****** DEAN CONFEDERATE FLAG THREAD #2 ******

[Skinner]

I am aware that my title breaks the GD rules. I am making the title very prominent because it is the only GD thread about this topic.

Apparently things got pretty ugly around here last night. I have temporarily decided to lock all of the Dean/Confederate flag threads that get started in the General Discussion forum, in an effort to get people to chill out. If you wish to discuss the issue in the General Discussion Forum, you must do so in this thread. I expect anyone who wishes to discuss this to do so in an adult manner. This restriction is for the General Discussion Forum only.

Late today, if and only if the behavior improves, I will remove this temporary restriction.

This is a continuation of Thread #1 on this issue, which now has 170 posts and has been locked.

Skinner
DU Admin

Howard Dean's Comment Sparks Iowa Dust-Up

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=694&ncid=716&e=8&u=/ap/20031101/ap_on_el_pr/democrats_2004

WASHINGTON - A comment by Howard Dean about Confederate flags and pickup trucks has embroiled the leading Democrats in Iowa's presidential caucuses in a name-calling donnybrook.

"I still want to be the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks," the former Vermont governor was quoted as saying in Saturday's Des Moines Register. "We can't beat George Bush unless we appeal to a broad cross-section of Democrats."

Dean's campaign said Saturday that Dean was intending to encourage the return of Southern voters who have abandoned the Democrats for decades but are disaffected with the Republicans.

Two Democrat rivals competing against Dean in Iowa's leadoff Jan. 19 caucuses saw the comment differently.

more

[OKNancy]

1. Well....I thought I was making a good point

But since my other thread was locked I will re-post at the suggestion of the mod.


One candidate supports the Confederate Flag.

He doesn't care about what it means; in fact he embraces those who defend it.

He also praises Republicans every chance he gets.

This candidate stood in the Rose Garden many times and bragged about the Iraq war.

This man is really the holy one. He uses religion at every opportunity.

This candidate says we should get over the 2000 election.

This candidate has been anti-choice in the past, but he hasn't changed his mind.

This candidate makes outrageous statements, but when confronted with the truth never apologizes.


This person is GEORGE W. BUSH.

That's who I'm working to defeat next year, how about you?

[madfloridian]

4. It was an excellent rant.

I was going to post and tell you so.
:hi:

[salin]

10. bingo!

Missed most of the raging debates and posts last night (fatigue led to very selective thread skimming). Thus I missed your point. Sometimes I think we get really distracted - thanks for bringing the MAIN point back to focus.

[w4rma]

2. Rep. Jackson, Jr. Praises Dean on Bringing Economic Agenda to the South

Congressman Jesse L. Jackson, Jr. Praises Dean on Bringing Economic Agenda to the South

"I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slaveowners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood."-- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., March on Washington, August 28, 1963

"White folks in the South who drive pick-up trucks with Confederate flag decals on the back ought to be voting with us because their kids don't have health insurance either, and their kids need better schools too."-- Dr. Howard Dean, DNC Winter meeting, February 21, 2003

Congressman Jesse L. Jackson, Jr., today said, "This year we celebrated the 40th anniversary of Dr. King's famous speech in front of the Lincoln Memorial in 1963. Forty years later, Dr. Howard Dean is reminding us that the great task of uniting the northern black and white urban poor and working class, with the southern black and white rural poor and working class around common economic issues good health care, high quality schools, and affordable housing is the key to wrestling our democracy away from the race-oriented Republican right-wing.

"Democrats were not competitive in the South in 2000, and we have struggled to thrive, and in some instances survive, since Richard Nixon and the Republican Party began using their race-based 'southern strategy' in 1968. The use of race, cultural and social issues have served to distract voters by keeping the focus off of economic issues has been the basic strategy of Bush and the Republicans in the South. That's why they make wedge issues out of prayer in school, the Ten Commandments on public buildings, civil unions, the false allegation that Democrats will take away hunters' gun rights, choice for women, the controversy of having the words 'under God' in the Pledge of Allegiance, and the Confederate Flag. Lest we forget, the Confederate Flag is the Democratic Party's historic contribution to the South, and current Democratic candidates have not been able to figure out how to come to grips with their own historic symbol.

"Normally, rather than directly confronting poor and working class white southerners with a strong economic agenda, Democrats have tried to imitate Republicans on many of these social issues. It is good that we have a candidate offering hope to the South with an economic agenda. It is Dr. Dean who is reminding us that the combination of poor and working class blacks and whites, north and south, united in coalition around a common economic agenda of jobs, health care, education and housing will constitute a winning strategy in 2004," concluded Cong. Jackson.

Posted by Mathew Gross at 07:12 PM
http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/002084.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=631124

Did these SOUTHERN, BLACK, Baptists have a problem with Dean's remarks?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=73335

[Toucano]

16. Your quote isn't right.

When I click the blog.deanforamerica link I got a slightly different story.

"Congressman Jesse L. Jackson, Jr., said yesterday, "This year we celebrated the 40th anniversary of Dr. King's famous speech in front of the Lincoln Memorial in 1963."

Your quote says his statement came today. It was posted on 11/01/03 and it says "yesterday" so the comments were made 10/31/03 before the statement in Iowa.

Or have I confused it? Maybe they changed it since you quoted it.

[Maple]

3. Comment:

"There's no reason why white guys who have a Confederate flag in the back of their pickup truck shouldn't be walking side-by-side with blacks, because they don't have health insurance, either," Dean said.

[Kahuna]

47. Newsflash! I don't know any blacks who want to walk

side by side with confederate flag waving confederates. That would be an abomination to me. Thank you, but no.

[wyldwolf]

5. "But Clark has had activites withen the Republican party" ... and...

..."Clark was a lobiest for Henery Kisinger."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=633913&mesg_id=634909&page=

This was mentioned in the previous thread before it was locked.

This is a perfect example of my point there:

This is just like the overblown threads on Wesley Clark and his Bush comments. Without framing those words in their proper context, (mostly) Dean supporters on DU, and Dean himself, gang tackled Clark as a Bush enabler to gain a political advantage.

Not to mention the constant retreaded but baseless accusations that Clark is war criminal and worked for Henry Kissinger.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=633913&mesg_id=633967&page=

It was just a matter of time before my point was proven - of course - on the wings of a lie.

One of the often repeated yet patently false statements about Wesley Clark is that he works, or has worked, as a lobbyist for Henry Kissinger. This conclusion was originally arrived at be an odd "six degrees of Kevin Bacon"-style name association Google search that showed both Clark and Kissinger were associated with a company called CSIS - Center for Strategic and International Studies.

The slanderer usually states that Wesley Clark is a lobbyist for a company whose chair (or CEO or head or owner or boss) is Henry Kissinger and thus, works for Kissinger. However, this could not be further from the truth.

According to the CSIS website, the chairman of the company is Sam Nunn, one of the country's most respected Democrats and a former senator of 24 years. In addition, The CEO is Bill Clinton's former U.S. deputy secretary of defense John Hamre.

Wesley Clark is a senior advisor for CSIS - a position so lofty that it doesn't even merit a bio on CSIS's homepage!

So where does Henry Kissinger fit in to all of this?

Kissinger heads up The International Councillors, a CSIS affiliate, comprised of a group of international business leaders. This minor affiliate group meets only twice a year to discuss the implications of the changing economic and strategic environment.

There is absolutely NO indication that Wesley Clark is a part of this group.

So, we see, a Wesly Clark-Henry Kissinger connection is dubious at best and the statement that Clark "lobbies for Kissinger" or "works for Kissinger" is intellectually dishonest.

Some may (and do) contend, in light of the above revelations, that Clark working for the same goals as Kissinger is still a bad thing. This is desperation on their part, though. There is no indication that Clark and Kissinger work toward the same goals at CSIS, which is a very multi-facited company involved in things ranging from programs on technology and public policy, international trade and finance, energy, enviromental concerns, and medical genetic therapy.

Further, there is no explanation to what exactly Kissinger's role there is, so making any judgement is a shot in the dark.

Plus, do we really want to venture into territory where personalities connected through physical entities automatically become associated? In that Bizarro world former President Bill Clinton and then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich are forever connected because they worked together for a shared goal - The Hart-Rudman report on Terrorism.

In the same vein, a similar slanderous claim could be made against Sam Nunn, Dr. Betty Stanley Beene (former president of United Way of America), Harold Brown (Jimmy Carter's secretary of defense), Zbigniew Brzezinski (Jimmy Carter's national security advisor), John Hamre (Bill Clinton's U.S. deputy secretary of defense), and Felix G. Rohatyn (Bill Clinton's Ambassador to France), among other members with democratic credentials - all members of CSIS.

The fact remains that CSIS is an independent, nonpartisan public policy research organization. However, with an active imagination, something sinister can be found in anything.

http://www.csis.org/about/#4

Funny, my reply in the locked thread was deleted and was similar to this one. However, the post I was replying to wasn't deleted.

Looks as though someone didn't want the lie "Clark lobbied for Kissinger" debunked.

[Skinner]

8. This is a thread about Howard Dean.

Not about Wesley Clark. This post isn't even about Clark's response to Dean.

Please try to stay on topic.

Skinner
DU Admin

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LoZoccolo]

6. To me, Kerry, Lieberman, Gephardt, and Edwards are /out/ now.

Why? Because they chose to jump on an opportunity to play politics with this thing. To me, they seem just like regular politicians who'll play to the crowd rather than do something to lead it.

By now we all know the statement was taken out of context and is a statement that racism is a way to distract white people in the south from actually voting for things which actually benefit them. If anything, it's a call to get them to stop being racist. It's a statement of intention to /lead/ the bigots to consider how the racism actually affects them and not a pander to them.

If people don't understand that by now I'm not going to try and nag them to actually find out what the context of that statement was - they make themselves part of the problem by making us all walk on eggs when trying to discuss this very important issue.

These quotes are from http://www.billingsgazette.com/index.php?id=1&display=rednews/2003/11/01/build/nation/67-deancomments.inc

Check this out:

"I don't want to be the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks," Gephardt said in a statement. "I will win the Democratic nomination because I will be the candidate for guys with American flags in their pickup trucks."

Basically in trying to distance himself from this out-of-context notion, he basically says he's not gonna /lead/. He's going to ignore the racists and let 'em go on thinking what they think rather than confront them on how this division actually works against them as people. Did he think about this before he said it? Nah, he was just going to try to benefit from the knee-jerk reaction. Politics.

Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts contended that Dean's "pandering" to the National Rifle Association gave him an inroad to "pander to lovers of the Confederate flag."

Basically the same thing here. Politics.

