Howie Zowie

Howard Dean is trying to dig himself out of the hole he’s gotten himself into. Says the AP:

Dean on Wednesday defended his recent harsh criticism of Republicans, including his observation that they are "pretty much a white, Christian party."

Dean noted that he, too, is a white Christian. But he said the GOP is too narrow in its scope and the Democratic Party is far more diverse. While even prominent Democrats in recent days have distanced themselves from some of his comments, the outspoken Dean, appearing on NBC's "Today" show, said criticism of him is meant by Republicans to divert attention from the country's problems and make him the issue instead.

Exactly, Doctor Dean. Why don’t you button your lip and stop making yourself the issue? Democrats are divided over Dean’s mouth that roars. But this is hardly a left/right issue. It’s a common sense issue.

The fact remains that as distasteful as this administration may be, the Democrats lost the election. Dean’s job and the Democrats’ job, especially at a time when Bush’s polls are heading into the potty, is to put forward a proactive alternative message that goes beyond Daily Kos and MoveOn readers being able to get their jollies.

A winning strategy (one by the way which I’m pretty well convinced the Democrats will never come up with) would aim not only at the base, not only at swing voters, but even more importantly at that pool of 100 million potential voters who are so turned off by both parties that they don’t bother to turn out.

The mistake that Deaniacs make is to confuse an aggressive tone against the Republicans with an aggressive statement of what Democrats actually believe in. Calling the other side names is always fun—and there’s certainly a place for it.

But there has to be more to it. Howard Dean was a fairly unremarkable, establishment Democrat when he was Governor of Vermont. When he stepped into the 2004 presidential campaign he started saying the right thing at the right time and sounded to many like he was really something different. But more than out-of-the-box, Dean is looking more and more like he’s just plain off—the-wall. Dean vowed to win back the red states for the Democrats. This is the way?

In the end, I don’t think it’s going to matter very much. Dean will soon be gone.

Comments

[Patrick]

On the day the pot decision was announced, talk radio and the blogs were abuzz with Biden and other Dems distancing themselves from Chairman Dean's latest screed about Republicans. How much better it would have been to be talking about the Chairman of the DNC having coodinated a rapid response by Democratic legislators in the Congress and state houses that anticipated the pot decision and would assure that those who need pot for treatment will get it.

[Marc Cooper]

Patrick.. like Western Civilization... that's a good idea. Problem is Democrats dont have a policy on this issue.

[Woody]

Great, Patrick. You mentioned a pot decision, and I started trying to figure out (honestly) if pot referred to cooking utensils or a code word or acronym for something else--then, it hits me. Such is the difference between a white Christian and the Democrats.

Dean will go as soon as Hillary Clinton is prepared to install her person. In the meantime, the candidness of the Democratic Party is refreshing.

What most of you don't understand are the valid reasons that the description of Republicans concerns Dean. Here's the link to ( http://tinyurl.com/afhqw ) and some Dean quotes from a related article:
_________

"Many Republicans probably voted for George Bush dozens, if not hundreds, of times in 2004, according to Democrat party Chairman Howard Dean, "by taking advantage of the fact that Democrat poll workers have difficulty distinguishing individuals from among a crowd of white Christians. Thanks to their pale skin, round eyes and khaki trousers, Republicans just blend in," said Mr. Dean. "So they vote, get in the back of the line and vote again. And because they've never made an honest living in their lives, they could do that all day long."
_________

Well, just be glad that elections aren't held on our golf days. Otherwise, with the bright colored and tacky attire of golfers, they couldn't tell the Republicans from pimps.

[richard lo cicero]

Well, I know that this will do no good, but here it goes anyway. So Howard Dean made a "gaffe" by saying that the GOP was a white christian party. Let's see - a few years ago a certain Tom DeLay introduced a motion to pass a resolution declaring that the US was one nation under the Lord Jesus, now what is his position again? Oh yes, he's the majority leader of the House! Ever see a GOP convention? Remember the joke that the only minorities in the room are the waiters? Or the speakers on stage? Sometimes its true that in pol;itics a gaffe is telling the truth. So Dean is dissing the Repubs - AHHH! The party that has the Speaker, Newt Gingerich, call Dems the "Enemy of Normal Americans" and blames them for Susan Smith is offended? Gee Whiz!

And I love the Answer. Defend Pot Smoking! Yeah that will fire up those 100 million! Look they don't vote because they are disengaged. They sure didn't turn out for st Ralph of the Corvair! What Dr Dean is doing is fighting back and given the current ratings I think its a good tactic. I think that one reason people distrust Dems is that they sit back and take it from GOP attack dogs and never fight back. Well if they won't fight for themselves how can they fight for you? And by raising funds from small donors he is breaking the link with big donors who exact tribute in the form of support for NAFTA, the Bankruptcy bill etc. Besides, if Chris Matthews, Howard Fineman, and the DLC think you're doing a bad job you know he's hitting the target.

