How The Democrats Took Paul Hackett Out - Mother Jones

<snip>

Democratic Senate candidate and Marine Corps Major Paul Hackett is accustomed to waging quixotic battles and taking his hits. He just didn’t expect the lowest—and fatal—blows to come from his own party.

In an announcement that stunned many in Washington and even some in his campaign staff, Hackett declared on February 13, 2006, that he was dropping his bid for U.S. Senate in Ohio, ending his 11 month political career. “I made this decision reluctantly, only after repeated requests by party leaders, as well as behind the scenes machinations, that were intended to hurt my campaign,” he said, only hinting at what had gone down behind the scenes. The day after his withdrawal from the race, he told me about the backroom battles that forced him out.

Hackett was running against seven-term Akron Democrat Rep. Sherrod Brown in a May primary, with the winner going on to face two-term Republican Sen. Mike DeWine in November (assuming DeWine wins his own primary against a longshot Republican challenger). DeWine is considered one of the most vulnerable incumbent Republicans, and the national Democratic Party is pulling out the stops to defeat him.

But first, the Democrats had to get Hackett out of the way. The weapons used in the rubout included economic sabotage, whisper campaigns, and threats.

<snip>

More: http://www.motherjones.com/news/update/2006/02/hackett_drops_out.html

Now I'm gonna get behind Sherrod Brown, but...

Let this episode BE THE LAST time we backstab one of our own. If we can't run aboveboard campaigns, we don't deserve to be in power either!

:mad::nuke::mad:

.... because the "liberals" on this board have transmogrified into "pragmatists" so they can excuse this sordid little mess.

Our party can get down and dirty with its own members but when confronted with a Republican they fold like the fucking paper napkins that they are.

Now just why is that, pray tell?

I to have watched as the apologists around here try to spin this piece of crap maneuver into something positive. When in fact it is just slimy in my estimation.

see in Repukes we hate is in some Dems we know. It's those people in power in both parties that must be overcome.

I'm one of the "lefty" crowd around here, like Hackett a lot, and think that what was done to him was bullshit of the highest order. And frankly, if I was voting in Ohio, I would probably go Green in the Brown race out of sheer spite.

So please, no blanket condemnations. I've seen many, many leftists on this board these past few days condemning this move by our so called leadership.

on the board, not all liberal Democrats. I'm afraid that the sentiment you expressed ("if I was voting in Ohio, I would probably go Green in the Brown race out of sheer spite") is shared by thousands in Ohio and it is likely to lead to the re:puke:s gaining the House seat Brown is abandoning to run for Senate to be followed by a win for DeWine. :grr:
And this is "our side".

out on the corrupt election system in Ohio. One would think with the GAO Report on Electronic Voting coming out, the evidence gathered from past OH elections would have motivated our party to act, but unfortunately not. there are many election reformers who believe that the only way to overcome this corruption is a huge win-which means a candidate that can draw from both sides of the aisle. * is at a 60% disapproval rate in Ohio right now, but this number doesn't unfortunately cross-over to Dewine.

re:puke: party. I swear, they are the same as the re:puke:s, "if I can't win, then nobody wins". IMO, if you strip away all of the Democratic-Republican, Liberal-Conservative bullshit, all you have left are the Ruling Elite and the rest of us. They are on the same side and it isn't ours.
Our time will come.

I'll kick this damn thing all night if I have to.

Tell me this is right.

I dare you.

Rove's political playbook, no???

Wow...the moral high-ground my ass!!!

:argh:

these party insider creeps need to just butt out of decisions that voters should be making. That's what primaries are for! I'm most disappointed with Waxman, he should have known better! Anyone listen to David Sirota on Hartmann's show yesterday? Geez.... he sounded like such an insider. And I'm still trying to process the fact that Thom agrees with him!

x(

Compare the $ raised Hackett v. Brown:

Open Secrets for the 2006 cycle:

Total Raised and Spent
2006 RACE: OHIO SENATE
Mike DeWine (R)
Raised: $6,107,495
Spent: $2,505,310
Cash on hand: $4,290,763
Last Report: 12/31/2005

Paul Hackett (D)
Raised: $1,334,881 *
Spent: $1,079,946
Cash on hand: $254,933
Last Report: 12/31/2005

Sherrod Brown (D)
Raised: $817,932 *
Spent: $551,785
Cash on hand: $2,368,982
Last Report: 12/31/2005

Do you have a link for this?

This may well shoot down one of the biggest arguments against Hackett staying in the race - but let's see where this goes.

http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.asp?ID=OHS1&Cycle=2006

But I'm sure you'll hear what counts is what is available. It does however indicate how viable Hackett was. Perhaps he needed a beter finance advisor.

money yet documented at opensecrets.org ... one minute it's Hackett has only raised $200K until that's proved false ... then, it becomes cash on hand (as if that should matter) or latest fund raising ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2466556#2466841

I appreciate your researching opensecrets.org for the contribution facts ... I used that data in that thread.

Brown's cash-on-hand is money carried over from House campaigns ... it's been growing over time ... it's no wonder he has $2M sitting around ... that kind of left-over money (it's not like he's had any struggle winning his district) ... it's part of the system which makes it difficult for newbies ... especially those who might not fit the good ol'boy network's mold ... even symbolically ... to get a foot in the door ...

Having a campaign funded by rank-and-file citizens against Big Money might play contrast against incumbent Democrats swilling in Big Business PAC money ... couldn't have that ...

