Most Harmful Democrat: Donna Brazile

By Big Tent Democrat

One of the biggest problems in the DNC remains the horrible Donna Brazile. Look at this divisive rhetoric:

There's a group around [Sen. Clinton] that really wants to take the fight to the convention. They don't care about the party. It scares me, and that's what scares a lot of superdelegates.

What a harmful figure Donna Brazile is to the Democratic Party. Apparently she cares not at all about unifying the Democratic Party. She should resign from the DNC immediately.

< A Reason The Race Should Continue: Debating "Umbrella of Deterrence" | Umbrella Of Deterrence Part II >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Heh! (5.00 / 4) (#3)
    by Fabian on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:07:41 AM EST
    Mommmy, make her go away!  She's scaring me!

    Yeesh.  I think Hillary's huevos are bigger than most of the other democrats.

    this is why the Dems lose. (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by kimsaw on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:10:05 AM EST
    They are AFRAID of themselves and DEMOCRACY! She needs to resign and this party needs to get down to business. This proves one thing to on lookers. Clinton is one tough candidate and she is the leader most needed at this time! At least Clinton isn't afraid to go to the mat.

    She's Not Afraid of Democracy (5.00 / 7) (#9)
    by BDB on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:12:15 AM EST
    She's afraid that Obama is losing his grip on the nomination and with it her plans to rise higher in the DNC.  

    This isn't about what's good for the party, this is about what's good for Donna Brazile.  As it always is.


    her loss in 2000 (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Salo on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:14:05 AM EST
    as a strategist should preclude her from higher staff positions forEVAH.

    Have never understood (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Fredster on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:29:12 AM EST
    How she got as high as she is now!  Sheesh!  Fired from one campaign, loses a Presidential bid in 2000 for another.  This is the formula for success?  And yet there she is, creating all this mischief.  Incredible!

    I had not seen her on the teevee shows lately and thought (hoped) she'd gone into hiding.  Oh well...


    Donna is bitter! (none / 0) (#64)
    by ghost2 on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:22:37 PM EST
    She said in those emails that the only people helping her were republican men. She said after 2000 that Rove called her, and said, "Donna, how are YOU doing?"

    Well, to be charitable, Al Gore has a terrific family, and I simply don't know if Donna had that kind of support.  Al Gore dealt with the loss graciously.  But, you know Donna, it was a really HARD loss for lots of people.  Heartbreaking. Devastating.  You were a grown up, and were playing in the big leagues.  If you couldn't see by then that you can't rely on politicians and political operatives for loyalty and understanding, you were in the wrong business.  

    What do they say? If you need a friend in Washington, get a dog.


    Read That Brazile Wants To Replace Dean (none / 0) (#20)
    by MO Blue on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:17:40 AM EST
    as chairman of the DNC. If that becomes a reality, it would guarantee that the DNC would not receive a penny from during her tenure.

    That's for sure the day I register as an Indie. (none / 0) (#72)
    by Maria Garcia on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:29:29 PM EST
    I'm with you Maria. (none / 0) (#79)
    by mexboy on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:44:28 PM EST
    I would register as an indie myself.

    My suspicion (none / 0) (#40)
    by cal1942 on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:50:59 AM EST
    is that it's not just Donna Brazile, although she's a prime example.

    It's my feeling that the party has a considerable number of people likewise inclined.

    It's their position that counts, not victory.

    I've actually witnessed this at a lower level.

    For some time I felt that these people didn't really want to lose.  They were simply focused on their own standing instead of the needs of the day.

    Now I'm not so sure that there aren't cynical calculations made to preserve position(s) even at the cost of sacrificing an election.

    Hopefully someday an honest participant or astute witness will write the story.


    There's an argument... (none / 0) (#51)
    by Salo on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:03:09 PM EST
    ...and it goes like this:

    Senators and Congressmen have tasted legistlative power for the first time in 12 years.

    An unpopular Democratic president would upset the cusshy sinecures they now enjoy.

    Better to lose a presidential election than gain a President and lose a midterm and thus lose the Senate and House.


    yep--that's the deal (none / 0) (#58)
    by kempis on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:10:33 PM EST
    I'm convinced the DNC knows that Obama can't win the general, not with such low polling in key demographic groups in swing states.

    But they think it makes more sense to lose with the candidate that improves their brand with young people.

    I think they're wrong. I think they're stepping back into those old "liberal elite" concrete boots by running Obama.


    I think they are thinking (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by barba on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:54:34 PM EST
    all these people who are BO supporters are going to vote in droves for down ticket dem races.  In Texas at least, according to exit polling, they voted for no one.

