Howard Dean would not appear with Melhman

[mandyky]

They will do separate interviews. Interesting. I am glad personally, but how will viewers respond? We'll find out shortly I suppose.

[bluestateguy]

1. There had better be a good reason for this

The Democrats are in a position to gloat with last week's elections and Bush in the 30's.

[GR]

2. Mehlman Is A Major-League Liar And Russert Would Have Ganged Up

two on one to smoke Dean. This way, it will be a fairer right. Russert will still try to smoke Dean, but at least Dean will have a chance to answer back.

[calimary]

38. It's one way to avoid the constant problem of rude republi-CONS.

mehlman wouldn't be able to keep jumping in and interrupting and sidetracking and planting his own seeds IF HE'S SIMPLY NOT THERE.

Notice, that's a tactic they employ ALL THE TIME, and our people are still just a ilttle too well-mannered to fight back here. DAMN I wish they'd get rid of at least this much courtesy.

- You must NEVER let the enemy butt in. If they do, YOU RAISE YOUR VOICE and muscle back in OVER THEM, and yank the conversation BACK.

- You must NEVER acquiesce to these people. WHEN, not if, they butt in, DO NOT EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER concede the point, try to look like a conciliatory nice guy and say things like "well, my opponent makes a good point..." or "Well, I agree with my opponent..." The subtext being - well, if you agree with your opponent so much, whatthefuck do we need with you, then? I call this the Michael O'Hanlon Misstep (Brookings Institution - one of the few liberal think tanks either in existence or allowed on the air). I had quite an email conversation with him one time about this, and he insisted this was a good way to go. He thought it was more important to make our side look like we are nice and moderate and willing to get along and make peace and not be confrontational and stir things up. FUCK. THAT. SHIT. UTTER BALDERDASH!!! I guarantee you he is SMOKING something if he really believes that, and he has no concept of human nature. THAT is the mentality that is ABSOLUTELY GUARANTEED to get us reactions like "there's no difference between the parties! They're all basically alike." That's what made bush's sales pitch "you may not agree with me but you know where I stand." As unfathomable and illogical as that may sound, IT'S THE TRUTH. People WILL vote for somebody with whom they disagree - because that person is clear on where tehy stand, and doesn't look like an equivocator - which is EXACTLY what O'Hanlon looks like, acts like, walks like, and quacks like.

- You must NEVER let the opponent get the last word. If they're about to cut to commercial or they say they have to wind it up, MAKE SURE you have one last quick jab to throw in. That's where buzz phrases and stuff help tremendously. Even if it's the opponent who's given the last 30 seconds - a la wolf blitzer saying - "I'll give you the final comment..." NEVER ACCEPT THAT. ALWAYS JUMP IN at the end. It is CRITICAL that OURS is the last message you hear, and the last, and freshest memory left behind.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

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

[kevinmc]

4. Good, I can skip watching Melman......

and just watch Dean. Watching Melman in the morning would ruin my Breakfast.

[HereSince1628]

5. I wouldn't appear with Melhman either, the little shit is always

spinning off half truths or outright lies that end up controlling the interviews he is in because hosts or other guests can't just let that crap stand.

It makes anyone appearing with him seem only reactive and defensive.

[mandyky]

7. I agree with this and the post

about Russert and Melhmen ganging up on Dean.

[HereSince1628]

10. True , it often seemsthe game with Dean is to try to make him look angry

or out of control. As though the producers are trying to get out one more version of the "AAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGHHHHHHHH!" video.

[tanyev]

6. Good. And there is no reason for any Democrat to appear on Fox,

either. They won't convince any Fox viewers of anything, and it makes it look like a legitimate news station when they do appear.

[Todd B]

16. Yes there is...

Like it or not, Fox still is the highest rated cable network with the masses (probably because of their tendancy to use flashy graphics and big text, but that's another discussion).. we just have to put *strong* Democrats on there instead of the week ones that usually get booked.

Good for Governor Dean, though. It will be good to have a full interview where he can lay it all out instead of dividing time between the GOP Spinmachine.