I want to win the Senate and Ohio, too, but not with shades of backroom politicking by a committee of 3, circumventing the DNC/Chair/rank-and-file, pre-empting the will of the people ... such shenanigans is not much different than Bu$h-Rove-Cheney hand-picking Coleman to run in Minnesota.

than Hackett? Seems that Hackett's only problem is that he didn't have a 'war-chest'. That could have been fixed if he was the candidate, by grassroots donations and some backing from the party.

I thought they were on the outs because of their election stance.

It's that sometimes the messenger is vilified if they do not report what we want to hear, as with the election reform issue. Hence the snark.

So now they're okay to report on. :eyes:

Thanks, LittleClarkie. :)

and then make a judgement.

Wouldn't that be the way to go on this one?

If those things in the article are true, and people STILL find nothing wrong with what happened, then we are in far deeper shit than even I imagined.

if the facts are true? How does one judge the trueness of facts they're newly being introduced to, unless one judges the source first.

But my comment was not about trusting Mother Jones as a source. It was about how they were villified when they didn't cough up a report about the election that was what people wanted to hear. I would just wish that people could back up and be more objective in their judgement of a source. One might disagree with a report if one has additional info that the source didn't have. But that doesn't make that source invalid overall.

Wait, you mean some people on here are like, schizophrenic or something? :) :) :) :)

... is a collection of journalists not a mom.

Any given journalist might arrive at conclusions or opinions we disagree with, but we have to look at the editorial staff and decide if overall we think the publication makes every attempt to be reputable.

There isn't anything here I hadn't already heard, and personally, I think it is probably more or less true.

Or lack there of?

to this election fraud articlewould be great. So maybe i can see for myself what you're talking about. I've always loved MOJO... i think they're the BEST (hands down) investigative magazine. I don't agree with all articles, but i learn something new each issue. And hey David Goodman (brother of Amy) wrote this one and he Rocks!

peace out
peace in

some of the best investigative journalism in the country

Hence the snark as to their going in and out of style with some folks depending on if they're hearing what they want to hear from them. I can disagree with a report without trashing the publication itself.

voters and party leadership should let all viable dem candidates have a chance and leave it up to the primaries. I guess big money plays an important role to many of our fellow progressives on this forum. It doesn't seem to matter that Hackett has proven he can get cross votes from the other side.

I mean, don't you know that Chucky Schumer knows best, and Sherrod Brown had lots of money and everything!!!!

The fact that he won't be able to draw flies south of Columbus has nothing to do with anything anymore.

But don't listen to me - I'm just one of those cynics, you know.

crossed over to the dark side. I went to grad school in Cinci, and have had residence in rural Ohio, as well. Although I now live in Columbus, I think I have an understanding of the demograpics on my state. Paul Hackett appealed to many in areas outside of urban metropolitan areas. Just look how well he did in the district 02 (went 70% for *) race.

What is happening is that people are so eager to defend Sherrod Brown (whose Congressional record, BTW, is outstanding) that they fail to look at the simple fact that he CAN"T win a state-wide race.

When one merely tries to bring up the fact that Hackett can pull votes from people that Sherrod Brown can only dream about getting we get accused of being all kinds of things.

You know Ohio, and I know Ohio. Sadly, not a lot of other folks on here do, and that is going to cost us dearly.

I went to OSU, lived in Columbus after graduation, have in-laws who live in the belly-of-the-beast southern Ohio, and get back there on a fairly regular basis. I also was a precinct captain in Columbus (161/Karl Rd. area) during the '04 election.

caveat: Brown can win if Bush is PROVEN to have broken the law, and finds himself in trouble a la Nixon.

own dime to help GOTV. It will be a glorious day when justice catches up to Blackwell. We will be holding one hell of party then.

We little folk should just be quiet and let the 'pros' decide all this for us...

That is what I was trying to say in the post I made in GDP, "you have to run twice." My point is that who wants to bother if the party leaders squash you like a bug.

:hug:

It is nice to see a great MoJo article clarifying the situation.

I refuse to back down over it!

What they did was wrong and Hackett has every right to be pissed, the voters of Ohio should be pissed. (if you aren't .. well .. you will be come Nov.)

Those, like myself who loved this man's honesty and found it refreshing, and wanted representation to at least the primaries. But he has been swift boated ALL day long on this board.

It's reprehensible behavior and inexcusable.. I was plainly just appalled by what I saw here .. and has much as we accuse the RW of having talking points. Man did I see them fly all around here today, 80 percent of them were utter bullshit.

was all of the big names that were throwing that bullshit. I recognize this is party UNITY time... but you're right...there were threads yesterday that were apalling. "It's politics... if you don't like it, get out of the fire/you shouldn't be in it", when we decry every instance of Rethug tactics like this. His "warchest" is larger... well, yeah money is important, but had Hackett won the primary the money would've come. Brown IS a good candidate. But i think that is beside the point. What the folk here were getting upset about was the underhandedness. OUR guys are playing dirty pool... with a candidate that really struck a chord with people. This was not "politics as usual" for a lot of people. Not recognizing that or downplaying it will only make the people who are outraged even angrier. The only resolution i can see is if Hackett, Brown, Waxman, Schumer and Reid all got up on a podium to talk about how they are all going to WORK TOGETHER to lead us to a majority in at least ONE freakin house. It would help too if Waxman, Schumer and Reid talked about the state of power politics and denounced what they had to do in order to get the "best" candidate to run. To me the most shameful aspect of this is Hackett's statement that he won't try to run again for a political office. To me that is his failure... and the failure of a system that would make sucha good man so disillusioned.

I still think they are going to put him up as VP in '08 though (scoff if you want, we'll see)....