    Don't know about other states, but here in NC, you vote separately for the president...you could conceivably go to the voting booth and vote for president and just bypass every other race quite easily and quickly.  Even if you vote a straight democratic ticket, you HAVE to vote separately for president.  If you don't realize this, you have not voted for president, screwed up, YES...


    I've heard Obama voters didn't vote downticket (none / 0) (#98)
    by jawbone on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 02:52:50 PM EST
    in the TX primary--and perhaps they really didn't know who the candidates were and felt they couldn't vote wisely.

    Do you have any links for this info? Anyone?

    Usually the higher office candidates work through their organization to help the downticket candidates, but not always. Especially since it means taking sides in a primary.


    Obama post-PA strategy (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by jackyt on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:55:01 AM EST
    I just read a comment/post over at Open Left that recommends a strategy for the Obama campaign starting tomorrow.

    If Clinton wins by 10 points or more, Obama should just act like the presumptive nominee, freezing Clinton out. No comments, no debates. Just "I am the One!"

    The inference is that if she wins by less than 10 she's toast. Call me stupid... I just don't get it.


    They Don't Care If He's President (5.00 / 2) (#47)
    by BDB on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:59:08 AM EST
    They just want him to be the nominee.

    That's the only explanation I can offer for such awful and divisive advice.  

    Not that I think following that advice would increase his chances of becoming the nominee - I don't see how acting as if he already has sufficient SD support will get him that support.  It seems like a stupid strategy all the way around to me.


    He has already announced (none / 0) (#76)
    by felizarte on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:35:28 PM EST
    that he is leaving for Indiana before the Pennsylvania votes are in.  Heard this on Morning Joe. I guess he really expects to lose PA just like what he did in Nevada.

    Nope, wrong again -- she often has stayed (none / 0) (#103)
    by Cream City on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:58:39 PM EST
    not always but often, whether win or lose.  And if she has to concede, she always has called for all to be ready to help a Dem win in fall.  I have watched and listened quite closely to their post-primary/caucus speeches.  (You can find them on Youtube, btw.)

    You are correct that he has not always given concession speeches (such bad form) and rarely calls for support for anything but his campaign.


    That's HILLROD to you....lol (none / 0) (#108)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:11:43 PM EST
    Brazile Loses FL, Yet Again. (5.00 / 8) (#10)
    by JoeCHI on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:12:58 AM EST
    Apparently losing FL in 2000 is not enough for Brazile.  Clearly, she insists on doing it again in 2008!

    She hates Hurricanes? (none / 0) (#28)
    by Salo on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:30:58 AM EST
    Double Standard on Rules (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:13:22 AM EST

    If you follow her Frau Brazille's logic, rules apply only to FL and MI.  The party rules about the primary process should be avoided at all costs cause it "hurts" the party.  Now, if she has such faith in their rule making, why is the process of carrying through to the convention floor destructive?  These are the rules, it's in the process.  So, as we adhere to the rules as regards to Fl and MI we must adhere to these rules.  

    Brazille and the Obama crowd want Hillary to roll over so that the cowardly SDs do not have to make a difficult decision.  If Hillary drops out, they can say, well she dropped out and they can without guilt support Obama, get PC points and  we lose the General Election.  

    They hesitate cause they know he is not electable.  

    Donna Brazile (5.00 / 0) (#13)
    by rooge04 on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:13:40 AM EST
    is threatening with violence and fisticuffs at the convention. Trying to scare supers into giving the nom to Obama OR ELSE.  

    Donna is my nominee (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:14:39 AM EST
    For best candidate for the "Not a Democrat" designation.

    How in the world could she possibly be a Democrat when she wants so badly to sabotage the party?

    I think its more like a tie (5.00 / 2) (#35)
    by TalkRight on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:45:51 AM EST
    with Dean and Nanci Pelosi.

    No (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by BDB on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:01:25 PM EST
    Dean and Pelosi may have said things that I think damage the party, but I don't think they intend to and I think, in fact, they have the party's best interest at heart even if I disagree with some of their statements and behavior.

    Brazile does not have the best interest of the party at heart.  I say that not because she appears to support Obama, but because she appears to want to split the party or at least doesn't care if it splits.  That's not in any democrat's interest, including Obama's.

    And this is why she's so damaging, she hurts even those democrats she ostensibly is trying to help.


    perhaps... (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by white n az on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 01:14:03 PM EST
    but it surely appears as though it is Dean, Brazille and Obama that are the vocal leaders of preventing the seating of FL and MI delegates.

    Dean, Brazaille and Obama surely can fix anytime this perception any time they choose to do so...we're still waiting.