But I could be wrong. We'll find out in 2006 won't we?

[jim hitchcock]

None of this matters. We have to give it back:

http://tinyurl.com/bxx7z

[Jim Rockford]

I agree Marc. Bush is TERRIBLY vulnerable on pretty much everything. If the Dems would just answer the questions on the two most important issues:

*What will your Party do to restore good paying jobs to the economy?

*What will your Party do to decisively win over Islamists who want to kill massess of Americans?

It would be a slam dunk over a timid, conflicted Republican White House and Party. However, instead we have Howie running for President again.

That's all this is. Deano is not stupid. He's trying to sew up the activist vote to present a fait accompli in 08 against Hillary; and then gamble he can move to the center in the General election. At a time when the Press, ACLU, Amnesty International, and all the other generally "lefty" types of institutions are believed to be stacked against America and middle class values (patriotism, family, populism, "decency/humanism") in favor of terrorists hurt feelings and the like, it's disastrous.

There's a fellow here that has what he believes is a fairly good explanation of why Bush won (cost of family/housing driving marriage and children choices): http://www.vdare.com/sailer/041212_secret.htm

Or, more simply control population density and the cost of good schooling (equals Reps win); which is damn suggestive. If Dems got on the right side of this ("Our Party is focused like a laser on housing affordability and great schools") this is potentially a huge landslide. I think Howie knows this, but instead is focused on his Presidential ambitions.

I mean, what the hell ELSE explains a guy who's accomplished the not inconsiderable task of becoming a physician, acted as a moderate Governor, and suddenly transformed into "screamin Deano?" He views that as the road to the nomination and I think sadly he's right.

[NeoDude]

He should have just called it a Party of Right-Wing Theocrats.

Anywayz, the Republican battle cry is:

"ATTACK, ATTACK, WHEN YOU ARE EXPLAINING YOU ARE LOSING!!!"

That's why they don't get punished for the crazy shit they say. When they are told to explain their wild language, it’s just another way to keep attacking and never apologizing or explain.

Moderates are never explaining or apologizing for their theocratic brethren.

The Trent Lott thing was a fluke.

[CarrieCann]

Well, from what I can make of the "blogosphere," it's kudos to Dean, no matter what the rest of M$M (cough, cough) says about it.

Just when I thought you were actually "getting it."

Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean apologized today for calling Republicans "pretty
much a white, Christian party," saying that he failed to mention that they were "fat and ugly" as
well.

Dr. Dean offered the clarification at a press conference at the DNC headquarters in Washington, D.C.,
telling reporters, "Any characterization of Republicans as white and Christian is unfair, since it
totally omits the fact that they are pretty much the party of the fat and the ugly, too."

[Mavis Beacon]

Wait a second guys. Are you saying that because Dean is uppity and feisty and we like that, we don't care if the stuff he says is really really stupid? Does anyone else think Dr. Dean's comments are either true or politically savvy?

Woody, the link you provided doesn't take us to a source for that quote where Dean says all Republicans look alike and so they vote multiple times. If you can show a non-blog source I'd like that very much. Either Dean didn't say that, he was joking, or he should be put out of his misery right now. If you can show evidence of the third, please do.

[Michael Turner]

"Woody, the link you provided doesn't take us to a source for that quote where Dean says all Republicans look alike and so they vote multiple times."

It's a satire site, Mavis. Not a bad one either, I must admit.

I'm sure glad I'm not Christian, cuz then I would be a Republican. Or pretty much a Republican, anyway. I hope you get my drift here, because it's the kind of clear, straightforward thinking that has made America great.

[Dave K.]

It's worth noting that when Dean spoke at my college, he repeatedly stressed a return to civil discourse between the Right and the Left.

With that said, my response to all this is "big deal." Yeah, what Dean said was stupid and easily disproven by the GOP's relentless courting of minority votes, but people are still overreacting. Besides, if Reagan can get away with calling black single mothers "welfare queens," then Dean'll be okay.

Frankly, I'm just glad someone in politics is saying spontaneous, interesting things, because the alternative is, well, the Bush/Kerry debates. The Democratic establishment needs to be shaken up, and if they can combine Dean's fire with not saying irresponsible crap, maybe they'll climb out of the huge rut they're in. But chances are, they won't, because they think being spineless is akin to taking the high ground.

For everything, there is a season.

If Dean, as leader of his parties' National Committee (read that fund-raising), is raising money from the faithful for 2006, then he may actually be doing the right thing now. After all, the Republican party is mainly white and Christian.

The question we are left asking is, is his decisive comment on purpose or by mistake? I am led to believe it is by mistake, considering his
back-pedaling behavior and really dumb comment on MSNBC, when ask about the 'white christian' comment, "What's wrong with that. I am white and a Christian".

Not exactly what the Democrat faithly wanted to hear, and voters in the middle will take as another dumb statement.