[tanyev]

39. Well, I disagree. Isn't Fox's viewership still a fraction of

ABC/CBS/NBC? Focus on those shows and other cable news. Say over and over again that you will be happy to appear on Fox just as soon as they stop promoting the agenda of the Republican party.

[Jai4WKC08]

55. You can't compare Fox News to the three broadcast networks

ABC/CBS/NBC may have larger audience, but they run news, what... a half hour per day? Maybe two hours if you count the mostly-fluff morning shows?

Fox has a larger audience than all the other 24/7 cable news channels combined. Something like 25% of the adult population watches Fox regularly. And of those, over 20% are self-identified Democrats, and an even greater portion are independents and moderate Republicans.

It is a total fallacy to think that people who watch Fox cannot be reached or convinced that the Repubs are wrong. Hell, most of 'em must think so already, if Bush's approval ratings are to be believed--despite listening to Fox. How many more are at some sort of tipping point if they can just hear the truth for a change?

Besides, you can complain about Dems going on Fox all you want, but SOME of them will, no matter what you or anyone else says. If it's only weanie weak and clueless Dems who are doing it for the money, then that's the impression Fox viewers will have of ALL Democrats. And if fact, that has been the Fox modus operendi for a very long time.

I think we need to see MORE strong, knowledgable, articulate Democrats on Fox, not fewer.

[0007]

45. I wonder why Clark keeps going on FAUX? n/t

I certainly wouldn't watch FAUX just to watch Clark.

[win_in_06]

57. He is no doubt compensated very well.

[Adelante]

59. And the Democratic Party is the richer for it

Because Fox pays for Clark to travel the country raising money for state and local parties and candidates, especially those in the reddest states and districts. Sweet, huh?

[win_in_06]

65. No, not sweet, filthy. The Fox $$$$$$, that is.

[Adelante]

66. Closed minds are the devil's workshop, or something

If you can't see the value in this Democratic strategy, poor you.

[Adelante]

60. This is why

November 12, 2005
Wes Clark: Intelligence Was Hyped

Wesley Clark, obviously an efficient time manager, wasted none softening his statements to Kiran Chetry on Fox & Friends this morning. He wasn't about to let the FOX spinmeisters help Bush avoid responsibility again. After Chetry asked him to respond the charges Bush made against Democrats yesterday, Clark answered with total calm and conviction. "Bush has a lot to answer for. The intelligence was hyped."

Clark went on to say that Cheney's talk about mushroom clouds and Iraq's short term capability to make nuclear bombs was irresponsible adding that nobody was shown the dissenting intelligence that warned against going into Iraq before voting for the war. "Going into Iraq was a blunder", Clark stated firmly.

http://www.newshounds.us/2005/11/12/wes_clark_intelligence_was_hyped.php#more

Nobody expects the Dem choir to watch Fux just to watch Clark. That's not the purpose. Telling the Fux viewing audience the truth is the purpose. Getting Reagan Democrat voters back so we can win elections is the purpose. Getting the Democratic message broadcast into every barbershop, Quick Mart and corner tavern is the purpose.

So that, and it pays Clark's travel expenses on behalf of the Democratic Party, is why Clark "keeps going on Faux."

[CarolNYC]

62. Things are not so black and white

My Mom watches Fox. She is a good Democrat and she's not stupid and it drives me nuts that she has Fox on so much when I'm at her house. But she's a news junkie and she says that sometimes Fox is the only network that actually has "news" on...as opposed to specials and shows about someone's biography, etc...She understands that Fox is a shill for the Administration but she watches anyway and she doesn't think they are as bad as I'm always telling her they are. I know there's no fear she'll end up going over to the dark side but I'm sure she's not the only one who watches Fox for the reason she does and some of those others who do may be in dnager of going over to the dark side if they don't hear some truth once in a while.

It's a lot easier to think that all of Fox viewers are just Bush loving zombies...but that's just not the reality...

[tanyev]

63. But that's my point.

Having legitimate Democrats appear on Fox bestows on it a legitimacy it does not deserve.

