DNC chair candidate Simon Rosenberg

[SHRED]

"I think Bush was well intentioned going into Iraq."

He said that just now on The Ed Schultz Show, hosted today by Peter B. Collins.

Uhh...NEXT!
What an ass.

[Nite Owl]

1. More of the same

we don't need that I think the dems already have the how to lose an election down pat. Let's get someone who can win some for us.

[Donailin]

52. Someone with sanity

and freely yells at the top of their voice, "Iraq had nothing to do with 911! We've invaded a soveriegn country that couldn't harm us if they wanted to!"

I can't stand this madness another fucking minute.

[Walt Starr]

2. DAMNIT!

What is with these weenies?

[Cha]

49. I would truly like to know! n/t

[noamnety]

3. That's troublesome

Bush hasn't been well intentioned with any of his policies. Did he say why he thought this one was an exception?

[SHRED]

4. Nope

He said it as a blanket statement. He also said many of the Dems supported us going in to Iraq, as if the majority did.

I'll have to start calling him Simon the dickweed.
If he wins the DNC chair then that is going to be trouble.

[sherilocks]

5. Did he mean Dem politicians or

Democrats in general?

[SHRED]

6. Good question

I was burned up by then so I wish I had paid better attention.
I am 90% sure it was all Dems as "in general".

Anyone else hear him?

[sherilocks]

11. Rosenberg is beginning to sound

like another limp dick, no spine Democratic politician. If he said that about Democrats in general, he's also out of touch with reality, just plain stupid, or pandering. My guess is probably that the last applies.

[Guaranteed]

15. How's he gonna raise money with that shit? nt

[fairfaxvadem]

7. yeah, he's lost me on this.

Overall, I thought/think he is a good candidate for DNC chair, although I feel better about Dean.

But "well intentioned", come on Simon, get a grip.

I don't get to vote, unfortunately.

However, if this is his "only" negative, then as DNC chair, there isn't much more damage he can do in this regard. We're in Iraq. And at least he isn't saying "it's going well."

[Walt Starr]

9. There was NOTHING "well intentioned" about this illegal invasion

NOTHING!

I just gave Simon Rosenberg a fair shake, and he doesn't shake out. No more corporate war whores.

[fairfaxvadem]

12. I completely agree.

I'm still in shock that this whole fiasco got sold to the American people.

We were commenting in the office yesterday that it's not just bad news every week out of these fools in the White House, it's every frigging day.

As one blogger put it a few weeks ago, "how do you unshit the bed"?

Good question.

[madfloridian]

8. On Fox News he said..."the war was a good idea."

And he said most approved. It was on Gibson's show.

[SHRED]

10. Uhh...

is this a Israel issue, like with Lieberman?

I am sorry for stereotyping(Rosenberg) but this is what lost me with LIEberman.

They are progressive and then all of the sudden---HAWKS!

Too wishy washy for me.

[sherilocks]

16. Please don't stereotype

I know too many Jewish people who are opposed to the Iraq invasion and it demeans the discussion.

[SHRED]

20. Ok

And too many, in power positions, were in favor.

If their faith gets in the way, and causes death and destruction, I am going to call them out be they Jewish, born-agains, or whatever.

The horrendous events that have unfolded in Iraq supersede any "belief" structure, in my view. If that structure sways people to have sympathies with invasive military invasions that kill and maime, then I don't give a rat's ass about them. They are death merchants at that point.

[sherilocks]

23. I agree with you on that eom

[CWebster]

34. Yes.

The unspoken. Israel.

No "even-handedness" there - which leaves the Dems yet again not in the position to improve on the Republican stance on resolving the Middle-East situation.

[Guaranteed]

13. Hey, Chris Heinz says he's the guy!

Case closed!

[H2O Man]

46. I had asked him

four times if it were true that Simon R. supported the Bush invasion, as some reports had indicated. While other questions got responses, mine were overlooked. I think Iraq must be viewed as a litmus test. If Simon R supports the war, he needs to put his quest for DNC Chair on ice, and put on a National Guard uniform and lead the way.

[Cha]

50. Excellent idea!

H20!

[ChiciB1]

47. I Mentioned That Yesterday...

but maybe it's not a "done deal". As I said... Martin Frost was mentioned as leading Dean or at least neck and neck with him!

The Lone Star State raises it Red Flag again!

[zulchzulu]

14. "well intentioned" ... BWAHAHAHA!

I was leaning toward Rosenberg...but not now. Granted, I hope he has a "...but..." after that quote.

[Guaranteed]

21. That's at least the second time he's expressed the sentiment. nt

[quaker bill]

17. Unacceptable

This is simply unacceptable.

Since when are "good intentions" an adequate justification for dropping 2000 pound bombs on civilian population centers?

What a lame comment.