    As for Obama's supporters claim that the Clintons are destroying the party...they have a vested interest in making that claim...because they stand in his way. Perhaps Obama should remind us how Bill's 2 terms...the only living 2 term Democratic president has destroyed the party again because I keep forgetting.


    Have you watched the video here (none / 0) (#104)
    by Cream City on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 06:00:44 PM EST
    in earlier threads of her performance in the committee meeting that amended the rules to screw over FL and MI?  If not, you might want to watch her gameplaying at that meeting before you speak on her behalf.

    I'm Not Talking About the Campaigns (5.00 / 2) (#101)
    by BDB on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 03:32:40 PM EST
    I'm talking about Donna Brazile.  I don't care whose side she's on, it's bad for democrats to have someone in the DNC threaten to leave the party over how the nomination comes out.  If Donna Brazile can leave the party over the primaries, then why can't you or I?  As a DNC leader shouldn't her first priority be to prevent that?  And how damaging is it that having blown any appearance of neutrality, she played such a crucial role in stripping Florida and Michigan of all of their delegates, giving some credence to the idea that it was done to help Obama, not to protect the party (which 50% penalty would've probably been sufficient to do)?  

    This isn't about Obama, I expect him to do what's in his best interest and not the party's.  Just as I expect the same from Clinton.  At least while the campaign is going on (in the end, I expect both of them to be good democrats).

    But the very fact you equate her with Clinton advisors is why I condemn her.  She isn't making these statements as an Obama partisan, she's ostensibly making them as a neutral party member.  And by doing so, she's throwing her credibility - and by extension the DNC's - away.  Credibility that's going to be desperately needed to resolve this entire mess in a way that doesn't split the party.


    Again, We'd Be Wise To Remember (5.00 / 7) (#16)
    by The Maven on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:14:51 AM EST
    that this is someone who in early February said that she would quit the DNC if the superdelegates ended up choosing the nominee.  She also indicated that the superdelegates "should reflect the will of the people," unless they happen to live in Florida or Michigan, that is.

    She said she would walk out.... (5.00 / 3) (#32)
    by ineedalife on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:36:58 AM EST
    if anybody used the politics of personal destruction. Well we've seen the "Hillary is a monster comment" and the "Hillary will do or say anything to get elected" comments, and this week's full out onslaught of "Hillary is a liar" ads and phone calls. What is she waiting for?

    plus the sly and deliberate use of keywords (none / 0) (#46)
    by dotcommodity on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:56:49 AM EST
    in speeches like "periodically, when she gets desperate...Hillary attacks"
    lets so you are Jo uninformed, you hear Obama say that...you get to work and want to see it so you google: desperate Hillary attacks

    google it:desperate Hillary attacks


    Well, Hillary must be "anyone", because (none / 0) (#50)
    by FlaDemFem on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:02:32 PM EST
    we all "know" that Obama is the One. So he can't be "anyone", right? And since the One is the candidate involved in the personal attacks, she is not obligated to speak up..see?

    We should start an email campaign to the DNC demanding that she be fired for stupidity.


    Oh donnna , oh ... Donna (5.00 / 0) (#17)
    by drewohio1 on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:16:02 AM EST
    Donna Donna Donna, We knew by your look in Ohio that you were not happy Hillary Won.... oh and the look you will show tonight is going to be priceless because CLINTON WILL WIN BIGGGG in Pennslyvania  !!!!!!

    I never fail to be astounded (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by cawaltz on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:16:11 AM EST
    at the logic gap that some supporters seem to display. Cosidering it is Senator Obama who is claiming "his supporters might not vote for Hillary" why again is Donna Brazile running her ap about how Clinton's supporters want to tear up the party?(Oh that's right I forgot in kool aid land the rules only apply to Senator Clinton, not Senator Unity) Count me in as one of the folks that hopes Hillary takes it all the way to the convention. I'm proud that Hillary believes that every American should have a choice and not just have to rubber stamp whatever the previous states decided for them. Viva la Democracy. Personally, I think it's a stupid argument that Hillary or Obama could not hit McCain during the primary season. They ought to be able to multitask if they are aspiring to the highest office we have.

    she should at least take it to Puerto Rico. (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Salo on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:19:10 AM EST
    If the superdels break the other way at that point so be be it.

    Donna & the Facts (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by BackFromOhio on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:37:12 PM EST
    DB seems to be of the community that empirically-based facts do not count; facts are what you think they are.  To wit, the DNC report on Ohio 2004 and the non-logical arguments to support its conclusion.

    OMG Yes (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by ruffian on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:20:58 AM EST
    A truer headline was never posted.