The two southerners in the Democratic race, North Carolina Sen. John Edwards and retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark of Arkansas, also protested. "Some of the greatest civil rights leaders, white and black, have come from the South," said Edwards. "To assume that southerners who drive trucks would embrace this symbol is offensive."

He didn't say that. Politics.

Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman weighed in as well. "Governor Dean ought to be more careful about what he says," Lieberman said. "It is irresponsible and reckless to loosely talk about one of the most divisive, hurtful symbols in American history."

He gave enough context when he said it to begin with! It is irresponsible and reckless to imply something is there that isn't. Politics.

This sort of doesn't surprise me - these four politicians, instead of /leading/ and questioning why they were voting on a war resolution far before it was evident that Iraq was violating a ban on weapons of mass destruction, and coming out with the tough questions, pandered to the fears of looking unpatriotic.

To be sure, there's a contingent of hard-core bigots everywhere, but then there's that contingent of white males who don't have anything against civil rights that's really just more afraid of being falsely accused of bigotry and doesn't want to have to walk on eggs about everything they say - the way Dean was trying to help and got accused of all this junk. Sure we all need to be more sensitive, all of us. But making it more like you can't even discuss this stuff without having your words twisted around is part of the problem. And that's what these four did.

Part of Dean's appeal is as someone who's a straight talker. Attacks like this from these four only help us.

[angee_is_mad]

116. That's a bunch of CRAP!!!

Dean's remarks actually confirmed, the reason why the majority of African-Americans were not drawn to him. I think subconsciously alot of African-Americans felt that his heart wasn't with them. He is from Vermount, so it is understandable about not being able to connect. Yeh,yeh, I know he did a stint in the Bronx, but so WHAT!
And for the rabid Howard Dean FANatics, he will never become President without the Black vote!!!
Hell, we have seen the worse and are surviving, so we could just sit this one out and wait for Hilary for 2008.

[LoZoccolo]

174. What remarks actually confirmed this?

I have no clue what you're talking about.

The only way to make him seem like a panderer is to subtract words from what he said.

If you want to play a game like that, you said:

"Deans remarks actually confirmed...he will...become President...we have seen the worse...Hilary for 2008" - angee_is_mad

[madfloridian]

7. Here is an excerpt from a Feb. speech at the DNC forum.

"White folks in the South who drive pick-up trucks with Confederate flag decals on the back ought to be voting with us because their kids don't have health insurance either, and their kids need better schools too."-- Dr. Howard Dean, DNC Winter meeting, February 21, 2003

Why didn't Kerry, Gephardt, Sharpton, et al jump on him then?

Why now, is the question? I have heard him say this in many speeches.

[Stuckinthebush]

15. Why?

Because now he is the front runner and the rest of the pack is getting desperate.

Actually, this hissy fit over nothing may help Dean out. He will still probably win the nomination, and then he can point to this episode to say that he wants to represent everyone.

[billbuckhead]

20. It was wrong when Dean said it earlier I've been saying it for months

Deans various "States Rights" cop outs are something that shows that he is not an acceptable Democratic predidential candidate. It's a shame the other candidates didn't jump on it earlier, but better late than never.

[tsipple]

9. I'm Kind of Tired of It All, Honestly

There are 20+ dead American GIs in Iraq today, and who knows how many dead Iraqis.

That's what we should be talking about. How we can get out of this mess in Iraq before more mothers and fathers lose their children.

Such a sad day. :-( :-( :-(

[curse10]

11. This is why I don't buy that "straight talker" bs

He seems more out of control than anything else. Those comments are, in my opinion, disgusting. I just can't believe people are out there defending this man for a clearly divisive comment.

Dean stays at the bottom of my list. I really hope he doesn't get the nod- I don't think I could ever vote for the man. I don't want to have to vote socialist.

[salin]

17. While I absolutely respect your opinion

and right to it. I have a request. Could you find some other way visually to convey your message? That picture creeps me out, it reminds me of the sick abortiondoctor killing websites where they would put the red bloody exes over the faces of slain doctors. Or of Bush's stated 'game' when in Afghanistan of having the faces of 'top evil duers' that he crossed out when they were killed. I am sure that you do not mean to convey an image that is used by some to indicate death to the person pictured.

[LoZoccolo]

18. Huh?

"There's no reason why white guys who have a Confederate flag in the back of their pickup truck shouldn't be walking side-by-side with blacks, because they don't have health insurance, either," Dean said.

Yes. Utterly disgusting. Pandering to racists. Divisive!

:eyes:

[curse10]

25. It is pandering

and I won't support a candidate who panders to racists. I don't care if it would mean we beat Bush by a landslide. Some issues we shouldn't waver on.

[LoZoccolo]

29. Right.

Telling the white racists that they should unite with African-Americans because they have common needs is pandering to racism. Specially after he's said that Confederate flags should be taken down from statehouses.

:eyes:

This is like arguing with a Republican. They just pretend like whatever smear they want to perpetuate is already true and well-established. That way, they don't have to establish it!

Like I say above, it's this sort of BS tactics that people are sick of, and the more it's played, the more it helps Dean. No one wants to support someone who makes dishonest accusations because they never know when they'll be the target of one.

[Cha]

40. You want to know what "pandering" is?

Pandering is voting "yes" on the IWR because it is thought to be politically expeditent! That's the worst kind of pandering that gets our boys and girls Killed. Not to mention the thousands of Poor Iraqis.

[tsipple]

85. You Want Some Pandering?

Paging Michael Dukakis! Your tank is ready!

[curse10]

173. Yes! Let's make fun of Michael Dukakis!

That's the ticket! :eyes:

[Cha]

31. Dean is trying to include Southerners in our Campaign

and you choose to see it as "devisive". Just like the candidates who are behind that are nipping, slipping, and grasping and using demagoguery and disingenuousness as their guiding light.

But you have always bashed Dean so you are only jumping on an opportunist train that is conceived with lies.

[salin]

52. He used a poor choice of words to convey a stereotype.

His strategy and message may be right. But use of such stereotypes, and not attending to language was a mistake.

[Classical_Liberal]

58. Boloney

There are so many voters in teh south that vote repuke over wedge issues like the rebel flag that it should be a concern to any rational candidate.

[salin]

64. there are many other words

I can use - that do not invoke the confederate flag - that is the point. His point wasn't about the flag. It was about voters who are voting on symbolic issues rather than in their own economic best interest - and taking the message of economic best interest straight to those voters rather than writing those voting blocks off. See - that could be said without the confederate flag.

[Classical_Liberal]

67. If he had brought up the 10 commandments you would

have said he was pandering to the religious right. All the wedge issue of concern are to groups Dems aren't chums with.

[salin]

70. putting words in my mouth

I am not saying the "pandering" thing. Where did that accusation come from?

I said particular word choice matters. Dean could (and should) have made the same argument without the confederate flag decal.

[Classical_Liberal]

81. I don't agree

His statement wasn't an endorcement of the confederate flag. The flag is a very recent battle in the culture war of three states. It shouldn't be taboo discussion or a taboo example. I don't see any fallout either other than from those who never liked Dean.

[Cha]

95. Precisely! Classical_Liberal!

:yourock:

[salin]

98. Look more closely

While I haven't selected a horse in the race - he is up there for me, in part due to the campaign he is running.

It does worry me.

You are naive to think this is a republican made symbol only with valence in recent years. That is the response typically of those who are racially insulated. Unfortunately, then, it reenforces the sense of some that a guy from very White Vermont is not able to (or unwilling to) "get" issues (and language used as a shortcut to refer to those issues) that divide us, pander to the racist among us, and are used to justify the holding of attitudes and biases that translate into injustices/biases and prejudices that block housing, employment, access to loans, etc. that has been found again and again in studies to still be with us. Prejudice that works to undermind citizen's opportunties (jobs, housing, etc.) is alive and well in america. Using language for a different purpose (in Dean's to convey what I stated above - that folks voting largely on symbolic but empty issues that work against their economic best interests - can HEAR and should HEAR about those economic issues.. and should be campaigned to.. and some will respond and return to the democratic party - for the right reasons) - that reenforces a weakness of the candidate is not something to lightly be dismissed.

All said by one who is not a "Dean Detractor".

[SahaleArm]

122. And if he defended Roy Moore?

Would you be claiming he's looking out for the disenfranchised bible-thumpers?

[Cha]

92. Too bad...Dean doesn't do political correct

like the other PCers. And that's Precisely Why I Like him!

[salin]

101. read what I wrote below

remember - I have a very favorable view towards Dean and his campaign.

I think he made a mistake that could cost him some.

I think he stumbled into reenforcing one of his characteristics (that of governing over a very white state - and perhaps not being able to "get" issues that face non-white americans) by careless use of a stereotype. It was a strategic mistep.

Geez - all candidates make them. It is wiser for the campaign to realize it / learn from it and move on - than pretend it was actually a "good thing" (ala woohoo! he's not politically correct!)

[Classical_Liberal]

109. I don't agree that it was a strategic mistep

It was a dead on observation of the problem. Let's leave it at that.

[salin]

118. why

should I agree to leave it at that when I simply disagree? :eyes:

Never mind - I thought you were asking me to agree with your statement - rereading realized you were suggesting, I think, that we agree to disagree. Fair enough. That I can agree to.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

73. People would get this point if he had said "Those people in white hoods

burning crosses." Instead he used the flag which like it or NOT is a symbol to the same people.

[curse10]

169. Southerners do not equate to confederate flag

that's the issue. Sure, go ahead, go for the Southerners. That's great. But confederate flag waiving racists? No thanks.

[curse10]

172. I have not always bashed Dean

and I still don't. Not agreeing with the man is not bashing. And just because I refuse to sit down and let people talk smack about my candidate doesn't mean I'm bashing.

I just can't support a man who has numerous campaign issues that I am opposed to. Simple as that. I refuse to be a one issue voter. I refuse to bow down to the mass hordes of Dean supporters on this board just because they say I should. Sorry.

[Eloriel]

164. People who see it as "clearly divisive" aren't seeing it at all

I will state quite frankly I wish he hadn't have used that term.

BUT -- he used it in precisely the opposite direction of divisiveness. Here's the way he uses it in his stump speeches, and the DNC Winter Meeting:

"I intend to talk about race in this election in the south because the Republicans have been talking about it since 1968 in order to divide us. And I'm going to bring us together, because you know what? White folks in the south who drive pickups trucks with confederate flags decals in the back ought to be voting with us and not them, because their kids don't have health insurance either and their kids need better schools too." (big applause)

If people are not interested in actually comprehending what he is saying, then fine -- don't vote for him. But it's intellectually dishonest -- in the extreme -- to knock him for "divisiveness" when that is exactly opposite of what he's saying.

