Paul Hackett STATEMENT on pullout from Ohio Senate campaign

[kpete]

Hackett statement on pullout from Ohio Senate campaign
RAW STORY
Published: February 14, 2006


Hackett Statement on Senate Campaign (as released to RAW STORY).

#
Cincinnati, OH - Paul Hackett released the following statement today to his friends and supporters regarding his withdrawal from the campaign for U.S. Senate in Ohio.

Today I am announcing that I am withdrawing from the race for United States Senate. 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.

But there was no quid pro quo. I will not be running in the Second Congressional District nor for any other elective office. This decision is final, and not subject to reconsideration.

I told the voters from the beginning that I am not a career politician and never aspired to be--that I was about leadership, service and commitment.

Similarly, I told party officials that I had given my word to other good Democrats, who will take the fight to the Second District, that I would not run. In reliance on my word they entered the race. I said it. I meant it. I stand by it. At the end of the day, my word is my bond and I will take it to my grave.

Thus ends my 11 month political career. Although it is an overused political clichй, I really will be spending more time with my family, something I wasn't able to do because my service to country in the political realm continued after my return from Iraq. Perhaps my wonderful wife Suzi said it best after we made this decision when she said "Honey, welcome home." I really did marry up.

To my friends and supporters, I pledge that I will continue to fight and to speak out on the issues I believe in. As long as I have the microphone, I will serve as your voice.

It is with my deepest respect and humility that I thank each and every one of you for the support you extended to our campaign to take back America, and personally to me and my family. Together we made a difference. We changed the debate on the Iraq War, we inspired countless veterans to continue their service by running for office as Democrats and we made people believe again. We must continue to believe.

Remember, we must retool our party. We must do more than simply aspire to deliver greatness; we must have the commitment and will to fight for what is great about our party and our country; Peace, prosperity and the freedoms that define our democracy.

Rock on.

Paul Hackett
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Hackett_statement_on_pullout_from_Ohio_0214.html

[EFerrari]

1. Kick

[LeftHander]

2. Tragedy....

Plain and simple.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

3. This is truly sad

For once, we get someone who isn't simply a politician running for office, someone not afraid to say things straight out, and what happens? The career pols pull the plug on him, and not in an altogether straightforward way. I'm disgusted with the Democrats who did this to Paul Hackett.

[cali]

10. Kind of a broad brush you're using there.

Career pols, as you call them, are supporting Bernie Sanders for the Senate- a self avowed Socialists. Whatever happened with Hackett, I don't think it has to do with his being straight forward.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

14. Then you think it is ok for

people not from Ohio to order who can and cannot run in the primary? This is what gets me.

[mopinko]

41. it's happening all over

in the illinois 6th, they are trying to shove a progressive candidate out of the race with a "fighting dem" who doesn't know if she is prochoice or not, and tells different stories about her views on cafta depending on who she is talking to.
this proves what many of us said about this whole "fighting dems" story. bullshit, just a steaming pile of bullshit.

[OzarkDem]

4. This is disturbing

He's "fudging" a lot of stuff here.

I'm glad he's out, he's an egomaniac and has a problem with truthiness.

[Guaranteed]

7. This coming from the man who "knows Sherrod Brown personally." nt

[OzarkDem]

13. I'm a woman

and I know a liar when I see one. Hackett has lied continually througout this campaign and he's done it for the worst of reasons, to gin up discontent in the party and to incite his supporters to smear Brown.

I don't know what your standards are, but mine are higher than what Hackett had to offer. I started out as a supporter, but he lost me along the way when he started lying.

[Toots]

24. Maybe you could be so kind as to elucidate

Instead of casting spurious charges maybe you could inform us of some of his LIES. I don't believe you....

[Kukesa]

27. I live in Ohio and I don't believe HER, either. nt

[OzarkDem]

99. See post below re Hackett not filing for Senate

by Labor Day then getting mad at Sherrod when he filed after waiting for Hackett.

Keep in mind Sherrod donated time, money and staff to help Hackett run in the Special Election against Schmidt. He's not a backstabber and the fact that Hackett is casting aspersions on Sherrod over this says more about Hackett than it does about Sherrod.

[Bandit]

87. A hit and run

Notice there is no response. This is some of the despicable behavior I have noticed more often here on DU. Hit and Run without any backup to their accusations. GOP behavior IMO.

[OzarkDem]

88. Some of us work for a living

He lied about getting into the race. Brown said he wouldn't run, but Hackett sat around and didn't file. When Labor Day passed with no Hackett filing, Brown got into the race.

Hackett's campaign has been bashing Brown all along based on a false allegation. Its getting very old and tiresome and has probably contributed to Hackett's failing campaign.

[Name removed]

92. Deleted message

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

[MoJoWorkin]

34. I am sorry you use the name "ozark dem" as I am an ozark dem

of 60 years and am DISGUSTED by your remarks. You do NOT know Hackett,and to call him a liar, when it was Brown who told HIM that he would not run in for Senate, so as to clear the way for Hackett to run, and then Brown "reconsidered" after it looks more promising.

I think you should reserve your vitriol for the Repug LIARS, but NO, you need to smear a man who is not even going to run. What IS your problem?

