Dean lost.

[WilliamPitt]

Time for coping skills.

Time to be a Democrat.

I'll coddle Edwards folk, because their pain is fresh.

But Dean-or-die folk have been out of it for weeks.

Dean lost.

Time for coping skills.

Time to be a Democrat.

My inspiration for this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=425072&mesg_id=425072

[jonnyblitz]

1. umm...can we drop this already.

anti kerry isnt exactly coming from Dean supporters only. Please. drop it.

[shance]

18. Youre kidding right ? Its William Pitt. Any anti Dean sentiment is good

for him.

Hes obsessed with attacking Dean. Havent you gotten the memo?

[Name removed]

93. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

102. Deleted message

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

[RummyTheDummy]

2. Will I couldn't agree more...

But go ahead and put on your flame retardent suit just to be safe.

[WilliamPitt]

3. Like I have fear

:)

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

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

[Mick Knox]

14. OUUUUCCHHH .. man thats gonna leave a mark. LOL!

[WilliamPitt]

22. Actually

I get my courage from laying it on the line for 2,000,000 people a month with my name attached via truthout. I get my courage from speaking to tens and tens of thousands of people live. I get my courage from speaking on radio shows which reach hundreds of thousands of people. I get my courage from going on TV and speaking the truth. I get my courage from writing books.

You get your courage from attacking people anonymously on websites?

I win.

[Dookus]

31. Indeed you do

*highfive*

[nomaco-10]

32. You'll think this is an attack,.......

but I mean this with all sincerity, your downward spiral in the last few months has been a painful thing to witness. At one time, you had the respect and admiration of everyone on this board, now most of your posts are held up to ridicule and scorn. I hope you find whatever it is you're looking for, but like most of us here, you ain't gonna find it on an anonymous internet board at 3:00 o'clock in the morning.

[WilliamPitt]

35. Ha ha ha ha ha

I *never* had the "respect and admiration" of everyone on this board. I LOL in your general direction. Frankly, by the way, I daresay you speak for yourself and not the majority. That having been said, I don't fucking care. I never spent one day on this forum posting as though it were in a popularity contest. I'm not going to start now.

P.S. Truthout's readership is exploding thanks to me, in case you were concerned. I LOL. My 'downward spiral' has led me into a presidential campaign and two more book deals. Um... you = wrong...and still attacking anonymously on the internet.

[lojasmo]

150. Or, conversely

Your readership has increased because you're writing for an online entity with honesty and integrity.

Go to sleep Will, unless you need to dance on Kucinich or Sharpton's bones too.

On second thought, that would be too even handed. Just go to sleep.

On edit;

Jason Askelin (so I don't get attacked for being an anonymous coward)

[Indiana Democrat]

154. Enough man...

Just enough!!

[Mick Knox]

37. Do you really do all that?

Wow! I find your writings and postings just about as good as any other poster here... you must have the hook up. I've never heard of you, where do you do all this?

[WilliamPitt]

38. www.truthout.org

Do a google search under "William Rivers Pitt" using the following non-in-quotes words:

Iraq, WMD, speech, Bush, Kwiatkowski, September 11, Haiti.

Enjoy. :)

[Mick Knox]

41. will do thx... tomorrow.. or sometime... its late...

wow.. a real life famous dude.

[Mick Knox]

45. hey you got some books on Amazon

coolness...

keep up the good work...

[WilliamPitt]

47. No

Not really at all. But I have done enough to bat down crap from anonymous forum posters who..well..ya know.

[Mick Knox]

50. Not bad for a godless heathen

LOL

just kidden man.. I'm impressed.

Well good night DU.. been a fun night!

[Bake]

91. Bottle of scotch. Yeah, great big f'ing right ...

That's why he puts HIS NAME on stuff that is read by many many people. That's why he writes books. That's why he goes on TV and radio. Because he has no spine and has to find it in a bottle of scotch.

NOT!

Grow the hell up. That was a cheap, false shot at a good man. You ought to be ashamed. The kind of crap I'd expect from a freeper.

Bake

Excuse me, I forgot to put my name on this:

David A. Baker
Jackson, MS

[WilliamPitt]

106. Pretty standard in this thread

If I had a drink for every accusation that I've been drinking that got floated in this thread...I'd be drunk. :)

[Jim Sagle]

4. Stuff it. If Dean is on the ballot when I vote, I'm voting for him.

End of discussion.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

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

[Jim Sagle]

23. Plagiarist.

;)

[WilliamPitt]

27. Ya got me

:)

[jpgray]

5. I'm not interested in a bum's rush the morning after

If there are still bitter divisions when Bush and Kerry really set to, then I'll have something to say.

[WilliamPitt]

8. The morning after what?

Please tell me you didn't think Dean was a gamer today...

[jpgray]

10. Nothing to do with Dean. 'The morning after' Kerry has sealed it up

Some people truly did not want Kerry. As you know, I'm not one of those people, but I try to empathize with those who are. :)

It is bad pool in my opinion to pounce on folks right when they're trying to cope with our presumptive nominee. If bitter divisions persist, I'll speak out against them myself. Until then, I'm prepared to allow some room for people to come to grips with this on their own.

[jansu]

25. Thank you!

Too many Kerry supporters have flamed our candidate and his supporters for so long....now it seems to be even worse! Seems to me that they do not want our money, our work or our vote. Remember, be careful what you wish for, you just may get it!

I posted tonight challenging everyone to pledge $100.00 or more to Kerry, stating that I had voted for Dean today. But, that I was willing to do everything within my power to help Kerry gain the White House. I've reached out in friendship and Democratic family pride, asking for all of us to come together. It's in your court now as far as I am concerned. I am not asking you to beg me, just treat me like any other family member, who you had a fight with and now, for the good of the family and for peace to reign, we need to make up!

Here's my hand......

[aquart]

13. Not what it's about.

I don't like having my choices reduced before I get to choose. So today I voted Dean.

I don't like Kerry's war vote, or the fact that he still doesn't see anything wrong with it. So today I voted Dean.

But November I vote to remove George Bush and I don't give a steaming meadow muffin WHO is on the Democratic line. I'll push the Democratic lever anyway.

But today was about MY choice.

[GalleryGod]

143. DUDE!? Where's the $45 Mil?

Trippi must've spent it on those flashy DKNY shirts he's been wearing.:think:

[dsc]

7. I am going to vote for the man

but frankly it is posts like yours which makes me like the idea less and less as the minutes go by.

