Hillary's "Dean Scream" moment.

How many of you here, especially any Dean supporters, hated the way that was used against him? The act of taking one moment of emotion and trying to equate it as something that shows how crazy, shrill, or mean someone is is garbage politics at it's worst. If the way the Dean Scream was used against him pissed you off then you should be equally wary of how some are already trying to use this against Hillary, and that applies whether you personally support her or not.

camera. Hillary forgot this and ended up looking crazy.

And obviously you've hitched your seat to Hillary. I'd fight this to if I were you, because its going to end up helping to cost her the election.

That perfectly illustrates your own simplistic and myopic view. Hillary is dead last on my list. Next?

We all tell little white lies during primary season.

There are posts by me here telling people I won't even vote for her in the General Election unless the race is tight here in Mass, and even then I'm not sure.

We all tell little white lies during primary season.

Speak for yourself, and thanks for the insight into your integrity, or lack thereof.

Next?

openly on DU is you find yourself aligned with some real pieces of work.

anyone who posts here as much as you do, should know that.

It clearly shows how people need to demonize a person in some way so they can feel superior in their position. If they admit that someone who might agree with them on many issues actually doesn't agree on something like this that means they would have to think for a minute instead of falling back on stock answers, and that's work. They can't have that. It hurts their brains.

Hilary acted like the same old Washington politics. Attacking and bickering.

And the ABC moderator opened the debate by specifically challenging her to attack Obama. That wasn't even a debate question for all the candidates. He literally forced Clinton's first comments to be negative ones directed at Obama's record, asking her to be specific about what in Obama's political record she thought voters should ponder for inconsistencies.

Edwards jumped in against Clinton like a tag team wrestler. Any other Democrat who doesn't go ballistic when accused as Hillary was by Edwards of being in collusion with special interest forces who seek to lock in a status quo that harms the interests of working Americans would be hounded endlessly on DU for having no spine or worse; of actually being guilty as charged because they did NOT get furious over such a smear. When it is a Democrat defending themselves against a FOX news jock like that we cheer. When it is Hillary Clinton, who has devoted her entire adult life to the Democratic Party including organizing for George McGovern and staffing impeachment proceedings against Nixon, who gets outraged at the implications of that smeer then suddenly it is "a melt down". It seems men never melt down, they bitch slap their accusers. Women are the ones who "melt down", right?

will she come through this? She'd be loving it if it were happening to someone else.

She took care of herself all by herself in real time just fine. She handled the crap thrown at her exactly like any one of us would expect a democrat to react to charges of being in collusion with forces working against the middle and working classes. I am proud of how she reacted, there is absolutely nothing to pity her for.

Except she can't be in all places at all times to deal with some of the slime ball efforts to spin and misrepresent what she actually did and said. She showed appropriate passion and she would not just shut up and take it and bless her for that. It is up to activists like us to defend Democrats who show a willingness to defend themselves if the media tries to manipulate reality when they fight for themselves and what they believe, not be complicit in those efforts.

There was a lot of real substance in that debate. There was plenty of matters where candidates differed in emphasis at least, but often policy and priorities also. One does not have to support Clinton for President. One can have principled disagreements with her. But one does not have to buy into a mean spirited media false characterization of her in order to oppose her either.

that warmongering, bush enabling, business as usual, clinton.

She sure didn't look passionate about anything else.

the job ahead and her drive to succeed at it.

or something outside of her own ambition. Such as showing the same passion for avoiding war as she obviously has for being in power.

Make that George McGovern of course. I am flying from thread to thread typing almost faster than I can think tonight. I'll finD a shrink later to ask what the implications of "George Mondale" flying off my fingers really is

P.S. I corrected it through an edit

This election has really opened my eyes.

Its getting a bit old.
She lost her shit because she wasnt getting her way.
plain and simple.

For simple minds.

It has nothing to do with being a woman. Quite frankly, the only ones I see making it an issue of being a woman are some Hillary supporters who see that because she is a woman she has a sense of entitlement to run. Any criticism, valid or not, is written off as mysogynistic.

Quity frankly, one of the reasons Hillary is not as well liked is because, in addition to presenting an image of being cold and calculating, she acts as if she has some sort of entitlement to the presidency.

it is all strategy

I hated when it was done to Howard Dean and even some so called friends made fun of it. I never saw it as "humorous" or "funny" in any way. It was distorted to destroy the political aspirations of a great guy. No one deserves to have that done to them. NO ONE.

and the question is, can you overcome it? That's the test.