[OzarkDem]

90. Get your facts straight

Hackett told Brown he was going to run, yet Labor Day passed (the traditional deadline for announcing candidacy) and Hackett still didn't file. Brown got tired of waiting for him to decide to run and announced himself. Even then, Hackett waited a long time before finally announcing. The whole episode made Hackett look clumsy and inexperienced, yet his campaign responded by attacking Sherrod.

Sherrod has been a saint to put up with the smears and trashing that came from a campaign he tried to help. He even loaned his own staffers to help Hackett run in the special election in OH-2. Then he offered to stay out if Hackett ran for Senate. Hackett sits on his thumbs, does nothing and expects everyone to bash Sherrod when he finally makes a move.

Sorry folks, but this is the Democratic Party not the Paul Hackett Party - we need to get candidates on the ballot, not sit around waiting for them to make up their mind.

[LittleClarkie]

158. I wonder if he wasn't a touch grumpy

when Sherrod's staff, the ones who'd helped Hackett almost win in 2004, went back to Sherrod when he announced.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

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

[OzarkDem]

91. Read my earlier post

Brown supporters are getting sick and tired of the smears leveled against him.

I started out as a Hackett supporter and was also confused when Brown got in the race. But when I took the time to check the facts (as many here seem averse to doing) I found that Sherrod did the right thing. My respect for Hackett has diminished as he has let his campaign and supporters smear Brown for mistakes Hackett made himself.

Enough with Hackett, he's conducted himself badly through this whole thing. I'm sorry he's decided to leave the Dem party, but it appears its not a good fit for him. He's more suitable as a Perot style candidate who has his own party to do his bidding. Big ego, not much more.

[FreedomAngel82]

100. So are you going to show us what you read?

[OzarkDem]

104. I have already

I'm getting tired of posting this link. Registered Dem voters and likely Dem voters don't support Hackett like they do Brown.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/12/12/175639/16

But by all means, please tell Hackett to stay in the race or ask him why he chose to get out. No one forced him to.

I hope he changes his mind and stays in. Then everyone will learn the lesson the hard way.

[Leopolds Ghost]

136. IOW, you found out "Brown did the right thing" when you read the POLLS

Showing Brown could easily beat his own handpicked candidate for the DEM Senate Primary.

The GALL of that Hackett, to take the tools Brown left and not use them! The NOIVE!

Clearly he doesn't just have the right to run and win if a more "progressive" candidate is available to channel voter discontent.

Never mind which candidate would win in November against DeWine. Funny how you didn't tell us about that poll? Why hasn't that poll been published?

[eridani]

143. Isn't Kos fudging the timeline here? Or maybe not, Can we find out?

I'd like to see the whole thing laid out, a substantiating URL for every assertion. Haven't seen it from either side yet.

[FreedomAngel82]

147. So why was he winning the polls?

[eridani]

142. From what I could see, both Brown and Hackett--

--bent over backwards to avoid trashing each other.

[dogday]

21. What is he fudging?

I like both candidates, I hate to see the party lose either one. What was Hackett fudging about?

[goodboy]

55. I live here too. What is he fudging here? Jean Schitt is so weak my

cat could run against her and win.

[Poiuyt]

5. I'm sorry it's the end of his political career

Personally, I'd like to see him beat Mean Jean in the House race

[Guaranteed]

6. FUCK THIS PARTY. nt

[MercutioATC]

11. AGREED!

Fuck them.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

8. While there are some stands Hackett takes that I strongly disagree with,

I so respect him and wish him the best. I feel it's a tragedy that he was forced out.

Damn it.

[Toucano]

9. What a tool!

"...and we made people believe again. We must continue to believe..."

Oh, yeah! Like it's done us a lot of good so far.

He's essentially saying, "I can't fight the machine, but you should believe you can fight the machine." Thanks, Paul :)

[MercutioATC]

12. Blaming Hackett for party machinations? Blame Brown and the Party.

Once again, the idiots have fucked themselves. I don't know why I bother.

[OzarkDem]

15. Blame the voters

He wasn't playing well out on the campaign circuit, he was losing support among registered Dems.

[Guaranteed]

16. So this is your spin, eh?

One two-month-old internal primary poll tells you all of this?

[EFerrari]

64. One two month old DLC primary poll. n/t

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

17. If this is so,

then why not give the Democratic voters of Ohio the chance to decide? After all, Schumer and Reid aren't from Ohio-why should they be able to decide who runs there and who doesn't?

[MercutioATC]

20. Look, I know where you stand on Hackett...

...and I think that it's disgusting for anybody to support our "leadership" when they force candidates out. Congratulations on your candidate's windfall. I hope he chokes on it.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

22. Hackett had the potential to move into a national grassroots movement.

I don't like his position on guns, but I appreciated his candor and honesty.

He reminds me of Dean in the Primaries. Pretty much the same fate. They give you a bone to keep the meat.

This party is frightened of anyone who engages in Plain Speaking.

[dogday]

26. You saw what happened to Dean, Right?

I am still trying to figure that one out?