[WilliamPitt]

9. Cope

There might be a thing or two on the table more important than your feelings.

[Newcastle]

12. Yeah,

like the illegal invasion of Iraq - which Kerry supported.

[Gore1FL]

46. Umm No

but good spin.

[Newcastle]

52. Oh, please!

We all know Kerry voted for the invasion. His vote served to grant the invasion. He was for the invasion. He was echoing Bush, Cheney, Condi, et al in claiming Saddam posed an imminent threat, had WMD, blah, blah, blah! If you're going to support the guy, at least support him based on the truth. The last thing we need is another bunch of pathological liars in the White House.

[Gore1FL]

He voted for the resolution

not the illegal invasion. I was against the vote, and I was unhappy with his and others decsision to do so. BUT to say he voted to support an illegal invasion is beyond the pale.

Bush was hell-bent on going to war and did everything he could to tiptoe through the demands placed on him by thjat bill.

Additiionally, The massaged intelligence information showed Iraq posed a bigger threat than it clearly was. And AGAIN the bill request UN involvemtn and inspections -- Bush jumped passed that.

As far as "The last thing we need is a bunch of pathological liars ion the White House" Exactly. That is what we have now. They lied their way past the resolution.

At least know the basis of what you are arguing before spewing RNC talking points.

[Newcastle]

97. One fella

refers to me as a communist. Now you refer to me as a Republican.

I probably have a hell of a lot more Democratic credentials than you or my other detractor. But that's beside the point.

Kerry supported the invasion of Iraq. Kerry "spewed" - to use your term - false information about Saddam's weapons capabilities. Kerry never retracted his support for the war. At best, he would have tweaked Bush's position here and there a bit. Kerry did the wrong thing.

[Gore1FL]

101. No nio one referred to you as a communist nor a repub

I made both posts and you misinterpretted both.

Until you consider reading for context, and putting words in peoples mouths in your responses, you are really not worth having a dicussion with.

[Newcastle]

115. Blue State Guy

thinks I'm a Communist. In fact, I come from a working class family that has always been Democratic and union. I work precincts, plaster my car with bumperstickers, put signs in my front lawn, meet with candidates when they're in town, go to lobby days with my union... The whole nine yards. Somehow, however, I'm not allowed to express my opinion on DU without being attacked as something other than Democratic. You have to do better than that to get me to back down, though, because unlike Kerry, I know what I believe, and I do not back down the first time someone says "Boo!"

[Gore1FL]

135. Just answer the question I posed

don't try to spin what I asked.

Tell me what a real Democrat is. You do not consider Kerry, whose voting record is considered the most liberal in the Senate to be one. You have labled him a republican lite.

Either support it with sound logic and good links or retract it.

I am not stopping you from expressing an opinion. I am asking you to defend it. So far, you have not done so, but rather put words into my mouth.

Support your assertation, or retract it.

Pretty simple really.

[GalleryGod]

147. Lay those alleged "Credentials" out there, Coco! Dates & Time lines please

For those of us who GRADE CRAP for a living.:puke:

[GalleryGod]

144. Vote Halliburton and KBR ,my friend, or Nader

Be our guest-but Give A Hoot & Don't Pollute!

[aquart]

16. Pitt, you're a smart man.

This is a crappy night to assume we don't know what's at stake.

Or to sound like you get it better than we do.

[dsc]

20. I will vote for the man

and I intend to work to elect a Democratic Congresswoman to go with him. If that isn't good enough then you can just cope yourself.

[Bake]

98. Yeah, I'd say the SUPREME COURT is more important!

Some people need to be reminded of the stakes.

Bake

[bluestateguy]

15. I support the nominee of my party

If I was on a basball team and I lost a spot on the first string of the team, I'd support my team any way I could. Only losers pick up their marbles and leave.

[Newcastle]

19. What if

you never get to second, third, fourth or fifth string? What if your team keeps ignoring the fact that you're even on the team? Wouldn't you start to wonder if maybe you should move to another team? A lot of us - the very core of the Democratic party, mind you - are getting sick and tired of being scared into voting for Republican lite candidates who turn out to be nothing but (surprise!) Republican lite.

[bluestateguy]

28. Oh geez

The "very core" of the Democratic Party voted for Kerry in 28 out of 30 states. Virtually every demographic group voted for Kerry. He has a mandate from the Democratic voters of this country, a far bigger mandate than Jimmy Carter had in 1976, more than Walter Mondale in 1984, Michael Dukakis in 1988 and Bill Clinton in 1992. I support the nominee of my party (I originally supported Clark). I don't have time, nor can I afford the consequences of, adolescent indulgences into third parties. Nor will I stay at home and whine and complain because John Kerry is not the ideological soulmate of Fidel Castro.

[Dookus]

33. Thank you bluestate...

you have said it well.

This Clark supporter high-fives you.

[RummyTheDummy]

36. In all seriousness.

That's what I don't get. Dean supporters, or the anti-Kerry crowd in general, keeps talking about Kerry stealing their democracy.

What that says to me is they think that every single state that voted for Kerry (by your count 28 of 30) are full of mind numbed idiots. Millions of democratic voters. That's really offensive on a couple of levels. It also reeks of sour grapes and above all, excuse making.

I didn't vote for Kerry in my state's primary. But I'm rational enough to understand that this hoe down was over weeks ago. I didn't need to be reminded * is dangerous.

[Newcastle]

59. I'm not a Dean supporter.

I'm a Kucinich supporter, although I think Dean was and is a far better candidate than Kerry. So is Edwards. In fact, everyone but Lieberman, who is completely indistinguishable from a Republican, was better than Kerry. And I don't think Kerry stole my democracy. I think the DLC has stolen my party. Then, come the general election, they try to scare me into voting for them because the Republicans are far worse. While technically true, that becomes less and less the case as the Democrats move further to the right.

[RummyTheDummy]

64. Not a flame here....

But if those men are better canidates (I voted for Edwards) then why did they win three primaries between them? What happened?

Besides theories about media conspiracies....

[dsc]

68. Reagan and Nixon won 49 states

they must be giants.

[RummyTheDummy]

72. Your comparison isn't valid really...

That was a general election. We're talking about a primary process where the overwhelming majority of voters are democrats. Nice try though.

