obama supporters put out that experience doesn't matter because no one can practise to be President. Excuse me but we all know already no job is comparable to practising for the Presidency but some experience in life, can help prepare you better than others. Then you trot out that decades in Washington or wife of a President don't matter to you. Of course they don't because your candidate doesn't have as much as even that. Being a Senator in a state legislature and then running for the House and losing - wonder why he lost? Or perhaps running a race for the Washington Senate against an imported slightly off balanced Alan Keyes is worthy of instantly being able to run the US and influence the World? Sorry, but you can be happy with the most important person in the world having very little to fall back on yet claiming that the other candidate has little to fall back on too, but that is somehow worse.

Actually I do know why Obama lost his bid for the House: he was running against a long-time incumbent in a primary. Its hard enough to defeat an incumbent of another party, but even moreso in your own party. Hell, our sorry governor here in Illinois got re-nominated and re-elected despite most people despising him. So, I'm not sure what his failure to beat Bobby Rush means. And Alan Keyes is more than "slightly" off balance. But, that's besides the point. My point is not that Obama is qualified because he has little political experience in Washington, but only that using "experience" in defense of any candidate is irrelevant. People made the same arguments for and against others, and there is no historical evidence that "experience" matters. I still don't know what exactly relevant experience is. Just how long in the Congress does qualify somebody? How many tours of duty? How many Ivy League degrees? Or maybe its just a rich daddy?

All the time in politics didn't help LBJ become more popular or get us out of Vietnam. It didn't make Nixon effective or able to avoid committing crimes. It didn't help Bush I, etc. There is no such thing as "experience" in politics. But then again, I prefer they be "public servants" and not career politicians. Maybe that's too idealistic, but I won't apologize.

Yeah... um... well done Howie. You let them get away with treason for eight years, but you want to catch them on racism. Keep aiming low!

File this under "Barn; closing gate after horse has left..."

Oncall:
I missed reading the JFK and LIncoln part and only caught from the Jimmy Carter on. That is why I mentionned them all being Governors.
My comment about the way Republicans say who they want to run against or don't want to run against seems to be something I would consider as thinking the opposite would be true. It is not as if the republicans would be warning you of anything to look out for the interests of democrats over republicans. So when I say that republicans are saying they would find it easier to beat Hillary, then I take that with a grain of salt. Are you saying I was a victim of personality politics with Bush or were you speaking in general of Americans who voted for him? I still feel Gore was the actual winner and it would never have made it to the Supreme Court if a little known court case that wasn't covered much had been decided as it should have been according to law. As for people who automatically feel that Obama should be President because of his race are a majority of the African American community who threaten other blacks for supporting Hillary or demand allegiance because how could they as a black person stand in the way of a black man becoming president. Look at the headlines of the Wright controversy and read how headlines read - Could a black man stop a black from getting to the White House?

gwg
Thanks for the info on why Obama lost his House race. I never could find out the reason.

To both mentionned above:
It is quite obvious that both of you feel experience doesn't matter in this race. That is the mantra that has been coming from the Obama campaign from the beginning. That's fine. I applaud your willingness to state it up front. I wonder if you would be so gracious looking for a heart doctor if you needed a transplant or a lawyer for an important charge against you and whether you would be willing to take the one at the bottom of the list because experience doesn't matter? I know that is a lousy comparison as you will call it, but then when does experience matter if not for the most important job in your country? Like I said, being older gives me the feeling that I would still like someone as head of my country deciding my fate that had a little more life experience than someone equivalent to Obama might have.

Thanks anyway for letting me be part of a discussion whether American or not. Since anyone with a TV no matter where they live is faced with day to coverage of your campaigns, it makes all of us think as the days go past what we would do if in your situation since the media has decided we ALL get the news of the day in your politics. Perhaps for us, it is more easy to look at coverage with less of a bias and see discrepancies and biases because we don't have a candidate to vote for.

Republicans have proven time and time again that race baiting works. If you don't believe me just ask president Dukakis, senator Harold Ford, and 2000 republican presidential nominee John McCain.

What's that reverend's name again, Chris?

Reverend Wright, Reverend Wright, Reverend Wright.

I'm sorry, could you repeat that over and over?

Reverend Wright, Willie Horton, Willie Horton.

It seems that the Willie Horton ads were first used by Al Gore against Dukakis in the Dem primaries in the late 80s. Gore lost. After that Bush père found them very useful

Get your facts straight. This is another one of what Atrios refers to as Republican zombie talking points, false assertions that live on no matter how often they're killed by the truth. Gore never ran ads. He never named Willie Horton or indicated what race he was. At one of the candidate debates, Gore said Massachusetts' program that let first-degree murderers get furloughs had freed some killers to commit new crimes, and he asked whether Dukakis planned to grant those kinds of furloughs to federal prisoners if he became president. That was ALL HE SAID. The Republican ads named Horton, described his crimes, and showed his "scary black man" face prominently. He actually went by William Horton, but the GOP ad called him "Willie." Some Republican outfit ran the first ad (so Bush could deny it came from him), then the Bush campaign ran a follow-up ad showing a bunch of menacing criminals going through a revolving door, some of them black and Hispanic -- all of them paid actors, though the ad was filmed in an actual prison, so they had a choice as to what types of "prisoners" we saw. What makes the Horton ads race-baiting is the visuals and the racial subtext, not the fact of the furlough program itself. Gore brought up the furlough program; he did not bring up "Willie Horton" and he ran no ads on the issue. And if the GOP had stayed focused on the program and the "soft on crime" aspect instead of the "scary black man" visuals and all the other subtexts, nobody would even remember the ad, or likely even the furlough issue itself, 20 years later. Gore did NOT race-bait on Willie Horton.

to post 128 and 132

No person who has never served as President of the United States has experience for the job because the only way one gets that experience is by serving in that job. Being the P of the US is on the job training.

QuakerDave @ 30:

...are you suggesting that bringing up Jeremiah Wright is “race-baiting” and hate and divisive?

Not suggesting anything. Calling it exactly what it is. Race-baiting.

Exactly. Let's call it for what it is.

When will Dean call the GOP out for war crimes and treason at the highest levels of power?