Eloriel

[Code_Name_D]

13. Perhaps there is something to "reverse discrimination" after all?

This is a Republican position that in the liberals drive for "equal right" that we have in fact persecuted the Southern white man in some kind of Black on white discrimination. There are been some ridiculous actuation about quotas and religious interlace. But there have also been accusations about Politically Correct language to that I could never so easily argue against.

But seeing some respond to the Dean; confederate flag flap, has forced me to wonder if their isn't some truth to this particular Republican charge. Do we reverse discriminate?

This isn't an ideal charge. Republicans are famous with there use of wedge issues. The flag is one of them. Not just the confederate flag mind you, but the US one as well. But such wedge issues only work so long as we respect the other end of the wedge. If the Republicans accuse the dems of being "anti-south" than this weadge only works if the Dems play along and become "anti-south."

Dean however, did not comment about the flag. He in fact commented about the economic disposition of people in the south, both Black and those who "display the confederate flag on their bumpers." But Clark, Karry, Leaberm have come down against the confederate flag, calling it a racist symbol. Not only playing into the Republican wedge, but giving some evidence to support the Republicans "politically correct" censorship argument.

[NashVegas]

37. Interesting Reaction in My Local Usenet Group

I posted the original, full quote and asked for peoples' opinions. One person responded with:

Should not this be posted in a news group such as
alt.politics.democrates or alt.discuss.politics or alt.hate? I just
did not see any direct connection to (our geographical area - which is very much in the South).

What was fascinating was that the comment came from someone who ordinarily only posts in threads about technical issues and local businesses, but occasionally jumps in to defend Bush or, more specifically, attack those who nail *. In other words, a right-leaning technocrat who didn't want to see the issue discussed in an area more prone to actual discussion than flame-wars. In spite of all the anti-Bush threads which he normally bypasses.

[VermontDem2004]

24. Who disagrees with this?

"We have working white families in the south voting for tax cuts for the richest 1 percent while their children remain with no health care," Dean said. "The dividing of working people by race has been a cornerstone of Republican politics for the last three decades — starting with Richard Nixon. ... The only way we're going to beat George Bush is if southern white working families and African-American working families come together under the Democratic tent, as they did under FDR."

[tsipple]

30. Nobody

Except maybe John Kerry and Richard Gephardt. I guess they think it's just fine to keep right on driving that wedge.

I hate losing for stupid reasons, especially when Democrats hand it to the Republicans on a silver platter like this. I don't see how Kerry or Gephardt can possibly win a general election with boneheaded campaign moves like this one.

[Kahuna]

53. "Southern white working families..." Not a thing wrong

with that. But for Dean to try to tell us blacks folks that we should partner up with confederate flag wavers is an abomination to us blacks folks. Clearly it is not an abomination to you. Maybe you should try to look at it from the African American POV.

[Some Moran]

60. Wow!

Now that actually does feel me with shock and awe. :) As opposed to that schlock and awe crap that Rethugs and DINOs always peddle.

[Cheswick2.0]

110. of course not... but where is the confederate flag part?

that is the part that was assinine and offensive.

He could have said, "I want to be the candidate for people ready to take the confederate flags off their trucks and join the rest of us in fighting for jobs, healthcare and dignity for all americans." But instead he made a really stupid remark that is sure to piss off Black voters.... the most loyal constituency in the party.

I don't think Dean is smart enough to be the candidate.

[Classical_Liberal]

142. So the progress of the whole country is held up by a flag

Gee thanks! BTW, if we don't get these voters in the dem camp the southern black vote will be irrelivant, since their states will be taken by Shrub! How come you didn't make such demands of Al Gore from the former CSA state of Tenessee?

[tsipple]

26. Here's What a Thoughtful Southerner Has to Say

Full uncopyrighted write-up here.

The Confederate battle flag seems to stir up a lot of controversy and emotional passion. There are several flags that represented the Confederacy, but the one pictured above is the most well known. If you are to believe the news reports, the Confederate flag is a racist symbol and offensive to most black Americans. South Carolina use (sic) to fly the flag above their capital (sic) until protests and boycotts, led by the NAACP, got the state to lower it and place it in a less prominent location. There have also been some states in the news that have changed or have considered changing their state flags because they contain a portion of the Confederate flag. Mississippi just voted 2 to 1 to actually keep their state flag as it is, with a Confederate flag in the corner.

So, is the Confederate flag evil and racist? Is it flown as a sign of white supremacy? Well, to let the cat out of the bag so you can determine whether or not to hate me, I'll say that the Confederate flag is not a racist symbol and anyone should have the right to fly it, southern states included.

The Confederate battle flag represents southern culture and pride to me. It was originally flown to represent the Confederate States of America, not to send a statement about blacks. And just in case you think the civil was (sic) about slavery, I need to remind you that northerners also owned slaves and still didn't treat blacks with equality. When I fly the Confederate flag, I'm saying that I'm a southerner and I'm proud of that fact. I like the culture of the south.

So why is the Confederate flag seen as such as negative symbol? It is true that it represented the Confederacy and the Confederacy was pro-slavery. But that has been the case since the flag was created. We've only seen protests and very vocal opponents in recent years. Remember the television show called the Dukes of Hazard? They had a car named General Lee and it had a big Confederate flag painted on it. No one seemed to complain then. When I worked at Microsoft, I had a United States flag and a Confederate flag on my office wall. No one complained about it at all. It was seen as part of my southern background and culture, just like the other objects that people put on their walls and desks. So what's different now?

I see it mainly as people trying to a) stir up trouble and grab the limelight, b) major knee-jerk reaction, and c) political correctness run amok.

Let's discuss the first point. Some people and groups need attention and controversy. They thrive on it. It gives them power and gives them a "cause" to fight. Such is the case with the NAACP and its boycott of South Carolina. I've heard quit (sic) a few famous black people speak out against South Carolina. But they weren't speaking out until the NAACP got involved. Why weren't they "offended" years ago? It's like someone had to inform them that they were being "offended" before they realized it. Protesting the Confederate flag is now seen as a noble gesture within the black community. They are fighting to stamp out this "evil" symbol of past oppression. I see it as an attempt for fame and power. And some people need the attention. If it wasn't for the flag, they wouldn't be noticed. I will state that I think that the NAACP does have some worthy ideas and goals, but I don't think their stand against the Confederate battle flag is one of them.

The second point has been caused by genuine hate groups. Unfortunately, groups such as the KKK, Neo-Nazis, and others have adopted the Confederate flag as their symbol. When they fly it, it gets associated with the crap and hatred they spew forth. And when we see and hear about racial discrimination and violence, we immediately react to it, whether or not the reaction is valid or needed. The illogical assumption is to assume the Confederate flag is bad because a bad group uses it.

The third point is seen day in and day out, and not necessary (sic) with just the Confederate flag. Zero drug policies are suspending kids because they brought Tic-Tacs to school. Fingernail clippers are seen as dangerous weapons. We see people getting sued left and right over trivial stuff. Society as a whole seems to go out of it's way to make sure no one is ever offended by anything. So if the Confederate flag offends someone, they take it down. They seem to forget that the first amendment gives you freedom of expression, but doesn't guarantee that you will not be offended by something at some point.

Again, I personally fly the Confederate flag because to me it represents southern culture and pride. Where do I fly it? From the stern of my boat. I want to display it at work and I want to display it on the front of my house, but because I fear what negative response I may get, I let my first amendment right be trampled upon. There's no reason why the Confederate flag cannot represent to everyone what it represents to me. Currently the swastika is a banned symbol in Germany and generally seen anti-Semitic. (sic) Yet before the Nazis came along, it was a good symbol. If this good symbol can now be "bad", there's no reason why the Confederate flag can go from a supposedly "bad" symbol to a good symbol.

Jeff Polston

And let me add: some Democrats are just SO stupid for playing right into this GOP wedge. We need to de-wedge the Republicans. Listen to what this guy is saying, people: if you fly off the handle on something so stupid, there's no serious reason to vote for you.

(On edit: Added "sic" to mark portions that appear to be typos.)

[LoZoccolo]

34. Actually, this is condoning Gore-ing on their part too.

Basically instead of acknowledging and dealing with the issue that this thing was taken out of context, they're perpetuating it as a campaign tactic. Now remember what happened to Gore with the "invented the Internet" thing or the Love Canal thing? Wouldn't it be better if it were totally unnacceptable to take that kind of thing out of context? Wouldn't it help us? These other candidates could end up getting bit with the same tactic come the general election if they condone its use.

[tsipple]

51. Quoting Out-of-Context

Tougher this time around because of the news role the Internet plays -- and that's something the Dean folks have figured out and others haven't yet.

You can go ahead and make a (false) assertion, but the truth (or something closer to it, anyway) is just a quick Google away. Like the fact Dean has been saying exactly the same thing for months, to many audiences all over the country, to big applause.

As pure politics, here's what I think:

1. Kerry and Gephardt's negatives go up. (Kerry's were already surging in New Hampshire. I predict they hit 30+ percent now. Which is an incredible feat, because New Hampshire really liked Kerry.) If this keeps up, John Kerry could well see a Massachusetts poll soon showing Dean ahead there.

2. Dean just got a big southern gift from Kerry and Gephardt, and for the stupidest reason imaginable. (Thanks, guys.)

3. Dean gets one more chance to remind voters why Jesse Jackson, Jr. supports him.

4. The move reeked of desperation and politics-as-usual.

5. It broke on a Saturday (when nobody is paying attention) and rolled right into the worst Iraq casualty news to date: one more reminder why Kerry and Gephardt want to talk about anything but Iraq.

6. The Republicans are just sitting back and watching Kerry and Gephardt do their dirty work for them. Lee Atwater is dancing a jig wherever he is.

7. The one bit of good news for Kerry? People forgot his disastrous Iowa shooting photo op. (It was nearly perfect Dukakis-in-the-tank execution.)

No wonder Kerry and Gephardt have been so ineffective as Democratic Party leaders in Washington.

[Cha]

36. Thank you for posting this, tsipple!

Nice to have a real Southerner's different perspective!

Personally, I want a World Peace Flag ..flying from my boat!

[Toucano]

38. What makes you think that's a thoughtful southerner?

"Let's face it, if being gay was natural, we probably would have died out as a species millions of years ago."

http://www.mindspring.com/~jeffpo/home.htm


A lot of people like the confederate flag for a variety of reasons. The whole "Heritage not Hate" argument, however, doesn't wash. You'll see that flag being diplayed all over the country and it isn't making a statement about the person's heritage.

As for playing into the GOP wedge, it was the so-called democratic wing of the democratic party that brought up the whole thing. Dean stepped in it, it stinks, but his supporters seem to be saying "It smells great!" When they could just say, "Yeah, it wasn't the best way to express his point, but shIT happens!" and move on.