[CarolNYC]

67. No,

It allows people, who would think it was legitimate whether Dems appear on there or not, to hear the truth every once in a while.

I think that's a good thing...

Of course, one may think it feels better to be self righteous and pure, staying away from Fox at all costs, rather than doing whatever it takes to help save this country and the world from the mess we are in right now but I'm thinking the situation is dire enough that we're past the point where we can afford self righteousness...JMO

[tanyev]

69. Well, then I will keep my self righteous opinions to myself from now on.

Pardon moi.

[DoYouEverWonder]

8. Good for him

Melhman isn't interested in debating issues, he just likes to throw sand and distract.

[thefloyd]

9. Good for Dean

Really helps Dean get a good Democratic message without instant response
with RNC talking points. Also, any attempt to respond to Dean's portion will be very fragmented compared to Meet the press, which has lots of viewers. When Dean and Mehlman interview together ends up being a draw (in my opinion) with the American Public.

[Flubadubya]

11. Russert will have Dean appear first...

Whaddya wanna bet? This way Mehlman gets the last word, refutes all that Dean says, and that's what the American people remember. I guarantee, Russert will take the advantage and give it to Mehlman.

Now, if Dean were to talk second, it would be a completely different outcome. Timmy will not have that! :puke:

[Flubadubya]

19. Does no one see the point of this???

Everyone is glad-handing about Dean taking a stand and refusing to be on at the same time as Mehlman, but does anyone see the possible and great disadvantage it might be for them NOT to be on together?

At least Dean would be there in the flesh to refute Mehlman's idiocy... as it is, if Mehlman speaks last, he gets to lie and obfuscate EVEN BETTER since he has Dean's points to make hay and strawmen of.

I'm just saying, I'm not sure it's such a good idea. No one agrees. :shrug:

[thefloyd]

22. Do you really believe

Mehlman and Russert would spend every minute trying to disprove dean? Clearly not. Russert clearly would have other items he would present to Mehlman.

[thefloyd]

23. Sorry did not happen.

n/t

[Flubadubya]

24. Yep, surprised the hell out of me...

I'm glad Dean got the last word, but it really does surprise me that Russert didn't give the advantage to Mehlman. Guess that's what I get for predicting... I definitely ain't no psychic! :blush:

[MADem]

26. Russert knows what side his bread is buttered on

Huge mortgage on fancy vacation home, kid in college at BC, full tuition. BushCo going down in flames.

He's waddling back to the center, so he can keep his job.

[msanthrope]

31. You got it. Like a good whore, Timmy knows who to service, and when.

[vi5]

12. I think this is awesome...

It's a great step in fighting the perception that it's just 2 sides yammering at each other and that both carry equal weight. No. Let Dean state our case. There's more of a chance of people just tuning in, seeing him, and thinking about the message rather than tuning in, seeing 2 people arguing with each other and then just tuning it out.

[Cassandra]

13. Given that this originally came from Drudge...

who knows whether it's true. Perhaps it was Mehlmen who didn't want to be up against Dean and Drudge is just blowing smoke. Do we know yet?

[OregonBlue]

14. Good for him. I'm so tired of shouting matches. Hope Dean just laughs

at these buffoons. There is nothing that will make Republicans and the President look worse than for the Dems to begin to refuse to take them seriously. No one believes them anymore so why not show just how ridiculous their lies are. Instead of getting mad, get even by literally laughing at them. Some eye rolls and shaking of heads would be good too!! The President and Vice President are so angry every time they appear, by contrast the Dems should be reasonable and affable.

That's one thing I like about Dean. Loved that he said the pres should be ashamed. Start talking in terms even your grandmother can understand.

[mandyky]

15. I am recording the show

so I can examine it if need be

[Oceansaway]

17. Melhman is just another Bush Apologist !!

[DemDogs]

18. Don't agree, have to confront them

We look defensive when we do stuff like this. Surprises me about Dean.