[dsc]

ever hear of Reagan Democrats?

I sure have. Democrats can make poor voting decisions too.

[RummyTheDummy]

77. Sure I've heard of them.

But I've yet to hear an honest assesment from a Dean supporter that didn't blame everyone but Dean for his utterly dismal primary showing.

[Newcastle]

84. What happened?

1. media manipulation
2. ABB
3. Democratic party machinery
4. obsession with personality politics (Kerry is a decorated vet, blah, blah, blah)

Hell, I was even at a Kerry victory party at which Kerry's precinct walkers admitted Kerry was no one's favorite. He's just the white refrigerator that goes better with the rest of the decor, even though everyone really wants a blue or green or yellow or even neon pink refrigerator.

[Newcastle]

39. Yeah, right.

Who are you, Chris Matthews? Bill O'Reilly? Opposing the illegal invasion of Iraq and rethinking NAFTA hardly makes someone a communist. Turn off Fox News, for heaven's sake.

FYI: Voter turn-out is way down in California, my state. And that's with Bush being the most unbelievably awful president in the history of this country. Why? Could it be that Kerry was a foregone conclusion given the Democratic party machinery and that Kerry is not anyone's real favorite? No, that couldn't be it because Blue State Guy says otherwise!

[bluestateguy]

62. I have no idea who you support

My comments were not directed towards the supporters of any specific candidate. There were people here who whined that Dean was not far enough to the Left and they vowed to go Green. Kucinich supporters who bolt the party will only be disregarding their candidate's advice. Kucinich will be supporting the nominee.

This is serious business and if you want to wait around for Prince Charming the Candidate you'll be like that play "Waiting for Godot". I don't know who you supported, but I'll assume that you fought the good fight and stood up honorably for for candidate. Now the voters of the Democratic Party have spoken and its time to unite behind the nominee in opposition to the most despicable, amoral, corrupt human being to sit in the office of the presidency in 215 years: George W. Bush!!!

[Newcastle]

75. I'm not waiting for Prince Charming.

I've never subscribed to the messiah theory of politics. No single person is going to fix all that is currently wrong with our system. I am waiting to have a party again, though. There was a woman on Now with Bill Moyers last week or the week before who said the Democratic party is not really a party anymore, it's just a fund raising machine. That's because the party keeps doing things like, oh, I don't know, select candidates who take two entirely different positions in the same sentence (Can you say "John Kerry"?). Republicans vote because they know their candidates are Republicans and are going to behave like Republicans once in office. Democrats get wafflers who ultimately cave to the money machine. It's no secret that most of the people who are not voting on election day are would-be Democrats. They would vote if they had a party they could count on.

[bluestateguy]

89. OK fine, who would you like to see as a candidate?

Who would be far enough to the Left to appease the likes of you? George McGovern? That didn't work out so well though he almost carried a 2nd state. Dennis Kucinich? He would lose a 50 state sweep. You might have to face the hard reality that most Americans simply do not subscribe to a Far Left ideology. Even getting a left of center candidate elected is a hard enough task. For every Greenie, or other far leftist we seek to bring into the party by moving to the extreme left we alienate scores more people. For every poet on Telegraph Avenue in Berkeley, CA we win over by moving to appease him, we lose at least 10 wishy washy suburbanities in Macomb County, Michigan.

[Newcastle]

100. You have a buddy

referring to me as a Republican up above. You assume I'm a Communist. You have to love unsubstantiated snap judgments! They're so reliable!

I don't particularly care who the candidate is because I don't base my politics on personality - unlike many of my fellow citizens. If you want Kerry, then, fine, we'll take Kerry. But have Kerry stop taking both positions at the same time, have him grow a spine and have the courage of his convictions, and make sure those convictions are actually in the Democratic camp. Kerry himself keeps saying that he and Bush have the exact same position on gay marriage, for example. Well, isn't that precious? And a gay person or those who support gay rights should vote for Kerry because...?

[Gore1FL]

145. Can you stop putting words in people's mouths

I never called you a communist or a Republican, you simply didn't read it right, or more likely, didn't want to read it right -- afterall, how better to defend an untenable position than to avoid it by making shit up, eh?

Actually, Bush and Kerry do not have the same position on Gay Marriage, and I defy you to find an article or statement by Kerry where he supports amending the Constitution to deny that right.

So far you have managed to misinterpret, or misrepresent Kerry's position, and then deny accountability by misinterpreting or misrepresenting what people have posted.

You did post a nice link from The NH Nader/LaDuke coordinator though as proof of, umm, something.

[DNA]

155. He did say

he had the same position as Bush on same-sex marriage and he did favor an amendment to the state constitution to prohibit gay marriage. On the same-sex marriage issue he's been less than brave. His support among the gay and lesbian community plummeted because of comments he made. All of this is well documented. You can google it easily.

[Gore1FL]

151. Just a point

Using your standards, Your post just called everyone talk show hosts who watch Fox.

Obviously you were not implying that, but I'd imagine your clone would go on endlessly about your calling him such.

[Gore1FL]

49. Republican Lite?

He is one of the most liberal in the Senate.

What is a Democrat to you? Karl Marx?

[Newcastle]

80. Right.

Analogies to communism are so convincing as arguments. Because, as we all know, the political spectrum runs from Republican to DLC to Communism with nothing in between.

In case you haven't noticed, you need the votes of the registered Democrats to get your guy in office. Is "Vote for Kerry or you're a communist" your propaganda line?

[Gore1FL]

96. What????

I didn't say that Kerry was a communist, nor did i say if you didn;t vote for him you are a communist.

What I asked is, what do you consider a real Democrat to be? If the most liberal member af the Sentate, in your eyes is Repuiblican lite, than You must consider a real Democrat to be farther to the left than the most liberal member of the Senate.

Who is not "Republican Lite" and how does their voting record stack against Kerry's?

Please don't try to spin me, or put words in my mouth. Just answer the question.


You called Kerry a Republuican. Defend it. Defend it rationally. Defend it with links.

Or simply admit that your assessment was nothing more than strident spin.

[Newcastle]

108. Kerry is not

the most liberal member of the Senate. You crowned him such, but I don't think you have that authority. Your reasoning is completely faulty: "I say Kerry is the most liberal member of the senate and therefore if you think he's not liberal enough you must be a communist." I don't think you're one to accuse others of not defending their points rationally. If you really need links to know what your candidate's positions are, I'll happily provide them.

