posted on January 13, 2004 08:44:09 AM newAnd you people really want him for President! If he can't take a little pressure now, how would he take the pressure of the highest office.
Dean Lashes Out At Iowa Voter Who Confronted Him on Negative Campaigning
By Jimmy Moore
Talon News
January 13, 2004
OELWEIN, IA (Talon News) -- Democrat presidential front-runner Howard Dean took out his frustration on a voter in Iowa on Sunday by engaging in a distasteful temper tantrum before a group of his supporters.
Dale Ungerer, a Republican from Hawkeye, Iowa who voted for Bush in 2000, was deeply concerned about the negative rhetoric coming from Dean in his speech, including harsh criticism of President George W. Bush on his Iraq policy and the economy.
After Dean finished his speech to the audience at the Oelwein Community Center, he asked the overwhelmingly pro-Dean crowd of supporters if they had any "questions, comments or rude remarks" to make in reaction to what they had just heard.
The 66-year-old Ungerer quickly jumped at the opportunity to speak directly to Dean and share with him his concerns about the campaign being run by the Democrat presidential candidates.
"Please tone down the garbage, the mean-mouthing of tearing down your neighbor and being so pompous," Ungerer urged Dean and his opponents at the beginning of his three minutes of comments. "You should help your neighbor and not tear him down."
Ungerer continued by suggesting to Dean that he and the rest of the field of Democrat candidates should stop dividing the country with "slam, bam, and bash Bush" tactics. Ungerer was loudly booed by the Dean supporters who attempted to silence him.
Dean, who became visibly disturbed by the suggestion that he has not been engaging in relevant debate of the issues during his campaign, reacted first by stating slowly, "George Bush is not my neighbor."
Ungerer quickly retorted by saying, "Yes, he is."
But Dean's propensity for lashing out his anger came to full fruition for all to see as he quickly interrupted the voter.
"You sit down," Dean shouted back at the startled senior citizen. "You had your say. Now I'm going to have my say."
Predictably, the Dean supporters cheered, and Ungerer was not given an opportunity to respond.
Dean repeated his notion that Bush wants to "harm this country" with his policies on the economy and Iraq.
Despite his recent assertion that his religious faith guides his daily life, Dean continued with his tirade by ridiculing the Bible and people of faith.
"It's not the time to put up any of this 'love thy neighbor' stuff," Dean exclaimed. "I love my neighbor, but I'll tell you I want that neighbor back in Crawford, Texas where he belongs."
Dean continued to unleash attacks against Bush and ridicule the Biblical notion of "love thy neighbor."
"That is exactly the problem," Dean quipped. "Under the guise of 'support your neighbor' we're all expected not to criticize the president because it's unpatriotic."
Dean added, "I think it's unpatriotic to do some of the things that this president has done to this country."
Ungerer left the room while Dean was still speaking. Dean mentioned the voter one more time when talking about overtime pay by saying that Bush's policy on that issue is another reason why he "differed with [Ungerer] so vociferously."
After the heated verbal exchange with Dean, Ungerer told reporters that Dean reacted to him the way he did because it fits his character perfectly.
"He put me down definitely because he is who he is," Ungerer said.
Dean has long been accused of being short-tempered by his Democrat opponents and has admitted he needs to be physically restrained from acting out on his temper at times.
"If someone punches me, I am apt to chase them down, and I need to be restrained by the people who know better and have been in the game longer than I have," Dean recently told MSNBC.
The Democrat caucus election in Iowa is on January 19.
"If you believe you can tell me what to think, I believe I can tell you where to go. Not all of us are sheep....."
[ edited by Bear1949 on Jan 13, 2004 08:46 AM ]
posted on January 13, 2004 09:13:29 AM new
And this shows what a really BIG person Dean is.
Dean Feels Heat From Rivals, Shoots Back
Tuesday, January 13, 2004
MOUNT PLEASANT, Iowa — Feeling the heat from the other Democratic presidential contenders just a week before the Iowa caucuses, front-runner Howard Dean said it's time for him to go after his rivals in retaliation for their recent criticisms.
"I'm going after everybody because I'm tired of being the pin cushion here," Dean said Monday.
The former Vermont governor told several audiences that if they want to change Washington, they should not vote for a Washington politician.
But Laura Capps, spokeswoman for the John Kerry campaign, told the Des Moines Register that it "sounds like anger-powered Howard doesn't realize that Al Gore, Bill Bradley and Tom Harkin collectively served in Washington longer than the candidates he is attacking for their service," she said, referring to Democrats who have endorsed Dean.
