Harold Ickes collecting Dem names and trying to take out Dean?

I've been extremely busy today and caught a bit of Washington Journal this morning. I though I heard Steve read an article about Ickes trying to collect/purchase/strongarm? databases of Dem voters out of someone for the purpose of collecting money and support for Hillary and trying to knock Dean down a peg as Party Chairman. Did anyone else hear that item this morning?

and the Repugs capitalize on it over and over again...Novemember is around the corner and they are doing this shit!!!

I recall that wacko conspiracy theorist - you know the one that thinks the lizards rule the earth...

you're referring to david ickes

They're making a database to help ID voters and rival the Repug's database.
So is the DNC.

Frankly, a little competition in the area might spur them both on to make a good product.

He is forming a private company to make a database. Why not work with the DNC and the company they have with them?

I only care if it works.

We cared only about winning, not about issues. Our Democrats gave him the war, the judges who will control this country for decades, and he got most of his agenda.

Bill Clinton tried to stop Dean from becoming chair. In fact, he tried to kill two birds with one stone for Hillary's 08 run by attempting to persuade Wes Clark to challenge Dean for the chairmanship. Wes declined.

I'm very weary of the Clintons.

repeated by people who don't want Hillary in the primaries.

In any event, here's just one source of what everyone knew at the time.

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/index.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2005/02/08/dean/index.html

Apology? I doubt it because it's usually something namecallers don't do. We'll see.

I have a lot of sources.

Unfortunately, it is true. And I agree with you, it is despicable.

Here's one link from Salon. http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/index.html?blog=/politics/war_room/2005/02/08/dean/index.html

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?pt=GC1nbWBk1KawulpqPq3uRR%3D%3D

You may need to be a subscriber to read it.

I wonder if you'll be called RNC now, too? Thanks for the supportive link.

By the way, Clark spoke about this as well. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6822569/

two articles I can't access.

I did not call you RNC - I merely indicated that these talking points sound like RNC points and I feel they are being used (opportunistically) by people who don't support Hillary.

I don't have a problem with anyone who does not support Hillary during the primaries but just wanted to let you know that your motives are pretty transparent.

Bill Clinton tried to sabotage Howard Dean from being Chair of the Democratic Party. The fact that you didn't know this fact that was national news and the fact that you can't access the two links that were provided to you by another DU'er and myself does not undo reality.

My motives are "transparent"? Your motives apparently allow you smear me suggesting that I am spreading RNC talking points about something you knew nothing about.

For your information, I was an elected delegate from California at both the 1992 & 1996 Democratic National Conventions and voted for him ON THE FLOOR and campaigned for him, raised money for him and attended the 1992 Inauguration at his invitation. There are many here at the DU who know me personally, something you don't.

Just because someone shares something that you didn't know about and that the facts are displeasing to learn is not reason to shoot the messenger.

I am not sure what it is you want proof of? Will be glad to help.

Howard Dean's revolution


Howard Dean's ascension in the DNC race has been so steady, so seemingly inevitable, that there will be a ho-hum quality to the proceedings when he's actually elected this weekend in Washington. It's easy to forget what a revolution this actually is.
Ryan Lizza reminds us in The New Republic. "The DNC chair race has exposed deep fissures within the Democratic Party," Lizza writes. "Some of these are ideological, but the real story of the race is the diffusion of power away from Washington and to new people and entities that have rushed to fill the power vacuum at the top of the party. When the Democrats control the White House, the president can simply pick the chair of the party. But, even when out of power, Democratic pooh-bahs traditionally rally around a consensus figure and present him to the DNC members as a fait accompli. An open process with all the trappings of a modern political campaign--including a seven-candidate field, fund-raising, regional debates, and smear campaigns in the press--is unprecedented in the party's history."

Not everyone is thrilled with the revolution, of course. James Carville says that "somebody should have fixed this damn thing in November" to avoid the embarrassment of a party looking disorganized and weak. But as Lizza explains, "every attempt to rig the race failed, revealing that the levers of power in the Democratic Party have shifted out of Washington's hands."

That's certainly true where the DNC is concerned. As Lizza notes, the 447 members of the DNC are generally local party operatives and activists, frequently frustrated that the national party gives their states neither the time nor the money they deserve. Howard Dean promised to send money to state parties and compete against the Republicans everywhere. Establishment Democrats tried to cut Dean off at the pass; Bill Clinton tried to recruit Wes Clark, Chuck Schumer urged Terry McAuliffe to stay on, Nancy Pelosi pushed pro-lifer Tim Roemer. Guess which approach spoke to the local-minded DNC members more?

Whether Dean's rise signals a shift in Democratic power more generally is open to debate. True, as Lizza writes, big party donors like Leo Hindery can no longer drop into a DNC meeting and expect that the endorsements of people like Dick Gephardt will give them the DNC chairmanship by acclamation. (Lizza says that Hindery's aides were so thunderstruck by the blog-enduced animosity toward their man at a DNC meet-and-greet in Orlando that they sent him home before he appeared, leaving some Democratic operatives to salute him in absentia with drinks from his hotel mini-bar.) But there's a difference between controlling the 447 members of the DNC and controlling the party, a difference between winning the DNC chairmanship and winning the Democratic nomination for the presidency or the White House itself. Dean has climbed the first hurdle. The real work -- for him and for his party -- begins now.


-- Tim Grieve

Remember, their SOP is CREATING division and character assasinations.

I'd pull back from this speculation.

Neither is the fact that he is an advisor to Hillary. Also true is that he said it was a commentary on Dean's ability at the DNC.

There is very little speculation. The DNC has a company contracted for fundraising already.

Ickes apparently thought enough of Dean to endorse him for Chair.

link

coming up on the situation room

Bastards.