[Wagner James Au]

The thing is, the statement is not only wrong on its face-- it also suggests that the leader of the Democratic Party isn't even aware that the demographics he's talking about are changing *against* them. From CNN's exit poll:

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html

Hispanic-Americans who voted for Bush in 2004: 44% (UP 9% SINCE 2000 ELECTION)

Asian-Americans who voted for Bush in 2004: 44% (UP 3% SINCE 2000 ELECTION)

Jewish-American voters who voted for Bush in 2004: 25% (UP 6% SINCE 2000 ELECTION)

Chances that Howard Dean's bigoted obliviousness to steady demographic and ideological affiliation shifts post-9/11 will guarantee the Democratic Party's continued irrelevance in 2008: 100%

When did being called a white Christian become an insult? He was talking about diversity.

[Gary Johnston]

Wagner James Au - So ... you quote some figures that say 44% and 25% of some minority groups voted for Bush.

Hm ... that leaves fifty-six percent and seventy-five percent that voted for Kerry. Ie, most minorities voted for the Democrat.

Look, as an analyst will say when he's allowed to talk race, the Democrats are only a competitive party because of minority voters. Democrats have not won a majority of white voters since 1964. In the South, Republicans regularly win 70-80% of white voters.

I agree that Dean was stupid for saying this and making himself a 2-day (thus far) media story, but what he's saying is impossible to deny. Especially in California, where he made these remarks. The California GOP's idea of a minority nominee is George Deukmeijan.

[Pearsall]

Wagner, the Latino Bush vote numbers are off.

See here:
http://www.emergingdemocraticmajorityweblog.com/donkeyrising/archives/000969.php

[Susan]

About Dean........think he is cool in his madness......what will happen in the next 3 1/2 years before the next election.......who knows...and I favor that I do not know......life is a true crap shoot...politics is a larger crap shoot...Amercian politics is the single largest gamble...all of this is a real wait and see.....

[richard lo cicero]

For those of you who still think Dr Dean was wrongt in pointing out that most Repubs are "White Christians" consider the fate of Julie Christie. Who is she? Well, she is a life-long GOPer who has been appointed by Shrub to be ambassador to the OSCE (Organisation of Security and Cooperation in Europe). You know the people who deal with questions like European integration, Chechnya, trade and the like. Well her confirmnation is being held up by Sen Sam Brownbeck (R-KS) who has placed a hold on her. And why does the Senator object? Seems she is pro-choice! Oh yeah, now pro-choice women need not apply to the GOP! But the dr is extremist! Right!

[reg]

"Such is the difference between a white Christian and the Democrats."

Screw you Woody...despite your sense of humor, I realize there's a bigoted, very badly informed, arrogant fuck lurking not far beneath the surface.

[reg]

Dean made one mistake...he should have said Fundamentalists instead of Christian....there's a big, big difference and ceding the word "Christian" to the slick, politicized, money-grubbing, dogmatic, anti-intellectual, insular world of fundamentalist bigots who are driving the thin religiousity of the GOP far-right is giving them credit they don't deserve and disrepecting decent Christians.

[Marc Cooper]

Reg, cany you PLEASE keep it civil? Since when, by the way, is the Democratic Party something other than an organization dominated by rich, white and predominantly Christian men? It's constituents might not fully fit that description, but its power apparatus certainly does. Sistah Souljah anyone?

[Howard Dean]

The Repubplicans are the party of envious midgets. You chance upon their lair and they'll tie you down like that Gulliver.

I'm not crazy. You're crazy.

[Susan]

Interesting, both Marc and Reg.........

All of politics, no matter what party, is still dominated by WASPs...the rest is all rhetorical bull shit...colors are fine, but they are the small print...the border edges of a page...they are, have gained some access, but miles and miles and decades away from any true power...and of course...taking a deep breath here...power is the name of the game....hell I am just looking on a selfish level for sure, for female power in the politico hype...and for sure not Condi or Billary...looking for real women....of any colour that have a grasp...not riding on the shoulders of others...to gain access......

[NeoDude]

Then in 1988, when we won with the Bush senior campaign and carried the highest total of evangelical votes ever in American history, we lost as we always do -- the Republicans -- we lost the Jewish vote and the Hispanic vote and all those votes. We lost the Catholic vote. We were the first modern presidency to win an election and it was a landslide and not win the Catholic vote. It was barely, but we lost the Catholic vote.

How did we do it? We carried 82 percent or 83 percent of the evangelical vote. I remember when it was all over-- this was one of the reasons I got a job in the White House -- but I remember when it was all over, there was great shock from me and others saying, "Whoa, this is unhealthy." We immediately began going after the Catholic vote.

While at the same time, we were frightened by the fact that we lost all these votes and still won the White House. The message did come home. My God, you can win the White House with nothing but evangelicals if you can get enough of them, if you get them all, and they're a huge number. ...

--Doug Wead

from:
The Jesus Factor
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/jesus/interviews/wead.html