All Democrats are soft on terror, love criminals, dildos, and drugs. How do I know this? No less an authority than Kevin Drum:
Newt knows this stuff backward and forward. He just doesn’t care. He’s not thinking like an academic, he’s thinking like a Republican.
Kevin is just taking his cues from the wingnuts in charge, though:
And Dean told the Hiebert fund-raiser that gay marriage was a Republican diversion from discussions of ballooning deficits and lost American jobs. That presents an opportunity to attract moderate Republicans, he said.
“Moderate Republicans can’t stand these people (conservatives), because they’re intolerant. They don’t think tolerance is a virtue,” Dean said, adding: “I’m not going to have these right-wingers throw away our right to be tolerant.”
And concluding his backyard speech with a litany of Democratic values, he added: “This is a struggle of good and evil. And we’re the good.”
When told of Dean’s remarks, Derrick Sontag — executive director of the Kansas Republican Party — said he was “shocked.”
“My immediate reaction to that whole dialogue is, it’s full of hatred,” Sontag said. “The Democratic Party has elected a leader that’s full of hatred.”
Republicans bad. Democrats good. Grunt. Must be hard for some of these left-wing pundits to type after their knuckles drag on the pavement all day.
Kimmitt
Let me see if I understand this — are you upset because the leader of the Democratic Party says that his organization is good while the other organization is bad, or is there some issue of tone?
Just Passing Through
Kimmit,
It’s not a matter of tone. Dean uses the word ‘evil’, not ‘bad’ There’s a world of difference between the two concepts. I can not remember or even concieve of the RNC chair calling his political opponents evil. You may find those sentiments on the far right fringe, but what does that say about Dean?
RW
You don’t expect the same people who reworded and redefined Kos’ “screw them” to do anything other than change “evil” to “bad”, do you?
In 48 hours it’ll be that Dean simply worded his dismay with the GOP and the right-wing junta in the press unfairly jumped on the poor chap, thus he’s the victim. Don’t laugh, I guarantee you something like that will happen.
“Bad”…..heh, good one.
Just Passing Through
‘In 48 hours …’
Nope. For one, the internet doesn’t let you get away with things that easily anymore. Ask Dan Rather or Eason Jordan. Too easy to resurrect what you said, when you said it, and the context. For another, Dean has been saying similar things both before and most notably since he assumed the DNC chair.
Dean greatest failing is that he is still playing to a very narrow demographic and hasn’t learned the basic lesson of his nomination campaign – hate doesn’t play well in US politics. Sling all the mud you can get your hands on, but don’t demonize.
If Dean doesn’t bring it down a few notches, he’ll be ousted in some DNC committee meeting and it’ll be sooner rather than later. The DNC won’t take the chance that the looney left Deans represents will entrench the republicans any deeper in 2006.
I almost think that the plan all along was to put Dean in, let him throughly discredit the far left wing thinking in the party, and then discard him for a moderate Clintonite chair. Give him all the rope he needs to hang himself and his adherents and get it over with before the 2006 election season gets under way.
Monica
Just Passing Through –
If that really is the plan – it would be brilliant. But unfortunately, I seriously doubt it.
Bob
Yeah, I agree that the use of “evil” sort of cuts off any dialogue between the parties.
Meanwhile, thank the Lord that we’re fighting the Axis of Not Really Nice in our War On Being Kinda Afraid. I’d hate to think that the current administration would demagogue those regimes it opposes in a Mannichean struggle of black and white.
George Saras
As usual Bob makes an even greater slur against Republicans than did Dean in his original comment. Bob suggests it’s inappropriate to question Dean’s use of the term “evil” to characterize Republicans since the President has used that term in reference to terrorists. In Bob’s view if the term was fit for terrorists, then why isn’t it fit for Republicans appears to be his shitty view.
Kimmitt
Look, there’s a Party that’s in favor of secret trials with secret evidence, and there’s a Party that’s . . not.
There’s a Party that’s in favor of using the institution of marriage as a cynical wedge issue, and there’s a Party that’s . . . not.