I understand that primaries are the time to hash things out within states and to let the voters within that state decide. I've seen how you've been smacked around and I'm sorry.

one thing to legitimately make contrary points, but attacks are unneccessary. I'm tough though. You should have seen/heard me protest out in front RNC HQ in Ohio recently. ;)

I am disgusted and appalled. I feel like giving up...
When we beg and plead our party leaders to grow spines and play hardball I think most of us mean against the REPUBLICANS.

Things keep getting worse on almost every front.

Yep, and people want to change DC by giving up? So how would it be if Howard Dean gave up politics? Or Wes Clark? Or Dennis Kuicinich? Cynthia McKinney? Please, you don't change things by rolling over for ANYBODY. And Hackett did that.

LOL ok ok, I get it and I don't "roll over" for ANYBODY but you can't blame people for being disheartened. It was a shock to hear about such unredemably LOATHSOME tactics being used to squeeze out someone I believed in and by people who should KNOW BETTER. (again re: Dean 2003)

He didn't stay in the fight himself and he didn't give the voters a choice. Imagine if people like Kerry, Edwards, Kennedy (Ted and Bobby), Clark and even Dean rolled over and dropped out of politics because of things that happened to them. If you can't play with the members of your own party how are you going to play with the big boys like Specter?

what Jean Schmidt tried to do to Murtha ~ in an attempt to silence him, she was willing to characterize a man who had risked his life on the battlefield, as a coward. It didn't work for her, and it won't work now. That kind of tactic is what disgusts decent people about the right.

When they did it to Max Cleland and to John Kerry, we condemned it. What changed? Are things so desperate that the left is now trying to cover up, as the right does, what was a disgraceful, sneaky betrayal of a good Democrat, by attempting to bully people into 'getting over it'?

If we are to 'move on' the best tactic would be to stop trying to cover up a gross mistake (and it's apparent now that it was, judging by the split it has created in this party) and admit it was a terrible mistake, apologize to Paul Hackett and his supporters, instruct THEIR supporters to stop the attacks on Hackett, promise not to do it again, and then we can focus on the future.

Paul Hackett has been a better person in all of this ~ we have heard NOTHING from Chuck Schumer, Reid, or Brown ~ while he has said he will support Brown and all democrats who are running for office. Maybe it's time for them to adress this controversy. I intend to call Schumer's office tomorrow to ask him for his side of this story, but I doubt I will get an answer. He rarely responds to us little people ~

How? HE dropped out of the race! He's a big boy isn't he? So why didn't he stand up and tell people to fuck off (maybe not those words but still same concept)? He's been a better person? How by rolling over? By quitting? Sorry but I don't like quiters. Imagine if John Kerry stud down when Richard Nixon was going after him spying on him and looking on his records and sent John O'Neil after him. Do you think he would've accomplished all he did? I thought he was a fighting democrat but he isn't. All talk no bite.

that we are on opposite sides of this issue, but with all due respect, I have to completely disagree.

I'm not sure who, but someone accused Hackett of war crimes and atrocities while serving in Iraq less than 2 years ago. My husband served over there around the same time as Hackett and he had to move dead bodies and do many other things that are part of war, but also damaging to any person's mental state. He still has nightmares about some of the things he had to witness. It's only been in the last 6 months that we don't have to hit the ground when a car back fires. All of this is still very fresh for Hackett and his family. It wasn't over 30 years ago, it was less than 2. It takes time to heal from something like this. It is not just about Hackett fighting either. He has a wife and small children who would face the ridicule. We are talking about a conflict that is still going on and Hackett and his unit are scheduled to return to Iraq this year. Can you imagine the uproar something like this would cause for Hackett and his unit??? Even if it were a repuke whisper campaign, he was left on his own by his own party. The Dems should have stood by his side, but they made it clear they were not, even after they had asked him to run. If my husband were in that same situation, he would have done the same thing because he would have never let his family go through something like that without any support from his "friends".

John Kerry was attacked by the opposition and had support from his own side. Paul Hackett was attacked by both sides and had no support. Big difference.

I feel like crying at the support these vile tactics, worse than what Rove did to Democratic veterans, are getting from people I used to respect. We condemned them when the right did it, I just don't understand it. :cry:

disagree on this issue and I wanted to offer another perspective about why Hackett would have dropped out of the race. FreedomAngel seems to be a really good and genuine person to me.

I think that all of us are sometimes guilty of holding people to certain standards that if we were in the same position, we probably couldn't handle either and come to the same decisions as they did.

I do really appreciate your support and I am disappointed that so many have not stood their ground on the dirty tactics regardless of the party who is guilty of using them.

The really sad thing for me personally is that I probably would have supported Brown more than Hackett based on the issues, but now I have such a sour taste in my mouth that I will probably do nothing with regard to the Ohio race for Senate. I'll send my $$$ to other races. There are other good Dems running in tight races, that have me on their e-mail list asking for donations so I'll send my little bit of money to them.

Thanks and it's good to meet you. :hi:

I usually agree with her quite often.. very often

But on this issues i've found us on opposite sides of the fence spitting at one another.. that's just plain ugly.

I've come to accept there are just times on Du when we will never see eye to eye on a subject. Perhaps that is our weakness?

We are not lock and step thinkers, nor morals the tent is large therefor always open thus more ideas and conflicts enter.

Perhaps we should ALL work on our tolerance for one another.

