Home » Blog » Howard and Danny in National Journal
Blog for America
Howard and Danny in National Journal
Linked to groups: DFA Blog Network
In an article titled Dr. Rorschach, National Journal's Alexis Simendinger examines the role Governor Dean has played in the Florida/Michigan debacle and the battle in the party over the 50-State-Strategy. The article is generally sympathetic to the situation Gov. Dean finds himself in and seems supportive of his decision to adhere to the rules regarding Florida and Michigan.
The carping from party veterans that Dean is to blame for the Florida and Michigan delegate disputes, or that he has been too passive or ineffectual to tease out a perfect compromise, exasperates aides and admirers who believe that Dean is being set up to be the fall guy, no matter what he does.
His defenders snipe that the same party insiders who tried three years ago to derail Dean's election as head of the party are the ones who now expect him to perform miracles to rescue the party from the negative consequences of the collective crackdown that failed to dissuade Florida and Michigan from holding primaries before February 5.
Later in the article, Simendinger looks at the DNC's fundraising prospects and mentions DFA, Jim Dean and new Commuinications Director Danny Medress:
After his defeat in 2004, Dean established the political action committee Democracy for America, which is run by his brother Jim. The group, which says it has 675,000 members, aims to "reform and reclaim the heart of the Democratic Party," said Communications Director Daniel Medress, but it has not sent a dime to the DNC or to state parties for reasons of both law and logic. "We can't be seen as an arm of the Democratic Party," Medress explained.
The group has raised $152,000 since the start of this year and uses its website as a portal to channel donations directly to candidates it endorses. In the four years since Dean founded the group, Medress said, the DFA has raised more than $3 million for candidates around the country.
Keep up the good work, Danny!
Show: Expand All Reply
THE AUDACITY OF HYPOCRISY
http://www.counterpunch.org/mowrey03262008.html
........the most "audacious" hypocrisy in the entire speech is the implication that the conflicts in the Middle East emanate from "the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical islam." Of course, European and Western colonialism and imperialism have no bearing on the discussion and our stalwart ally, Israel, has nothing to do with the situation. Radical islam just popped up out of the fertile sands of the cradle of civilization with no provocation or rational historical context.
Praising Israel in a speech about racism is like praising the history of White South Africa in a speech about civil rights. Has the fact that Israel is a Zionist state completely escaped the minds of all the Obamakins?
On the surface Barak Obama may constitute one of the more palatable lesser of two evils we have been offered in quite some time. But he is still only the lesser of two evils. He offers us nothing more than a continuation of the United States' corporate militarism and imperialist policies as well as the unquestioning support of a racist regime in Israel. For the last 60 years (at least) we have "lesser-of-two-evilled" ourselves into the position we are currently in on this planet. If we want actual "change" in our country and the world, we must move toward a true social revolution and not accept more of the same sound-bite political rhetoric. No matter what color the candidate may be on the outside, and no matter how inspiring his speeches and slogans may be, it is an honest examination of what is in his head, his heart and his bank account (and who put it there) that matters.
Obama represents the same old wine in a brand new bottle. And the bottle is too opaque to see into, even if "progressives" were willing to take off their rose colored glasses long enough to have a look inside. To quote one more line from Obama's speech: "But race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now." I couldn't agree more. Too bad Obama doesn't have the courage to include Israel's state-sponsored bigotry against the Palestinian people in his definition of racism.
6:27PM
http://www.counterpunch.org/lind03262008.html
Lots of people in Washington are pondering possible consequences of an air and missile assault on Iran, but few if any have thought about this one. The American military's endless "we're the greatest" propaganda has convinced most people that the U.S. armed forces cannot be beaten in the field. They are the last in a long line of armies that could not be beaten, until they were.
Here's roughly how it might play out. In response to American air and missile strikes on military targets inside Iran, Iran moves to cut the supply lines coming up from the south through the Persian Gulf (can anyone in the Pentagon guess why it's called that?) and Kuwait on which most U.s. Army units in Iraq depend (the Marines get most of their stuff through Jordan). It does so by hitting shipping in the Gulf, mining key choke points, and destroying the port facilities we depend on, mostly through sabotage. It also hits oil production and export facilities in the Gulf region, as a decoy: we focus most of our response on protecting the oil, not guarding our army's supply lines.