    I've been waiting for a Donna Brazile thread to tell about something I just read in an excellant book about the Everglades, called 'The Swamp', by Michael Grunwald.  I'll make a long story short. Longtime FL residents probably know this alreayd.

    When Brazile was managing Gore's campaign in 2000, one of the big issues in FL before the election was the federal approval of a major airport in Homestead, FL, near the Everglades.  Environmental groups vehemently opposed it, and so did a lot of Clinton admin officials, but Al Gore refused to make his opinion known one way or another, partly because he thought he should remain neutral until the admin annoucned their decision, and partly because his advisors told him that the main group opposing it was funded by Republicans who just didn't want their posh estates buzzed by the aircraft at the airport. So the environmental groups picketed Al Gore, and withheld their support.  Brazile reportedly sent them a message to "Go f#$# themselves". As a result of his whole handling of that, Al Gore lost a lot of environmental votes to Nader in the GE, and we all know what happened.

    In the end, the Clinton Admin disapproved the airport.

    I didn't know until I read that that Brazile had such a bad history with FL, even before this election cycle  She should never have even been involved in imposing the punsishments this year.  She was clearly biased and out to get FL.

    she said that... (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Salo on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:32:30 AM EST
    ...in so many words? To a group in a swing state?

    Quote from the book (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by ruffian on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:06:27 PM EST
    From The Swamp, by Michael Grunwald, p. 347

    When a Democratic operative had tried to warn Gore campaign manager Donna Brazile that Everglades activists were irate about Homestead, the message had come back "Tell them to go f--- themselves."  Where else could environmentalists turn?

    The answer, for some of them, had been Ralph Nader...."

    Grunwald is a Washington Post reporter, and the book won prizes and is very well sourced, though he does not give a source for this particular quote.


    Wouldn't be too shocked if that was true (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by Step Beyond on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:12:50 PM EST
    I don't know if that is true or not, but that is the same attitude that the DNC and leading Dems seem to have during this whole mess.

    Dean has even said that when it comes down to the election that people would put Iraq and the economy before being denied their vote. Which is just another way of saying "Where else you gonna turn?" So I wonder if they just feed each others opinions that they don't need to worry about earning Dem votes. Maybe they need a business lesson, where in business you need to make sure you value your current customers as it takes more to earn new ones than it does to maintain the ones you have.


    I am on the verge of teaching (none / 0) (#62)
    by ruffian on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:20:02 PM EST
    them that lesson.  Hillary can probably talk me down, if she has to, and I hope she is the nominee so she doesn't have to try to talk us all into voting for Obama.

    Both (none / 0) (#86)
    by Claw on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 01:24:53 PM EST
    Clintons have said, in so many words, that no matter who wins the nomination, be it Clinton or Obama, Democrats should vote for the Democrat.  It was an honorable, sensible gesture.  As I've said before, even if you think Obama is terrible, McCain will be infinitely worse.  So, even if you have to hold your nose to do it, please help save us from 4 (8?) more years of republican rule.  I'll be voting for Hillary if she's the nominee.  

    Don't you understand? (none / 0) (#91)
    by cmugirl on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 01:55:36 PM EST
    Many of us don't think Obama will be any better than McCain (or Bush) at this point because the problems that we face, well, I don't see how Obama's "green-ness" is a better answer than to what we have now. We're just finishing up 8 years of someone who had on-the-job training - we can't afford another 4.

    Many of us also believe that if Obama wins, he is going to be such a disaster, that Democrats will get painted with the same broad brush, and come 2012, you will see a Republican sweep into power like never seen before.


    Don't You Understand (none / 0) (#97)
    by Claw on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 02:43:46 PM EST
    That the President is surrounded by advisors?  That McCain will completely destroy the SC and expand Executive power to an unheard-of degree?  That we'll have conservative justices all the way down the line, so it won't even be necessary for the SC to deny cert.?  That we will increase our illegal activities at home and abroad?  That we will find a way to get ourselves into a war with Iran...with a President who can't keep the ethno-religious groups in IRAQ straight?  I can keep going if you need me to.  It's fine if you favor Clinton over Obama, but considering that both Hillary and Bill have said they would campaign for Barack over McCain, it's a little strange for Hillary supporters to say they think Obama would be just as bad.  It's the same false comparison we fell victim to in 2000 (republicans and dems are basically the same...who'd you rather have a beer with?), and it was as dangerous then as it is now.  If you trust Hillary's judgment, please show it by voting for the democratic nominee.  
    Cmugirl, I don't think we'll see a republican surge to power like the "republican revolution" any time soon.  Also, you do realize that Bill Clinton had on the job training, right?  He, like Bush, was a Governor.  Unlike Bush, he possessed the capacity for abstract thought.  