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

35. Exactly. At the first chink in the armor, he was thrown to the dogs.

[EFerrari]

65. No -- they didn't want another Dean on their hands. After Dean,

they sat down and planned to head off popular candidates early. I bet you that's what they just did.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

140. Who do you think created the "chink" in the first place?

[EFerrari]

37. The DLC collaborated with the Thuggery to take Dean out.

At least, they were more honest with Hackett and earlier.

[MrBenchley]

58. What rubbish!

Dean finished no better than third in any major primary. Democratic voters wanted a liberal like Kerry or Edwards (both DLC, by tyhe way) instead of a Rockefeller Republican like Dean.

[Ciggies and coffee]

93. Money was behind the attack on Dean

No matter how much you get paid to scream otherwise

[MrBenchley]

94. Bull shit....

The view must be stunning that far from reality.

[SOS]

124. Here's the REAL bullshit:

"David Jones, an avid fundraiser and organizer for the Democratic National Committee and a staunch DLC patron who garnered money for centrist New Democrats, founded an anti-Dean group that ran vile ads attacking him early on in the Iowa contest. Deceptively called “Americans for Jobs, Health Care & Progressive Values”

Jones’ group raised in excess of $600,000 from numerous Democratic insiders, including former New Jersey Democratic Senator Robert Torricelli. Torricelli donated $50,000 to Jones’ group. We learn now that unions that had endorsed Rep. Richard A. Gephardt (Mo.) contributed $200,000 of the group's $663,000 in donations. Two top Gephardt backers also contributed: Leo Hindery Jr. of YES Network ($100,000), who served as a national finance co-chair, and Swanee Hunt ($25,000), who was a national campaign co-chair.

While Mr. Gephardt's backers constituted the bulk of the donors, they weren't alone: Slim-Fast Foods founder S. Daniel Abraham, a major Democratic donor who contributed to his home state senator, Bob Graham (Fla.), and to Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.), gave $100,000. J. McDonald Williams, a former chairman of the Trammell Crow construction company and a donor to the Bush-Cheney campaign this year, though to Democrats in previous cycles, gave $50,000.

As Marc Brazeau pointed out on the online political site Joe Hill Dispatch, a closer examination reveals “that the law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & From was paid $18,000 for legal work by the group and the e-mail contact for "Americans for Jobs” ended in skadden.com. Why the fuss? It just so happens that skadden.com was Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & From—a firm that has donated $176,575 to John Kerry’s presidential campaign as of mid-June 2004. So you have a $50,000 contribution from Kerry fundraiser Robert Torricelli, legal expertise provided by Kerry’s largest contributor, and a major donor from an industry that Kerry was responsible for regulating,” Brazeau explained. “Those are the dots. Connect them how you like.”

Given this, it’s abundantly clear that the grassroots efforts of Howard Dean, Inc. were being taken on by insider money, inevitably dashing Dean’s prospects of winning his party’s nomination."

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/July2004/Frank0709.htm

[FreedomAngel82]

106. Of course you have NO proof

Kerry won Iowa so I'm sorry that doesn't please you.

[Justitia]

97. Yeah, and look how great THAT worked out! -eom

[FreedomAngel82]

105. Kerry is NOT Dlc

He hasn't been affiliated with them since 2003. Please stop that bullshit. Read my signature line on what Kerry says.

[stickdog]

117. What you mean is that Iowa voters got sick of the negativity

when Gephardt kamikazied Dean, and between Kucinich teaming up with Edwards, Kerry getting the benefit of Vilsack's machine and the Center for Growth's attack ads, Iowans went to Kerry & Edwards.

What happened between Iowa and New Hampshire still boggles the mind.

[Leopolds Ghost]

137. Huh? I thot you considered yourself a moderate Dem, not a liberal.

Social issues don't count. The DLC is defined by using social issues as a standard while minimizing liberal positions on all other issues.

The DLC approach tends to attract only folks who are comfortably well-off. This is blatant in the cities. The tragedy is, too many traditionally democratic groups consider themselves "upwardly mobile" and do not see how the DLC is using them. They are basically exporting secular Reaganism into the party.

If the DLC is partnering with Wellstone Democrats (social and economic liberals) to drive off populists like Dean or Hackett, then that is dark days indeed.

[johnfunk]

68. Specifically, a small cadre of Senate Dems who think they know better...

... than the voters.

I wish Chuck Schumer and his pals would just shut their pieholes. Hackett got a mountain of favorable press -- even from a few conservatives.

I hope Hackett reconsiders, specifically for the OH-2 seat in the House -- after the grassroots BEG him to come back. It could be to his tremendous advantage to say, "Yes, I wanted out, but YOU wanted me to run, and I'm going to heed the citizens' call to political arms."

My advice: write Hackett a note. Ask him to reconsider.

[FreedomAngel82]

103. LOL!

Even though Kerry won Iowa right? LOL! Please. When Dean was becoming popular and on "Time" Kerry hadn't even formally announced he was running yet. Give me a break. Please get your facts straight. Go to c-span.org and google John Kerry and look for him on "Road to the White House" on August 8th, 2003.