Dean also singled out rivals Kerry, John Edwards and Dick Gephardt by name for supporting the Bush administration's war with Iraq.
"I want you to remember a week from tonight when you caucus who stood up against that war when no one else would," Dean said at a Monday night spaghetti dinner in Burlington, Iowa.
The comments marked a shift in strategy for Dean, who had been behaving like a front-runner and attempting to shrug off the daily barbs from his rivals. He told reporters last week that he would remain above the fray.
"I think the way to deal with that is not to go back at them because I think that's what voters don't like," Dean said last Tuesday in Iowa. "I think the best way to deal with it is to rise above them and that's what I intend to do."
But Dean did make news this week for not holding in his temper when an audience member at a debate told him to stop trash-talking Bush and other lawmakers.
"You sit down," Dean told the man.
But with the race tightening -- he is in a close competition with Gephardt, a Missouri congressman, for first place in the Jan. 19 caucuses -- Dean apparently feels the need to distinguish himself and answer back. He said Monday that the race is "very close."
A Los Angeles Times poll taken last week of 640 likely Democratic caucus voters in Iowa showed that Dean would garner 30 percent of the vote, Gephardt would get 23 percent, Kerry would get 18 percent, Edwards would get 11 percent and Clark would get 4 percent.
A Research 2000 poll of 404 likely Democratic voters in Iowa last week also showed that Dean would get 29 percent of the vote, Gephardt would get 25 percent, Kerry would get 18 percent, Edwards would get 8 percent and Clark would get 3 percent.
Dean was on the offensive Monday and Edwards was a frequent target. The North Carolina senator was endorsed by The Des Moines Register, Iowa's largest newspaper, over the weekend and observers say that may have pumped new life into his campaign.
Dean pointed out that Edwards voted for the congressional resolution authorizing the Iraq war, as well as for Bush's No Child Left Behind education bill. Edwards now says his vote on the education measure was a mistake.
"Who was the first one who stood up against George Bush? Now everybody is 'Oh yes, I was against George Bush," Dean said in a mocking tone of voice.
"They didn't say much about the war now, did they? They didn't say much against No Child Left Behind either. Who was the one who was willing to take on George Bush when his popularity was at 70 percent?
"Politicians from Washington will tell you all these things. I know one of them says, 'I've only been in Washington three years. I'm not a real Washington politician,'" Dean added. "When you go to Washington, you're a Washington politician."
Although Dean named no one that time, the reference to Edwards was clear. However, Edwards, elected in 1998, has spent five years in the Senate.
Edwards, campaigning in Storm Lake, Iowa, responded by saying that if caucus participants want a candidate "who has been in politics for nearly two decades and is good at sniping at other Democrats, they have other choices, that's not me." Dean got his start in politics in Vermont in 1983.
Meanwhile, Dean also used former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill's charge of pre-emptive war planning by the White House to go after his rivals' position on the Iraq war.
Dean said Kerry, Edwards, Gephardt and former Gen. Wesley Clark supported the war resolution without scrutinizing information from the White House.
Clark made a similar claim to being vindicated by O'Neill's remarks. Clark is running as an opponent of the war, but Dean often notes that Clark said two years ago that he would have voted for the resolution and that there was a connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda.
Despite the harsher tone, Dean also said several times in Monday appearances that although he disagrees with his leading rivals on foreign policy, he will support whoever wins the Democratic nomination to challenge Bush.
"Whatever we get is better than what they've got on the other side," Dean said at the spaghetti dinner.
posted on January 13, 2004 05:22:27 PM newDale Ungerer, a Republican from Hawkeye, Iowa who voted for Bush in 2000,
What exactly is a republican doing at a democratic candidates conference anyway? Oh yes, CONCERNED: "Dont call my friend Bush any bad names you bully!! You're not nice!! You dont love your neighbor!"
Oh please. Republican supporters are the biggest crybabies I've ever seen. Going around masquerading as oh so concerned about thy neighbor adults, no less.
posted on January 13, 2004 05:30:16 PM new
Of course you're right, Bear! What Dean should have done was to relegate Ungerer and others like him to a "Free Speech Zone" as your good buddy Bush does...
edited to put a space in--darn keyboard still hasn't recovered from being cleaned.
Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
[ edited by bunnicula on Jan 13, 2004 05:32 PM ]
posted on January 14, 2004 12:24:21 PM new
Right keep telling yourselves Dean is the man. He;s nothing but a loose cannon with lips that all the other Demo candidates regognize as such.