[Gore1FL]

138. I didn;t crown him

his 97% voting record is what I was basing it on. Once again, you are putting words in my mouth.

On edit: BTW, who is the most liberal Senator, and why? (I would say I am looking forward to your answer, but I imagine you'll change the subject and say I called you a Communist or a Republican.)

[Newcastle]

132. Here's a link for you

Must be some Republican commie Fidel supporter in Massachusetts!

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0219-11.htm

[Gore1FL]

140. OK -- An article by the NH Nader/Laduke coordinator

Your idea of a Democrat is someone who belongs to another party.

P.S. Why do you insist on putting words in my mouth? Your "Republican commie Fidel supporter in Massachusetts" line is just bizzare

You have misquoted me, and have been corrected. Your strident attempts to hide your untenable position is, well, really getting old.

BTW: New Hampshire isn't Massachusetts.

This is getting laughable.

[GalleryGod]

146. There are PLENTY of More Liberal Organizations to Support other than DEMS.

The Christian-Democratic Party of Chile is a wonderful organization IMHO.

Should you "take a walk"? To quote Mr. Big from "Sex & the City":

Ab-so-fuckin-lute-ly

BUH-BYE!

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

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

[WilliamPitt]

26. I'm a HUGE fan of Howard Dean

I'm puking sick of a portion of his DU supporters.

If you had clear vision, so would you.

[shance]

60. LOL!! With fans like you WP, whew boy, Id rather have hecklers!!.***

And you might want to watch it on the clarity due to your late night drinking threads. The truth seems to reveal itself.

Get real. More importantly GET HONEST.

If you hate Dean than just ADMIT IT William. Quit portraying something that you are not. Its so transparent.

Be gutsy enough to admit who you are.

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

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

[shance]

66. Wow. I feel sorry for you WP. You have no idea who I am.

And yet you are narrow minded enough to start a thread that says DEAN LOST, and all the other bullshit that came with it.

I could give a shit if whatever you thought about me, because obviously your mind is very limited in scope.

[WilliamPitt]

71. Um...Dean DID lose

He did. He really did.

I don't know you, but Dean did lose. If you absolutely refuse to wrap your brain around that, and if you continue to attack fellow Democrats because you absolutely refuse to wrap your brain around that, then yeah, I might hate you.

Cope.

[shance]

87. Ooohh thats pretty big of you there WP - did you get a college degree

for that?

We are SO SICK AND TIRED OF YOUR INSULT TO INJURY and no valid defense as to WHY you have taken a tirade against Dean.

Why do you hate him so bad? Or is someone influencing you to take him on here?

I want the TRUTH Mr. William Pitt. Im tired of it. You are SO transparent and its getting SO FUCKING OLD. And its ruining the quality of DU and Im SICK OF IT.

[WilliamPitt]

90. "We"?

Say "you" and be done with it. I speak for myself. Speak for yourself.

[shance]

105. Oh trust me WP*** Its a "we"......Its a BIG "WE".

Im sure I could get a petition signed, but gosh I would figure we all have bigger fish to fry.

Apparently you dont...you would just rather go after your own?

[Maddy McCall]

127. LOL!!!

It gets EVEN funnier the further ya read down this thread. In my best Foghorn voice: Delusional, I tellya, Delusional!

[Maddy McCall]

124. I dunno, William...

I was informed by one of the "we" that I am a topic of heavy discussion at "dean underground." Looks like "we" are hatin' on you too. LOL!

:eyes:

[shance]

130. Jchild - keep up that dreamin, ya hear?

Contrary to your popular belief, there are actually things more important these days than chatting about you as a primary topic.

[Maddy McCall]

136. You need to get back with "we" because one of your "we" buddies

told me this.

Or was it just another vacuous threat coming from that weak end of the Dean sect?

[shance]

137. Jchild - you mistake me for someone who cares what you imply.

I dont know you obviously, and I dont know who this 'we buddy' thing is, and you insinuate and insult me for things that arent remotely accurate.

I dont want to be rude, but on the contrary it is you who are being rude and accusatory - and I am tired of the baseless accusations all due to your perpetuating hate against a candidate.

I cant grasp the continuous assaults and nit-picking unless you are here to divide the Democratic party even further.

I have no buddies over THERE at that weak end as you say. Yes I am a member there and am glad for it, but nothing limits my vision and my beliefs.

What in the world are you trying to stew up that isnt there?

[Bake]

112. To quote from Richard Pryor:

How long? HOW LONG WILL THIS BULLSHIT GO ON??

How long do "Democrats" have to nurse their wounds?? You say you DO know what is at stake here, but still, you wanna mourn for Kucinich, or Dean, or Edwards (OK, Edwards is still fresh ...).

THIS IS HARDBALL, PEOPLE! This is a war. There is NO TIME TO MOURN. I was a Clark supporter. The next day, hell, later that same night, I looked around at who was left. Because NOTHING -- NOTHING -- matters more than taking down the Imposter in the People's White House! Soldiers at war don't have time to sit on the battlefield and cry while the bullets are flying all around them. They battle on.

So must we.

Bake

[shance]

119. Dont you dare bring this to my table. Talk to William Pitt.

Im defending someone who he attacks consistently EVEN AFTER HE HAS WITHDRAWN FROM THE RACE.

How many times do you all have to BLAME THE GOOD GUY???

YOU BEG PEOPLE TO JUMP TO THE OPPOSITE SIDE by your controlling, scape goating tactics.

LAY OFF DEAN FOR CHRISSAKES!!!!!!!!!!!!

[WilliamPitt]

122. Again

Where, in this thread, did I attack Dean?

I said he lost.

That's all.

Try to answer with LESS CAPITAL LETTERS this time.

[shance]

131. okay william, here we go.....

try looking at the inflammatory title and just go from there....

no caps....did that help?

[Gore1FL]

152. You'll find reading beneath the title is often helpful

Seriously -- If you get so incensed over the title that you fail to read the post for context, you probably shouldn't even open the thread.

[Maddy McCall]

128. From one Mississippian to another...

:yourock: bake!