Simultaneously, Iran activates the (Shiite militias to cut the roads that lead from Kuwait to Baghdad. Both the Mahdi Army and the Badr Brigades -- the latter now supposedly our allies -- enter the war against us with their full strength. Ayatollah Sistani, an Iranian, calls on all Iraqi Shiites to fight the Americans wherever they find them. Instead of fighting the 20% of Iraqis population that is Sunni, we find ourselves battling the 60% that is Shiite. Worse, the Shiites logistics lie directly across those logistics lines coming up from Kuwait.
U.S. Army forces in Iraq begin to run out of supplies, especially POL, of which they consume a vast amount. Once they are largely immobilized by lack of fuel, and the region gets some bad weather that keeps our aircraft grounded or at least blind, Iran sends two to four regular army armor and mech divisions across the border. Their objective is to pocket American forces in and around Baghdad.
The U.S. military in Iraq is all spread out in penny packets fighting insurgents. We have no field army there anymore. We cannot reconcentrate because we're out of gas and Shiite guerrillas control the roads. What units don't get overrun by Iranian armor or Shiite militia end up in the Baghdad Kessel. General Petraeus calls President Bush and repeals the famous words of Marshal I MacMahon at Sedan: "Nous sorrune dans une pot de chambre, and nous y serron emerdee." Bush thinks he's overheard Petraeus ordering dinner -- as, for Bush, he has
6:34PM
FRONTLINE'S WAR
http://www.counterpunch.org/mcgovern03262008.html
Except for an inside-the-beltway tidbit here and there-for example, about how the pitiable secretary of state Colin Powell had to suffer so many indignities at the hands of other type-A hard chargers, Frontline added little to the discussion. Notably missing was any allusion to the unconscionable role the Fourth Estate adopted as indiscriminate cheerleader for the home team; nor was there any mention that the invasion was a serious violation of international law. But those omissions, I suppose, should have come as no surprise.
Frontline has done no timely reportage that might be looked upon as disparaging the George W. Bush administration-I mean, for example, the real aims behind the war, not simply the gross incompetence characterizing its conduct. Like so many others, Frontline has been, let's just say it, cowardly in real time-no doubt intimidated partly by attacks on its funding that were inspired by the White House.
And now? Well the retrospective criticism of incompetence comes as polling shows two-thirds of the country against the Iraq occupation (and the number is surely higher among PBS viewers). So, Frontline is repositioning itself as a mild ex-post-facto critic of the war, but still unwilling to go very far out on a limb. Explaining the aims behind war crimes can, of course, be risky. It is as though an invisible Joseph Goebbels holds sway.
Frontline's careful avoidance of basic issues like the strategic aims of the Bush administration in invading and occupying Iraq are proof, if further proof were needed, that the White House, and especially Cheney's swollen office, exert enormous pressure over what we are allowed to see and hear. The fear they instill in the corporate press, and in what once was serious investigative reporting of programs like Frontline, translates into programs getting neutered or killed outright-and massive public ignorance.
6:43 PM
I do wish John Huron would take his "selections" and jump in Lake Huron with them.
Joan
I'd be happy with a compromise of one or two paragraphs, as Danny has pointed out here to a few others several times.
Huron, great articles. "The Audacity of Hypocrisy" is a good read and I, like you, noticed the reference to Israel and cringed.
We just don't have good choices, do we? MOTS
I'm thinking that with this division, the dem party would be wise to put them on the same ticket and I don't care which order.
That said, either one is world's better than McC.
Good for Chelsea. It's none of their business.
There is simply no plausible scenario where Clinton surpasses Obama in pledged delegates. So in June the superdelegates will be faced with the same choice they are faced with today: give the nomination to Obama who leads in pledged delegates, or give it to Clinton who has lost the primaries.
More here
I do wish John Huron would take his "selections" and jump in Lake Huron with them.