    Another thing that scares (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by standingup on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:22:39 AM EST
    the superdelegates?  Donna Brazile.

    She (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by sas on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:27:19 AM EST
    should not be acting like a spokesperson anywhere if she cannot be impartial.

    She's scared of a convention fight?  That's what this party has been always about.

    God forbid Obama might have to actually 'go to the mat' for something.

    Obamites are sure scared a lot this week (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by ruffian on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:27:51 AM EST
    I think Donna is another one for the 'if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen' club.

    BTD (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by Claw on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:29:00 AM EST
    Fails to point to Donna's funniest line.  She ominously hints that she's going to be calling her "ex-boss" (Gore.)  Everyone should read the article.  Donna is a riot...if you have a very dark sense of humor.    

    as if (5.00 / 2) (#70)
    by isaac on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:28:07 PM EST
    gore would even take her call


    'it's donna, donna bra...'



    Yeah, right. (none / 0) (#33)
    by Fabian on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:38:55 AM EST
    Gore is on everyone's lips anymore and every single time, it's pure gossip.

    Brazile should try a line that hasn't been done to death on the internet.

    And since when did Gore have so much street cred that people drop his name when they want to say "Daddy spank!" ?  Why imply Gore has the ultimate authority?  Shouldn't that be someone else?


    Well (none / 0) (#36)
    by Steve M on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:46:47 AM EST
    I hear he's had training in how to be an alpha male...

    Remember the Bible story (none / 0) (#38)
    by Fabian on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:49:08 AM EST
    about the moneychangers in the temple?

    If Gore is going to meddle in Party politics, that's what I want to see - a righteous whupping!


    Let's not be bashing Gore, he's a good (none / 0) (#54)
    by Radix on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:03:52 PM EST
    guy. He wont way in till the convention, so Donna, like she already hasn't tried, is welcome to make another call, it wont do her any good.

    Because there are no facts, there is no truth, Just data to be manipulated

    Don Henley-The Garden of Allah


    He's carefully avoided the bear traps (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by Salo on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:09:02 PM EST
    no need to dis him---agreed.

    I'm not dissing Gore. (none / 0) (#71)
    by Fabian on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:29:02 PM EST
    He appears to deliberately have stayed far, far away from this squabble.  It makes sense.  If there was a truly strong advocate for all things environmental in the race, I would not be surprised to see his endorsement.  But neither candidate is strong on environment, objectively.  (Better than McCain, sure - but it's easy enough to be better than Republican.)

    Real Democrats (5.00 / 4) (#30)
    by myiq2xu on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:33:28 AM EST
    are not afraid of democracy!

    And The NOT Real Dems Are The Ones Calling (none / 0) (#109)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:20:15 PM EST
    for Sen. Clinton to leave the race.  WTF

    Howard Dean and Donna Brazile (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by GMN on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:34:07 AM EST
    are two of the biggest reasons for my having decided to drop my registration as a Democrat in favor of Independent.   This party seems destined to destroy itself.

    I think (5.00 / 2) (#34)
    by Claw on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:41:14 AM EST
    Dean is honestly doing what he thinks is best in terms of winning this election and getting more dems elected down ticket.  He may well be doing a poor job, but he isn't in the same class as Brazile.  Not even close.

    Absolutely (none / 0) (#53)
    by BDB on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:03:44 PM EST
    I'm not particularly happy with Dean, but I think he's a good democrat.  I don't think Brazile is a good democrat.  

    Me, too (5.00 / 0) (#43)
    by Davidson on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:54:37 AM EST
    My family and I--staunch, activist Democrats--did that a week or so ago.  The final straw was MI and FL but we had been livid about the smear campaign and (misogynistic) bigotry allowed, if not overtly encouraged, against Sen. Clinton (and the Clinton "brand") by the Democratic "leadership."

    Whenever I think of how much I hate the Obama campaign, I remind myself that those power brokers who enabled them are the true culprits.


    VRI (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by Step Beyond on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:02:02 PM EST
    I knew she was off the RBC in January, but here's the better question....

    Is she still the chair of the DNC Voting Rights Institute?

    Very few in the leadership care for the party (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by Prabhata on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:03:33 PM EST
    Most are out to get something from the party.  That's normal, and Donna is not different.  The only way to get rid of her is for HRC to win.  She'll be packing her desk and out the DNC the same day.

