Why Would Howard Run From The Party Platform?

Was Howard Dean running from the Democratic 2004 platform in an attempt to burnish his party's appeal to evangelicals?  The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force think so:

National Gay and Lesbian Task Force denounces DNC Chair Howard Dean's misrepresentation of party platform

Returns $5,000 donation from Governor Dean in protest

WASHINGTON, May 8 —In a Christian Broadcasting News segment aired today on The 700 Club concerning how Democrats are reaching out to evangelicals, Howard Dean, chair of the Democratic National Party, said, "The Democratic Party platform from 2004 says that marriage is between a man and a woman. That's what it says. I think where we may take exception with some religious leaders is that we believe in inclusion, that everybody deserves to live with dignity and respect, and that equal rights under the law are important."

In fact, the DNC 2004 platform says, "We support full inclusion of gay and lesbian families in the life of our nation and seek equal responsibilities, benefits, and protections for these families. In our country, marriage has been defined at the state level for 200 years, and we believe it should continue to be defined there. We repudiate President Bush's divisive effort to politicize the Constitution by pursuing a 'Federal Marriage Amendment.' Our goal is to bring Americans together, not drive them apart."

This plank was considered a victory for its inclusive references to gay families and activists. We are proud that two of our current Task Force board members — Roberta Achtenberg and Jeff Soref — fought hard for it. The platform was approved by the more than 4,000 elected and at-large Democratic delegates who met in Boston in 2004 to pick a presidential candidate, and there have been no official revisions of the platform since 2004.

On the internet, no one knows if you are a dog.  But with the internet, it is harder to be a two-faced weasel.

MORE:  The WaPo on divisions amongst Dem strategists:

Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean and the leader of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee have clashed angrily in recent days in a dispute about how the party should spend its money in advance of this fall's midterm elections.

Rep. Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), who is leading the party's effort to regain majority status in the House, stormed out of Dean's office several days ago leaving a trail of expletives, according to Democrats familiar with the session

The blowup highlights a long-standing tension that has pitted Democratic congressional leaders, who are focused on their best opportunities for electoral gains this fall, against Dean and many state party chairmen, who believe that the party needs to be rebuilt from the ground up -- even in states that have traditionally been Republican strongholds.

...Many Washington Democrats think Dean is unwise to spend on field organizers and other staff in states where House and Senate candidates have little chance of winning. Dean has maintained that the party cannot strengthen itself over the long haul unless it competes everywhere.

I would recommend an "inkblot" strategy myself:

...experts call it the "inkblot strategy": take control of several towns or villages and expand outward until the areas merge. 

Ooops.

UPDATE:  Now Howard is runnning from Howard:

Democratic chairman Howard Dean mischaracterized his party's platform on gay rights in an interview courting evangelicals, then set the record straight Thursday when an advocacy group called him on it.

Dean told Christian Broadcasting Network News that the 2004 Democratic platform declares "marriage is between a man and a woman" just one of the points he made in reaching out to religious conservatives who are largely hostile to the party.

But the platform does not define marriage that way, and his remarks prompted the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force to return a $5,000 donation from the Democratic National Committee.

Dean later acknowledged his misstatement, but the group sent back the money anyway. "We need for Governor Dean to demonstrate real leadership on our issues," executive director Matt Foreman said in an interview, "not to equivocate depending on the audience."

...

After the gay rights group went public with its complaints about his remarks, Dean acknowledged: "I misstated the Democratic Party's platform, which does not say marriage should be limited to a man and a woman," and reasserted the party's commitment to equal protection for all.

Foreman said Dean should be persuading Democrats to fight against ballot initiatives seeking to ban gay marriage, but instead has misrepresented the party's "important and affirming plank" several times.

"There has been a disturbing lack of clarity from Governor Dean about where we fit into the party and the country," he said after Dean corrected himself.

Well, if Bush performed this two-step, I suspect a portion of the blogosphere would wail that he was pandering to homophobes.  I can scarcely wait to see their rationalizations for Dean (although my real guess is that this gets ignored.)

In looking for reacton, I find Amptoons noting that Dean admitted his mistake but did not apologize for it.  Matt Stoller at MyDD tackles Dean's performance head-on, and I will reprint his entire commentary: "I'm glad he clarified.  Good for him."

The comments at MyDD are at least honest - several folks priase Dean's clever media manipulation, noting that the 700 Club audience that heard his intial reassurance on gays will notice this buried retraction.

I have every intention of keeping this incident in mind when, as the months and years unfold, folks on the right are asked to endure diatribes about our homophobia and pandering on this issue.  The silence greeting Dean tells me all I need to know about the left blogosphere's real commitment to this issue.

Oh, well - my free advice to gay activitists would be, have Stephen Colbert deliver an unfunny skit about gay rights, and hope that some poor sap like Richard Cohen fails to laugh - then you will get some attention.

Comments

[windansea]

"The Democratic Party platform from 2004 says that marriage is between a man and a woman. That's what it says.

where Howie??