[stickdog]

118. Sorry that you backed such a loser. (nt)

[FreedomAngel82]

148. You're such a sore loser

[Toucano]

40. He didn't have it afterall.

Else he'd have stayed and fought.

[FreedomAngel82]

107. Exactly

He would've done anything he could to get in the House or Senate and he rolled over. I thought he was a fighting democrat!

[stickdog]

119. That's what I USED to think about Kerry as well. (nt)

[FreedomAngel82]

149. Oh so who did the filibuster?

Who stud up for us when nobody else will? :eyes: Please get over it. Kerry won and you're a sore loser.

[MrBenchley]

59. So tell us, Tom, if Hackett was Mr. Grassroots...

How could Reid and Schumer possibly convince the grass roots to stop contributing, as the absurd claim goes. Did they have thousands of e-mail addresses?

[FreedomAngel82]

102. Oh please on Dean

Kerry was winning Iowa by 60% and Dean was closely behind him by the Iowa Caucus dinner and Kerry won Iowa. :eyes: If Hackett can't stand up and tell Schumer and Reid "hell no" and to let the people decide maybe politics isn't for him and if he's dropping out because of them than how is he going to "play" with the big boys?

[Connie_Corleone]

25. You're living in a dream world if you think Brown will beat DeWine.

[Kukesa]

30. Amen, Connie, Amen. And this from a Buckeye. nt

[Connie_Corleone]

33. I can't say it enough. SW Ohio gave us Taft, Blackwell and DeWine.

Brown would have to win down here if he wants to beat DeWine. Good luck.

[danalytical]

57. Where the proof he is a liar

You keep smearing. Well how about I call YOU a liar. When you ask me to prove it, I'll point to this thread. At least I have proof.

[Toucano]

39. You accept that bullshit statement?

"I don't know why I bother."

Because you've got ass monkeys like Hackett telling you to "keep the faith" and "don't stop believing" while they're backing down and giving up.

No one put a gun to his head. He could have stayed in the race and given us an actual PRIMARY so the strongest candidate could go up against DeWine. But no, we're supposed to work and send money because we "believe" in something that he already knows is bogus.

It isn't the machinations, it's the spinelessness.

[MercutioATC]

44. Wow! "Leadership" forces a candidate out and you blame the candidate?

Yes, it was Hackett's decision ultimately.

However, he has no war chest, low name recognition, and an immature organization. He's not a career politician. He didn't ask to run for Senate, our "leadership" asked him to (and pledged to support his campaign).

Hackett didn't stand a chance with the party actively working against him. Name one rookie candidate who would.

[Toucano]

48. None of that matters.

FUCK YES I blame the candidate! If no one will stand up to "party leadership" how will the leadership ever be changed?


Hackett either has a spine or he doesn't. If he has no war chest and can't raise money, he shouldn't be running. If he can't hire competent people, he shouldn't be running. That has nothing to do with any request from the leadership.

But mostly, I fault him for that bullshit "keep on believing" statement. If the truth is there's no hope because the party is too fucked up, he should say so.

[MercutioATC]

54. In that we agree. The party is too fucked up...and we keep supporting them

I've always said that Brown was a good candidate and that I'd vote for him in the general if he were the candidate. But how do we change the party if we keep supporting the very people who continue to run it into the ground? Brown can be as progressive in his politics as he likes, but until we get politicians out of the business of politics for politics sake and into the business of representing people, I don't think we're really gaining anything.

[regnaD kciN]

122. More to the point...

If he is the type to "take his ball and go home" over private pressure from a couple of party leaders, how on earth could he have survived a full-out assault from the Republican Noise Machine in the general election?

:shrug:

[Leopolds Ghost]

139. "If he has no war chest and can't raise money, he shouldn't be running."

:evilfrown: :eyes:

[FreedomAngel82]

109. So why didn't he stand up and say "hell no"?

Once again as someone else stated if he's such a grassroots person why worry about money and support? Give me a break. Hackett rolled over.

[PassingFair]

18. I'm done.

No more canvassing.
You corporate dems can have the party.
I'll back individual dems until Dean resigns.
After that, I'll vote green or
HOPEFULLY a viable 3rd party that speaks for
middle america.

[Toots]

19. Remember, we must retool our party

The current leadership is all a bunch of tools and they need to be gotten rid of. I can't believe they cast aside such a good decent man.....

[robbedvoter]

23. Shades of Gore's withdrawal in 2003 "some in the party"

We are so powerless, we can't even have people who speak for us stay in the race...Then comes Diebold...
FUCK!

[baldguy]

28. The current "party leaders" are part of the problem.

We need new leaders. Of course the old ones will try to discourage or sabotage those who would replace them.

[ticapnews]

29. Reid and Schumer killed his campaign

His statement after the Republicans attacked him for calling their brand of religious fanaticism on a par with Osama bin Laden sunk him with the Senate's leadership.

"The Republican Party was up to its old tricks again, using fear to silence opposition. They expected me to back down like too many Democrats have in the past"

This was a shot directly at them. Rather than being inspired to action by Hackett's words, they bullied him until he had to drop out of the race. They don't like his kind in DC (in either party) and would consider him a maverick. And we don't want mavericks in the US Senate, do we? We want people who will go along to get along and keep that powder dry in case we feel like actually fighting someday. In the distant future. When we're all dead. The powder will be plenty dry.