"If you believe you can tell me what to think, I believe I can tell you where to go. Not all of us are sheep....."
posted on January 14, 2004 03:56:46 PM new
Bear, I dont particularly like Dean if you must know. I like Clark -- but dont know what his chances are of gaining momentum moneywise etc.
The incident posted in this thread just smells of standard republican under-handed political tactics.
posted on January 14, 2004 05:39:51 PM new
As we can see, Bush has nothing to offer. Several Democratic candidates are highly competent and one will win this election with ease.
posted on January 14, 2004 07:22:50 PM new "Bush doesn't have to do or say anything. The Democrats are destroying themselves."
Destruction should be George Bush's middle name. He has taken a surplus economy and reduced it to over a half billion dollar deficit.
He has led the American people to support an illegal war by lying about the justification of that war. Americans are being killed daily because he went to war without a plan and without help from the international community.
Instead of protecting our country from terrorists, we are at war with a country unrelated to the 9/11 terrorism..
Domestic issues have been neglected. Nothing has been done to improve education.What happened to the "no child left behind" plan?
The environment of the United States and the world has been negatively affected because he refused to sign the Kyoto agreement.
The recent drug benefit for seniors was just a subsidy to the pharmaceutical and insurance industry.
And you say now, Bush doesn't have to do or say anything???
I think it's time for him to do something or say something for this country -- something that is not self serving or a perk for his corporate buddies.
What has he done for you, replaymedia? Did the tax breaks for the wealthy benefit you?
Edited to add...
Disagreement on issues within the Democratic party or any other party is not destructive. Debate on issues is healthy and regardless of differences, I believe that any of the leading candidates will represent the people of America much better than George Bush.
posted on January 14, 2004 08:04:20 PM new
"What has he done for you, replaymedia? Did the tax breaks for the wealthy benefit you?"
I've lost so much money since the economy took a nose dive that taxes aren't exactly a problem right now. I don't NEED a tax break with income like mine!
If you think the economy is bad now, look again after terrorists make another successful attack and see how much worse it can get.
But my statement wasn't about Bush. It was about the Democrats destroying themselves.
Did you hear Al Sharton call out Dean on not having a single black member of his cabinet? Dean hemmed & hawed and then finally admitted there were no important blacks in Vermont.
How about the "You sit Down" comment from Dean? This whole campaign HAS been an anti-Bush tirade. STILL None of the Democrats has any positive plans other than simply not being Bush.
I'm NOT pro-Bush, and I don't think Clinton was all that bad either. But I'm certainly not for any of the current Dems. They act like a bunch of short-sighted children.
-------------------
Replay Media
Games of all kinds!
[ edited by replaymedia on Jan 14, 2004 08:23 PM ]
I agree that there has been some silly and contentious jabs among the candidates. But overall, as I said in my edit, disagreement on issues within the Democratic party or any other party is not destructive. Debate on issues is healthy and regardless of differences, I believe that any of the leading candidates will represent the people of America much better than George Bush.
If you had a group of Republican candidates in that kind of debate framework, I believe the disagreements and personality conflicts would be similar.
posted on January 14, 2004 08:29:43 PM new
"If you had a group of Republican candidates in that kind of debate framework, I believe the disagreements and personality conflicts would be similar"
I don't remember this kind of backstabbing in 2000. Some, certainly, but not the constant barrage of verbal attacks between them. They are doing so much damage to each other that NONE of them are going to be able to be trusted or taken seriously by the time the REAL election rolls around.
I really thinks it's time to destroy BOTH parties and simply have a collection of candidates to choose from. Let the three or four most popular ones get on the final ballot and eliminate the whole "party" concept entirely. What we have now is too confrontational.
The Dems are too far left. The Cons are too far right. The Centrists don't have a say in anything without a party to back them. Why not just pick candidates for what they believe in and throw out this party support system?
What'cha say to that?
-------------------
Replay Media
Games of all kinds!
posted on January 14, 2004 08:47:45 PM new
I agree that the Cons are too far right and have managed to completely eliminate the concept of a centrist Democrat. From their perspective, ALL Democrats are left. That's not the case.
And I agree that the verbal attacks are generating negative feelings such as you have indicated.
You certainly have an original idea but in the final analysis that is essentially what will happen. Finally, from two candidates a president will be chosen.
In January 2000, there were only two major Republican candidates for president-- George W. Bush and John McCain. Keyes, Forbes and Bauer were still in the race but irrelevant.
posted on January 15, 2004 05:37:59 AM new
"I agree that the Cons are too far right and have managed to completely eliminate the concept of a centrist Democrat. From their perspective, ALL Democrats are left. That's not the case. "
I don't see how that is the fault of the Republicans- All 9 of the hopefuls are WAY over on the left. It's the Democratic PARTY that causes this. A more middle of the road Democrat cannot get any Democratic support. Zell Miller comes to mind. He's been a Democrat for his whole life, but I believe many Dems now call him a traitor or a Republican.