[Classical_Liberal]

43. I don't think he is, but I sure as hell don't want him voting for

Shrub no matter how misguided he is.

[tsipple]

68. The Guy Worked for Microsoft

Much as I don't like Microsoft, he can't be a total idiot.

Also, you presuppose facts not in evidence. I don't think Dean's statement was particularly brilliant or particularly not brilliant.

However, I do think Kerry and Gephardt (and the other candidates who echoed) are race baiting, and they're managing to figure out a way to blow the 2004 election for totally stupid stuff.

The only thing Bush will have to run on in 2004 is the "values" crap. Dean is doing a pretty decent job calling the Republicans on their race baiting. Kerry and Gephardt fell right into the trap. The GOP knows exactly which hot buttons to push, and Kerry and Gephardt got pushed. (Guns is another one.)

The brutal truth is that if the Democratic nominee wants to run against the confederate flag he will LOSE.

Make no mistake. Dean said, to an audience in South Carolina no less, that he thinks they should take the damn flag down from public buildings. That took balls. But he's also going to de-wedge this issue whether or not Kerry and Gephardt approve, and he's going to run on jobs, healthcare, and education in the South. Smart guy, dumb opponents.

[Toucano]

90. Well, it was stupid.

"I don't think Dean's statement was particularly brilliant or particularly not brilliant."

It was not brilliant. It added a non-issue controversey to the national dialogue by invoking a symbol of hate. Not smart.

Dean polls poorly with African Americans and this will not help.

[SahaleArm]

127. Spinning.

It'll be interesting to hear the effect of Jackson's Spin.

[boxster]

45. It's not what WE think is important here. It's what potential VOTERS...

think is important.

I think most of the people in these DU conversations realize and understand the ideas represented in that article and can see the issue from many sides.

The problem is that many, many potential voters will not. To those who DO believe that the flag represents slavery and racism, telling them that it doesn't is meaningless and is not going to change minds.

That's why I think it was a strategic mistake to even bring it up at all.

"some Democrats are just SO stupid for playing right into this GOP wedge"

Seems to me that the GOP had nothing to do with this. Dean made an ill-advised statement using a symbol that represents racism to many, many Americans. Either it was a calculated error or he's trying a bit too hard to pander to some Southern voters.

We need to win the election next November, and a candidate that gives the impression that he either doesn't understand a portion of the voting public, or at the very least, doesn't understand the symbolism of the Confederate flag as it relates to many potential voters, could be a liability in the general election.

[Classical_Liberal]

54. When did Dean tell voters the flag doesn't represent racism?

Answer: Never did!

You all misrepresent, then when you can't misrepresent anymore you bring friends to misrepresent so more.

He said basically that economic issues were more imporatant than the confederate flag, which is an idea noboby should have a problem with.

[boxster]

75. Thank you for not reading my post.

I never said that Dean misrepresented the flag.

HE DOESN'T HAVE TO.

That's my point. Geez, are you telling me that just because Dean didn't tell voters the flag didn't represented racism that they can't think for themselves?

Obviously, you didn't get the point. The point is that voters could independently decide - based on what Dean said, whether directly or through the media attention it is getting - that he was pandering to racists.

Just because we don't believe that doesn't mean the average voter won't. If Dean never uses the reference to the flag in the first place, this misinterpretation of what he said NEVER happens.

You all misrepresent, then when you can't misrepresent anymore you bring friends to misrepresent so more.

By the way, where did I misrepresent ANYTHING in this thread? Perhaps you should actually think about why this is getting so much attention rather than knee-jerk defending your candidate.

And, sorry to disappoint you, but I came to this conclusion independently, so I'm not sure what the hell you're talking about in your "misrepresenting friends" statement.

[Classical_Liberal]

89. Voters that are so slow they

think saying people should vote their economic interest rather than on wedge issues like the CSA flag, is an endorcement of the flag would be so capricious and unpredictable it doesn't matter. I have faith that most of them aren't. Anyway the spin here would actually be more of a problem than anything he said with that type.

[boxster]

103. Since when have people voted for their own best interests?

Be realistic, please. If people voted for their own best interests, Bush certainly doesn't win in 2000. Clinton has even stated that publicly.

It appears that you're basically saying, "Screw anyone who isn't smart enough to vote for us." You're grossly overestimating the common sense of the American public. Ignoring voters who vote based on their own pet issues will most certainly lose us the election in '04.

Dean's strategy is a calculated risk - he assumes that the number of people he'll gain by mentioning the flag is higher than the number he will lose.

By the way, I'm still waiting for you to tell me where I misrepresented Dean in this thread.

[Classical_Liberal]

114. Everything is a calculated risk

I agree with Dean's calculation. Since I have faith that most voters are not that slow I think your projecting.

[boxster]

121. Faith? You have faith in an electorate that made it possible for W to be

"chosen" by the SC?

Oh, please. Don't make me laugh. If the electorate was generally as smart as you give them credit for, Florida is never even an issue in 2000. Anyone who knew anything about W's past should have run screaming away from him, yet he got nearly half the vote.

More than 50% of the public STILL approves of him. Still think they're so smart?

Intelligence is not the issue here. The issue is apathy and lack of information. The 50% of the public still approving of Bush are obviously not getting all of the available information. It is THOSE voters that I am worried would be swayed by an issue like this.

[Classical_Liberal]

132. Gore won the last election so what are you talking about

? It was stolen by Jeb and Katherine Harris in the vote purge. Anyway, I think someone who uses plain talk will do as better with Bushites than the so-called nuanced candidates.

[boxster]

147. Do you READ the posts you respond to? Apparently not.

"You have faith in an electorate that made it possible for W to be "chosen" by the SC?"

Go back and read my post, because you obviously didn't read it the first time. I didn't say that Gore didn't win.

The election should have never been close enough for the Supreme Court to have been in the position to "chose" Bush. Assuming your "the electorate votes their best interest" statement is true, there were numerous states other than Florida that Gore should have won, making Florida irrelevant.

Gee, which is what I said the first time.

Not to mention nearly half of that electorate STILL approves of Bush. You didn't counter that argument, so I assume you believe it is accurate. Is that half still "voting" their best interests?

Still waiting, by the way, for your proof I misrepresented Dean in this thread.

Oh, wait, you must have just assumed I did in a knee-jerk reaction to defending Dean. I understand.

[tsipple]

125. Let's Look at Gore in 2000

Gore lost Tennessee, West Virginia, Arkansas, and Florida because voters, mostly white males, thought he'd take away their guns.

Classic Republican wedge issue. Works every time.

And it'll work again in the midst of the "Terra War" if Democrats are not careful.

[Cheswick2.0]

129. wrong, Gore lost in Tenn because of voter fraud

and he won florida but it was stolen from us.

[tsipple]

134. OK, Whatever

When even Barbara Boxer is trying to get pilots armed and Michael Moore is admiring gun-friendly Canada, you know a gun control zealot ain't going to win in 2004.

[boxster]

33. Why bring the flag up at all? Geez, how complicated does this...

discussion have to be?

With all due respect to Dean and his supporters, what was Dean thinking? Most rational people understand what the Confederate flag represents and nearly EVERYONE knows that it represents racism and slavery to MANY Americans.

So, why bring it up at all? Why even mention the flag? Either he doesn't understand the symbolism of the flag or he's pandering. There really isn't any other rational explanation.

That's the point, as far as I'm concerned. It's not that he's being taken out of context. It's not whether it was racist or not (I think not). It's the fact that he referenced a symbol that to many, many people represents racism and slavery.

Defend or spin it any way you want, but regardless of his motive or his intended meaning, bringing it up at all seems like a significant strategic mistake.

[Classical_Liberal]

39. Yes there is a rational explanation

He was telling CSA flag lovers that economic issues are more imporatant, but you probably knew that. I hope he doesn't change his tune one iotta on this because it is actually good politics. I think that is the biggest reason for the present whine.

[Cha]

44. Dean is "thinking" ..Smart as usual! and OUtside the

puking Box!

[SahaleArm]

143. Would you defend him....

If he claimed he wanted to be the candidate for 'skinheads' in Idaho? I'm sure they would proudly wave the confederate flag.

[Cha]

183. Quit being disingenous and bringing up these

hypothetical situations that have no bearing on the subject a hand except in your dreams.

[tsipple]

117. Why bring up the confederate flag? Answer...

...Because the Republicans are guaranteed to do so in the general election -- whether Democrats want it or not. Best get it off the table now. Of course the Republicans are going to run on the "values" crap, 'cause it's all they've got.

Dean says, "You're a sucker if you fall for that crap. I disagree with you on the flag, but so what? Let me tell you why you ought to agree with me, because the Republicans have been shafting you."

Kerry and Gephardt say, "Sod off. Vote for the Republicans. We don't care. Let's keep the South solid. Surrender your guns and your confederate flag decals." (That's almost a verbatim quote from Gephardt -- one which will come back to haunt him if he somehow got the nomination.)

That's the difference. Dean knows how to campaign, and Kerry and Gephardt are losers.

Truman did exactly the same thing. So did Kennedy. They persuaded southern whites that it was in their economic interest to vote Democratic, and that that was more important than northern elite Washington liberals telling you what you can and cannot stick on your pick-up truck. (And of course it's more important!) Truman desegregated the Armed Forces, and Kennedy (with Johnson finishing the job) ushered in landmark civil rights legislation.

How the heck do you think Dean won re-election after signing the civil unions bill? By telling Vermonters who opposed him that they're idiots? Or by finding common ground while disagreeing on a particular issue?

Let me amend what I said earlier. The more I think about this, the more what Dean said strikes me as brilliant. Get the wedge issues off the table and boil it down to core Democratic issues. If Dean does nothing else but at least force Bush to compete in the South, mission accomplished.

Let me also make another prediction: the Republicans will NOT want this debate to penetrate the South. They won't talk about it at all. Why? Because if Vermont Yankee Dean is in any way seen as getting attacked on the confederate flag by elite liberal Democrats, they lose.

[WilliamPitt]

35. This is one of the most absurd arguments in the history of DU

I am flabbergasted that this has caused such anger and anxiety. In my heart of hearts, I think this is being pushed here by some folks who have a vested interest in seeing Howard Dean take a fall.

This has nothing to do with the larger argument over whether Dean will make the best national candidate. I don't think he will, which is why I am a Kerry guy. But this argument is absurd.

"We have working white families in the south voting for tax cuts for the richest 1 percent while their children remain with no health care," Dean said. "The dividing of working people by race has been a cornerstone of Republican politics for the last three decades — starting with Richard Nixon. ... The only way we're going to beat George Bush is if southern white working families and African-American working families come together under the Democratic tent, as they did under FDR."