[paul]

Big tent politics-"this one is full, but you can still pitch it next to ours."

[JJ]

Inkblot and Ooops link?

[The Unbeliever]

Aww, lay off of poor Howard Dean. Even though he lied through his teeth, he is--as Kos himself noted--the valiant reformer who will lead the DNP to ultimate victory! And surely the Democrats wouldn't elect an ultra-divisive panderer to that position since he would be unrepresentative of the party as a whole, right?

...right?

[JJ]

OIC, the inkblot is down in the oops. A jarring headline to walk around though!

[Gabriel Sutherland]

It's in there. It's just written with a new ink, ironically invented by John Kerry. It's better than invisible ink because it rewrites itself based on whatever audience you are appearing before.

The best evar!

[tomf]

O.K. Garbiel, but I have Sen. Levin's magic magnifying glass and I'm going to be looking. :).

[Old Dad]

tomf,

Would you consider trading Sen. Levin's magic magnifying glass for Sen. Biden's Plagiaromatic?

[kim]

Don't tell everyone, but there's going to be a big surprise jump out of the middle of that yellow cake.
===================================

[kim]

Well, I didn't know it was going to be a surprise 97th birthday party for my dear old Daddy, so all I brought was this tattered retrospectoscope I picked up cheap off a down and outer name of Joe.
===============================

[kim]

Dang, 'battered retrospectoscope' as in yellow cake mix.
=================================

[windansea]

Dean sez sorry...nevermind

"I misstated the Democratic Party's platform, which does not say that marriage should be limited to a man and a woman, but says the Party is committed to full inclusion of gay and lesbian families in the life of our nation and leaves the issue to the states to decide," he said in a statement.

"The Democratic Party remains committed to equal protection under the law for all Americans. How we achieve that goal continues to be the subject of a contentious debate, but our Party continues to oppose constitutional amendments that seek to short circuit the debate on how to achieve equality for all Americans."

[Gabriel Sutherland]

lol. There's Dean's "voted for it, before I voted against it" moment.

[Sue]

My God...he just lost the 700 Club vote. ::grin::

[mariner]

Let's see:

A constitutional amendment concerning marriage would short-circuit debate.

Rulings from judges imposing gay marriage on unwilling populations is the way of democracy.

I guess I just don't have that "reality-based community" thing down yet.

[The Unbeliever]

Warning, ignorant hypocrite alert!

our Party continues to oppose constitutional amendments that seek to short circuit the debate on how to achieve equality for all Americans.

You don't say? Last I checked, Americans decided issues on the national debate scene using that quaint mechanism we call elections. Let's assume a basic understanding of the Constitution, and try a little thought experiment: for any given proposal, which resolution would be more "representative" of how Americans feel?

(A) An Amendment proposed by 2/3 of Congress and ratified by 3/4 of the duly elected state legislatures
(B) A Supreme Court decision handed down by 5 individuals

Bonus question: which party, over the last 40 years or so, is best known for pushing its constituent members' agendas through the Court system as opposed to the Legislature?

[The Unbeliever]

Dang, mariner beat me to the punch while I was typing. (Note to self: sarcasm impedes brevity.)

[flenser]

"our Party continues to oppose constitutional amendments that seek to short circuit the debate on how to achieve equality for all Americans."

So, constitutional amendments, with all the democratic discussion and process which accompany them, "seek to short circuit the debate"?

Unlike, I suppose, the scenario where the Supreme Court amends the constitution.

[maryrose]

According to a dem strategist the slap-fight between Dean/Emanuel/Schumer was because of Dean{taking the long view 50 state strategy} versus putting what little money dems have on hand{at least for the house races} into contests they can actually win. I have to go with Dean on this because unless they can repair relationships in the South, Midwest and Southwest they haven't got a prayer of regaining the WH. I'm just wondering how much longer before dems throw Dean under the bus?
ships

[davod]

It is my understanding that Dean's strategy is to take the fight to the Republican heartland. Republicans would do well to stop looking at the Democratic theatre and start looking at what Dean is actually doing.

Republicans strategists would look pretty silly on November 8 if a sizeable number of Red areas turned Blue.

[richard mcenroe]

OK, I gots to know.

What POSSIBLE relationship with the South could Nancy Pelosi, Howard Dean and Kos repair?

Unless we're warming up for Civil War II?

[topsecretk9]

I second Richard...

what are they doing? Doing and saying you are doing are different.

[clarice]

I think there's hardly a soul left in the Democratic party who understands the American Middle Class-they spend too little time with them. It's a pity really, not just for the election chances, but because they are what makes this country strong, resilient and unbeatable.

[Sue]

and start looking at what Dean is actually doing

You mean lying? Cause the people he is trying to buffalo may not be blue bloods, but they aren't chicken feed either. Something we can spot a mile away is a lying Yankee carpetbagger.