So when Mike DeWine wins re-election in the fall remember who we have to thank.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

31. Rahm Emanual has a lot to answer for.

Damn them.

[wndycty]

49. Rahm had nothing to do with this. . .

. . .he wanted Hackett. He was not the one who stood in the way of Hackett running for Senate.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

52. reports i heard in chicago suggested he spearheaded the move to

get him to withdraw. Were they wrong?
I'd like to know, 'cause my sources would be a lot less reliable in my mind.

Rahm allegedly called him repeatedly, offered him the congress seat and told him that he would not get any national support if he continued.

Not arguing, just curious, concerned,

[Ciggies and coffee]

95. Is Rahm DLC, or an agent for the corporate interests?

Well I guess if one label applies so does the other. He is not exactly a household name. Just wonderin

[radio4progressives]

96. Rep Hoyer at a Press Club televisted on C-Span - Reveals Emanuel's Role

and job to execute tactical and strategical plans of action and messaging (Hoyer's job). Rahm Emanuel is 100% DLC functionary and tool.

using a modicum of common sense, draw your own conclusions

[DancingBear]

43. "So when Mike DeWine wins re-election.."

Thank you - you said it all.

I am enraged right now - these cowardly bastards make me sick.

[Eurobabe]

121. Hey DB, tried to send you a heart

but I can't figure out how to do it!! 48%er

[On the Road]

56. I Like Paul Hackett

and I gave to his campaign. Personally I would have rather let the voters decide. But you have take into account that there are certain things, no matter how true, that you simply can't say as a candidate for Senate. Hackett's comparison of Christian fundatmentalism to Al Qaida crossed the line. They made him radioactive and would have been used against him mercilessly in a campaign.

This isn't a matter of principle, of calling for an end to the war or national health care. It's a matter of being smart. Bill Clinton knows how attack without leaving himself vulnerable. Hackett did not. I hope he returns to politics, but he wounded himself with some of his remarks.

[ticapnews]

69. Yeah, we all know American voters aren't ready to hear the truth.

Unlike those AQ nutjobs, our religious leaders are tolerant (Tele-tubbies) and forgiving (Matthew Shepherd). They would never condone violence against others (shooting abortion providers) or support terrorist activities (murdering Chevez). Our religious leaders are moral men (who molest boys) and women (Cathy Cleaver Ruse) who value peace above all else.

How dare Paul Hackett have the nerve to say otherwise.

[On the Road]

163. That is Green Party Thinking, My Friend,

and it will have the same consequences. In support of a good policy, it is sometimes a good idea. In an extreme case, it might be worth sacrificing a Senate seat. In Hackett's case, it was in support of nothing as far as I can tell. It was a politically intemperate comment. Same thing John McCain got nailed for in the 2000 primaries.

[Hippo_Tron]

129. So why is it that Republicans can say that gays are as bad as terrorists

But Hackett can't say the same about gay bashers? Makes absolutely no sense to me.

[FreedomAngel82]

110. Hackett killed it himself

He's the one who rolled over and said "oh yes my masters!" He should've stayed involved and gotten into the House race. He should've stud up and told them "hell no let the people decide" but he didn't. He's lost my respect and I thought he was a fighting democrat. If I was in that position I would've told Reid and Schumer to fuck off since they aren't from Ohio.

[Hippo_Tron]

130. Why should he serve a party that betrayed him?

He's not interested in participating in democratic party internal fights against Reid and Schumer, he's interested in fighting Bush and his war. He also avoided the house race because he promised the candidates already in the race that he wouldn't enter (he is giving them the courtesy that Sherrod Brown did not give him).

[FreedomAngel82]

150. He told in October he wasn't going anywhere but he did

He didn't keep his word than and he didn't now.

[derby378]

32. We will miss you dearly, Paul

We'll do our best to carry on without you.

Do us a favor, though - hold the other guys' feet to the fire once in a while, okay?

[progressoid]

36. "repeated requests by party leaders" Sheesh - how sad.

[katinmn]

42. This is happening in races all over the country.

Sad.:-(

[Edgewater_Joe]

45. Liar.

Chalk up yet another guy on our side who would rather be ideologically pure than actually try to get power and DO SOMETHING FOR THE COUNTRY.

YOU could have beat Schmitt, Mr. Hackett, but your ego said you only wanted a Senate seat. When it became clear that you couldn't win and your party asked you to finish the job and beat Jean Schmitt -- which would have given you a vote for impeachment and actually succeed in getting Bush out of power -- you lean on "your word" instead of stepping up and doing the right thing.

You are not acting in the best interest of the Democratic Party or the state of Ohio -- you are acting in the best interest of yourself.

You have that right, as I have the right to then ignore you when you try to "lead" anybody. You had the chance to lead and you stepped away from it.

Good bye.

[mzmolly]

76. Very interesting perspective.

One which I shall mull over.