I think you set a perfect example peacebaby

It seems to be BOTH Brown and Hackett were "victims" of this. Brown was encouraged by others to run because from what I understand Hackett didn't file for his candiacy on the date people usually do. I have not seen any proof Brown himself was involved. From what I have heard of Brown it doesn't seem like something he personally would do.

it came across as I was holding Brown responsible for the "whisper campaign", that was not my intention. There are some who have accused his campaign of being involved, but I have seen no evidence to back that up. I don't know who is guilty, but it is true that it happened and that the party leadership did not stand up and back Hackett. They made it quite clear that Brown was their man (after they had asked Hackett to run) and even worked behind the scenes to try to keep Hackett from raising money and there is evidence to back that up. They would have let the repukes attack him for war crimes and atrocities while also working against him in other ways. That's horrible and nobody would be able to take that kind of punishment. Hackett didn't stand a chance under those circumstances even if he had told everyone to f*ck off and stayed in the race. He and his family (and his unit)probably would have had to endure things that none of us could imagine with regard to the public ridicule. They might have been able to stand it if they had support from their own party, but they wouldn't have support from anybody. He also might not have any money to respond to the allegations because certain "politicians" were working to keep big donors from supporting his campaign.

I agree that if he was not involved that Brown is definitely a victim as well. If he had a chance of winning in Ohio, this could ruin his chance. I feel bad for him, but I can't be sure what his involvement was so I will send my support and money to people I have more confidence in. Hopefully, he and others will speak out about what went on and clear the air because I have heard nothing from any of them.

If it was people associated with his campaign, he has to take the blame...they work for him.

I should clarify, when I said 'people I used to respect', I meant Reid in this instance, and some people here that I came to think of people who would automatically condemn tactics that appear to be carbon copies of those they condemned when Republicans did it.

They do not address the tactics, they attack Hackett ~ and attack anyone who tries to point out, as you did, why his choice was the only one he could make, considering what he was dealing with.

It actually took more courage for him to do that, imo, than to go forward, run up bills, destroy his family (and we know if they would lie about him, these were not people who would balk at attacking his family and he hadn't even faced Republicans yet) and as you pointed out, subject his Unit to charges of war crimes coming from vicious, hateful people with zero principles, caring only about winning. That kind of winning, is not winning, and he mature enough to know that. There are better ways to serve your coungry.

'What does it profit a man if he gaineth the whole world, but loseth his immortal soul'. Hackett made the right choice, the only one a man of honor could make.

I admire him more than ever to be honest and all this has done has cast a real shadow over what should have been an exciting year, because now it is not just Republicans we have to worry about, this makes me wonder what say the people will have in any of the elections. The bad judgement also, is stunning and will most likely lose support for Brown as long as he is in any way, associated with this ~

No matter who did that was quite wrong, nobody is denying that, but in the end HACKETT is the ONLY ONE who is incharge of his campaign. NOBODY else told him to quit. HE is the only one in the end who quit. In October of 2005 he told a Ohio newspaper that "I'm in the race now and I'm not going anywhere." Gee, whatever happened to that? It seems to me that Mr. Hackett needs to learn about peer pressure and how to handle it if he's going to play with the big boys. If he can't handle pussycats like Reid and Schumer how in the hell is he going to stand up to Specter, Sessions, Santorum etc?
He could've told whoever was all involved with this to fuck off and let the people of Ohio be involved in the primary but he rolled over. This, again, reminds me of how lots of Christian's I know who go around and do something and say "oh the devil made me do it!" It's all about personal responsibility. It's Hackett's campaign. Not anybody else's. Imagine if John Kerry rolled over after he had two failed political runs with Congress and the Senate. Imagine if he rolled over with BCCI and Iran/Contra. What about Howard Dean? If he gave up after his failed presential run he might not be in the job he's at now. So in my opinion while I do like Hackett and agree with him on a lot of issues (yes even on guns and halfway there with immigration) he needs to learn how to fight and not just bark.

was when Brown entered the race. The "I'm not going anywhere" comment was related to that.

It would be hard to Carry on if people who asked you to enter the race suddenly were asking to you resign from the race.

Dean even admitted Hackett had pressure to leave the race. Hackett bowed out


Now FA.. we've wrestled this quite a bit. But lets change things for a min so you can see from our perspective. It's always important to view through another's eyes.

I see you have a Kerry picture. I love Kerry, he also said he won't go anywhere until all the votes were counted. What happened?

We both know he was pressured by party insiders to abandon his word for the "good" of the party.

So please please stop bashing Hackett on this front. It's ugly and so beneath your character that we admire.

We both know Hackett has no problem standing up "leadership" or even Specter or any other bully. He called the RW party full of christian fundamentalist (something I am nearly positive is why you dislike him so much) who were ruining this country. He was asked to rescind that statement, he refused. He called Bush a son of a bitch. He called people like Pat Robertson the reason this country is in the state that it is(manipulating decent christians into voting against their best interest.) He has said nothing that we haven't said here in DU.

Looks to me like he was paying attention. So can we just let it go?

it's all about peer pressure. Once again only Hackett had control over his campaign. If he can't stand little pussycats like Reid and Schumer how is he going to handle the big boys like Specter? The thing people, including myself, liked about Hackett was he appeared to be a fighter. When the peer pressure came on he bowed out. He should have told Reid, Schumer and whoever else was involved to butt out of Ohio politics, since they aren't from Ohio, and to let the people decide. But he didn't do that now did he? And if you keep up with election fraud Kerry does have a lawsuit in Ohio for August of this year. So he hasn't gone anywhere. Uh excuse me but when did I ever say I did not like Hackett? I like him fine and I like him calling people out. I am a Christian but I DO NOT like the fundamentalists who want to act like little dictator wannabe's and make my country a religious theocracy. My great uncles didn't die in WWII fighting Nazi's for that to happen! I'm not bashing Hackett. I'm telling it like it is. Hackett couldn't handle peer pressure. All bark and no bite. When his test came he failed. Anybody can call Bush a son of a bitch. Hell, I do it all the time! I call him all sorts of name's but who gives a damn about name calling. I want someone who will fight. Imagine if Kerry gave into peer pressure with BCCI. Nobody wanted him to do it including fellow democrats. They all pressured him not to but he still did it and closed them down. So it seems to me like Mr. Hackett could learn something from people like John Kerry, Howard Dean, John Edwards, Wes Clark, Cynthia McKinney (that's for damn sure!) and Dennis Kucinich for example.