    Why Republicans win (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by dianem on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:10:13 PM EST
    They were completely divided over McCain, and attacked him viciously during the primary, but Rove and the big people pretty much stayed out of the debate (at least directly) so that they could legitimately endorse him as soon as it became obvious that he had won the primary. Now the right wingers who hated McCain are following the lead of the party leaders and supporting him (even though it chokes them) and they have not alienated the moderates who voted him in.

    Leading Democrats, on the other hand, have been falling all over themselves to alienate Clinton voter's and make it quite clear that they need neither her nor supporters to win. They even insulted her donor's when they simply asked Pelosi to be fair. No matter how this turns out, the Democratic Party will be divided for a long time.

    To borrow from HRC: yes, yes, yes (none / 0) (#61)
    by Prabhata on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:17:49 PM EST
    There are lots of things I like to say about Donna (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by ghost2 on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:16:04 PM EST
    But out of respect for Jeralyn and BTD, I refrain (and it kills me to not say what I think here).

    Can this woman be any more divisive?  In a normal time, she would be kicked out of the party.  Does she have no shame? After all those emails came out?  

    What about Florida, Donna?  That after the 2000 experience, you still decided to be a hack, and do all you can to disenfranchise the whole state.  And let me tell you bluntly.  What you and DNC have done is 1000 times worse than what Bush did in 2000.

    If your candidate wins, that may not be the only thing in which he beats Bush.  God help us all.

    No one knows much about Obama, his governing style, his reactions under stress, and the USA and the world is in a FINE mess.  You are asking voters to overlook his lack of foreign policy experience (look over there, Clinton didn't either), his lack of governing experience (oh look, Kennedy didn't either), his lack of legislative experience (oh, look Lincoln didn't either).  But let me spell it out, the lack of gravitas, the lack of either executive, foreign policy, or legislative experience could be catasrophic.  It's like choosing a star hockey player than can neither skate, nor defend, nor shoot, nor score, nor keep goal, just based on the lousy argument that there were some star players in the past who was weak in ONE of these areas.  

    But look, there is a pony over there.  Washington, Europe, and the ME are all going to be equally charmed by Obama, and poof, the US and world problems will disappear.  

    What is the old saying? If you see poop, look, there is a pony around.  Well, judging by the amount of horse--t you have peddled, there must be at least a dozen fine ponies around.  

    Donna was identified (5.00 / 0) (#65)
    by polyblog on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:24:37 PM EST
    as an undeclare super delegage.  A bit misleading.

    My Donna Brazile Theory (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by BDB on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:24:50 PM EST
    Is that she isn't very bright.

    I used to work in a law firm and there would always be one or two associates who thought they were very clever and able to outmaneuver other associates politically within the firm.  The thing is, these are the same people you always saw coming.  Their ulterior motives were like neon lights.  They just didn't realize it.  The really smart ones at the firm, the real sharks, you never saw coming.  

    Yeah (none / 0) (#88)
    by Claw on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 01:39:29 PM EST
    You're right.  I've worked with the same kind of lawyers.  Donna isn't bright.  She isn't good at her job(s)...but she somehow hangs around long enough to make partner.  This route to the top usually applies to men, though.  Possible the legal profession is still more hampered by sexism than the DNC and the pundit market.  

    Agreed. And I never would have her (none / 0) (#105)
    by Cream City on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 06:12:10 PM EST
    in my office.  I've dealt with too many of these types like her, too -- so self-focused as to be incapable of seeing how others see them but somehow thinking others don't see them for exactly what they are.  They're incredibly divisive in any office, group, etc., unless time-consuming plotting is done to team up to isolate them.  That can't work with national committees of huge size and of folks who hardly see each other.

    And when types such as this control communications, have a platform from which to speak -- as if they speak for all -- it's a disaster.  And that's Donna "Watch Me Walk Out" Brazile.


    Obama Is A Shark, Based On Your Theory (none / 0) (#110)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:25:31 PM EST
    He has his followers massively fooled.

    Donna (5.00 / 2) (#87)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 01:27:40 PM EST
    is inflammatory.  To bully a viable candidate out the way she (and Dean and Pelosi and Obama's surrogates) have tried to do is the only divisive thing going on in the primaries.  Voters consistently report in polls that they are fine with the race continuing.  They see this going to the convention.

    These guys are obvious in that they are Obama supporters but pretending to be neutral.

    It's too obvious, and a lot of people resent that they are abusing their power in this manner.

    They are ignoring also the polls that show that Hillary's supporters are far more likely to switch parties than Obama's supporters.

    The super delegates, however, are not so stupid.  They actually have to be re-elected in most cases.  They are NOT going to be stupid about this.

    Donna needs to shut up.  