There’s a Party which is in favor of punishing groups that give unfavorable testimony at Congressional hearings, and there’s a Party that’s . . . not.
Assuming that the quote is accurate and in context (which, in the absence of a transcript, I can’t), the controversial statement in there is that the Democrats are the Good Guys, instead of a bunch of milquetoast Quislings who submit relentlessly to the Republican onslaught.
I can not remember or even concieve of the RNC chair calling his political opponents evil.
I mean, it’s not like a Republican State Party Chair just called us, “the party of Barbara Boxer, Lynne Stewart and Howard Dean” or anything, so I can see where your disbelief comes from.
Oh wait.
RW
A state party chair!
Oooooooo, facial!
Sav
“There’s a Party that’s in favor of using the institution of marriage as a cynical wedge issue, and there’s a Party that’s . . . not.”
In Kimmitt’s world those who support gay marriage by judical fiat, even if said position is a minority stance in the country, are certainly not using using the subject as a wedge issue. They’re just good, tolerant folk. Those who oppose it are dastardly wedge issuers.
“I mean, it’s not like a Republican State Party Chair just called us, “the party of Barbara Boxer, Lynn Stewart and Howard Dean” or anything….”
Boxer is a Democratic Senator, Dean the Democratic Party Chairman and Stewart a registered Democrat. That’s a bit more factual than insinuating the other party is “evil.”
RW
Bin Laden is evil.
Hussein is evil.
The sad thing is that so many (scroll up) think that the GOP and Bush are not far from Bin Laden & Hussein.
Of course, that’s just part of the reason why they’re the fringe faction of a minority party.
Bob
Hey Say, a majority, by the last poll, supports civil unions between gays. A majority favors a woman’s right to have an abortion. A majority doesn’t trust the Republicans to fix Social Security. A majority thinks that we are going in the wrong direction in Iraq.
By the way, Say, in the 2004 elections Barbara Boxer got the third-highest number of votes in the United States, after the two leading Presidential candidates.
Bob
RW, this blog is about Dean using “good and evil” in a speech to Demo faithful.
It’s laughable that initiates of the party that drapes itself in the Bible and piety, who has introduced torture as a part of its SOP, who wants to hold citizens without trial indefinitely, who pays reporters and columnists to lie and shill for it to “create its own reality,” that calls for opponents to the war be used as human shields in Iraq (i.e., kill them), would be so offended that the head of the other party calls it good and the other side evil.
Of course, RW, you are right. It is a battle of the Democratic versus the psychotic.
If Hussein is evil now, was he evil when Rumsfeld was over there in the 80s sucking up to him for Ronnie Reagan? If Osama is evil now, was he evil when he was getting money and weapons from us to fight the Russians in Afghanistan?
Getting back to democratic versus psychotic, the Republican Party is the celebration of the unfettered id, it lives by the philosophy of grabbing all for me and screw everyone else. Babies are like that. Fortunately, a baby learns to play with others, learns to understand others and learns that he isn’t the only one who counts. He learns that there are shades of gray and his infantile id is controlled by becoming civilized. If an individual does not grow up to recognize his part in the whole, if his emotional greed is not moderated by a self-recognition of boundaries, he becomes at the very least narcissist, and eventually moves into the land of psychosis.
Me good, you evil. That’s the philosophy of the Republicans. If it bothers you so much, next time trademark your mental illness.
Speaking of unfettered ids, when is Frist going to apologize to Richard Clarke for slander?
Sav
I’m not getting into a pissing match with you, Bob, especially over a bunch of non-sequiturs.
“Me good, you evil. That’s the philosophy of the Republicans. If it bothers you so much, next time trademark your mental illness.”
And even more especially with someone so adept at mean-spirited projection.
RW
Indeed.
If your attempting to turn John’s comments sections into your own virtual Usenet world that mirros the postings at DU, don’t get too upset when you’re ignored, Bob.
Kimmitt
That’s a bit more factual than insinuating the other party is “evil.”
David Duke is a registered Republican — do I now get to say that the Republican Party is the Party of David Duke?