[GalleryGod]

149. WEll that makes ONE of us Will.

Amateur nite in Brattleboro, Ah say-Amateur Nite!:smoke:

[Dookus]

34. LOL

Dean dropped out a long time ago. He started losing long before that.

Why are your wounds still so raw? Get over it. He lost. He not only lost, he lost spectacularly. He not only lost spectacularly, he lost in the most spectacular collapse in decades.

I know it hurt then. But it's been awhile now. Heal. Dean's whole raison d'etre was beating Bush. He couldn't do it. Kerry can. Remember the cause and forget the person.

[NoCorporatePols]

73. Bravo Shance - 100% on point !

[madfloridian]

21. You have caused a lot of people to leave DU.

You have gone out of your way to be unkind to us, and it makes no sense.

You have made us sound like fools, and it is very bad for a board to be split this way.

You are not the official coddler of DU. Only in your own mind.

[WilliamPitt]

24. "You are not the official coddler of DU."

At what point did I ever assume that title?

LOL

:)

[madfloridian]

29. This statement:

"I'll coddle Edwards folk, because their pain is fresh.

But Dean-or-die folk have been out of it for weeks."

[WilliamPitt]

43. Nothing but the truth

Welcome to the learning curve.

[madfloridian]

48. Will, you win.

It is just not worth it here anymore. You have it, guy.

[joshcryer]

56. Key to winning discussions on DU: reply until everyone gives up.

Even if your replies are strawmen or insults. :)

[WilliamPitt]

57. That's why I never sleep

:)

[lojasmo]

153. See post #35 N/T

[Dookus]

54. If Will Pitt

is responsible for a lot of people leaving DU... AND they're the people I think you refer to, then he has my most heartfelt thanks.

[WilliamPitt]

61. Oooooh...that's a stingah

as we say in Boston.

:)

[Name removed]

79. Deleted message

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

[joshcryer]

30. Imaging me pooping on your head.

Because that's what I'm doing (imagining myself pooping on your head, that is). :)

[maggrwaggr]

40. gloating does little to inspire others

Had we known you weren't a Kerry man, you might get away with it.

How 'bout a message to the assholes on this board who continue to bash Dean even though he's been long out of the race?

What's up with those chumps? Do they really think their irrational and untimely hatred of all things Dean is gonna win them any converts?

They just come across as bizarre and angry.

Your lecture is misdirected.

[Gore1FL]

53. Didn't (Doesn't) WP work for Dennis Kucinich?

How is this gloating? DK is sort of statistixcally out of it at this point, wouldn't you say?

[arcos]

67. well, he supported Kerry before moving to the DK campaign...

he IS gloating.

[WilliamPitt]

69. He did

He is also off-the-scale tired of coddling the sore, poor feelings of Dean people who feel somehow disenfranchised. Work for Kucinich, and then bitch about disenfranchisement.

The emoticon I seek is ----> :eyes:

[joshcryer]

85. Facts about Kucinich.

Kucinich didn't have nearly the number of supporters (specifically internet oriented) that Dean had.

Kucinich wasn't the frontrunner, only to wind up at the back of the pack within a few weeks time (talk about a painful turn of events, I'd personally say that foreshadowed all the other candidates losing combined, from a certain perspective; try having your guy do that).

Kucinich didn't get bashed by the major news media days in a row over irrelevancies.

Kucinich doesn't have very many negative posts here at all (and thus, being a Kucinich supporter on DU is actually one of the more gratifying things, as he gets support from everyone!- of course, this is opinion, not fact).

[WilliamPitt]

94. And...?

None nof that is wrong. I seek your point.

[joshcryer]

104. If you can't see the point, then I don't know what to say.

The point is that you act as if being a Kucinich supporter equals "worse disenfranchisement" when clearly in the case of Dean supporters it's obviously worse.

Dean has more supporters, so the likelihood that someone will feel bad (and voice that position on an internet forum) about a given turn of events is increased.

Dean's people felt a much greater loss than many of the other people combained. At least Dean's people can say that they thought they had a chance, no Kuchinich supporter can reasonably say that.

Dean's people further felt worse, because their candidate was essentially Gored, just like in 2000; so they had a direct relation to the 2000 elections (and thus, the "get over it" people are no worse than the "get over it" people back in 2000; to dean these supporters- don't forget why this forum was created, it certainly wasn't so people could brag about extra hits to a site they wrote for).

Kucinich supporters. Disenfranchized. :eyes:

[Merlin]

42. Jesus, Will! What the fuck is your problem?

I've always been a fan and supporter of yours. But I sure as hell love Howard Dean, too.

Do I think Dean's going to win the nomination? Do other Dean supporters? Only idiots believe anything like that.

Will I support Kerry, the Democratic nominee? You bet your sweet ass I will. BIG TIME! So will 99.999 % of Dean supporters.

But godam it, Howard Dean did one hell of a lot for this party and for this country. He kicked this party in the ass when most of its dignitaries were merely sitting on theirs. He reminded us what democracy is all about.

Was he an imperfect messenger? Yes. Then again so are most of us--including probably you.

But it is entirely uncalled for to slam Dean supporters at this stage of the game -- particularly on the night when his home staters gave him a sentimental victory.

God bless Howard Dean.

Get over it, Will. And get some rest or something. Ever since you started that Kucinich crap you've been off your game, imo.

[WilliamPitt]

44. You didn't see the thread I referenced

Take a close read.

[dsc]

51. Yes

Someone actually had the temerity to ask that Kerry supporters actually be gracious in victory. Shame, oh shame on that person.

[WilliamPitt]

55. Yeah, that was all that happened in that thread

:eyes:

[Dookus]

58. Nonsense

that thread was yet another sore-loser bitching and whingeing because her candidate lost. Lost spectacularly, I might add.

Join the party or go home, but stop blocking the doorway.

[dsc]

65. Yeah and she mentioned Edwards why?

The fact is so many of you have been so utterly insufferable in victory that if the stakes weren't so high I would wish Kerry to lose. Why in God's name you think this does anything but engender bitterness is beyond me. If you do lose the election by 600 votes in a Karmic sense you will deserve it beyond words.

[WilliamPitt]

74. Vote for a candidate because of what happens on an internet forum

Go ahead. Feel the power of dumb.

[dsc]

76. I have stated not once but twice

that I would vote for your man. And her post says not one word about voting for others.

[WilliamPitt]

81. "if the stakes weren't so high I would wish Kerry to lose"

...because you think people were mean to you on an internet forum.