[Flubadubya]

20. I see you agree....

good, I thought I was all alone. (See posts 11 & 19)

[PATRICK]

25. Even in "High Noon"

the marshall shot someone in the back. This isn't bad, just common sense.
Basically the GOP never engages in dialogue, just talking points while the mediator grants him the illusion and DOES the confrontation with the dem for him. Dean forces the format to be accurate. GOP blather- mediator- Dean talking with the mediator and making sound points against Mehlman's parrot squawking.

Due to the dishonest nature of MSM shows, this is a smart fix but not what the show should have been if fair. Most Dems think they can win anyway and are not afraid, but the slanted process continues to punish this acquiescence no matter how "well" they do. They might say things that make us happy but the net effect on the people? Unfairly mitigated by the media.

[snappyturtle]

21. Maybe Dean....

is just trying out this format to see if it works better for getting his message out. What I think is interesting is that pointing out that Dean will not appear with Melhman is being pointed out at all! What's the big deal? I've noticed this pattern more and more lately. After all, people are tired of listening to screaming matches where in the end not much is said.

[spooky3]

27. How has appearing (usually outnumbered) with 'pukes been working for us?

Especially when the "journalist" usually piles on or refuses to call the 'pukes on their BS?

I think it's a good idea to change things.

[DeepModem Mom]

28. Good for him -- eff outnumbering Dems on these shows. We know...

Russert bats for the WH.

[madfloridian]

29. I heard Dean once said it lessened the discourse, or something like that.

I don't remember the exact words, but something about stuff like that lessening discourse. He once said they would not likely appear together. A brief statement, vague in my mind.

But I think Drudge is the one pushing that meme.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

30. Dean was just ok, not as sharp as he usually is

I thought he was a little off the cuff and not as prepared as he should have been about the whole "misled us into war topic."

He should have boned up a little more with this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2246731

You would think if Waxman had this that Dean would have it and be very very familiar with all these points. We all need to be.

[wisteria]

32. I would have prefered a duo appearance and an exchange

of ideas and opinions.

[Cha]

40. Oh yeah, like the rwingers have

ideas and opinions.

[No Exit]

33. Good strategic move by Dean.

It is said that Mehlman wanted to have Dean as his opponent so Mehlman could frame the Iraq war, and the coming wars against Syria and Iran, as a republican-vs-democrat issue. By refusing this juxtaposition, Dean effectively stopped Mehlman from creating that false image.

Good for Dean.

[Catchawave]

34. I'm surprised the GOP isn't spinning this ? Ha!

To tell you the truth, I enjoyed the one on one format much better than the partisan shoutfests. As a viewer, they make me uncomfortable, so probably why I'm such a huge Keith Olbermann fan, his show is polite and courteous, no matter who's spinning the stories we'll be talking about tommorrow !

[liberaliraqvet26]

35. they are spinning it....

it was drudge's headline

[davidwparker]

36. Isn't it a waste of time to be interviewed with Melhman or most RNC

pundits when there is no lie that they won't tell.

[ruggerson]

37. Maybe Dean Doesn't Admire Self Hating Gay Men

I know I don't.

[mandyky]

41. All in all, I think it was a good move

Timmy Russert was quite hard on Melhman, and Dean did well. No bickering, more of an assessment of where things stand for each party.

[Comadreja]

42. Drudge calls him "Chicken Little"

This was the take on it at whatreallyhappened.com:

The DRUDGE REPORT has learned from exclusive sources that Democrat Party Chair Howard Dean turned down Republican Party Chair Ken Mehlman’s last minute offer to appear together on NBC’s MEET THE PRESS this morning.
Posted Nov 13, 2005 07:30 AM PST
Category: CURRENT EVENTS


I normally don't link to Drudge, and this article is an good example why. Druge has totally missed what happened here. Mehlman wanted Dean on that stage with him to frame the Iraq war and the coming wars in Syria and Iran as a Republican versus Democrat argument. By refusing to go on with him, Dean left Mehlman stuck trying to stand on the Republican message, and right now that's not working.

[Cha]

44. Good! That sounds like the

Smartest move..why bring Swarm on the cameras with you..isn't one Slimebucket enough?

Brilliant!