lyrics from one of his songs:

Sometimes I feel I know strangers
Better than I know my friends
Why must a beginning
Be the means to an end
The stones from my enemies
These wounds will mend
But I cannot survive
The roses from my friends

In other words, I can stand up and survive anything thrown at me by my enemies, but when my friends back stab me it is much harder. Roses are beautiful, but they have thorns. Hackett's own party were his thorns and that is devastating for anyone. That's the difference here and I have never heard of the party ever working to keep any of the people you mention off the ballot.

Peace.

yet your still displaying a picture of him. I love Kerry but we both know he was pressured by party insiders to roll over too.

Kerry still has a suit in Ohio for August 2006.

he rolled over.. he has a suit?

Far as I know the Green party was the one fighting in Ohio.

Was here there to contest the election results? No.. Ms. Boxer slugged that fight out for him.


A scant few hours after that, Kerry left tens of thousands of volunteers and millions of voters hanging. With Bush apparently leading by some 130,000 votes in Ohio, but with a quarter-million votes still uncounted here, Kerry abruptly conceded. He was then heard from primarily through attorneys from Republican law firms attacking grassroots election protection activists who dared question the Ohio outcome.



But those committed to democracy and horrified by the on-going carnage of the Bush catastrophe still have no credible explanation as to why Kerry abandoned ship so abruptly. He had raised many millions specifically dedicated to "counting every vote," which clearly never happened in Ohio. More than a year after the election, more than 100,000 votes are STILL uncounted in the Buckeye state.
http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1556

I didn't see anything with Kerry having a lawsuit except this

Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) was reported to be filing a brief in federal court in relation to the activities of Triad and events in Hocking County, where serious questions have arisen as to the integrity of the recount. Kerry previously circulated a letter to all 88 counties requesting information on how the vote was conducted. The Kerry campaign raised millions of dollars from grassroots supporters with the promise that "all votes would be counted." But the Democrats are not known to have helped fund the legal work of the Green and Libertarian Parties and their grassroots Election Protection supporters, who have raised the money for the shoestring campaign that has kept the legal challenges alive thus far.


My point is I feel it's hypocritical for you to be attacking Hackett in every post. You may have nothing against him, but it sure seems like you do.

How committed was Hackett to politics? NOT VERY MUCH!

Another shill that think a Democratic Oligarchy is better than a re:puke: Oligarchy.

I'm sick that this happened to Paul Hackett, but I hope everyone will take a deep breath, get behind Sherrod Brown, and work towards building a new Democratic party from the grassroots up.

Historically, we've seen things like this happen, and we've gotten mad, walked away, voted for third party candidates, or stopped voting all together.

Look what happened with LBJ. Rightfully, Democrats pressured LBJ on the Vietnam war, but then they protested Humphrey. Looking back, that didn't do the country any good at all, 'cause then, we got NIXON! Sometimes, a little bit of what we want is better than losing everything.

This time, we have to stay with the party, and change the party culture from the ground up--starting with Precinct chairs, school board and on up. Work inside the party to make it more progressive, and more welcoming to people like Paul Hackett.

Stay with the party, everybody, and keep your eyes on our long-range goals.

that long.

No way I'd "get behind" Sherrod Brown after reading his campaign's non-denial denials about the whispering campaign against Hackett -- and ugly it was, too. Worthy of Rove himself.

incase no one saw this from a previous du'ers post it about sums it up




I think given a bit of time to vent people will fall in-behind Brown, but its gonna take a little bit of time.

Right on the money.

"This time, we have to stay with the party, and change the party culture from the ground up--starting with Precinct chairs, school board and on up. Work inside the party to make it more progressive, and more welcoming to people like Paul Hackett."

It's pie-in-the-sky. Every time a progressive breaks out, we CUT THEM OFF AT THE KNEE!

We have already lost ONE FULL ELECTION CYCLE waiting for an implosion
that will never happen.

If Dean leaves the DNC, I'm going third party.

I'll put renewal on my to do list. :kick:

Unfortunately, I've gone from the frustration, through anger, right through apathy and have arrived at humor with regard to my opinion of our party's inability to get anything right. Yeah, Hackett is a firebrand, but throwing him under the bus? WTF is this party doing anymore? It's almost like your alcoholic gambling uncle who just can't stop being drunk and broke. *shakes head*

Oh well...I guess I should get ready for the Obama sabotage that is inevitably next.

... they are not going to do jack to Obama, because he is as status quo as it gets.

push paul hackett over board, then try to sink christine cegelis with a vet whose wounds make her immune to criticism. she ain't quitin', tho.
piss down my back and tell me it is raining.
:nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

On what possible facts do you base that assertion?

and Brown's people were "whispering" the rumor that Hackett committed war atrocities in order to try and discredit him, then he is a phony and no better than rove and that group of souless hacks-- IMO.

... with the whisper campaign, "phony" isn't close to describing how awful he is.

The Republicans? (Not being sarcastic, I'm just wondering if you have an opinion on that.)

Should Brown be held to a different level of proof than we hold the repugs to? What's right about that?

"...suspected the smear was being floated by Sherrod Brown’s campaign."