    Is she hinting at a fisticuffs? (4.50 / 2) (#1)
    by Salo on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:06:27 AM EST
    Or that clinton supporters would stoop to fisticuffs?

    Playing the "fear" card. (none / 0) (#5)
    by Fabian on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:08:58 AM EST
    Although in this case, I wonder about the wisdom of admitting that you are "afraid" of a candidate.

    Fear embiggens the soul. (none / 0) (#18)
    by Salo on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:16:09 AM EST
    she actually Terrified.

    New Thought (none / 0) (#73)
    by ghost2 on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:29:47 PM EST
    It's amusing that those who have played the race card decry the use of the fear card.  

    It may be misuse of the rating system (none / 0) (#63)
    by ruffian on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:22:26 PM EST
    but I give you a 5 for the use of 'fisticuffs'.  Perfect.  But then you'd expect that from someone who names their dog Ruffian!

    At least I didn't say milling. (none / 0) (#68)
    by Salo on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:25:54 PM EST
    i'm the great grandson of a barefisted miller.

    great great granddaughter (none / 0) (#85)
    by ruffian on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 01:22:18 PM EST
    of an Irish textile mill-worker, and I'm sure he was no stranger to fisticuffs. Rich language in those days, especially among the ruffians!

    Great great grand-daughter (none / 0) (#106)
    by Cream City on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 06:15:04 PM EST
    of a Molly McGuire here, and the mills were awful, but you oughta have seen the mines.  

    My great grandma spoke Gaelic 'til the day she died in her '90s and taught me a few phrases that . . . well, sure and in any language, they're break the blog rules here. :-)


    Everyone should cool it (4.50 / 2) (#2)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:07:06 AM EST
    until tonight. I doubt that will happen.

    I'm thinking of holding a beer aside (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by Fabian on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:10:19 AM EST
    for tomorrow morning.  I don't think I can face the inevitable emotional outbursts sober.

    Beer in the AM?! (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by nycstray on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:54:17 AM EST
    How about a Bloody Mary or Irish Coffee instead  ;)

    OR a Mimosa! Rather celebratory   ;)


    A robust porter. (none / 0) (#74)
    by Fabian on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:32:04 PM EST
    Dark brown and velvety.  

    (I do like a nice hoppy pilsner on occasion.  Usually it's stout, ale, porter with an occasional lager.)


    I disagree (5.00 / 5) (#41)
    by Claw on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:51:42 AM EST
    I don't think anyone should cool it when it comes to Brazile.  She's an atrocious strategist and an equally abysmal commentator.  I'm an Obama supporter (if you haven't heard, she supports my candidate) and I'm saying that her involvement in the Democratic Party damages it.  I'd be okay with her canvassing for Obama...but that's about it.

    A One-Woman Wrecking Crew (4.50 / 2) (#4)
    by BDB on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:07:52 AM EST
    I'll give Dean this, it appears he may have outmaneuvered her.   She's no longer on the Rules Committee.  What a shame.

    As unhappy as I am with Dean, I'll also give him that it can't be easy to run the DNC when you have people like Brazile undermining you and pressing their own agenda all over the place.

    One of the Best Things About HRC Winning (5.00 / 10) (#7)
    by BDB on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:10:10 AM EST
    would be that it would pretty much guarantee Brazile's ouster from any position of power at the DNC.  

    It's not universal healthcare, admittedly a better reason for supporting Clinton, but it would still be darned good for Democrats.  


    Given her mishandling of ... (5.00 / 5) (#11)
    by Salo on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:13:00 AM EST
    ...Mr Gore, i'm incined to see her as a REVERSE BAROMETER.

    Democratic Party: So Donna whatduyathink?

    Donna: "blah blah blah...."

    Democratic Party: "Okay so well do ....halb halb halb"


    citizen big tent democrat, i disagree. (none / 0) (#37)
    by cy street on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:47:48 AM EST
    donna brazile is one voice of a chorus within the party.  retire?  she is not making up the fact that clinton's motives have scratched heads since wisconsin.

    i listen to obama supporters who believe that she intends to destroy obama if she cannot win, so she can run again in '12.

    i do not agree with them or donna, but they are good life long democrats and i would not ask one of them to leave the party.

    i still hold out hope that they will both appear on the ticket, so you can imagine how diluted i am.

    yeah, shame on donna.
    i don't think so.

    Personally (5.00 / 3) (#45)
    by cawaltz on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:55:17 AM EST
    I agree with BTD. With friends like Donna Brazile, who needs enemies. Where was her "concern" for the health of the Democratic party when Obama spoke out and said he felt his supporters wouldn't vote for Clinton? This isn't about what is best for the party, this is all about Donna Brazile and her opinion prevailing. Shame on her.