[FreedomAngel82]

111. Even though it's true

[Hippo_Tron]

133. There are already several Democrats running against Schmidt...

He made a promise to these Democrats that he would not enter this race. Unlike Sherrod Brown, he keeps his word about these kinds of things.

And yea you're right he could've beaten Jean Schmidt, if the DCCC had supported him the FIRST TIME.

BTW, now that he's out of politics, he's headed back to Iraq in 2006. I'm not so inclined to call someone self-centered when they are putting their ass on the line for their country.

[EFerrari]

162. Is there a fact available to back up this smear?

:)

[Citrene]

46. It is truly a sad day. Best of wishes and lots of love to you and

yours, Paul Hackett. I'm so sorry.

[MrBenchley]

47. You won't have Paul Hackett to kick around any more....

[SOS]

71. True

He's going back to serve in Iraq.

"Hackett said his unit is slated to return to Iraq sometime next year -- and that he intends to join them. "My understanding is that we're scheduled to return in 2006," he said."

While Reid and Schumer only vote for war, Hackett actually goes to war.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/20/AR2005072002119.html

[Hippo_Tron]

132. Amen to that

[stickdog]

120. Is the centralization of power the end in itself with you guys?

Is that all it's about?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

50. How utterly juvenile.

"You won't let me play the way I want to so I'm going to take my ball and go home and call you names while doing it."

Here's one person that's glad he won't be running under our name.

[MrBenchley]

60. Amen to that....

I'm reminded of Nixon's 1962 self-pitying jeremiad...."You won't have Richard Nixon to kick around any more."

[cassandra uprising]

63. I echoed your sentient below n/t

[mzmolly]

78. Hmmm, could be?

:(

[FreedomAngel82]

112. And if he can't stand up

to Reid and Schumer how was he going to stand up to the big boys in the Senate?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

115. Or the Republican Smear Machine

[LittleClarkie]

159. I'm not sure what to think, but it does remind me of the DUDQ -- DE

(Democratic Underground Drama Queens -- Dramatic Exit division) alittle.

[democraticinsurgent]

51. Hackett deserves a ton of credit

For his honesty, all the way through this. He has a right to be frustrated. He didn't deserve to be forced out. He has been honest, forthright and brave in his short campaign.

Further, his unwillingness to "bump" the Dem candidate running against Jean Schmidt is even more honorable. He's not going to stoop to Brown's level.

Bravo.

And may his retirement from politics be short.

[Roland99]

53. Must eliminate the "tools" in the party in order to retool it.

[Kolesar]

61. I see no endorsement of Brown in his statement of withdrawl

One could honestly say: "can you blame him"? After Tim Ryan, who had endorsed him, turned and asked him to leave the Senate race and run for OH-2, he must have been totally let down.

Another Democrat would have endorsed Brown and offered his enthusiastic backing. It appears to me that Hackett is annoyed enough that he is leaving electoral politics forever. Hackett represented the dearth of candidates that the Ohio Democratic Party has to offer. He certainly did not have the experience to run a huge and high stakes campaign for national office. There's only a hundred senators. He did not have a broad understanding of the issues, either.

I hope you change your mind and come back and run again, Mr. Hackett. Never say "never".

[cassandra uprising]

62. Well take your jax and go home then.

I was initially shocked to hear this news this morning too. What I knew about Hackett I liked. I know nothing about Brown but I do know primaries are expensive and draining. If the 2nd district isn't good enough for his service never mind a lowly state office and you think you're going somehow rock america by rocking a microphone I say good riddance.

[EFerrari]

66. Democracy is expensive and draining. And Paul gave his

promise to the Dem running in the 2nd district not to run -- after Brown told him *he* wouldn't run.

Paul Hackett was set up, plain and simple.

[cassandra uprising]

67. Fair enough

But why not run for state office? How was Hackett set up as it appears that he was trailing in the polls and underfunded?

[EFerrari]

70. The only poll I've seen is a DLC poll. And underfunded --

by what standard? Here in SF, Newsom won by a single hair after outspending his contender by a brazillion dollars AND bringing every Dem rockstar out to support him.

I'm not in OH. But the thought of simply accepting the establishment's choice is disturbing. Especially with their track record.

[cassandra uprising]

72. Excuse the cynicism as I have seen all too often money fly

out the window while dems beat the crap out of each other just to have the repukes waltz in and take the general election without breaking a sweat. I also get a little suspicious of folks who have never held public office, run for the top ring and then bail when they are denied. We need dems in every office high and low. Progressive legislatures can move mountains. I'm not from Ohio either, how do you think Hackett was set up?

[EFerrari]

74. Well, this is what I think I've pieced together from DU threads.

Paul has a great run against that gargoyle and, he probably won. Lots of "irregularities" including "humidity" that shut down lots of voting machine on election night.

Then, he is looking around for a race. He is told by Brown that Brown will not be running.

Paul gets support from the party.

Paul promises not to run in the 2nd district and another Dem declares.

The party pulls its support. End of potential Paul Hackett a la Howard Dean problem.

[mzmolly]

79. Dean involved in a conspiracy?

Hmmm, I honestly don't think so. I think it just happened. I also have a suspicion that Paul will be back - somehow.