Spoken like a true Hypomabamcrite
Denise, Agreed but of course Huron knows we wouldn't click the link.
~~~~~~~~~~
The corporate media of the public airwaves keep referring Hillary Clinton as a "fighter" but that noun doesn't address anything visible about her.
Obama says she is "tenacious" and that better describes her persistence in hanging around the primary with no place to go.
From The Atlantic
The Clinton campaign is distributing an article in the American Spectator (!) about Obama foreign policy adviser Merrill McPeak and his penchant for.. well, the article accuses him of being an anti-Semite and a drunk. Principally, the author takes McPeak to task for supporting a Middle East map that would require Israel to withdraw to its pre-1967 border. It also makes the case that McPeak supports the Walt-Mearsheimer view of the influence of the Israeli lobby on foreign policy.
The author's sudden conclusion: "Obama has a Jewish problem and McPeak's bigoted views are emblematic of what they are. Obama can issue all the boilerplate statements supporting Israel's right to defend itself he wants. But until he accepts responsibility for allowing people like McPeak so close to his quest for the presidency, Obama's sincerity and judgment will remain open questions."
As one keen observer pointed out to me, if advocating the pre '67 border map makes one an anti-Semite, just about every iteration of the U.S. government since 1967 would qualify. Tony McPeak's verbal gymnastics do not make a "Jewish problem" for Obama.
bBUSH
So that's why Danny hasn't been around lately. Congratulations, Danny!
********
Yet another stuanch DFA member who has distinguished herself for her tireless reporting on the Florida primary and delegate situation has received lots of well-deserved accolades over at DU.
=============
From DU's *blondie58* ...
"official thank you to Mad Floridian!
as I just read through another installment in the horrible Florida fiasco, I just wanted to thank Mad Floridian for the great postings. Thank you!!"
There are lots of great comments following this.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/dis...
*******
And G'nite!
BUSH VS OBAMA
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_william__080326_bush_spins_iraq__the.htm
Millions of Americans, regardless of their skin color, religion, ethnicity, or national origin, harbor varying degrees of distrust of people who are “not like us.” Obama confronted the resentments, the stereotypes, the bigotry, head-on, and suggested the urgency of a national conversation on these issues. It’s an uncomfortable conversation we’ve been only too happy to ignore, and we need to have it.
But saying so was not merely a good and necessary idea – it was an act of extraordinary political audacity.
Contrast that with what the President said on the fifth anniversary of the Iraq invasion. He spoke of the success of the initial military campaign of March 2003, and how quickly our military vanquished Iraq’s scattering army. He then spoke of the success of the "surge" during the last year, noting it has drastically reduced the level of violence in Iraq and turned "the situation in Iraq around."
The President paid tribute to the 4,000 Americans and countless Iraqis killed in his “cakewalk.” He told us we were succeeding. Al Qaeda was on the run. The flowers would soon be burying the ‘liberators’. Victory was just over the horizon.
What he conveniently left out were the four-and-a-half years in between – years that demonstrated either the ideological arrogance or the abysmal foreign policy ignorance of the president and his advisors. No planning for the day after Saddam’s statue toppled. No understanding of the simmering rage of Iraqi Shias, repressed for years by a brutal dictatorship led by a Sunni. No clue that Iran, an overwhelmingly Shia theocracy, would be a predictable Iraqi ally. Not enough troops. An Iraqi government riven by corruption and unwilling or unable to implement any real political reconciliation, although that’s what was posited as the rationale for the surge. An Iraqi government still paralyzed into inaction in delivering the most basic services people expect of their government – water, electricity, education, health care, security. And no exit strategy for America or anyone else.
Yikes ... *stuanch* s/b *staunch* ... definitely time for bed.
People would be more likely to read your C&Ps if you copied a small part and linked to the rest. This format isn't condusive for reading long psts.
I don't see any reason for Clinton to quit if the the two of them turn their sights on leading Democrats to a November victory over McCain and run on a vision for America post Bush. Let us finish organizing the remaining states precinct by precinct.
The actual lead isn't insurmountable til after North Carolina anyway.
Clinton isn't doing more damage to the party than forcing her out before she is ready would.