[Cha]

51. Beyond lame! Like he's addressing

a bunch idiots who are sucked in by anything they hear on tv.

[cal04]

18. No Retreat. No Surrender

I like Simon Rosenberg and I have met him on more than one occasion but despite his quick moves to embrace the blogosphere (like bringing on Matt Stoller as an NDN Blogger) he is not the man the grassroots should want for the job. He is still not firm against the President’s war and the GOP has a lot of firepower if he becomes Chair. Staying at NDN, and being a reasonable answer to the DLC is definitely a better job for Rosenberg and his staff.

With Rosenberg as DNC chair, the RNC will facetiously crow from the rooftops that they are glad DNC chair is supporting the President on the war on terror and in Iraq. While supporting the war is not a kind of position that would disqualify anyone from the position of DNC chair, the way in which Rosenberg defended and continues to defend the president’s decision bothers me.

he gave the RNC ammo on John Gibson’s show on Fox News, Sept. 9th of this year. Rosenberg said “I think the debate that is not happening is whether or not the war was a good idea. The war was a good idea. I think the American people were behind the President.” In that same interview with John Gibson Rosenberg said “The President was resolute and strong in his decision to go to war. He may also have been wrong in the way they executed it.” Rosenberg's problem is that he says the President MAY have been wrong in the way he executed that while our candidate was very clear that the President WAS wrong. This kind of statement illustrates how Rosenberg cannot lead a strong, aggressive opposition party, which is essential in today's DNC chair.

more
http://mars.typepad.com/no_retreat_no_surrender/2004/11/the_case_agains.html

[robbedvoter]

19. "F* Saddam, he's going down" - peachy good!

I have no vote in this (or anything else) and nothing good for me will come out of it.

[welshTerrier2]

22. serious lack of judgment to say that now

in response to his "the war in Iraq was a good idea" quote last September, some of Mr. Rosenberg's defenders argued that it would have been foolish for him to contradict the position of the Party's nominee ... well, that was pretty thin to begin with ... i'm not sure Kerry ever suggested the war was "a good idea" ... but OK ... we move on and look for a new basis to evaluate Mr. Rosenberg ...

but now he repeats this idiocy ... is this the "strategy guy" we want? that's the strategy? to compliment bush on his good intentions? Is this Mr. Rosenberg's "master plan" to win back the Party's majority status? is it just possible that many Democrats did not, and do not, trust bush's intentions one iota?

but Mr. Rosenberg "knows" what it takes to win ... if Democrats can look like republicans, smell like republicans and have the same good intentions as republicans, perhaps we'll do as well as republicans ...

and whether or not you think policy considerations are relevant in seeking the Chairman position, what kind of message does this send to the majority of Democrats who oppose what's going on in Iraq and who don't believe bush's "intentions" are ever good? the timing of making a statement like this, especially while the Party is trying to find some unity, clearly demonstrates a lack of awareness, an insensitivity and a lack of judgment that, regardless of the merits of the issue itself, should totally disqualify Mr. Rosenberg from further consideration in any important role in the Party.

[Walt Starr]

24. Yep, this latest statement makes Rosenberg a DEAL BREAKER

Can't support a War Whore.

[welshTerrier2]

25. here's what he should say when asked about Iraq

first, of course, i'd like to hear him say we should get the hell out ... that's just my opinion ...

but what Rosenberg keeps doing fails to demonstrate any awareness whatsoever about what's going on inside the Party ... none whatsoever ... the guy lacks judgment, awareness and sensitivity and does not belong in any position of power in the Party ... these are not the kinds of things that "strategy guys" should be showing us ...

anyway, here you go Simon ... write this down for next time ... when asked about "the tough issues", let's take Iraq as an example, say something like this:

"look, it's clear there are many voices and many views on this issue under the Party's big tent ... we need to be sensitive to giving each and every Democrat a voice in shaping the policy ... we have not been as open as we should be and i hope to make reforms in this area ... this is not about "my views" and, given that I believe we need to build an infrastructure that really provides an opportunity for every single Democrat to help define the positions of the Party itself and the Party's candidates, I won't answer specific policy questions at this time. The role of the Chairman is to strengthen the Party's membership in support of its fundraising and organizational goals. We do, indeed, have to address policy considerations, but policy definition should eminate from the reforms I hope to support, and from the deliberations of all Democrats, not from my personal views."

OK? Got it? feel free to tinker away ... just don't screw up the central theme ...

[SHRED]

27. Awesome

:toast:

[CWebster]

37. Not if you seek AIPAC funding. nt

[Sparkly]

26. Bzzzzzzzzzt!!!! Wrong answer, Simon!

That's exactly what we need LESS of right now, imho.