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

80. No -- Dean was not the DLC "pick: when HE was running.

I think they just Deaned Hackett.

[mzmolly]

84. Ahh, gotcha.

:hi:

[FreedomAngel82]

151. Wasn't he DLC himself?

[cassandra uprising]

81. If all that is true, that's a pretty sad state of affairs.

And that would most definitely constitute a set up. It would be nice to have those sources referenced. I still think if he was genuine in claim to take america back through public service, he shouldn't have given up. With his name recognition and momentum he could easily go up against Blackwell. If the Dem leadership set him up that sucks, but what are other factors at play here in these elections? And to be in politics and give up after 11 months? In my opinion, that is now what is going to help us take back our government.

[EFerrari]

83. The account I put together is from DU threads, and mostly

from Hackett's statement today. I just checked my timeline with mod mom -- she is in OH.

Maybe I'm having an attack of paranoia but don't think so.

After Howard Dean beat up the DLC for all those months, I'd be surprised if they hadn't spent some time planning how to deal with the next very popular guy who came along.

[EFerrari]

85. Here's VolcanoJen's post about Hackett declaring:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=411952&mesg_id=411995

Here's Hackett's statement:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x412688

[FreedomAngel82]

113. And how do you know it's a DLC poll?

[EFerrari]

144. I looked up the Feldman Group. And, Diane Feldman worked

on Donna Brazile's ridiculous report on the election problems in OH. That's as far as I dug.

[FreedomAngel82]

152. But does that mean it's DLC? No

So how do you know it's DLC?

[EFerrari]

160. You may be right. Too many coincindences for me. :(

[EFerrari]

161. I'm trying to look into this a little more -- just so I know what is what.

The poll was conducted for the Brown campaign:

A new poll conducted for Rep. Sherrod Brown's (D) Senate campaign shows him with a wide lead against primary challenger/Iraq war veteran Paul Hackett (D

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2005/12/brown_the_democ.html#comments

And I posted a little more on autorank's thread -- in particular, an analysis of the poll by a (seeming) Hackett supporter.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2460894&mesg_id=2460944

[EFerrari]

145. Just found this report on MCM's blog from August re primaries:

http://markcrispinmiller.blogspot.com/2005_08_07_markcrispinmiller_archive.html

[FreedomAngel82]

153. And that's happening now isn't it?

How sad. The people should vote. Isn't that what an election is?

[peacebaby3]

73. Wow, I have never been more disgusted with the Democratic Party as I am

right now. I'm basically at a loss for words and so disappointed. I didn't agree with Paul Hackett on every issue, but he spoke the truth and gave me something to believe in. I thought that the voters of Ohio should have the right to decide.

I'm not sure what I am going to do now. I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place. Just so, so ,so disappointing. I haven't felt this bad since the day after the 2004 election.

Edit: typo

[mzmolly]

75. This is such bad news.

I wish he would stick it out.

[AzDar]

77. Again with the giving up! If he were going to go up against Mean Jean,

I'd understand his leaving the race; if not, it's another Dem yelling "stand and fight", all the while slinking away.
Kerry redux.
WTF???

[MoonRiver]

82. They did the same thing to Dean and Clark in 2000,

and I heard the same lame arguments about why they did it. I'm totally fed up with the DLC status quo. I vote 100% on the basis of MY appraisal of a candidate from now on, instead of whomever the DLC decides to prop up.

:mad:

[saracat]

86. I am horrified. I wonder what they threatened him with. I have

no words to say what I am thinking. I am in shock that they would do this. I am a loyal Dem but I can't swallow this. It also makes me wonder about Brown, who I thought was a decent guy. Why would anyone go along with this?

[Orion The Hunter]

89. When I see behavior like this from the DLC...

..it makes me glad that I do not support those idiots at all. I'll donate directly to the candidates and the DNC, but not those jokers at the DLC.

[FreedomAngel82]

98. I do wish he would run for the House or told them "hell no"

to Schumer and Reid.

[OzarkDem]

101. Why didn't he tell them "hell no"? n/t

[FreedomAngel82]

114. That's the same question I've been asking!

If he's any type of "fighing dem" he would've told them "HELL NO" and to let the voters decide. But he rolled over and took his ball home.

[SOS]

127. The answer is likely quite simple

He's a Marine, not a sleazy Washington politician.
Hackett could have withstood anything except being betrayed by his own party.
He won't be part of an organization that betrays it's own.
What's left of the Democratic Party doesn't deserve him.
I hope he tells Schumer and Ried to shove it on his way out.

[FreedomAngel82]

154. And that means he couldn't say "hell no"?

All you have to do is say "NO." Is that so hard?

[Kukesa]

165. Good post. I totally agree. nt

[Hippo_Tron]

128. They called his donors and told them to stop contributing

They pulled the ultimate in sleezy tactics against him and he had no interest in serving a party that betrayed him.

[FreedomAngel82]

155. So he couldn't go to us common folks or the DNC?

Remember when he ran for Congress people all across the internet sent him money? He was winning the polls from what I understand so he would've easily won.