Obama will be the likely nominee, we need to think about whether or not Hillary's strong supporters join in his cause in the end.
Good for Chelsea. It's none of their business.
seashell,
Clinton opened the door to this discussion when she said, "You don't choose your family, but you choose what church you want to attend."
You DO get to choose your husband and you do get to choose whether to dump a philandering one. We know how the subject must be a touchy one for her.
But she should have just ignored the question which, BTW, was asked by a Clinton supporter.
I don't see any reason for Clinton to quit
She and her people just need to quit doing McSame's hatchet work.
But she should have just ignored the question which, BTW, was asked by a Clinton supporter.
Make that a former Clinton supporter.
I don't see any reason for Clinton to quit if the the two of them turn their sights on leading Democrats to a November victory . . .
Phil, the problem is that isn't what is happening and it is Clinton who is initiating the attacks, time after time.
She is losing and reaching for revenge I guess trying to destroy the opposition.
The actual lead isn't insurmountable til after North Carolina anyway.
I suppose not if you believe in miracles.
Denise
Wed, 03/26/08
I'd be happy with a compromise of one or two paragraphs, as Danny has pointed out here to a few others several times.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yes, could folks please just post one or two paragraphs as a tease and a link to the full article?
====================================================
JudyforDean *Wed, 03/26/08
So that's why Danny hasn't been around lately.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
DFA is regularly in the national press. If ya'll would like, I would be more than happy to write posts with links to our press hits. Let me know. Thanks.
Danny
Communications Director
Make that a former Clinton supporter.
Very possible after that rude reply. Tells a lot about the campaign.
I have always like Chelsea though, watched her grow up in the WH. I don;t admire her parents one bit for keeping her on the road now in this kind of an environment they themselves are perpetrating.
16. Huron John
People would be more likely to read your C&Ps if you copied a small part and linked to the rest. This format isn't condusive for reading long psts.
Sitka, if you bothered to go to the link, you'd find I quote a very small fraction of the article. just enough to pique the curiosity of a truly inquisitive reader
I have always like Chelsea though
Me too -- until recently. Nowadays she acts like the royal heir to the throne. I was rather put off by her cold rebuff of the kid who wanted to inteview her, and she could have easily said in response to that question about Lewinsky, "That was a very difficult time for our family and I'd rather not discuss it."
Sitka, if you bothered to go to the link, you'd find I quote a very small fraction of the article.
Well, if you won't listen to me, hopefully you'll listen to Danny who asked that you post less and link more.
Yes Danny. I would love to see a DFA Press Clippings post return to the bfa. HQ staff in the past would post them at least 3 times a week and sometimes more. It was the final post of the day. The bloggers would comment on them all evening. It was fun.
----
...If ya'll would like, I would be more than happy to write posts with links to our press hits. ...
Hillary is still at it trying to get the committed superdelagates to change sides. This is typical of a person who would be a tyrant if elected.
She should stay in until she decides to leave. Obama will need her supporters and if she is forced out early, they may not support Barack. This is simialar to the argument I made about not supporting Hillary because she is so disgusting and evil. My family and friends are struggling with the idea of supporting Hillary. The three Supremes is a very powerful argument. The Democrat platfrom is far superior to the republican platform. Hillary and McCain are both evil and each day both out do the other with some outlandish claim. Logically, Hillary should be supported because of the party and platform, not because of the person. But when you are in the voting booth, it becomes very personal. I don't know how or if I will vote if the choice is McCain or Hillary. Both are personally repulsive. I am supporting the Congressional Dems to at least limit McCain as much as possible.
Chelsea is a fully grown adult (28 yrs. of age); and also a public figure (out on the stump for her enabling "Mom").
Highly dysfunctional couple; and neither have any business being in power again.
Zero boundaries.
Suck it up, folks. Pun intended....
Chelsea's fair game--well past being an innocent child.
Living w/a womanizer & sexual harasser for over 35 yrs. hardly displays sound "judgment."
Yes, during their engagement. I have zero empathy.
Big Dog never having 'sex' with THAT woman insulted every woman in this country; who has ever been on the receiving end of the double standard (millions).