That being said, I thought for a moment there that she was going to knock Richardson's toupee off...

Peace

I don't care whether or not Hillary is a woman. Gender doesn't mean anything to me in an Election.

Her CORPORATIST politics does get my attention.

She is Busco-lite or Bushco Blue.

She takes her money from the lobbyists and then wants you to believe she will be a tad less corporate than Bushco.

I hope her candidacy goes down in flames, leaving Edwards and Obama or a deadlock which brings in Gore!

Did you also know Al Gore said he discovered Love Canal and invented the internet? :eyes:

What goes around comes around.

How about this instead; If it was wrong to do it to one person than maybe it's wrong to the same to another? Two wrongs not making a right, and all that. :think:

:eyes:

to prevent it happening to her. They made it clear that this sort of thing is fair game. They can't cry foul now.

Is revenge that important to you? And when you get it, can the next person take revenge on you and claim you deserved it like you're doing? And where does that eventually end?

They wrote the rules. Now they should abide by them. I didn't see Hillary or Bill come to Dean's defense.

That seems fair.

I don't think we're going to agree on this one.

Peace

Trust me, the corporate media aren't going to to after Hill like they did Dean. Rupert Murdoch didn't give her that money to see her lose.

I was a Kucinich supporter in '04 and I am again in '08. If I had to pick out of the top three it would be Edwards. I'll tell the DLC it was wrong if you agree that doing the exact same thing would also be wrong. ;)

My point is that, if anyone did it to Hillary, it would be because they learned it from her and her cronies.

I thought it was one of her best.

She got pissed 'cause Edwards stuck her in the back. I like it when candidates show some emotion. When they go off script a bit.

my estimation one of her better moments. When edwards decided to double team hrc with obama then hrc saw it coming and she headed it off and you obama folks can call it a dean moment or pissed off or whatever,but a funny thing happened, HRC scored points against this double team. Hell, Obama came across as lackluster and reminded me of Bob Dole giving the republican response to President Clinton in 1996 and he like obama tonight looked like the National Director of Morticians.

I would say HRC did herself some good tonight and if you think obama did good by just sitting there and not being focused and at times giving incoherent comments (ie Bush) then Bill Richardson was a debate master.

Ben David

on her from Edwards.

Of course, it seems that "strong and forceful" are words reserved only for men in the political arena. Hillary got "emotional". "Lost control". Women, you know, are prone to that...

:sarcasm:


The double standard that's constantly being applied to HRC is nauseating. I think it's interesting that outside of the usual suspects who are stirring up shit tonight, there are a lot of non Hillary supporters who are recognizing the double standard.

did he lose his cool like Hillary did?


She didn't lose her cool because she is a woman. She lost her cool because she...well, there isn't a real good explanation for it! Why would she run for such a pressure packed job if she can't handle a debate?

I didn't see her "lose her cool".

Apparently you and I watched the same debate.

Your use of imagery sucks

not Hillary.

Steph used to work for him....

Does anybody have a link to video of what you're talking about?

had to manipulate the microphone to create Dean's Scream. I didn't see the debate but I'm doubting the m$$$$$$$$$$m will play hillary's whatever 700 times like they did Dean's. They were scared of Dean and still are.

but they're still hoping for a Hillary nomination. She may screw that up, but the MSM won't help her do it.

:popcorn: i'll sit this one out and enjoy the show.

:)

:hi:

She couldn't have screamed or I would have heard it. I saw all of it.

But its there now in those who want it to be.

losing it . . . well, my goodness. Some people must scare real easily!

She didn't even raise her voice that I could tell.

I'm not a huge fan of the Hillary of this campaign, but dang, this is a phony charge.

I saw the clip at TPM, and I thought Hillary acquitted herself fairly well. She strongly defended her own record, put it in the context of the conversation of the moment, and wrapped it up with concrete examples of changes she helped bring about.

This is no "Dean Scream" moment for a couple of reasons, however: First, the Dean Scream was a blatantly misleading bit of tape, and the outlets that ran it over and over again (CNN in particular) knew it. They knew Dean was in a boisterous, raucous room, and that the microphone he was using electronically filtered out all the other noise going on in the room. It made Dean sound shrill, but in the context of what was going on in the room at the time, was wholly appropriate. The electronic doctoring of the sound clip, accomplished by the microphone Dean was holding, made the clip a complete lie about what had really happened in that room full of supporters.