[Generator]

108. More proof

the Democratic party is in bed with the enemy. Maybe they don't even know it. Whatever. The Democratic party leaders think that "winning" is to be just like Republicans-to have the same policies and the same bullshit mealymouth lies that we get from..insert least favorite Dem here. They apparently threatened this guy with something bad to make him quit. Those that did this are as bad as the Republicans. And some day if this nightmare ever ends-we can look back and THANK! many Democratic leaders as Republicans for all the needless deaths. Because that's all this in the end says to me- "stay the course"-"stay the status quo"-war war war.

[Drewskie]

116. Hackett comming up soon on Schultz show....

Schultz is on a red hot pissed rant about how the dems have treated him.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

123. WRITE that SOB Emanuel and complain. Here is the site. and what I wrote

http://www.house.gov/emanuel/


"Shame on you, sir. Pushing Mr. Hackett out of the race will backfire on you. He was a new breed, an independent sort who sees the Bush administration in all of its gory dishonesty. When your machinations end up losing us Ohio, you will be to blame.

I had high hopes for your future, but this event so thoroughly disgusts me, that I am at a loss for words. Just be aware that more and more democrats are thinking about a third party - in part because of the spineless behavior of our congresscritters and senators, but more in the DLC's illicit marriage to big donors and trying to turn my party into the GOPLite.

I would have donated money to you and Mr. Hackett. Now, I am considering venting my anger at the DLC in the only way I know how.

Shame on you. If you still recognize that emotion, something I very much doubt."

[RazzleDazzle]

125. retool our party... Hmm. Dean should try to find a place for him.

[Buck Rabbit]

126. Acccckkk!! Someone help me understand please.

This is what it appears like to me but it is bizzaro and must not be right.

a) Paul Hackett a political moderate but tough guy quits because of pressure from toothless wimps like Schumer and Reid, yet he thinks he is tough enough to stand up to Bush and Cheney?

b) He pledges to continue to fight in the middle of his announcement he is quitting?

c) Supposedly the DLC is pushing Brown but isn't Brown by far more progressive than Hackett on the issues? What's up with that? I thought the DLC were supposed to be wetting themselves in pushing Veterans against progressives, isn't this the opposite?

I honestly don't know, these are impressions I have gathered from this thread and a quick look at the candidates websites and a couple of news articles I googled up. I am open to a reeducation.


<edited typo>

[derby378]

131. Hackett was bled to death in the political arena

Someone stabbed him in the back. So whose fingerprints are on the sword?

[Buck Rabbit]

134. You tell me?

Isn't Brown the liberal/progressive and Hackett the moderate. Why didn't the DLC support Hackett over Brown?

Why did Hackett care what Reid and Schumer say, the Republicans don't why should he? I liked Hackett because I thought he was a fighter. Where is the fight?

[FreedomAngel82]

157. Don't they support the Band of Brothers?

And isn't Hackett a part of them? It doesn't make any sense.

[FreedomAngel82]

156. It is very strange

Maybe they were wanting to lose.

[Nothing Without Hope]

135. Such a bitter disappointment. See this COMPILATION of threads on

Hacket's withdrawal - they range over the wide response to this event. I'll add this one shortly.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x411573
thread title (2-14-06 GD): COMPILATION of Hackett withdrawal threads and 3 CARTOONS for the DEMS:

[proud patriot]

138. .

:patriot:

[roody]

141. Are the Democrats

determined to lose?

[KAT119]

146. Truly sad, we need our courageous vets to save the Constitution n/t

[mod mom]

164. Perhaps there is a segment of Dem leadership who is afraid that vets,

who have witnessed the horrors of war, will be less likely to send others, thus hurting the military industrial complex. Unfortunatley there are Dems who support this war based on cherry picked evidence and lies.

[Buck Rabbit]

166. Then why would they throw their support to Brown?

Hackett is right in line with the Band of Brothers Veterans that the centrist party leadership is pushing, whereas Brown is a progressive who was one of the few who voted against IWR and the Patriot act.

Aren't the facts in 180 degree opposition to that theory?

As a raging liberal, whose main political issue is the war being waged by the Haves against the largely unsuspecting Have-Nots, the DLC is my ideological enemy. Lower than the Republicans because they subvert a two party choice on this issue through their infiltration of the Democratic Party. But it does me and my ilk no good to blame the DLC for something they did not do and is completely opposite of their pattern in other Band of Brother races.

The PDA wanted a possible twofer on this. (The Senate plus mean Jean's House seat.)
The DLC wanted a twofer.
The DNC wanted a twofer.

The PDA was willing to take a Dem centrist in the house. The DLC was willing to take a progressive in the senate. Have you noticed that both Will Pitt and MrBenchly are both in agreement on this?

This was the idea different leaders presented to Paul Hackett. If he didn't like the idea he was completely free to ignore it and continue to run his long shot race for the Senate. A couple of out of state dems had no way to force Hackett's grassroots campaign out of the race. He quit the Senate race on his own, where he admits to being millions of dollars in campaign funds over matched, and choose to not pursue the House race. His decision and one that disappointed the Dem leadership that supposedly back stabbed him, because all these people saw him as a rising star who was shooting himself in the foot by running in the wrong race.

My opinion - so flame on everyone.