"Turning to faith" as a coping mechanism/lame excuse simply doesn't cut it.
I'm sick and tired of this "faith" sh^t.
Idiotic Hillary "made a choice" to stick w/numbnuts.
Outrageously poor role modeling for young women, BTW.
Tough cookies if the Clintons can't take the heat.
It sounds like Chelsea inherited her mother's charm.
The actual lead isn't insurmountable til after North Carolina anyway.
I suppose not if you believe in miracles.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The odds are better for Hillary than they ever were for Howard Dean except for a few weeks in the fall of 2003, and I was extremely disappointed when he dropped out, and I imagine there are Hillary supporters who can dream too. the problem isn't her being in the race anymore than Huckabee was hurting McCain except for the Tonya Harding aspect which could change at anytime if they ever get a brain and see she doesn't need any higher negatives
Obama's lead is less than 200 with 600 to go so she does need to only be close to doubling him, which by now would have to be the result of some unseen major event.
Tom Vilsack came from down 17 points with six weeks to go, very unlikely but not impossible, so you can be sure if it was me running her campaign I wouldn't be telling her to quit (until she loses North Carolina and it does become impossible)
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Richard Gage AIA, the founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 TruthRichard Gage AIA, the founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, and hundreds of other industry experts’ call for a new investigation into the collapse of the WTC twin towers and Building 7 is gaining strength following revelations of falsification and cover-up in relation to the FEMA-funded inquiry into the destruction of the buildings on 9/11.
As we reported earlier, the American Society of Civil Engineers - an organization that was funded by FEMA to investigate the collapse of the twin towers on 9/11 - has been accused of engaging in a cover-up to protect the government, with critics charging the organization falsified conclusions that skyscrapers could not withstand getting hit by airplanes.
Richard Gage details the evidence for demolition in an exclusive new PrisonPlanet.tv video presentation. In a recent sit-down video interview conducted by Alex Jones, Gage gave a succinct presentation bringing forth the best evidence for controlled demolition being the cause of the three buildings’ implosion on September 11
I agree with Phil..Obama is up about 200 with 600 to go. Hillary should stay in until the end.
We all complained about the Supremes denying a Florida vote count and how Kerry didn't demand a recount in Ohio. We should demand candidates stay in until the numbers say they lost.
I can't stand Hillary or Bubba want I want Obama to win based on the total numbers and not on someone insisting his opponent lost when the numbers say otherwise.
Besides, Hillary will come up with another reason to dislike her and drive her substantial negatives even higher.
If she does lose, what is the over and under on how long she divorces the "The Great Unzipped One".
seashell from last thread~ Will s/o please tell me why BO is NOT pushing for a do-over?
It's futile in Michigan and has nothing to do with Barack pushing or not pushing for a do-over. The Republican-controlled Michigan legislature will not approve it.
The end.
The U.S. military in Iraq is all spread out in penny packets fighting insurgents. We have no field army there anymore. We cannot reconcentrate because we're out of gas and Shiite guerrillas control the roads. What units don't get overrun by Iranian armor or Shiite militia end up in the Baghdad Kessel
And the Iranian air force would deal with overwhelming air power that would destory any armor moving anywhere in the flat plains of Iraq. It is the Iranian air force you think we should fear??? Smart one. Do you seriously think the US Navy is worried about the Iranian Navy?? Your Iranian allies would not get anywhere near our ground force until they are being overrun by 500 Abram tanks and 200 Apaches tanks, Then the b=52's from the Indian Ocean start circling the battlefield. I am certain if the Iranians thought they had a chance they would have already taken it.
My family and friends are struggling with the idea of supporting Hillary.
No stuggle for me and hubby; we will not. ever. support. her.
Danny, part of why things look so long now is that fact that the blog is running on a column instead of full page like it used to. Is that going to be fixed when the blog is *fixed*?
Hillary should stay in until the end.