    Just so I understand (none / 0) (#67)
    by flyerhawk on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:25:37 PM EST
    You think that a convention floor fight would be a good thing for the Democratic Party?

    That would preempted by (none / 0) (#69)
    by Salo on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:26:50 PM EST
    superdels deciding before the convention and after the primary calendar.

    Yup (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by flyerhawk on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:35:14 PM EST
    Which is what the article basically says and what Donna Brazille says as well.

    Come June 4th it will be time for the Supers to coalesce around one of the candidates.  Pelosi and Reid will push to make that happen.  

    I just don't understand why Brazille's comment is particularly divisive.  Some Clinton insiders are willing to fight to the bitter end?  This is surprising why?


    Incredible (none / 0) (#90)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 01:47:01 PM EST
    "I just don't understand why Brazille's comment is particularly divisive."

    You really don't? My gawd.


    Someday (none / 0) (#92)
    by flyerhawk on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 02:00:54 PM EST
    you are going to learn that insults and ad hominem jabs do nothing to further your arguments.  

    Some day (none / 0) (#94)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 02:24:48 PM EST
    You will learn to stop this silly game.

    No (none / 0) (#89)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 01:46:20 PM EST
    But this post is about Donna Brazile's comments that Clinton is surrounded by people who do not care about the Party.

    Your inability to criticize her is not surprising anymore Flyerhawk.


    You may not believe this (none / 0) (#93)
    by flyerhawk on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 02:02:43 PM EST
    but I am wholly indifferent to Donna Brazille.  I don't know why she has so much pull in the Democratic Party since I find her to be not terrible bright or sharp.  

    Your inference regarding her comments is curious.  I inferred that she felt that Clinton has people around her that put her candidacy above the party.

    The same is probably true of Obama. How is this surprising or divisive?


    I believe you sem incapable (none / 0) (#95)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 02:25:45 PM EST
    of criticizing this horribly divisive statement for reasons only you can explain.

    It makes you look unreasonable to me.


    Because you assume (none / 0) (#96)
    by flyerhawk on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 02:39:19 PM EST
    that the comment is horribly divisive mainly because you don't like Brazille.  

    I just don't see the comment as being particularly bad.  Maybe you feel that the Clinton campaign is fully of good party soldiers primarily concerned with the wellbeing of the Democratic Party but it seems pretty unlikely to me.

    Brazille has been very clear that she feels that this ongoing battle is hurting the Democrats in general.  She may be wrong but her comments hardly merit particular scorn.


    I usually (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by Claw on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 03:05:50 PM EST
    Really enjoy your comments, flyerhawk, but Brazile makes me sick and I support Obama.  I can't imagine how angry she makes Clinton supporters.  She's very divisive, she misuses her power, and she just plain doesn't seem very bright.  I just don't see why we would want her in a position of power.

    I don't (none / 0) (#100)
    by flyerhawk on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 03:14:29 PM EST
    I have no use for her at all.

    And my dislike of her goes back to the Gore campaign.  I think she was a key factor in Gore creating one of the dumbest, politically tone-deaf, campaigns of the past 40 years.

    I really have no idea how she continues to hold any sway in the DNC.

    But that doesn't mean that I think that we should attack her for fun and sport.


    Point taken (none / 0) (#102)
    by Claw on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 03:40:31 PM EST
    I will happily concede the last point.  I don't like posts making fun of the way she talks, etc., but I do think there's a good argument to be made that she's bad for the party.  And I absolutely agree with you RE: Gore.

    Fear is crippling Donna go see someone, but you (none / 0) (#78)
    by Salt on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:42:54 PM EST
    cant put this blunder only at her feet BTD Dean deserves the lion share of this blunder I not sure its not his narrative she spouts as an rabid Obama Fan wallowing in her and his poor Obama victimhood she just artfully stirring the grievances pot oh if Bill Clinton ohhh again.

    If Supers Are Scared Maybe They Should Give (none / 0) (#107)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:10:06 PM EST
    up their superdelegate status.  This election is not for wimps.  Supers are there to do a job and they need to do it!

    Really folks she a real dud. (none / 0) (#111)
    by The Big Raven on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 07:04:17 PM EST
    I wonder about the state of this country and the so-called leaders that we vote for. None of them have been raised to be a leader or have gone to any of the many "leader schools" that I wished we had.
    This person will do anything for a vote Lie ,Steal, Cheat.ect........................................................................................... .................................................................................................... ..................you get my drift?
    Peace is the only solution and a change is a commin!