---> :eyes: <---

*cough* Bush *cough*

[dsc]

86. you do know what if means

You are an author right? I surely don't need to send you to an online dictionary to decipher that Oh so confusing sentence. And yes, I would certanly derive pleasure from seeing you and the other insufferable in victory, Kerry supporters taste defeat. In some elections that might even outweigh the consequences of that loss (say a Congressional seat in a year that we lose or win big). But not this one. That is why, I used that Oh so confusing word, if.

[joshcryer]

111. dsc, I love you.

Seriously. I've meant to say it for awhile now, but you're awesome. There, I said it.

[joshcryer]

78. Isn't that what you're telling people to do when you say 'cope?'

C'mon, seriously. People can't still have opinions, or still support their favored candidate, without being called sore losers, crybabies, etc?

[WilliamPitt]

83. Where did I call anyone sore losers, crybabies, etc.?

[joshcryer]

88. That's the sentiment.

note the "etc"

[joshcryer]

70. Um, people can support who they damn well want to support...

...until the primaries are over. I defened Willam Pitt's support of his candidate just as much as I do ANY OTHER person on this board. I'm sorry if it offends you that people believe in their candidate EVEN WHILE THE PRIMARIES CONTINUE.

I'm sorry democracy, the kind we have here in the states at least, offends you.

And I'm sorry people have to start petty threads when they can't deal with people have emotions and continue talking about their favored candidate, WHILE THE PRIMARIES CONTINUE.

[Sushi-Lover]

82. What earthly good can posts like this do?

The only thing I can think of is that it makes you feel good to be patronizing. Who has asked for codling? Who has stated that Dean did not lose? All I have seen is one person asking that a few fools stop kicking the dead horse while screaming loser and a very few persons who's most outstanding traits are not whom they support, but how delusional they are. All you are doing is antagonizing people by implying that they don't have coping skills and are not proper Democrats if they want others to cease and desist from trashing a person they supported and respect.

None of us are required to like Kerry right this moment, we just need to vote and campaign for him when it counts. A few weeks from now when the emotion has dried up and we all feel nauseated from watching Shrub on the tv being an insufferable asshole, John Kerry is going to start looking really good (even to some of us who aren't ready to like him just yet). It will come in time.

I don't have a good analogy but its sort of like someone has been asking you if you want chocolate or vanilla ice cream for months and you keep saying chocolate. Then it turns out the chocolate got left out of the fridge and melted and now your choice is between vanilla and bullshit with caramel swirls. Are you going to be disappointed you don't get chocolate? Sure you are. Are you a whining child if you state, "gee you know I really prefer chocolate", while you chow down on the vanilla? Nope. Is any reasonable person going to eat bullshit just to spite vanilla?

[DannyRed]

92. Dear William,

I read truthout, and, along with numerous other extremely good sites like memoryhole, commondreams, zmag, GNN, informationclearinghouse, buzzflash, truthout is an excellent resource, and you have done excellent work for them and for us.

Here's my beef with your post, and with numerous other posts:

When I read your material, your interviews with Ritter, your exposés of WMD lies, of foreign policies based on imperialism, war, lies, colonialism, resource domination, of cooking intel (Kwiatkowski), of puishing the country to war in order to both expand and hide the continued corporate conglomeration, and rape, and pillage of this nation's people, resources, and economic infrastructure...and the rest of the world's to boot....

when I read these articles, I nod my head, and look further both on my own and based on leads, keywords, and references in your work...

And I think about progressive movements for change, and about grassroots, and about activism, and about power...

And then I read what you write here, in this post, and in several others...

And I shake my head, and I ask myself:

What is going on here? Is this the same person? Is this the same message?

How can such an excellent and prolific writer who espouses nearly every single political ideal, talking point, data point, and prescription for change that I myself have arrived at through years of activism and engagement...suddenly turn into Rosemary's baby on a website supposedly dedicated to the multiple and complementary tasks of unifying the Democratic Party, building a progressive message, growing the progressive base and cementing the various factions of that base together in a powerful unit directed at real change for our nation?

How can this tireless and eloquent advocate for progressive change, tireless and biting critic of Bush, the GOP, the RIght, the corporatist/elitist/oligarchical cabal of rotten lying thugs who have hijacked our nation and the world...how can this person suddenly turn so savage and cruel, and dedicate so much time and effort to baiting, trashing, sniping, snarling, and sneering at not only a candidate, but large swaths of that candidate's supporters and advocates?

William, you may think you are somehow being discriminate when you direct your sarcastic ire at a "small subset" of Dean supporters...but you are not...your attacks on Dean's supporters are broad, sweeping, and deeply disturbing, and indicate a failure to connect with what is driving many of those supporters...

You continually take their words out of context, impute motives or statements that are not accurate, fair, or reasonably derived from the content of their posts, and by doing so you drive them, and their fellow supporters further away from you, your opinions, and your candidates.

You may think that your linked articles and opinions on the subject of Dean and the DFA "thing" are objective, logical, balanced, and fair, but they are not - they are certainly one side of the story, and deserve to be read and thought out, but they are not the only side of the story.

Finally, I sense a deep and strange disconnect between the tone, content, and factual basis of many of your articles and your behavior and stated preferences on this board.

For someone who has interviewed Ritter, someone who has interviewed Kwiatkowski, someone who has attacked the PATRIOT acts, the War on Terror, and the perfidy of the Bush Administration AND (yes, you have, and you know it) the spinelessness and self-defeating calculating fence sitting behavior of many Democrats on those specific issues....

How can you justify your savaging of Dean and your apparent strong support of Kerry?

Make no mistake - I supported Dean, and did not want Kerry to win the nomination, HOWEVER, I am and was highly critical of Dean and will support Kerry now that he has locked it up.

Color me confused, and disappointed.

I also note that the many times that I have addressed this type of concern to you in your other posts, I have been put on alert and reported to the mods for nit-picky minor offenses, and have been roundly ignored.

When I responded to Norm Solomon's article that you posted, I did so in a very reasoned and debate-style fashion, and even posted a link to Greider's article on the same subject.

From you? Nothing. Nada.

Why?

In short, I think you are not achieving the purpose you are supposedly aiming for, and that you are showing evidence of a serious blind spot on the issues and concerns surround this topic.