Once again.....there's nothing wrong with The Clintons staying in. It actually helps implement Dean's 50 State Strategy.But there is everything wrong with them tearing down Obama, even to the point of saying McBush would be a better president.
mainefem ~~ Howcome your posts (and often Monica's) escape the word wrap function? I generally have the text enlarged, and that does seem have something to do with it. . . .
In a perverse way, Hillary bashing Obama strengthens Obama.
Hillary's crap is so absurd, it will only hurt Hillary and is one more thing McCain can't use against him.
So go ahead and let Hillary bash Obama. She can even say McCain would be better but no one beleives her because she has less and less credibility every day.
Each day Hillary gets weaker. There is so much ammo to use against McCain, Obama should have no problem defining McCain as an ancient, out-of-touch warlover.
Everytime Bubba opens his big mouth, he reminds everyone of his hyperactive zipper and demeans Hillary.
It is odd Joe Wilson supports Hillary as Hillary is an enabler of the Iraq and possible Iran Wars.
I think Obama resisted the Michigan efffort because Michigan was going to restrict the do-over to Dems only while Obama wanted everyone to participate as before. This would leave out about 100K voters.
The easy way would be for Obama to ok the revote as it was planned knowing the Repub-led state legislature would never approve it. It owuld be a safe, reasonable, but totally hypocritical vote and I am glad he refused the easy way out.
Hi Huron,
I also cringed about the explanation of MIddle East conflicts and the stalwart ally. But I read an evaluation by Uri Avnery, the Israeli peace activist, and he thinks Obama is ok, nevertheless. Its worth reading: http://www.ccun.org/Opinion%20Editorials/2008/March/24%20o/Two%20Americas%20I%20am%20for%20Barack%20Obama%20By%20Uri%20Avnery.htm
Fox,
if we invade or attack Iran it willl be another 4GW war; just like Iraq and VN.
Everyone knows they lose in a toe-to-toe slugfest so no one will do it.
Since Iran is 75 million people, they will field a lot of hit and run attacks and will devastate our supply routes.
Their airforce and navy are almost irrellevent; as well as their armour and mechanized forces. What is relevent is their land armies and their abilities to go underground.
We underestimated North VN and Iraq and are about to underestimate Iran.
A couple of tankers sunk in the Straits and the oil dries up.
I am sure Iran has been watching for 4 and a half years and knows what works and what doesn't.
I like Huron's posts. The articles referenced are great reads.
What I dislike is the entry shuffle that goes on. I follow over two dozen blogs and this is the only one that is fouled up.
Supporting Israel has become almost a part of our cultural fabric. Obama should be concentrating on how to make the relationship better. Increasing Israel's security demands a peaceful solution to with Palestine.
I think we should seize all the oil companies by eminent domain and make them a public utility like the electric company or the water company. Any profits would be returned to the shareholders - us.
I heard on the radio this morning that gas can be expected to rise 75 cents at the pumps over the next few weeks. I'll see if I can find something to back that up.
The cheap place near me on this side of the bay was $3.65 this morning.
I think we should seize all the oil companies by eminent domain and make them a public utility like the electric company or the water company. Any profits would be returned to the shareholders - us.
Annilow...I second that motion.
At the pump, gas prices rose 0.6 cent overnight to a national average of $3.261 a gallon, according to AAA and the Oil Price Information Service. Prices have slid recently from a record of $3.285 a gallon set last week, largely because of oil's decline last week.
But with oil now on the rebound, gas prices could rise further. The Consumer Federation of America predicted Wednesday that prices could jump another 75 cents a gallon over the next two months if refiners continue cutting production. That would be bad news for consumers also bearing the burden of falling home values and high food prices. Diesel fuel, which is used to transport the vast majority of the nation's food and goods, rose 0.1 cent overnight to a national average of $4.027 a gallon, a cent shy of a record set Saturday.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i5Tta...
I think we should seize all the oil companies by eminent domain and make them a public utility like the electric company or the water company.
Not likely since the US has been boycotting Cuba for 50 years because Castro nationalized the sugar companies.
Sophie the blog is broken and jumps around the order of the posts, so look up thread for responses. Thanks for the link.
-
By Phil Specht on Mar 26, 2008 12:04 PM EDTHoward Dean is first.