This is one of the wisest things any of the candidates has said. Dean's courting of Southern voters is wise and well-planned. The words 'Confederate flag' were used, and so people fly off the handle. Context is important, and no, I'm not a slave-owner.

Jesus, people. Unbelievable.

[Classical_Liberal]

41. Please Will write something about this in truthout

This is coming from the other candidates not just their supporters on DU. It will be talking point dejure with the pundits next week, and the truth is his observations are a key to the success of any candidate that eventually wins the nomination, so they are shooting themselves in the foot by discrediting Dean on this.

[Cha]

42. Thank you Will for joining in with that astute

observation! One thing all this does for me, anyway.. is to look deeper into the issues and makes me appreciate my candidate, Govenor Dean and our campaign Even More!

[WilliamPitt]

46. I don't know how astute it was

I'm just kind of stunned at the level of mania this caused. Yeesh.

[Cha]

49. I guess "astute" is in the eye of the beholder!

:)

[JVS]

48. I agree.

I am probably considered a South-basher by many, and I don't think that our party's constant desire to make inroads in the South is the most productive activity. I think that it is over-reaching at best and diverting resources from more crucial and potentially lucrative areas at worst. That being said, I don't see a problem with Dean's statement. It is the logical extension of wanting people to vote their interests and the desire of the party to do better in the South.

Also Dean's statement is necessary in light of all the criticism that he won't do well in the South. He needs to be able to explain to Southern voters why they should support him. If he had said nothing, I would bet that he'd be bashed for ignoring the South.

It also strikes me as odd that some of the loudest whining about this comment has been from Clark supporters. Clark supporters have constantly been talking up Clark's popularity in the South and his ability to attract Southerners and Reagan-Democrats, and now when another candidate makes an appeal toward the conservative voters they cry bloody murder.

[bigtree]

97. good point

what does courting racist republicans have to do with a Democratic primary? I mean, he's calculating that he can put us all in a tent together. What a waste. What a messed up sense of priority. And you know he'll just keep saying different versions of this from now on to save face. Along with some other muddle about supporting everyone else.

What about trying to unite sensible Southerners behind a rejection of that symbol. Why the dancing around the racist rag to get votes? Craven.

[dd123]

50. Thank you.

Excellent post.

[boxster]

55. Yes, from a DU perspective, it's absurd. However, from a voting public

perspective, is it still absurd?

To those who view the Confederate flag as a symbol of racism and/or slavery, couldn't this potentially be seen as pandering to racists? I personally don't think so, but does that mean the average voter won't? We have to think in terms of the average American and not DU.

I guess my point is - why bring it up at all? It seems like Dean's trying a little too hard to court Southern voters. His intentions are good, but the message is garbled by the flag reference that seems completely unnecessary.

What if he'd said, "I think the guys out in the Midwest with gun racks in their pickups should vote Democratic because they need health care, too"?

Don't you think that would have elicited a response from anti-NRA DUers and voters?

Edit: actually, Dean *might* say that, so I should probably come up with a different example! :crazy:

[WilliamPitt]

63. Dean should say that

and he should work very very very hard to bring Southern voters back into the fold. One cannot "work too hard" on this score; the wall of GOP states down South will be a permanent electoral advantage across the spectrum until we crack it. We will always be playing catch-up until we do. Saying the words "Confederate flag" will be part of that process.

[boxster]

88. No, I agree entirely that Dean should work hard to bring the South

back into the (D) column. My point is that this seemed like a rather strange way to do that and a calculated risk that he may not have fully thought out.

Here's why I think this was a mistake. The media has conditioned the average voter to acquire their political knowledge in sound bytes. The media, as we're all painfully aware, is conservative and predatory. I think the media is going to jump on this and make it much more of an issue than it has any right to be. If we think it's been misrepresented here on DU, wait until the Rush/O'Reilly crowd gets a hold of it in the next few days.

I see both sides of the issue. I see the necessity of working hard to regain the electoral advantage in the South, and I agree that "Confederate flag" in the right context could do exactly that.

But, I also pessimistically believe that this isn't going to play well in the media and could cause more harm than good.

[Classical_Liberal]

94. Why are so many duers helping O'Really formulate his soundbites?

This messageboard is really f-ing backfired if we do that?

[boxster]

113. Are you referring to me?

I don't see where I did that. Frankly, I didn't have to provide any sound bytes, as Dean's comments will be chopped up by the media without my help. What I said is that it will most definitely be misrepresented in the media. Do you disagree?

If you think that Dean critics are the only ones formulating sound bytes, you should probably look around. The candidates get bashed on DU roughly equivalent to their standings in the polls.

And, CL, you obviously misunderstand. I like Dean and will vote for him in a heartbeat if he wins the nomination. What I'm afraid of is that he doesn't always understand the ramifications of the things he says. If he goes on to win the nomination, he needs to provide as little ammunition to the Republicans as possible.

[Classical_Liberal]

126. I am posting with five different people so

I don't know whether it is you. Having said that Dean has said that he would rather screw up than be over-careful. I agree with this sentiment. He is like by most of us for being a risk taker.

[boxster]

153. Well, let's try to reply to the correct posting then, shall we?

Instead of randomly attacking people for things they did not do or say.

The jury is still out on whether or not a "risk taker" would be the best choice for the White House. Depends on the importance of said risks and the consequences of the actions involved.

[Kahuna]

57. Easy for you to say. None of your ancestors were slaves..

Dean should have chosen his words more wisely.

[Classical_Liberal]

65. Jessie Jackson Jr's were

. The only people who are children of slaves I have seen complain are anonymous characters on DU that didn't like Dean in the first place.

[Cha]

99. You're being so right on!

Yeah! Jesse Jackson Jr's ancestors were "slaves"! You know what? Thank god for Jesse!

[SahaleArm]

152. February 21, 2003

Looks like Jackson, Jr. was on the pre-emptive:

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=10232&news_iv_ctrl=1301

[Kahuna]

178. Jesse Jr. Is a pampered rich kid. He didn't experience any..

Jim Crow or blatant discrimination firsthand the way me, my parents and his parents did. Jesse is about the same age as my son. My son didn't experience what I experienced but he has sense enough to know what Dean said was stupid and insensitive. We spoke about it today. Even my brother who is one of those really low key, it's all good types said that was a stupid remark. Of course my brother thinks it's stupid. He's in his fifties. He knows what went on 40 years ago in this country. We watched black folks getting dogs loosed on them and hosed on the nightly news when we were kids. What does Jesse Jr. know about that?

[Cha]

185. Jesse is a cool guy. you just don't like him cause

Jesse likes our man Dean!

[Kahuna]

179. And for good reason we didn't like Dean...

Some of us know a phoney when we see one.

[salin]

59. I agree. With one caveat.

I think that Dean used a bad steroetype to try to get the point across about this strategy. I think it was a very unfortunate choice of words, when many others could be used to convey the same thing.

Some mistakes reverberate more than others.

Sign of racism? No. Sign of insensitivity - yes and maybe.

Sign of not always being attuned to why specific words matter? Absolutely.

Sign of having a smart strategy? Yes.

The point he makes in other places - is getting voters to realize they will not agree with any candidate on every issue - but that they should really consider which issues for agreement are most central to their daily lives/existence - and that going straight to those voters, that many strategists/campaigns write-off as lost, is the way to campaign - because for some - the message (eg economic) will resonate. That is damn smart.

But the poor use of stereotype to make this point? Very stupid.

[Terwilliger]

66. it goes a much larger issue

what is the Democratic party and what are the values behind it?

Republicans can claim goodness and light, too, and they do. They're appealing to the "confederate flag" owners too...how do they appeal to them? Is it in the common belief of the rightness of the American way?

So, who actually believes in that stuff? Democrats? Republicans? Both? Neither? What do we believe in? What do we want?

[WilliamPitt]

71. When you have a big tent

some things are going to come under the flap you don't agree with. I'd say value #1 for the party is 'Tolerance and Understanding.' You can't convince the Confederate flaggers they are wrong unless and until you get them under the tent and have a talk.

Small tents are great. Everyone knows each other. Everyone agrees. The bigger world outside goes by...

[Terwilliger]

79. to what end

I keep hearing the big talk about utopia or progress or ABB...but what happens? What changes? So, are you saying Republicans like your grandfather, are, in fact, corrupt and evil? Why are we so desperate to win here? Because Bush is a fascist, or because he's wrong? What's wrong about him? Why is he a fascist? Why don't these reasons apply to all Republicans? Are you saying you would have voted for McCain? Is Miller right to endorse Bush? If he does, then what's the hurry? What's the hatred? What's the ABB? Isn't this a BIG TENT country?

[WilliamPitt]

86. That was a scattershot series of questions

What changes? The big tent of FDR lead to stronger unions, social security, medicare, the birth of the civil rights movement, the women's rights movement (Thank you, Eleanor), and a whole series of other gains that we have lost as the tent got smaller and smaller.

[bigtree]

135. What do confederate flag wavers offer outside of their vote?

Are we buying votes by compromising on our values?
I think that's Dean's main message in his statements that included the rebel flag. Vote for me. Put down your flag and vote for me. We'll pretend that you aren't racist.

I can't wait for the reaction from these racists that he's trying to appeal to.

[tsipple]

144. Plenty!

Poor and middle class white southerners have been shafted by Republicans for 30 years. Yes, many of them put confederate flag decals on their pick-up trucks. Yes, many of them love firearms. Yes, many of them watch NASCAR races.

But many are naturally aligned with core Democratic values: jobs, healthcare, education. Almost none of them are racists. (Whether it's ignorance or not, they don't think the confederate flag has anything to do with racism. Firing someone because she's black is racism.)

Sorry, I'm not going to be a snob in 2004 -- or any other election. If someone with a confederate flag on a pick-up truck wants to vote Democratic because we're on his side for jobs, healthcare, and education, I say, "Welcome to the Party." And so should you.

[bigtree]

181. man

Are all Southerners confederate flag lovers? I don't think they are a majority, notwithstanding the polls on the statehouse flags.
What else will we cede ground on for votes? Does a big tent include everything, everyone? Are there any votes that our party should reject?

What in the world will you stand on when you cede ground to the racists? The flag is racist. I don't accept the bunk that it is a symbol of Southern Pride. It's a symbol of resistance to the Union, to Civil Rights. I frankly don't see anything worth defending about the battle flag.

Also, what does the flag have to do with Nascar or guns?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

69. I disagree

Whether intentionally or not, his comments DID glorify those that display that flag. This is a big problem since Dean should have said what he meant and I doubt he meant exactly what he said.

If he had simply STOPPED with the quote you display, there would be no issue. He didn't.

[WilliamPitt]

72. "Glorify"?