I think you are doing more harm than good, and that you should redirect your energies to more positive ends.

Why not write one of your most excellent articels recounting the strengths of Kerry, why you support him, why he is better than just "Not Bush" and why everyone should dry their tears for their own candidate, and get on board early and work harder than ever?

Just a thought.

[Name removed]

95. Deleted message

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

[WilliamPitt]

103. God damn it

"Savaging of Dean" ?????

FIND ME where I "savaged" Dean. ANYWHERE on this website.

No. You find this:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/122403A.shtml

AND this:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/052203A.shtml

SPARE me the victimhood mythology. I haven't "savaged" Dean...and if you think I have, brother, I envy you for not knowing what a savaging looks like. I asked HARD QUESTIONS in December...and was rewarded by a Dean supporter on DU trying to get me FIRED because I spoke "criticized" the presumptive nominee on a web forum.

I have attacked, and will attack again and again and again, the sense of privilege and martyrdom that some...SOME...Dean people have cloaked themselves in. I will attack the Dean people who use that martyrdom to attack others. I will attack any Dean person who pretends that, during Dean's time on top, the Dean folk here didn't lord it over everyone and push the definitions of 'obnoxious' into broad new vistas.

I have paid my fucking dues to Howard Dean. I almost lost my job because I DARED criticize him. Don't you dare lecture me. Ever.

"Savaging" Dean? I'd laugh if it weren't pathetic.

[ShaneGR]

110. Hey Will, I think you've lost it

You endorse Kerry. Then you work for Kucinich. Then you bash the hell out of Dean, even after he's been beaten.

Word to the wise will, you are no smarter than how smart people think you are. And in a few short months, you've tarnished what a lot of people thought of you. Why?

Ask yourself that question.

[WilliamPitt]

113. Where, exactly, IN THIS ENTIRE THREAD

did I bash Dean?

I said he lost.

Fact.

Bash?

Fact.

Cope.

You are the one who needs some work, friend.

[Name removed]

116. Deleted message

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

[WilliamPitt]

117. "Lets see who's still around working in politics 20 years from now"

I'll see you there, Mr. Anonymous Internet Guy. My Name is William Pitt, and I hide from no one.

Dean did drop out two weeks ago. Per the thread I referenced in post #1, some folks didn't get the memo. Hence, this thread.

[ShaneGR]

126. Actually, that's the beauty of it

No one will remember when I say anything really stupid on this board. Because no one knows who I am. Of course, when you ruin your reputation acting like an idiot.... everyone remembers.

[DannyRed]

125. Aaaaaahhhh, Now we are getting somewhere...

Ok, the articles you wrote about Dean on Truthout were good. I enjoyed them, and I agree with a lot of your positions regarding Dean the candidate - both positive and negative.

However, I would ask you to compare the tone and content of those articles - which reach a wide and varied audience, to the tone and content of your posts here on DU - which also reaches a wide and varied audience...

I have done such a comparison, and found some disturbing differences...differences that I simply could not understand - those differences made/make no sense in the context of your own stated opinions, your own writing, and your own political outlook.

"SPARE me the victimhood mythology."

I am not victimized, never have been, and never will be. Politics is nasty and dirty, and so it will always be. I just get disturbed when people whose opinions I respect - yours, for example - turn weird in other forums or venues, and come out with words, ideas or statements that are jarring in the context of their other work.

"I haven't "savaged" Dean...and if you think I have, brother, I envy you for not knowing what a savaging looks like."

On truthout, you certainly have not, I found your articles to be very informative, interesting, and useful. But here on DU (again, a place with wide readership and participants and readers from all over the world and all across the political spectrum) you have...both the man and his supporters.

"I asked HARD QUESTIONS in December..."

Yes you did. And kudos to you - it was a well done interview.

"and was rewarded by a Dean supporter on DU trying to get me FIRED because I spoke "criticized" the presumptive nominee on a web forum."

So your nasty posts here are a form of collective revenge? Against one jerk-off with a problem? You engage in divisive rhetoric that angers and disturbs literally hundreds (perhaps thousands??) of people who do not understand the context? That starts lame-ass flame wars and insult fests?

Based on your words, which I trust, you didn't start it, and you suffered a terrible attack from an anonymous source for unfair and unmerited reasons.

That sucks, and I am sorry.

But...but..

You yell at me about victimhood mythology?

Come on.

"I have attacked, and will attack again and again and again, the sense of privilege and martyrdom that some...SOME...Dean people have cloaked themselves in."

Fine. Do a better job. Do it in a way that helps those of us who do NOT feel privileged or martyred understand your context and your point. That helps us know that we as an entire group that worked very hard are not being written off, sneered at, and belittled.

"I will attack the Dean people who use that martyrdom to attack others."

Again, good. Do a better job. SOME of the issues raised by hurt, offended, or angry Dean supporters are issues that YOU raised in your article - the media, the Osama ads, the Brother's remains, and more.

"I will attack any Dean person who pretends that, during Dean's time on top, the Dean folk here didn't lord it over everyone and push the definitions of 'obnoxious' into broad new vistas."

Oh, indeed, indeed they did.

I for one spent a good deal of time telling them to stop. As did many others.

But I, for one, also remember back to when Dean was an asterisk with support and recognition lower than all the other candidates, getting trashed, having to defend my choice against dishonest, insincere, poorly sourced, arrogant, unfair, divisive, and insulting attacks from all sides...attacks that were posted again and again and again.

Look, now that I know more about the genesis of this whole business, I feel a lot better about it.

I understand why you are angry, and even agree to some extent. I would be, and am, angry too.

And I certainly hope that whoever tried to get you fired understands just how lame that is, and understands (more importantly) just how badly stupid shit like that can backfire onto them, and their own candidate, and their own candidate's other supporters.

So, Will, peace.

Step back from it.

Turn it around.

Ease up a bit, and you'll be surprised at how quickly most others do too.

And, you'll be surprised at how many will string up the ones who do NOT ease up....let them hang themselves by their own petards.


On edit:

My name is Daniel Curewitz.

I am a 33 year old Jewish male, born and raised in rural Maine.

I currently live in Tokyo, where I am engaged in Structural Geology and Tectonics Research at the Ocean Research Institute, University of Tokyo.

My politics are very very Left, as my handle might indicate.