[welshTerrier2]

28. reflections on Mr. Rosenberg's flexibility

sorry, just couldn't resist this ... but his statement is so ill-timed, so alienating and so fucking wrong that he deserves the following compliment on his remarkable flexibility:

"one has to admire the flexibility of anyone who can put their foot in their mouth while their head is up their butt" ...

there is nothing "well intentioned" about lying about WMD, going to war against a contained adversary, handing out no bid contracts to the friends of Vice President Oil Boy, alienating "old Europe", destabilizing Iraq leading to the growth of Al Qaeda, bankrupting the U.S. Treasury with a "we have no idea how much money we need for this" budget, and sending American troops to war without adequate equipment ... anyone who thinks bush's "intentions" going into Iraq were noble is not someone who should be given a position where judgment is important ...

perhaps being a little less flexibile on bush's intentions will serve you better in the future ...

[AmerDem]

29. Nuff Said. Someone show this ass to the door.

The scary part is we have a few Dems. in higher places pushing for this guy.:wtf:

[SHRED]

53. Really

Do you have there names?

We've got to smoke these critters out!

[Vinca]

30. Another Bush suck up.

NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[SHRED]

31. Peter B. Collins just now mentioned this thread on air!

I sent him an email referring to this thread and next thing I know he gave us a mention.

Thanks Peter!

[crispini]

32. WTF?

Uh, NO, Simon, PNAC much? Jeez....

[ChiciB1]

33. Martin Frost Has Been mentioned as running

Neck and Neck with Dean.

[crispini]

36. What? Whoa. Really?

Well, I wouldn't be surprised. The entire Texas delegation will stick with Frost. They kinda have to. :shrug:

[ChiciB1]

45. Well, If You Believe CNN

that's what Wolf said TODAY, 'er Juan Williams said it. Guess you could check out Juan's site. I had just turned off my VCR from listening to Zinn again, and that's when I heard it.

And those were the ONLY 2 names mentioned!

[fujiyama]

35. He's starting to sound

worse than McCaullife, and I'm no fan of McCaullife as he is corrupt and has led the party nowhere.

If someone doesn't understand that Iraq was a bad idea by now and if he's still defending Bush's intentions in taking us there...he's obviously not fit for a leadership position in the party

[Cheswick2.0]

38. ummmmmmmmm

good intentioned? I guess if your agree with PNAC/PPI it was a good idea.

[ClarkUSA]

39. DISGUSTING

Does he think Ken Blackwell was "well-intentioned," too?

Bye bye, Simon. I withdraw any support I had for you as COO of the Party. Martin Frost is my choice for COO now. I've seen him (he's down-to-earth and makes alot of sense) and he gets Tom DeLay like nobody else.

In a KOS poll of 187 DNC members, Dean was running a strong first amongst them, with Martin Frost a distant second.

[dbeach]

40. DNC=RNC

Rosenburg should smell the roses..SOS! Another corporat Dem with bottomless pockets and brainless ideas.
Does make me want to leave {again } this Dem party

[moggie12]

41. I think it was a smart way to start off

I'd like to hear the rest of the quote, but that sounds like a good lead-in to saying, "but it was a terrible mistake and he made a mess of it". For those people who "don't listen" to Dems, couching critism this way disarms them and makes them more likely to listen to the rest of what you say.

It's the difference in interpersonal relationships between people who say "You're stupid" and those that say "I see your point, but have you thought about...."

Face it, half the country isn't listening to Dems and we need them to.

[SHRED]

43. That was the quote

I heard him say it.

No follow up.
Peter B. Collins told him he disagreed with Simon's opinon that "Bush went into Iraq, well intentioned" and Rosenberg didn't even have a comeback.

[moggie12]

44. Oh good God. What a sap.....n't

[sistersofmercy]

42. Bush* apologist...

Nope, we don't need that now do we!?!

[Cha]

48. bush has Never done Anything

"well intentioned" in his life! So that gives rosenberg a Big Fat Zero rating in my book.

I was talking to someone today at work who can't stand the sight of bush and neither can her husband..she says you can see it in his eyes that he's lying..someone else asked .."what does he lie about?" and we both said.."EVERYTHING!"

Why doesn't rosenberg know this?

[farmbo]

54. ...And the Swift Boat Vets were "well intentioned" in going after Kerry...

Is seems many Democrats are so frightened of "offending" any RedLanders that they have lost the ability to call a spade a spade.

Bring on Howard Dean!

[Zhade]

55. Kick for exposure

:dem:

[Generator]

56. This guy is clearly a Lieberman Dem

Influenced by being pro-Israel. It appears obvious-many more conservative Jews are pro-Bush because they think he's protecting Israel by staying in Iraq.I know getting rid of Saddam was good for Israel, but it has done nothing for America.

America first!

[lojasmo]

57. He'd be perfect for another Kerry run in 2008...

"If I had known then, what I know now, I still would have voted the same way"

:eyes:

Both of those guys can jump off a bridge into a lake full of alligators.