SUSPECTED. No proof is there?

one: I apologise if my original post seemed misleading that was never my intention.
two: I also made note in my header "If..."

Like it or not, it is something that can potentially dog Brown's campaign. "Whisper campaigns" are not that uncommon by either party (I can name three campaigns I worked with that used them). The only time they really ever become damaging to a candidate is when they are talked about openly.

I think Mr. Brown has two choices
1) He either addresses this and puts it to bed completely
2) He says nothing and hopes it all blows over.

I haven't heard of anything.

stand up and show the courage to totally condemn these Rovian tactics within the Democratic party, then imo, he will lose a lot of support. People are sick to death of this kind of despicable politics and unless he shows he opposes it, he will be associated with it.

As it is, he will not get the support that Hackett had, financially I mean, from people outside the state ~ and since Dewine already has millions of dollars more than he does, he is now at a disadvantage.

Aside from the disgusting tactics, and the high road taken by Hackett now, just financially, I don't see how Brown has a chance against the Republican money machine. It makes you wonder, did someone want Dewine to win?

Also, I just saw a report on the funds raised by both Hackett and Brown and contrary to what was posted here yesterday, Hackett raised quite a bit more than Brown ~ that is not a good sign for Brown either. He'll need lots more than he has right now to bead Dewine.

We'll see if he, Reid and Schumer (although I wouldn't expect Schumer to apologise for anything) stand up and condemn whoever did this. If it was someone in Brown's campaign he needs to fire them immediately

Since they have already committed the stupidest political blunder that one could poosibly make, they will now pour money down a rat hole in hopes that the rats have all left for the day.

They can't afford to have him lose, and if (when?) he does they can say "But we used all of our available resources. The people of Ohio have spoken."

And then go off and screw someone else in favor of someone "whose time has come."

Hackett backers suspected the smear was being floated by Sherrod Brown’s campaign. A senior Brown staffer angrily dismissed the charge this week as “ridiculous.”

Brown campaign spokesperson Joanna Kuebler declined to respond to the rumors. She offered this prepared statement: “This campaign has never been about Paul Hackett or about Sherrod Brown. This campaign is about the hard working people of Ohio, and what Republican corruption has done to them.”



If that's not the wimpiest, most Republican-sounding prepared statement I've ever heard, please don't show me worse.

This article has made me more enraged than before. Thank Heaven Hackett had the cajones to speak up about it. May that be the beginning of a permanent end to such shenanigans and anti-democratic maneuverings.

Oh, and fuck Schumer all to hell.

Just asking--it sounds more like the work of a rethug infiltrator than Brown.

He is not a phony - he is indeed a progressive. And a damn good one. He just can't win state-wide.

The fight here lies not with who, but with how.

And ESPECIALLY with "why?"

(Although these tactics as described in MJ, if true, are just not defensible, so if Brown had a part in them (BIG IF) then my respect level drops like a rock).

... of Republicans, cui bono?

It's no stretch for me. The man said he wouldn't run, then when he found the waters to be better than he expected, he "changed his mind". It's kind of like a man who "changes his mind" and decides that he should be able to fuck women other than his wife. It is not a "I think I'll have steak instead of chicken" sort of mind change.

Again, some seem to gloss over the fact that HE GAVE HIS WORD that he would not run, then did, "causing" Hackett to KEEP his word and leave OH-02.

The word "phony" doesn't leap at me when thinking of that, but the words "typical politician" do, and NO amount of 100% voting record from NARL is going to make me think otherwise.

& we have seen that new faces, fresh voices are not wanted in D.C.

Hackett's "outspokeness" threatened them all.

This proves they are all the same.

i was referring to tammy duckworth, who is certainly a dem, certainly a vet, but does not have any fight in her as far as i can see. i do not know ALL the candidates that are running under this ridiculous banner, but the ones that i have seen that were recruited by the party, seem to be chosen more for their ability to follow orders than for their "fight". and those that have been chosen by the grassroots, who do have fight, get no respect from the party.
after seeing tammy sold here as "wes clark in a skirt", only to have her come out of the box with mealy mouthed statements on core dem issues, then to see hackett shoved out of the way...... oy, this party!

:eyes:

Not to me, anyway.

I read with some interest yesterday that Limbaugh thought Brown was black, until corrected later in his show. Aside from the quite obvious racism which Limbaugh is always eager to promote and exploit, I thought to myself: and that's a pretty good indicator of exactly how EFFECTIVE ole Sherrod Brown must be, even Limbaugh doesn't know who he is. Whereas a very large percentage of tuned-in Democrats and other liberals definitely know who Hackett is, and would've been eager to contribute to his campaign, probably.

But then, I guess Sherrod Brown doesn't need campaign contributions from regular folks. He's probably all connected to the contributors the Democrats have been using for a couple of decades now, to the detriment of the grassroots, growing the party, getting people excited and involved and engaged in politics.

This isn't a defeat just for Hackett, it's a defeat for the people, and a defeat for the democratic process, and a HUGE defeat for the Democratic Party itself. Schumer must be made to know that.

sorry to be unclear.

And if Mixner spoke to them on the record, then you can bet it's true.

What a bunch of cretins.

?

NOT the Democratic Party. A few Washingtonians who are a little fucking full of themselves. I like how it was put in the Mother Jones article from David Mixner, and it's SO TRUE:

“They are people who have no idea what’s going on in the country but believe they know everything.”

So true. So fucking true.