Wrong. He noted the existence. Glorify? Not hardly.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

78. Come on Will..if he said "Those people in whote hoods burning crosses"

Which is the allegory to this crowd would anyone be defending it?

He stopped a sentence too late.

[WilliamPitt]

82. Buuut he didn't say that

Not even close. Nor did he "glorify" anything.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

100. I still want to be the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their

pick up trucks"

It's close enough to be appalling, context or NO context.

[Classical_Liberal]

120. "because there kids need health insurance too!"

many things are appalling when you go out of your way to be appalled.

[Classical_Liberal]

137. Look you thought turning arnold in the groper nazi

was a sure fire vote getter, so I don't see why you impressions are more valid that anyone elses.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

148. It was a sure fire vote getter and DID harm him

and please avoid personalizing this as you are wont to do.

If you support a candidate who uses racist CODE talk to score points and I don't then we simply disagree.

[Classical_Liberal]

165. I also disagree that it was racist code talk

I strongly suspect you do to.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

177. Sorry you are incorrect. If I didn't believe it, I wouldn't say it.

Please try to speak only for yourself.

[KaraokeKarlton]

105. Some people on this site don't seem to understand

that the ONLY way to put an end to fear and lack of understanding and tolerance of each other is to actually make the effort to recognize that as much as people are different, they are the same. Most blacks and whites (and every other racial group) in the south actually care about the same things and have the same concerns. All this race baiting is counterproductive and enables division and avoidance of addressing the issues. Until people start talking and finding common ground, bias and bigotry will exist...on ALL sides. And for the umpteenth time, white people need to stop with the assuming that black voters are too dumb to know what Dean meant. Now THAT is insulting! If that isn't bias and playing into stereotypes, I don't know what is. Dean's comment wasn't racist in any way, shape or form, but the reactions of the other candidates is definitely biased against poor white southerners who like the Rebel flag just because they see it as "anti-establishment" or simply a part of the history and heritage of their region. Why on earth we allow hate groups to hijack the Rebel flag and re-define what it means to be southern is just as serious a question as why we allow the religious right to hijack the American flag and re-define what it means to be patriotic. And some here would call others "morans"? Puhhhleaase!

Okay, rant over...I feel better now. :D

[bigtree]

119. I gotta wonder

what would have happened if Dean had made strong statements against the flag before he went pandering. That's where context could be drawn from. Did he?

I think is no less offensive than Bush courting Jim Jones supporters in the last election.

[tsipple]

130. Um, Dean Did

Dean went to South Carolina and told his audience that he thought they ought to take the confederate flag down from public buildings. (You can find the quote on umpteen threads here at DU.)

That took balls.

[bigtree]

175. Not very convincing

Contex: It was slippery cover for his earlier pandering.

[Cheswick2.0]

128. Will, maybe you should talk to some minority democrats and get a grip

on the issue. Come back when you have done your research.

[Toucano]

133. Not glorify, but affirm

The statement appears to validate their use of a hate symbol.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

136. Thankyou.

This sums up my sentiments.

[Classical_Liberal]

149. Appears that way to you?

For what reason I have no idea!

[WilliamPitt]

150. I think that's a reach

The use of language here is interesting. "Glorify" and "validate." I'd say the more appropriate word is "acknowledge."

[Toucano]

160. Sorry Will, but isn't he trying to "appeal" to them?

Does one appeal merely by acknowledging?

I mean, Bush acknowledged gays when he said he was aware that we're all sinners, but I didn't find it appealing.

[WilliamPitt]

163. This is a circular argument

To my way of thinking, leaving the South to the GOP is a suicide strategy electorally. One must appeal to those voters. In doing so, one must acknowledge some things that are potentially distasteful or enraging. You can call it pandering or use whatever semantics that may apply, but it has to be done regardless. Any short-term distaste will be rewarded in the long term. Is it better to save the South from the GOP so as to bring needed changes down there, or is it better to keep our hands clean and leave that area to rot? You know my answer to that question.

[bigtree]

168. That's like saying all of the Southerners are rag flag lovers

What do you think we would be left with if we divided the racists from everyone else in the South. I'm optomistic. I think the flag wavers are a minority, not worth pandering to.

[curse10]

176. I don't think anyone is saying we need to leave the South to the GOP

But perhaps there is a better way to get their vote? Definately. If this party starts accepting racists into its fold is that really a party we want to be a part of? This is not something that should be included in the "big tent"

[Toucano]

188. I see where you are coming from.

And I appreciate your view.

However, I have heard no one say they intend to leave the South to the GOP. I haven't heard anyone suggest it be left to rot.

You may have heard about the migration to the South.
http://www.msnbc.com/news/987498.asp

Wouldn't it be better for Howard to motivate this segment of the electorate to get out and vote for him? I recognize that sometimes we have to soil our hands, but I don't think this is one of those times. Especially if you consider that the battle flag isn't the only issue we differ with these people on.

[Terwilliger]

56. it doesn't matter

no one will ever convince racists how racist that flag is

Zinn is right in that there are far more important issues, but black folks have to literally FIGHT to be taken as equals in this society. That flag celebrates the subjugation of black people, not nostalgia for southern history.

[dd123]

80. The point is that all of us are spending our time

with a huge debate over a freaking symbol while we ignore the many substantive needs of our citizens.

When we do this, Republicans win, because then we are not debating health care for kids or jobs or tax policy. The Republicans have learned how to distract the populace with these wedge issues so that we are no longer interested in fighting for economic justice.

Apparently, many Democrats also know how to use wedge issues. I find that pretty disgusting.

[Eloriel]

170. You're right, Terwilliger

That flag celebrates the subjugation of black people, not nostalgia for southern history.

But only to those people who have been properly sensitized to the issue.

I've been remembering back to my childhood. I used to absolutely love anything about the Civil War era, including that ole debil rebel flag. I loved antebellum clothing, furnishings, mansions, and I loved stories about the war. My sentiments were with the South -- not because of what the war was fought over, just because I identified with other things about the South during that time. I remember reading in my high school US History book (the ONLY thing I remember from that otherwise totally dreadful, boring class) that there came a time when the Confederacy had to pull up rail from one place to apply it elsewhere in order to try to provision the troops. It broke my heart.

That era has been greatly -- and often inappropriately -- romanticized, probably no more thoroughly than in the South itself. That romanticization isn't JUST about slavery and racism. I still love all that stuff about the Civil War Era South. The difference is I now understand more about slavery and, inevitably, the Confederate flag.

None of that indicates I was a racist. It only indicates that I was not informed or sensitized to the issue of what the war was about, the hell and terror and obscenity of slavery, and what the flag meant.

In truth, it took me well into my adulthood to run across sufficient information about the flag and how African Americans feel about it, and how it's been USED SINCE THEN, to develop a properly negative attitude about it myself.

Just about every week on DU I see things said by DUers that indicates a lack of understanding about racism and sexism that they haven't been introduced to. They haven't been sensitized to the issues to understand how racist and sexist their remarks really are. (Too bad they don't want to HEAR about it and mend their wicked ways, but that's another subject.)

My point is that I know for a fact that there are many people IN the South (and elsewhere) who simply don't understand about the flag (and, like our resident DU sexists and racists, are going to be hard to reach on the subject because they don't particularly WANT to listen and "get it") and that doesn't make THEM particularly racist.

True, the flag has been used and misused by the hardcore racists among us, and it does have an irrevokable connection to slavery, and for that reason should NOT be glorified. But it also represents to many of us (and I'd be among them except for my own education and enlightenment which I can't expect everyone to have had the benefit of) other things about the South as well.

I think one reason the South tends to cling to it is the humiliation of their defeat, including Reconstruction. But that too is a whole 'nother discussion.

So really, Terwilliger, what I'm saying is this: what any symbol represents is what the people who use that symbol AGREE it represents. You (and others) can insist on defining a symbol your way, but that doesn't mean others are necessarily going to accept that meaning. And there are some who don't.

Eloriel

[Zomby Woof]

61. in response to my post in there

I do not intend this to be a "calling out" of another member to incite or inflame. I just never had the chance to reply to a post by Classical_Liberal before the first thread was locked. Which I thank you for locking due to the length.

Reply: Yes, the flag of the Army of Northern VA was flown under Lee's command, and therefore, connected to the CSA, but that wasn't my point. I was merely correcting you when you linked Arkansas's emblem (whether state seal or flag, you were not clear) to that of the ANV flag. (I don't use the term 'Confederate Flag' because it is a misnomer - despite its popular and widespread use.)

I also wondered if you were truly linking support of Clinton or Carter to support of the flag and its racial context, or just being facetious, and I missed it. In case you were serious, then linking Carter or his supporters to the flag, even as that emblem was on the Georgia state flag, is a serious misreading of context and history. Context DOES matter. In the 1970's, the ANV flag was seen by far more (far more than now) of the mainstream as a generic symbol of rebellion or a benign symbol of regional pride. Was the mainstream, largely white and suburban/rural, wrong? Perhaps so, but not out of malice aforethought in all cases. Ignorance or insensitivity? Maybe. The flag is quite literally a mirror of whatever one projects on it, well-meaning or not. Any symbol is. Because it is largely used as a symbol of hate and divisiveness, it should not be taken lightly. But neither should its more benign representations be dismissed trivially. The United States flag is no less complicated depending on what a person (or people) project upon it. It is no less free of baggage and historical context.

I really didn't intend to devote this much energy to the argument. The ANV flag issue comes upon DU every now and then, and there are too many logical fallacies and historical inaccuracies that occur in threads for me to even want to address, that I resign myself to staying out and letting it be.

Suffice to say, whether it's the ignorant racists who defend the flag on those grounds, or many of our liberal cohorts who only see it as a racial symbol, there are errors all around from all sides. But I couldn't sit silently while I perceived a link was being made between support of Jimmy Carter and racial politics. Though I am not a Dean supporter, I find accusations of racism against him equally troubling. I felt his context was closer to populist and class rhetoric, rather than playing the race card. Populism as relating to rural white southerners is a minefield fraught with peril, as he may find out. My comments about his remarks are found in brief in Skinner's poll about the matter.


Edit: typos

[Classical_Liberal]

76. I thought you were just making coversation but I wasn't sure.

.

[Zomby Woof]

96. after reading your posts above

I am not sure we differ all that much on the issue - at least not to a degree that warrants endless debate and expending energy needlessly. At the very least, I got my opinions on the matter out of my system, and am spending the next few hours reading up on the latest from Iraq, and working on my candidate endorsement piece.

Thanks for a civil exchange on what is a very hot-button and emotional issue for many.