I supported Dean out of pragmatism, coupled with surprised respect for his courage, coupled with admiration for the Dean For America organization (warts and all)

My email address is [e-mail]

email me if you wish - anonymity is a myth, anyway.

I fear nothing.

[Gore1FL]

99. After rerading through this and other trhreads tonight

I long for the simpler days at DU when people actually read more than the title of the thread before assuming they knew what it was about.

Sure, Will could have stated it better and presented it a lot more logically, butwhen you get down to it, all he is saying is:

Lets quit bemoaning the losses of our respective candidates. The Defact nominee is John Kerry. John Kerry is better than Bush.

We have bigger fish to fry now.

[WilliamPitt]

107. No. The real thread is

"Will Pitt is a drunk who 'savages' Howard Dean."

Read closely. That's the deal.

Or something.

:eyes:

I type real well for being a drunk. Don't I?

[GalleryGod]

139. Hey,Will! You can put the Bumper Sticker on the Chariot,Now!

Thanks for the inspiration when those ethereal "poll" numbers weren't so good.

See you on your Home Turf, This Summer, Not to worry we've got our own lodging!

Oooops! I must remember to mind the future Pulitzer when traipsing around your place!

D00-BIES!


Too many numbers to crunch and the S.U.B. is trashed!
:hangover: G.G.:smoke:

[Gore1FL]

142. Hahahah

n/t

[DannyRed]

109. Oh, and to respond directly to the post at hand...

Dean didn't lose.

Dean won.

He helped midwife and interesting and possible important phenomenon into modern politics.

To be sure he did not create it from thin air, he was not the only one and he was probably not the first one, he did not do it alone (not by any means) and he did not do it perfectly (far far from it)...but there it is.

He helped bring the rhetorical house down around GWBush's ears, led point on a series of really damaging attacks on the GOP, the right and Bush, and made room for the other candidates to do so as well.

He re-energized many who were apathetic, and helped bring in many who were new to the game or had never been active before.

He forced the other candidates to address him and the issues he brought to the table.

And I do not think he is done...not by any means.

Now, let's get to those supporters of his...like me...and like many others....well, they were certainly important drivers in the equation...how important? No one really knows yet - that is something that will remain to be seen...

But he won.

So there.

[WilliamPitt]

114. So he wasn't running to win the Democratic nomination?

He should have told a lot of people that a while ago.

I give him credit for doing everything you say he did. But he lost. Either that, or he was never really in the running for the nomination...which means the Dean 'victims' I speak of aren't victims, because he never had a chance, because he didn't want one.

Is that right?

[Wonk]

118. (I don't really want to go here, but...) Two words: Dennis Kucinich. nt

[WilliamPitt]

120. Go there all you like

Dennis got his ass beat in. I see his supporters here coping really well...or better than some Dean folk, anyway.

[Name removed]

121. Deleted message

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

[WilliamPitt]

123. Before your post gets deleted for a personal attack

some reading:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x415664

[ShaneGR]

129. Was that your first campaign Will?

Because I've been on a couple. When a press-secretary gets hired and let go within a matter of weeks it usually means things weren't just fine.

[shance]

133. Oh William - Im sure you have been punching alert all night at those of

us who dare to dispute the almighty YOU.

YOU asked for it and stop being a wimp. Be a man and deal with what you INVITED for a change.

[Gore1FL]

148. He only asked for it

by not making the Thread title more in line to what his initial post was about.

Therefore it was misleading to those who didn't bother to read the actual text of the initial post.

If the title was "Let's follow Dean's lead and get behind Kerry" I suspect a lot less flaming would be going on.

[DannyRed]

134. In terms of the nomination fight?

Yes, he lost the nomination. Or was erased. Or was removed. Or whatever.

Point being that Dean went for broke, played his cards, and came up short on the nomination.

But take a closer look. You talked with the man...what was he all about? What did he REALLY want?

He wanted to "TAKE AMERICA BACK"

Right?

Well, he just may have done it.

Which means he won.

If, by winning, one means achieving one's goals, that is.

Right?

Let's use a really lame-ass metaphor:

Did Moses win, or did he lose?

[VelmaD]

141. Some observations on this thread

First, let me say that everyone on this thread needs to go to bed right now. From the level of discourse it's obvious you all aren't at your best at this time in the morning.

Second, I for one still cannot believe the number of people on this board who click on threads KNOWING full well they're gonna be pissed off by the content...and then have the temerity to act all pissed off about the content. For those of you on this thread with some sort of problem with Will...can't you put him on ignore or just not read what he writes or something? The fact that you continue to follow him around to try to poke at him says something about you.

Third, I'm really tired of the ridiculous expectations some people seem to have around here regarding Will. I've told him this repeatedly as a joke but it's only funny because it's partly true...he has to write things that everyone agrees with 100 percent of the time. :eyes: It's like some of you have built up this larger than life version of Will in your heads. And you either set about tearing it down (and trying to tear down the real Will in the process) to make yourself feel bigger. Or you tear it down because the real Will has the unmitigated gall not to agree with you on everything. Or the worst sin of all, he engages in behavior that shows he's just this guy in Boston...a regular person. Granted, a regular person who gets it right a lot of the time and a regular person who has a hell of a gift and a regular person with a passion that we could all use a little more of, but a regular person nonetheless who engages in all the same normal bullshit behavior that all the rest of us do. We can't be having that. :eyes:

Finally, the next person who accuses Will of posting while intoxicated or casts apsersions about why he left the Kucinich campaign or makes other accusationts about him without any evidence whatsoever to back up their claims...well, you and me are gonna have a problem. It's really easy to throw accusations around when you're anonymous. Doesn't take any guts at all.

[DNA]

156. I don't know Will

I do agree with your first comment. There seems to be a lot of nastiness out there. People are personalizing everything and attacking each other as human beings rather than making rational arguments. We need charm school something fierce.

[CWebster]

157. This is the most pathetic thread ever

How could Pitt still be so obsessed with Dean or Dean supporters? What could they possibly represent that burns him so harshly? You would think he would be overjoyed yet-he is consumed by bitterness. Those internal demons of a guilty conscience?

Sad.

[Iverson]

158. I'll have an order of apple coddler ...

Let's see ... the special of the day is Dean on a Stick.
Hang on! Are Kucinich and Sharpton served in this restaurant (and if so, then in what kind of sauce)?