Howard Dean, chair of the DNC (DNC, aka: "the Party") was foursquare against what happened and made a couple of statements on the matter. He was thoroughly disgusted.

about this. Naturally, he has nothing to say to US, which is typical of him. He seems to have appointed himself the chosen 'leader' who gets to pick candidates for every state. Who annointed him? I knew he was an ambitious (wants to be president) arrogant, unpleasant, petty and vindictive individual, but I would never have thought he could be this bad ~

I'm glad this got out now. It was important to know what is going on ~ before he destroyed anyone else. Too bad he's not up for reelection this year ~ it would be a pleasure to work against him ~

with a strong dose of paranoia. Paul Hackett himself would agree,

Thank you so much.

It'll be interesting to see if they actually let somebody run against Holy Joe.

to campaign for Brown. Brown is going to have to seek Hackett's formal endorsement and have a photo-op that shows them in the same room. There will be others seeking Maj. Hackett's endorsement for office as well. By gleefully stabbing Hackett, these politically inept *leaders* ensured the nastiness stays seared on the hearts of his supporters. The assumption that Brown would get Hackett's passionate supporters & the netroots effortlessly was blown out of the water by the political IED these leaders deployed. What a mess for absolutely so little gain!

The machiavellian lengths they undertook to make a decision that was NOT theirs to make has eroded the Trust of the People.

If you'd heard Hackett on Randi the other day, you'd realize that Hackett knows how important this is. Hackett is not throwing up his hands and walking off- quite the contrary- he's admonishing ALL Dems to get t work!

therandirhodesshow.com go listen to the interview.

He'll sacrifice himself on his own sword for a party that embraced him then treated him like a leper after he outlived his usefulness.

He's a great guy, with great integrity who really seemed to care about the party and the ideas of the OH constituents.

I'm not saying Brown is not, but if were involved with just an ounce of what Hackett's team accuses them of. We'll, lets just see how the Karma plays out.

Sounds to me like the Republicans took him out. Before the "war crimes" allegations, Hackett had backing.



Bottom line, Republicans floated "war criminal," they swift-boated Hackett, it DID create "doubt and suspicion" and Dems got cold feet - they went with a known commodity.

He in the end is the only one who killed his campaign. This reminds me of how a lot of Christians I know that say "oh the devil made me do it!" nonsense. (Side note: I am a Christian and this isn't bashing or anything like that) Hackett could have stud up and said "hell no, let the people decide" but he didn't did he? If he was so worried about money he could've either come to the internet like Howard Dean or he could've found new donors or had a serious talk with the other donors he had. On edit I don't like how Reid and Schumer butted in but Hackett is a big boy isn't he? How is he going to handle big boy politics if he can't even stand up to Reid and Schumer who aren't vicious like other politicians are.

I'm not happy about this in my party. They'd better leave my state alone because there will be a Democratic candidate running against Dianne Feinstein in the primary. They'd better leave it alone and let it play out.

I still think there are DLC operatives behind this. So far their tactics have caused us to lose two presidential elections if those elections were fair elections. (We don't know about that either.) I hope some influential Democrats tell them to butt out in the next election.

Sure.

It won't be the last time until we stop letting insiders make our decisions for us.

:kick:

:kick:

i know who paul hackett's daddy is, who he would have represented. i guess i know who sherrod brown's daddy is too.

I just don't know what to say. I've got to think long and hard about where my loyalty lies now. I just don't know where to go and who to support anymore. Which devil do I support?

I've noticed some people making comments about Hackett quitting, backing down, etc. Did you read the article? They (not sure who) were going after him - accusing him of war crimes!!! My husband served over there and had to move dead bodies. Jesus, he still has nightmares about that sh*t and if someone accused him of war crimes and atrocities, it would probably kill him. He would never put his family through something like that either, particularly when you know that you have no friends! Hackett's own party tossed him to the wolves and may have even been giving them a few bites instead of standing behind him and fighting anyone who would say such things.

I've never been more disillusioned. This was a really big mistake because it is already dividing the party...just look at this message board.

Maybe it will pass, but I will NEVER forget this and it has really had a strong effect on how I view this party. As far as I'm concerned, I'm a very liberal independent who has no choice but to vote for the lesser of two evils.

Mother Jones has some serious hidden agendas.

And they absolutely hate organized democrats.

Democratic Leaders 'Betray' Hackett

By Robert Parry
February 15, 2006

<snip>

The ultimate goal in politics should be to do both what’s right and what’s smart, what’s honorable and what works with voters. In the American context, that could be telling a hard truth instead of pandering or standing for principle at a time of fear – and thus inspiring the public.

In recent years, however, what’s right and what’s smart have rarely made joint appearances on the stage of U.S. politics. The Republicans have built their national dominance – controlling the White House, Congress, the courts and much of the news media – by doing what’s politically smart but rarely what’s right for a healthy democracy. For instance, White House political adviser Karl Rove has exploited the Sept. 11 terror attacks to marginalize the Democrats as people unconcerned about the security of the American people. Those tactics may be terribly wrong – because they divide the nation – but they certainly work.

The Democrats are even more galling. They seem zeroed in on both doing what’s wrong and what’s stupid. The latest example is the party leadership’s “success” in driving Iraq War veteran Paul Hackett out of the Ohio Senate race apparently because he speaks his mind too much and takes the fight directly to the Republicans. Instead, Democratic Senate leaders, hoping to win in Ohio by default because of Republican disarray, opted for an establishment Democrat, Sherrod Brown, a seven-term congressman who has raised $2.37 million, tenfold more money than outsider Hackett.

But by settling on a business-as-usual strategy, Democratic leaders offended the idealism – and fighting spirit – of their base and may have ultimately hurt their chances for victory in November, a lose-lose strategy that has become all too familiar for Democrats.