[tsuki]

43. It's a slap in the face to Russert and Mehlman, good! Go Dean!

[Kurovski]

46. Maybe Dean has a weak stomach.

But seriously, why should Dean waste all his time arguing with some dishonest whining schmuck when he could get messages and info out instead?

And he got to go last. Good move.

[shance]

47. This is a great response by Dean. Dean is a huge audience draw

NBC knows it, so he is in a position to make smart and reasonable requests.

It's not a bad idea and a rational defense to take, however unfortunate since our networks have been hijacked by neo cons with an agenda after Reagan scrapped the Fairness Doctrine.

In addition its not a secret is it, that the show is biased against Democrats and right winged slanted to its core.

Very smart response by Governor Dean.

[Carolab]

48. Seems like they preferred to have Timmah control the discussion.

He seemed to be doing okay with Mehlman although he DIDN'T stop him on the senate intelligence committee lie--should have gone into the fact that Roberts has actually been blocking phase II which is ABOUT finding out whether intel actually WAS manipulated...

But I would have preferred it if Dean could have gone head to head with Mehlman and cut down each of his lies one by one.

Still, it was nice that Howard didn't have to share his billing with Mehlman and got to go on second so he could rebut his points.

I thought it was interesting that Ken seems to be putting out the notion that he and Howard are somehow "friendly"...sharing green room space, etc. Quite respectful instead of the usual mud they used to sling at Dean.

[FreedomAngel82]

49. I would love to see a

knock out drag out fight with Dean and Mehlman. I think Dean would kick his ass so bad.

[Carolab]

50. Yeah and I'm pretty sure that's why you didn't see it today too. n/t

[emdee]

51. I noticed the same tactic with Roberts and Rockefeller....

after the Rule 21 was invoked. Rockefeller requested equal, separate time. Chris Matthews acted totally surprised and Roberts acted as if his feelings were hurt. LOL

I like the idea. It keeps the RW from shouting out and contradicting the truth and it allows the LW to stay on message. I like it!

emdee

[LittleClarkie]

52. How do we know it wasn't Ken who wouldn't appear with Dean?

Or Russert who wanted to keep them apart? Where did Dean make this known?

[AntiCoup2K4]

53. Drudge is trying to spin this into a bigger deal than it is.

Since it's obvious that the DLC and the Pukes have both decided it was time for another "Attack Dean Week" anyway, (for the sin of winning an election)I'm not too surprised to see the Busheep ride this one.....

[Carolab]

54. Well, if they decide to attack Dean we can implement the plan.

The "We've Got Your Back, Howard" campaign where the grassroots donate MORE $$$ to the DNC. Works every time!

[wiley]

56. Good for Dean!

Good for Clark!

[win_in_06]

58. A showdown has been set up.

I don't see how Dean can turn down another opportunity to appear with Mehlman on a major network.

[bklyncowgirl]

61. I think that Dean did the right thing on Sunday

Appearing alone allowed him to get his message out and he did an excellent job of appearing intellegent, engaging and good humored.

Mehlman on the other hand sounded like a broken record.

Having seen Dean's debate with Ralph Nader I don't think he has much to worry about appearing with Ken Mehlman. He does the moral outrage thing very well and while not an elegant debater--has a way of poking holes in the biggest windbags.

Personally I'd like to see a good mud throwing, eye gouging, no holds barred showdown between the two, ending up with them wrestling on the floor, something which Dean would probably win and Mehlman would probably enjoy more than the representative of a conservative family values party should.

We'll have to wait for that show.

[Danger Duck]

64. Anyone who thinks it's good Dean didn't appear is a fraud,

Dean should take him on, or find a new job.

[Touchdown]

68. Typican Melhman debate. "YAP YAP YAP YAP YAP!!!!!"

Dean looking at Melhman...



Melhman...

[formernaderite]

70. Mistake....

it created fodder for the talking heads, even Russert mentioned it. It made it sound as if Dean was afraid, which I know he's not. I can't figure out what the purpose behind this was. His answers, or non answers to "what" the democratic plan would be were weak as well. Why are we waiting till 2006?