[sistersofmercy]

62. Dean said it SO WHAT? Why is this a big issue?

Golly, I haven't been around here much for the past week and this an exciting topic? Whatever! What gets me is that nobody seems to bother with the threads on human trafficking, it happens in our country, in the countries of our allies, 27 million human beings are estimated to be victims of trafficking, majority being women and children (some as young as four years old working in jewerly sweatshops in India) and not many on this board care.
But boy this is an issue to take up! Whatever!

[Terwilliger]

83. sisters...

Why does it not matter? If he'd said we needed to appeal to those young white guys flying the Nazi flag, would it have been ok?

[sistersofmercy]

93. Hey Terwilliger I don't like that flag either but

how can we remedy the ignorance behind the ppl who revere such flags? I believe through an example of tolerance with open discussion and debate. Perhaps I am naive, a Cock-eyed Optimist (song from South Pacific quoted in my sig line)but slamming the door before it can be open isn't going to do anything.

[Classical_Liberal]

102. Here is the difference

There aren't enough people who fly the damn nazi flag in America to swing the election. Even if there were, I would have no problem with Dean telling these numbnuts that they are voting against there economic interests for a shabby race privlage substitute.

I also consider the nazis worse than the rebels because most weren't confused with the states rights buzz, like the South was even during the civil war.

[Cha]

106. What's "nazi flags" and something Dean Didn't say

have to do with what he did say?

[w4rma]

108. Misplaced priorities is partly why I support Dean instead of the others.

Dean has been making this statement in stump speeches for nearly a year, or at least since February. I felt it was precisely on the mark when I first heard it months ago, and I still feel that way.

I see these out of context smears coming from Kerry and Gephardt, two extremely influential Democratic Congressmen, and I think I'm beginning to understand whose fault it is that the Democratic leadership has been so poor in the pase few years.

There are so many important issues going on right now and these two decide to smear Dean again instead of attacking bush on IMPORTANT issues.

[sistersofmercy]

123. OK but to be fair now...

Dean has done a little bashing as well. But I wholeheartedly agree that Kerry and Gephardt should take up the issues not bicker over statements like this.

[madfloridian]

74. Let's just be sure we here keep the pot stirred up.

Right?

He said it in February, he has said it many times. But this time it needs all this attention. Not one person has made an effort to answer my question. WHY? Why now all the fuss?

White folks in the South who drive pick-up trucks with Confederate flag decals on the back ought to be voting with us because their kids don't have health insurance either, and their kids need better schools too."-- Dr. Howard Dean, DNC Winter meeting, February 21, 2003

Maybe the other candidates and the C-Span camera did not hear him then at the DNC meeting? I heard him. I saw him say it. Why are all the candidates jumping on him now? Why not all the other times he has said it.

We need to keep this going here so it will get lots more attention. Or do we? Of course there is nothing else going on of any importance. Nothing at all.

[wyldwolf]

77. Question: If your candidate made a REAL racist comment or action..

...not like Dean's current gaffe (which I don't believe is racist) ... but comments or actions that only the most shameless spinner could deny were racist... would you want to know?

[Classical_Liberal]

84. Yes, but that would go without saying

Since Dean's comments weren't why ask? I really hate it when answer snobs call Clark a war criminal. Why do so many Clarkies engage in smears on Dean?

[wyldwolf]

87. This isn't a smear on Dean.

I plainly said I didn't believe his comments were racist. But thanks for answering my question.

[bluestateguy]

91. Principal Skinner

I think another candidate poll posted by you would be in order in light of the recent developments.

[salin]

104. there was a candidate poll

yesterday. and the day before. Do we need a daily poll? Silly. Always seems to be more about 'gotcha' by one camp at another camp after something happens that is perceived to either bump one guy up, or another guy down.

[boxster]

115. I think he means another semi-official one, linked at the top of GD.

eom

[salin]

124. perhaps - but my observation remains

that these things tend to be called for to try to get a momentary "gotcha" or ones upmanship from each camp over a slew of reasons.

The critique of Clark came out over inconsistencies in (place one of several trumped up controversies)... lets have a poll (re: did the story sway people???)

The story leaked of Kerry and Gephardt ganging up on Dean came out... lets have a poll (re: will this backfire on Kerry and/or Gephardt?)

Or the current scenario...

Seems more like people want DU to become a market research tool to see what is swaying a captive audience of democrats. I don't think that is the purpose of DU.

If instead polls (on the top) were used at regular intervals (rather than in reaction to specific events) then readers get to "see" trends (of DUers, at least) over time.

[boxster]

155. True. And, it's a little early for any of us to be trying to

analyze trends, especially on DU. I like the idea of interval polls.

Re: "gotcha" - yeah, you could certainly be right there. Quick, start a poll while there's negative sentiment about a candidate.

Regarding market research, DU doesn't seem terribly representative of voters. If it were, Kucinich would be doing much better nationally! :7

[Woodstock]

107. Dean always followed up these remarks with racial unity remarks

I've listened to a LOT of Dean's speeches, and he's been using this approach for a long time (as far back as January.) These remarks ("those with confederate flag decals on their pickup trucks should vote Democratic") were directed at white self-named rednecks (now the exclusive domain of the Republicans - Bush harnesses their racial fears and prejudices to get them to vote Republican with talk of "quotas" and "welfare" - and it works, as their votes largely go to Bush.) Dean was trying to get them to see that Bush isn't looking out for them (duh, he's looking after rich people.) And most importantly, Dean always follows up these remarks with comments that working people of ALL races need to work together for better lives. He says that Bush uses these words to divide us, but we should be united. Dean doesn't have a prejudiced bone in his body.

[Zynx]

111. Exactly.

None of these candidates are racist. Hell, I would go so far as to say that there are very few racist elected Republicans out there.

[Cha]

141. I know he doesn't and I'm wondering

what agenda is had by the people who are trying to imply that
he does?

[Classical_Liberal]

151. The DLCers are going to be standing in unemployment lines if he

wins.

[blm]

167. Why? Dean governed as a DLC/Libertarian leaning centrist.

Just because some of you actually BELIEVE his populist rhetoric now, doesn't mean that Dean really is a populist.

[slinkerwink]

112. Gephardt's Hypocrisy on the Confederate Flag Matter

Gephardt Courted White-Rights Group Cited by Lott's Critics

Smelling blood in the water, Democrats and their media sharks have renewed their complaints about Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott's speeches in the 1990s to the Southern white-rights group, the Council of Conservative Citizens.

But there's a reason Democrats stopped pretending in 1999 they were outraged by Lott's visits to the allegedly racist group. That's because top House Democrat Richard Gephardt did the same thing in the early 1980s, when he courted a Missouri chapter of the group's more extreme precursor, the Metro South Citizens Council.

News of Gephardt's ties to the white-rights group was an open secret in Missouri, but the news didn't get any national attention until NewsMax.com followed up on a brief mention of the former House minority leader's CCC ties in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

Here's the March 1999 NewsMax expose that put an end to all the complaining about Republicans and the CCC three years ago:

House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt spoke before a prominent St. Louis white-rights organization during his first run for Congress and attended two of the group's picnics after his election, says Gordon Baum, head of the Council of Conservative Citizens.

Interviewed by NewsMax.com, Baum explained that Gephardt had come to a meeting of the Metro South Citizens Council to debate his primary-election opponent.

"The hall was adorned on one side of the speaker's platform with the Confederate flag, and on the other side was the American flag," said Baum. "And Dick Gephardt addressed the group and asked them openly for their endorsement."

Link can be found here at:
http://www.newsmax.com/showinside.shtml?a=2002/12/16/112750

This also was referenced in the St.Louis Dispatch---are you also going to call it a right-wing paper? Excerpt below from St.Louis Dispatch.

"Gephardt is one of many local officials who dropped by the Metro South Citizens Council's gatherings in the early 1980s," according to a March 7, 1999, report in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

I am merely pointing out that you can't have the kettle calling the pot black in this case. Hypocrisy is everywhere, especially in politics.


"What's madness but nobility of the soul at odds with circumstance?"

[SahaleArm]

131. Desparate...

You're quoting the completely dicreditable newsmax. Go to their home page (http://www.newsmax.com)to view right-wing filth. That quote to the dispatch doesn't tell me much, have a link?

[dsc]

139. Nevermind that the ST Louis dispatch

and his own campaign backs that up.

[SahaleArm]

145. Got a link?

I'll be happy to accept it as fact.

[tsipple]

154. Link As You Request

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/special/gephardt.nsf/0/DA1ED8BF2C9D33C486256D5A0005DD3C?OpenDocument

Here's the section you were looking for:

In 1982, Gephardt and then-Missouri Attorney General John Ashcroft were on the same side of the busing issue when each asked the Justice Department to end mandatory busing in St. Louis.

Gephardt was also one of several local politicians to stop by a 1980 picnic held by the Metro-South Citizens Council, a St. Louis-area organization that described itself as a white-rights group. Years later, he took some heat for the appearance and said he had known nothing about the group's motivations and disavowed what it stood for.

I should say that, in my opinion, with the major exception of this recent attack on Dean (which is frankly despicable), since the mid-1980s Gephardt has had a good civil rights record.

[tsipple]

156. Here are the Three Paragraphs Ahead of Those Two

In 1985, for instance, Gephardt was one of 41 Democrats voting for a budget resolution that would have eliminated cost-of-living adjustments in Social Security checks.

The "big-government liberalism" that defines Gephardt in the eyes of his detractors was scarcely in evidence two decades ago. As a young congressman, he voted against setting up both a Department of Education and a Consumer Protection Agency in the federal government.

Gephardt's opposition to busing to achieve school desegregation was common among members of Congress in both parties. Busing was an emotional issue in many cities, and that was true for Gephardt's largely white district. There, Gephardt had also fought as an alderman against red-lining, the discriminatory practice by some lenders who refused to approve mortgages in minority neighborhoods.

[tsipple]

138. Ooops

Of course, we can look just at Gephardt's recent votes (YEA on Patriot Act, YEA on "No Child Left Behind," YEA on the Iraq War) and wonder. We don't need to go back that far.

Isn't Google wonderful? It's a different world.

[Ambassador Hope]

140. Not one dem can tell you what good it does for the party to attack

Dean on this silly flag issue given all the dems that do nothing about it in their states.

[tsipple]

146. Oh, And Nice Move, Kerry & Gephardt...

...We have hot governorship races in Mississippi, Louisiana, and Kentucky on Tuesday. This junk was SO well timed to help our candidates run for governor. If we win two or three, we take Bush and the GOP down a peg or two.

Way to stay on economic message for them.

(Not!)

[andym]

157. At the debate

At the debate, Dean will liekly will be called on this.

He will likely state that the confederate flag
should not be flown, that it is a racist symbol.
(Hopefully)

Hopefully he'll even do it apologetically.

Because otherwise this issue is likely to
use up all of his time, and alot of the others'
time at the debate, where they could instead
be describing how they'll make america better
(better economy, less racism, more opportunity).