<snip>

More: http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/021406.html

There's lots... LOTS more !!!

:shrug:

Read The Nation.

but it would take a real politician to do it and so far all I see is go-along-get-along politics. Stop the clumsy political maneuvering. Did they even approach Hackett and talk about it? Dirty politics should ONLY be used against Repukes.

If nothing else, Hackett is brutally honest about what's going on. His version was not contradicted by Shumer and Reid. Like you, I'm appalled that this was handled to poorly.

It's unfortunate across the board. Unfortunately the people who will pay the highest price will be the people of Ohio.

for those of you who missed it:

The Veteran Of Fallujah Defeated By OH's Humidity
Tuesday, 23 August 2005, 10:54 pm
Opinion: autorank
DÉJÀ VU ALL OVER AGAIN?
DEMOCRAT HACKETT LOSES A SQUEAKER IN
OHIO’S 2nd CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT:
THE NEW VOTING RIGHTS STRUGGLE 2004-2005
by autorank

DemocraticUnderground.Com

2004 Elections Results and Discussion Forum



ATLANTA, August 6 - Thousands of people marched down Martin Luther King Jr. Drive on Saturday to mark the 40th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act, in an event organized by the Rev. Jesse Jackson and attended by lawmakers and celebrities, including Stevie Wonder, Willie Nelson and Harry Belafonte.
New York Times, August 7, 2005


The historic celebration of the Voting Rights Act occurred in a mood the Times described as “more cautionary than celebratory.” As they marched, participants knew that the Republican-dominated House and Senate were showing reluctance to fully renew the act.

The old and new voting right struggles merge.

Many marchers also knew that they are involved in a new voting rights struggle, one that involves blacks, whites, and any citizen voting for Democratic candidates. The struggle came into clear focus in Florida 2000 but in truth has been carried forth ever since the full implementation of the Voting Rights Act. While the act pushed forward the voting franchise to all Americans regardless of race, it was not able to ensure that all votes would be counted, particularly in predominantly black precincts, due to “spoilage” – ballots that are not marked clearly enough to be counted. A Washington Post study (12/3/04) after Florida 2000 showed that spoilage occurred at exceptionally high rates in precincts with greater than 70% black population. The total spoiled votes in just black precincts in Florida 2000 would have given Gore a comfortable victory margin without any reference to “hanging chads” and “butterfly ballots,” under the reasonable assumption that most of the discarded ballots were marked for Gore.




Florida 2000 also introduced a new level of state intervention to impede voting rights. The famous Florida “felon purge” effort was initiated by Governor Jeb Bush and his then Secretary of State and Florida Bush Presidential Campaign Chairman Katherine Harris. This purge, conducted with ChoicePoint software, resulted in the disenfranchisement of at least 50,000 black Floridians who were legitimately eligible to vote. This marked the beginning of the new voting rights struggle, combining the elements of bias by highly political secretaries of state, computer systems and software to handle registration and voting lists, and voting machines for casting and tabulating ballots. By 2006, 80% of the votes in the United States will be counted by just two firms, Diebold and ES&S, both with executives who endorse extreme right right-wing positions.



http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0508/S00186.htm



Heres a link to a current DU Retrospect on DU ER + D's work a la Autorank:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x413128

(please drop by + say thanks!)

In the end, we have two choices (Or at least Ohioans do) Dewine or Brown.

All of the wailing and gnashing of teeth does nothing.

If Progressivces choose to not vote DeWine out of spite or to punish the DLC, the R's win yet again.

It sucks, I loved Hackett, but unfortunately we have no choice but to be pragmatists.


Its just the way that it is.

It's about how we operate. If we operate like the Republicans but lose, it's a double insult.

I want my party to be different, not the party of the Patriot Act and smoke filled rooms, but the party of democracy. I now some in the "leadership" want to name candidates and do away with the messy, noisy process of campaigns and democracy within the party. This bodes ill for how they behave in power.

Paul Hackett was a superstar who attracted rural voters with a hard core liberal message. We need more Paul Hackett's.

Great post.

the game.

of power the Democratic Party once had. If the Party (that would be us) doesn't get rid of them, we have nothing but dictatorship to look forward to.

control including two of the best senators ever: Howard Metzenbaum and John Glenn. The Dem leadership in Ohio has been in steep decline since then. :(

we still support them.(Party 'leadership') How stupid are we?

"Because it feels so good when I stop"

It doesn't really matter anyway.

Even if it was repukes who leaked, the Dems failed to back Hackett up and were going to let them smear him and ask people not to donate to his campaign so that makes them enablers. He couldn't have fought the false allegations with no support or money. He had been raising more money than Brown and the "politicians" from his own party started contacting potential donors having fundraisers to "discourage" them from supporting Hackett.

campaign. If Goodman knew it was GOP, why didn't he state that and back it up? There is no evidence to support it was GOP or the Brown campaign.

I like both candidates. Hackett dropped out due to not getting enough money, lukewarm support in polls and possible swiftboating from the Repugs regarding his service in Iraq... he's out. OK?

Brown is a good candidate and he now needs all the support he/we can get/give to beat DeWine.

Enough of the goddamn circular firing squad crap! Move on. We have a lot of battles to fight.

If anything, Hackett can campaign FOR Brown, remain in the limelight and try again later.

but we cannot condone they way that Hackett was treated by some in the party. Calling his donors and spreading whisper campaigns about him is downright despicable. The way that Brown entered the race was frustrating - but nothing to write him off for. He needs to now show leadership, denounce the way that Hackett was treated and if he finds out anyone in his campaign was involved in these underhanded tactics, he should immediately fire them.