I find it particularly telling that I talk about basic violations of human decency and the best counterexample you can come up with is judicial review.
RW
The officials of the LA state & national Republican party headquarters have stated on the record that David Duke is not welcome in the GOP. I thought everyone was aware of that.
Try again.
Kimmitt
Duke was a Lousiana state Rep and is still a member of the Party — doing well enough to place second in the open primary for governor and collect 40% of the vote in the general. The current Louisiana Party leadership may not endorse his views, but that’s my point, isn’t it? If you’re allowed to cherry-pick a registered Democrat with which the National and State Parties patently obviously disagree, then it’s only fair that I get to pick a Republican with the same credentials.
If I felt like it, I could spend some time finding some other complete whackjob who happened to hold Republican Party affiliation, couldn’t I? Or I could say, “Michelle Malkin speaks at Republican functions,” and now the Republicans are the Party of Internment. And it’d still be a dishonest attempt to smear by association. And you know it.
RW
Kimmitt, you and I disagree on this. We’ve discussed guilt by association before, IIRC. Because I’m a conservative Christian it doesn’t mean that Pat Robertson speaks for me. Guilt by association, especially when the “other person” is choosing the party, is a slippery slope.
That said, this falls in line with your earlier (failed) attempt at distancing the Democratic party from the rebuttal speeches from Reid & Pelosi after the SOTU. In this case, as in that case. Howard Dean is the elected/chosen spokesperson for the party. John put forth the example of the sitting CHAIRMAN of the Democratic party making a stupid statement.
And, your retort? To try to pretend that someone that the official infrastructure of the GOP has dismissed is the same thing.
Dean made a mistake…..move on. Your examples are comical and you’re defending the indefensible.
Kimmitt
My issue was with the Party being characterized as the Party of Lynne Stewart, not that the Chair of the New York Republican Party finally noticed who won the race for DNC Chair.
Sav
“David Duke is a registered Republican — do I now get to say that the Republican Party is the Party of David Duke?”
I don’t know why not. Many on the left have uttered similar comments over the years. Might as well join them.
As for the argument put forward, I don’t believe anyone defended Minarik’s Stewart analogy. You, on the other hand, said the following—
” the controversial statement in there is that the Democrats are the Good Guys, instead of a bunch of milquetoast Quislings who submit relentlessly to the Republican onslaught.”
—when you know that’s not what Dean was inferring. It wasn’t what he was inferring when he said he hated Republicans recently either.
RW
Well, you chimed in on that one *after* you attempted the “bad” BS, but point taken.
John Cole
Sav- You mean it wasn’t what he was implying. You imply something, I infer.
Sorry. Pedantic pet peeve.
Bob
Sorry to hurt your feelings, Sav.
I stand by what I said about the Republican Party. You go far enough back not all of them were owned by the corporatists, but that’s all there is now: Hobbesian greed flavored with some wild-eyed end-of-the-world nutjobs that would have fit in with Charlie Manson’s head trips, if not his tonsorial tastes. I mean, there’s a thin line between someone who says he’s Satan and people who claim that that they’re mouthpieces for God.
Sav
John, good catch.
Bob, well, you’re beyond help.
timekeeper
Kimmitt, if you want to play the smear-by-association game, why don’t you take a look at what party perennial candidate (and perennial loon) Lyndon LaRouche claims.
Kimmitt
My point is that I don’t want to play that game. You can find wackos everywhere. I’m far more interested in the statements made by actual high-level elected and Party officials.
RW
You can read this post for a doozy.
Kimmitt
Again, no transcript.
RW
No transcript?
Do a google search if you’ve decided that John is making up a quote.
It’s a little early to move the goalposts, isn’t it?
Kimmitt
I don’t think he’s making it up, and when I do a google search I get multiple formulations with different conjunctions and not a single sentence on either side of the statement.
RW
Do you need instructions on how to use Google?
Kimmitt
Do you need instructions on how to post links? If you’ve got anything other than a single sentence which is absolutely free of context, please be so kind as to post it.