It might drown out Clark, Edwards, and Kerry as well,
which will be another opportunity lost to
further their candidacies.

[quaker bill]

158. Stratagery within a stratagery

No one is more qualified to remove the 'liberal' label from Howard Dean than his Democratic opponents.

Why was Karl Rove salivating for the chance to run against Dean? Because it was going to be 'so easy' to marginalize him as a 'liberal'.

If you haven't noticed, Howard Dean likes having the media focus on him. There were lots of different ways for Dean to have communicated the concept made by the confederate flag reference. Most would not have been notable or gotten much print. This was no mistake, he has trotted out versions of this line before. I have no doubt that this language was used for effect, and I believe he has achieved even more than he set out to do with it.

Let's look at the bigger picture for a moment. Dean came out of the chute sounding all 'liberal', against the war and in Shrubya's* face over it. The DLC was all over him. To competewith his early lead, the entire field moved left. This posed some true complications for Kerry, Gep, and Edwards, who voted for the war and had some serious backfilling to do to get left of Dean. Lieberman saw the trap and did not try. Kucinich was already there, but so few take him seriously that he was never a threat. Graham was never healthy enough or charismatic enough to be a real threat. Clark, while starting out with a mixed record, has now moved firmly left of Dean.

This has left the center free of contenders. Dean's record always indicated that he was likely to run from the center outward. Dean was never a pacifist, he was only against this war because of it patent stupidity, and the obvious lies that were it's basis.

So why would Dean chose to lay down some red meat in front of his competitors? Because they are now left of him and it is in his interest to be attacked from the left. Why? because:

1. It puts him in the spotlight (which he constantly desires) for a negative issue (nearly non-issue by the quote) for which he had already gathered sufficient insulation for his own protection (note: he secured Jesse L. Jackson's endorsement first).

2. By the attack the rest of the field concretes themselves well to his left. (Bonus points from his perspective)

3. By being attacked from the left he makes it that much harder for Shrubya* to hang the 'liberal' label on him later.

The man is simply tacking back to the center and using the other candidates for an assist. Kerry, Gep, and Edwards, had far better claims on the center than Dean did to begin with. Now, thanks to their help he is getting there.

[quaker bill]

159. Stratagery within a stratagery

No one is more qualified to remove the 'liberal' label from Howard Dean than his Democratic opponents.

Why was Karl Rove salivating for the chance to run against Dean? Because it was going to be 'so easy' to marginalize him as a 'liberal'.

If you haven't noticed, Howard Dean likes having the media focus on him. There were lots of different ways for Dean to have communicated the concept made by the confederate flag reference. Most would not have been notable or gotten much print. This was no mistake, he has trotted out versions of this line before. I have no doubt that this language was used for effect, and I believe he has achieved even more than he set out to do with it.

Let's look at the bigger picture for a moment. Dean came out of the chute sounding all 'liberal', against the war and in Shrubya's* face over it. The DLC was all over him. To competewith his early lead, the entire field moved left. This posed some true complications for Kerry, Gep, and Edwards, who voted for the war and had some serious backfilling to do to get left of Dean. Lieberman saw the trap and did not try. Kucinich was already there, but so few take him seriously that he was never a threat. Graham was never healthy enough or charismatic enough to be a real threat. Clark, while starting out with a mixed record, has now moved firmly left of Dean.

This has left the center free of contenders. Dean's record always indicated that he was likely to run from the center outward. Dean was never a pacifist, he was only against this war because of it patent stupidity, and the obvious lies that were it's basis.

So why would Dean chose to lay down some red meat in front of his competitors? Because they are now left of him and it is in his interest to be attacked from the left. Why? because:

1. It puts him in the spotlight (which he constantly desires) for a negative issue (nearly non-issue by the quote) for which he had already gathered sufficient insulation for his own protection (note: he secured Jesse L. Jackson's endorsement first).

2. By the attack the rest of the field concretes themselves well to his left. (Bonus points from his perspective)

3. By being attacked from the left he makes it that much harder for Shrubya* to hang the 'liberal' label on him later.

The man is simply tacking back to the center and using the other candidates for an assist. Kerry, Gep, and Edwards, had far better claims on the center than Dean did to begin with. Now, thanks to their help he is getting there.

[tsipple]

162. Bingo

I totally agree.

Dean just won the bubba vote -- no small feat for a Vermont Yankee.

I'm now waiting for Ronnie Musgrove to blame John Kerry and Dick Gephardt for his defeat in Mississippi if he should lose to confederate flag waving Haley Barbour. Musgrove is trying to run on economic issues, and Kerry and Gephardt just totally botched the message for him.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

161. A great study on the POLITICS of the flag from The U of South Carolina

The Confederate Flag


snip
The Early 1990s: The Search for a Compromise Begins



By late 1993 politicians and business leaders were searching for an acceptable compromise on the flag question. The flag was bringing the state unwanted negative attention and publicity from around the nation. Business leaders expressed their concerns that businesses perceived South Carolina as racist and were choosing to locate elsewhere. Mayor Coble of Columbia expressed support for a compromise, citing some of the same concerns (Brook “Flag compromise,” 1993).


South Carolina’s state-level politicians were divided on whether the flag should keep on flying and how to resolve the ensuing conflict over the issue. African-American politicians such as Senator Robert Ford, who was elected to the legislature in 1993 on a platform of removing the flag, and Senator Maggie Glover, who was the incoming Black Caucus Chair in 1994, favored a compromise that would recognize both African-American and Confederate history, as did Senator Verne Smith, a white Democrat and descendant of a Confederate soldier. Senator Glenn McConnell, a Civil War re-enactor and chair of the Senate Rules Committee, worked with Ford, Smith and others to seek a compromise. McConnell attempted to sell the idea of a compromise to flag supporters in the white pro-flag community, while Ford made similar efforts with flag opponents (Brook “South Carolina Voices,” 1994, A8, 9; Brook “Flag compromise,” 1993, 1A, 8A).


Senator Ford brokered a proposal to replace the Battle Flag with the Stars and Bars, the first Confederate national flag. To McConnell, the Stars and Bars represented South Carolina’s battle for states’ rights, a position that Ford and Senator Kay Patterson, a sponsor of the annual proposals to bring down the flag, felt that they could live with. Other senators opposed making any changes at all (Brook “Flag compromise,” 1993, 1A, 8A). African-American legislators also applied as much pressure as possible to Republican Governor Campbell, trying to force him to state his position on the issue. The governor claimed that he did not have the power to remove the flag (Butler “Rebel flag,” 1993, 1A, 8A). Although Campbell worked unsuccessfully behind the scenes for a compromise, in March of 1994, he expressed his support for flying the Stars and Bars (“Confederate flag debate,” 1994, A10).

snip

Ordinary South Carolinians were also divided on whether the flag should keep on flying. A 1994 survey found that about half of South Carolina voters favored keeping the flag flying over the State House, while about one third favored taking it down (“About half,” 1994, B7). That same year, the question was posed to voters in the Republican primary. Voters there expressed a preference to keep the flag flying by a 3 to 1 margin (Surratt “Poll shows,” 2000, A1, 10). The question had been aimed at stimulating turnout, which it did, but the results made compromise more difficult for Republican politicians.


http://www.usca.edu/aasc/Flag.htm

[Classical_Liberal]

166. I don't understand what your are trying to say

You realize this is being used with great success in the south to wedge white voters to the republicans, but you are mad a Dean for the same observation? The numbers on this issue are massively against us, but you want the weak and impoverished Southern Democrats to fight it rather then get some successes with issues that would be easier to win on. In many southern states there are many large rural areas with no electricity or running water, and this is where you choose to make your stand. It is an issue of priorities. Do your realize this?

I don't get it. Don't you want to win a majority of voters? The truth is that as civil rights issues go this is fairly unimportant because it is just a symbol. It isn't as important as getting dems in office so Black kids can finally get a well-funded school system or anything like that.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

171. You have no right to question my priorities. Please AVOID personalizing.

My discomfort with Dean using this goes to the fact that one wonders what else Howard Dean will dream up in order to appeal to and appease this voter block.

You realize this is being used with great success in the south to wedge white voters to the republicans, but you are mad a Dean for the same observation?

I am NOT mad at him for making the observation, I am uncomfortable with the fact that he used the terms he did to DO IT thereby VALIDATING their use of that divisive symbol.

The numbers on this issue are massively against us, but you want the weak and impoverished Southern Democrats to fight it rather then get some successes with issues that would be easier to win on.

I look at the manner in which the Dem party has taken this tack with other issues such as the environment and women's issues and thus far, it hasn't been terribly successful. If anything, it marginalized that aspect of the base.

In many southern states there are many large rural areas with no electricity or running water, and this is where you choose to make your stand. It is an issue of priorities. Do your realize this?

No. You choose to make it APPEAR as though my priority is a symbol of hatred and slavery versus their well being. I certainly never indicated it was one or the other, but I have grown accustomed to the fact that you will twist others words including my own when it suits you. You did this with Salin above.

I don't get it. Don't you want to win a majority of voters? The truth is that as civil rights issues go this is fairly unimportant because it is just a symbol. It isn't as important as getting dems in office so Black kids can finally get a well-funded school system or anything like that.

Yes I want to win a majority of the voters. I don't think taking and validating a sign of oppression wins African American voters. I might be wrong. Time will tell.

I have NEVER been anti-Dean. I am simply not happy that he went this far rather than stopping a sentence early.

[billbuckhead]

180. The guy from a 97% white state of 600,000 proves he's out of touch

with urban and black voters. Big surprise. America deserves Bush if Dean is the best candidate Democrats can come up with.

[mzmolly]

182. I posted a totally unrelated thread and it was locked?!

May I ask why? Sorry to intrude here, but as I was told to post the issue here, I thought I would ask here.

Though some took the issue off topic in MY thread, the subject matter was not the same. :shrug:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=634876

[Skinner]

184. Unfortunately, your timing was very bad.

The inescapable conclusion is that you were posting that thread because of Dean's comments regarding the Confederate flag.

And those who replied to your post seem to agree.

[mzmolly]

187. To suggest so lends credence to the thought that Deans remarks

were/are racist?! I disagree, I posted the information because Dean has been deemed 'anti-black' due to his positions on gun control and capital punishment.

In fact, I waited a while to do so, to be with in the guidelines.

Your right that some respondents (who don't want to see positive threads about Dean) turned it into the same ugly subject but that is beyond my control.

I am sure Dean bashers alerted the mods in an effort to suppress anything positive about Dean. But, the issue is totally seperate.

[Skinner]

186. I'm locking this thread.

Continue discussion here.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=636191

Skinner
DU Admin