Second, Clinton, like Dean, expressed herself in a wholly appropriate manner given what was going on at the moment. Shorn of its context, with some electronic "enhancement," it could become another Dean Scream. I'd like to think that at least the folks here at DU are a smidged more sophisticated than that. See in Clinton's statement what you will, but I thought it was a good play of a weak hand.

I find it stunning that some DUers still buy into "The Dean Scream." I know one person in the room that evening, and she didn't even hear it. Corporate Media didn't like Dean, and Corporate Media took out Dean. Yeeeargh.

But Carville and his ilk made sure the rest of us did.

don't get anywhere near any of our candidates.

This is just my opinion, but here's why I think Dean's moment and Hillary's moment
are like comparing apples and hockey pucks.

First off, when Howard Dean behaved that way, I never once though, "Oh my gosh, that's
so out of character for him." Dean was himself, only magnified. The impression I got
watching Hillary is that her facade was removed. The curtains were parted and we saw
what was inside. And it was kinda ugly.

In addition, Dean had his moment at a rollicking, high-energy, rah-rah rally. Hillary
was at a debate. This was a lively debate, but her emotion and lashing out was a bit
over the top.

I mentioned this in an earlier post. If you look at what happened before this moment, Obama
slams her, then Edwards slams her and comes to the defense of Obama. Hillary was livid. It
is OBVIOUS that Edwards and Obama had decided before the debate to unite and position her as
the outsider and the status quo--with those two positioning themselves as the agents of change
who will be attacked by the establishment.

Hillary was so pissed off that anyone would dare, in a sense, to double cross her. You could
see this on her face. It was as if she was saying, "Oh no you don't you assholes. You don't
do this to ME!". If you catch her, right before she responds she says something about, "Ok...
this is obvious..." And she stops herself at "obvious." You know she was thinking and about
to say, "It's obvious you guys are working against me here" and it drove her to the nostril
flaring that we saw!

I think there's a huge difference between Dean elevating his emotions at a rally--and Hillary
unleashing an indignant and vindictive part of herself--at a Presidential debate.

It'll be interesting to see how this all shakes out.

As someone not tied to any candidates 'wagon-train' ... she did not appear to me to be either indignant or vindictive. She simply looked like a candidate defending herself and making a point. I know many would be delighted if she just stood there with an empty expression on her face and let all the misinformation go unchallenged ... but that's not her style.

That's my opinion.


edit for missed word.

...different people saw different things.

Big whoop.

Quick! Someone call a press conference, not everyone in America
agrees with what they just saw in a debate.

:eyes:

That's a big bad booboo don't you know?

I automatically discount the opinions of people who accept that kind of "thinking". That's just yahoo-level stuff. Karl Rove called. He wants his superficial politics for gibbering idiots back.

LOL...that about sums it up.

btw ... I love your little Godzilla. :hi:

Someone in a bar could take me home with that as a pickup line. :evilgrin:

because when I read what I'd typed I thought it might sound kinda suggestive ... but then I thought ... nah, not everyone has my dirty mind. :blush:

When dealing with me it's safe to assume my mind is not only as dirty, but probably more so. :D

And yet, here are the same infantile blow-hards, Fox news watching, "who would you rather have a beer with", morons....trying to dredge it up again.

You know who they are. And it is equally as repulsive now as it was then.

I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but there are some "paid by the post" GOP assholes on this site.

That was pretty much my inspiration for this thread. As much I don't support Clinton I don't want to see the same tactics that were so bad then being used again.

I'm only seeing this so-called "Dean scream" moment by HRC on DU. Not Fox News or CNN or MNSBC any other MSM. In fact, the whole thing is absurd. It was a forceful, articulate response, nothing more or less.

Also: If you're watching the MSM, including FOX, you'll see that Fox is aligned with the rest of them in one important way: They cover Hillary Clinton and Obama, and DESTROY Edwards by ignoring him. There is no way they would want HRC damaged at this point - it would hurt their effort to remove Edwards from the running. They'll wait till that happens before really focusing their negative attacks on the other two. Sure, they've done a few snark attacks but those are just warmups.

What's wrong with getting a little pissed off once in a while? I saw a later broadcast and, from what DUers were saying, I was expecting a total meltdown. Sadly (for this Edwards supporter) she came off as forceful and passionate in that exchange.

after reading the comments in this thread, you can see how difficult it is to defend Clinton even on something as basic as this.

I appreciate your effort.

There's some people who get it, and for that I'm grateful. The ones who don't are usually pretty hypocritical and shouldn't be taken too seriously, so I can't say I worry about them not agreeing. :)

When?

it won't fly