"You certainly have an original idea but in the final analysis that is essentially what will happen. Finally, from two candidates a president will be chosen. "
Yes- One supported by by each of the major Parties and no one else. What chance do the Greens or Libertarians have? NONE. Even though I believe most Americans would prefer the Libertarian point of view if that option even had a chance of getting the fundng of the other two weenies.
"In January 2000, there were only two major Republican candidates for president-- George W. Bush and John McCain."
I personally voted for McCain and still would. BUT I go right back to my point- thee were only two radically different cancidates for the Republican choice, not NINE. it's about time for 6 or 7 of them to drop out, don't you think?
-------------------
Replay Media
Games of all kinds!
posted on January 15, 2004 09:48:45 AM new
Republican presidential candidates
George W. Bush
John McCain
Alan Keyes
Steve Forbes
Gary Bauer
Orrin Hatch
Samar Alexander
Pat Buchanan
Elizabeth Dole
John Kasich
Dan Quaule
Bob Smith
As you can see, there were only two strong Republican candidates and they moved ahead quickly. With today's Democrats, however there are at least four strong candidates. Have patience!
Kerry is ahead today in Iowa.
I have to go out to photograph a bad roof job. The roofers splattered alluminum coating all around the flashing of a building and then sent me a bill. LOL!
posted on January 15, 2004 10:58:12 AM new
"engaging in a distasteful temper tantrum before a group of his supporters.
Dean, who became visibly disturbed by the suggestion that he has not been engaging in relevant debate of the issues during his campaign...
But Dean's propensity for lashing out his anger came to full fruition
Dean shouted back at the startled senior citizen."
The problem with the above quotes is they are actually editorial comments posing as factual reporting. What is a distasteful temper tantrum? Maybe it is vehemently disagreeing with Bush or just showing a litte emotion. And what is "visibly disurbed?" Maybe a simple show of emotion. Dean "shouted back." Maybe he raised his voice or the microphone was off. What was the decibel level of his comments?
The Bush propagandists will say anything and if it is said often enough and loud enough they think it will be the truth.
posted on January 15, 2004 12:43:20 PM new
I heard the incident on the radio. Dean lost his temper and shouted at the old man, who was calmly making an honest point.
Granted, Dean wasn't expecting anything controversial at a Democratic meeting, but he most certainly was taken off-guard.
Listen to the segment of the speech and draw your own conclusions. I really don't know about a "propensity for lashing out" but the rest of the article was dead-on correct.
Just listen to it for yourself. There has to be a clip on the net somewhere.
-------------------
Replay Media
Games of all kinds!
posted on January 15, 2004 02:13:38 PM new
Talon News is a Conservative Republican Newspaper. You should be able to see based on unsupported and sensational word choice that this is not representative of Dean.
I can go through the article and point it out.
Just one example...
Dean simply said, "Bush is not my neighbor".
That statement was construed by this reporter to mean, ""Dean continued to unleash attacks against Bush and ridicule the Biblical notion of "love thy neighbor."
If I said to you, Hitler is not my neighbor, could you interpret that to mean that I had unleashed an attack against Hitler and by doing so, ridiculed the Biblical notion of "love thy neighbor."
posted on January 15, 2004 02:31:09 PM new Dean said, "I love my neighbor, but I'll tell you I want that neighbor back in Crawford, Texas where he belongs."
I agree with that along with millions of other Americans.
Dean said, "Under the guise of 'support your neighbor' we're all expected not to criticize the president because it's unpatriotic."
I agree with that too. Dam the number of times that I and many people here have been ridiculed and called unpatriotic because we are critical of Bush policy.
Dean said, "I think it's unpatriotic to do some of the things that this president has done to this country."
AMEN to that!!!
But guess how those good statements were interpreted by the writer of this article...
"Despite his recent assertion that his religious faith guides his daily life, Dean continued with his tirade by ridiculing the Bible and people of faith." "Dean continued to unleash attacks against Bush and ridicule the Biblical notion of "love thy neighbor."
posted on January 15, 2004 03:31:32 PM new
The only rude and angry fellow at the campaign rally was Mr.Ungerer.
We don't need to use inflamatory words, such as tirade, distasteful, temper tantrum, visibly disturbed, lashes out -- and we don't need to state baseless opinions to illustrate that Mr Ungerer was rude and angry. We can just read a couple of his remarks.