[clarice]

A bit off topic--but this deserves wide distribution:
quote]SPEAKING OF RU 486 [Ramesh Ponnuru]

Judicial Watch's report on the topic has a lot of eye-opening information, but the letter from Ron Weddington, the co-counsel on Roe v. Wade, to President-elect Bill Clinton is especially worth checking out. It's on pages 61-64.
A sampling:
[Y]ou can start immediately to eliminate the barely educated, unhealthy and poor segment of our country. No, I'm not advocating some sort of mass extinction (sic) of these unfortunate people. Crime, drugs and disease are already doing that. The problem is that their numbers are not only replaced but increased by the birth of millions of babies to people who can't afford to have babies. There, I've said it. It's what we all know is true. . . .
I am not proposing that you send federal agents armed with Depo-Provera dart guns to the ghetto. You should use persuasion rather than coercion. . . . You made a good start when you appointed Dr. Elders, but she will need a lot of help. . . .
[G]overnment is also going to have to provide vasectomies, tubal ligations and abortions. . . . There have been about 30 million abortions in this country since Roe v. Wade. Think of all the poverty, crime and misery. . . and then add 30 million unwanted babies to the scenario. We lost a lot of ground during the Reagan-Bush religious orgy. We don't have a lot of time left.
We don't need more cannon fodder. We don't need more parishioners. We don't need more cheap labor. We don't need more poor babies
Now of course these sorts of sentiments aren't shared by all or even most supporters of legal abortion, but I suspect they are more widely thought than voiced.[/quote]

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NGMwMTg3MjUxNWUxYmM2NjA4YjQyMGY1YWFhN2RlYjg=

[kim]

Clarice, that smells like hoax to me.

Or else the Dems spell demographics with an H and an A and an R and an I and a K and another I, and another R, and yet another I.

That's not disemboweling, it's disenfranchisement.
========================

[kim]

Every beating heart arrested disenfranchises a voter.
===========================

[clarice]

It was gathered from Clinton's library as a result of a lawsuit. I have no reason to doubt it's authenticity.

[clarice]

Here is the 64 pp pdf file of the documents obtained in this litigation from the Clinton Presidential Library.http://judicialwatch.org/archive/2006/jw-ru486-report.pdf

There's a great deal more there, including how the "morning after pill" was pushed through the FDA without normal review.

[kim]

It is damning if real. Shades of Margaret Sanger.

We know where dwell those shades.
==============================

[clarice]

Isn't it?

[kim]

An ironic illustration of the unsustainability of evil.
================================

[richard mcenroe]

Here's the very simple question:

If the Democrats are restored to power, will they end the datamining?

Will they close down Echelon?

Will they disband DHS?

If not. Why not?

[JM Hanes]

Clarice

I've only gotten through page 11, but so far I have to say that the "RU-846 Files" is one of the most flagrantly biased presentations I've read in a long time.

[clarice]

Is it? After the 47 pp filing I'm avoiding pdf files. The key thing is this? Was the letter truthfully reported?

[clarice]

JM I tried just now. I really can't bearing reading pdf files. (About shortcircuiting the fda proceedings, I will say my nephew did post doc work there and had many questions about how scrupulously the agency adheres to its normal testing. There is a great deal of pressure by drug companies, often successfully, to shorten the process.)

[JM Hanes]

I'm afraid I just don't have the time or patience to do the wading it would take to find out.

[JM Hanes]

It seems to me that Republicans have been every bit as willing as Dems to politicize the FDA -- and more recently a host of scientific governmental agencies to boot. My sister has been involved in ethics-related oversight of grant proposals in scientific research for a couple of decades, and she is absolutely scathing in her criticism of this Administration's policies and appointments in this arena.

[JM Hanes]

BTW -- I usually print out PDF's instead of reading them online. Makes it easier to highlight stuff and write my screechy comments in the margins too.:)

[clarice]

Me, too--but when they reach a certain size I kind of pass..unless it's critical..Weddington BTW is the ex-husband of Roe of Roe v, Wade..

[clarice]

FDA is in a funny position--everyone wants the new medicines on the market yesterday but they also want them as safe as possible and the normal FDA process takes ages. I think this process reduction pressure has been going on for a long time.
And we both now that until large numbers of people (way beyond those in the largest feasible trials) for a decade or so, we aren't able to fully know all the risks. Or so my nephew says.

[clarice]

**And we both Know that until large numbers of people (way beyond those in the largest feasible trials)use a drug for a decade or so, we aren't able to fully know all the risks. ******

[richard mcenroe]

Davod — "It is my understanding that Dean's strategy is to take the fight to the Republican heartland. "

Between the clueless teenagers, convicted felons and aging lefty flakes he sent out last time, we can only hope.

[Gary Maxwell]

Sue

Something we can spot a mile away is a lying Yankee carpetbagger.

Spoken like my dear relatives in Tennessee. But us Texans are usually a bit more circumspect in our elocution. Such as "dont pee on my boots and tell me its raining." Haha

[maryrose]

My understanding is the Southwest is a target area most prominently figured in dem stategy. Remember how Kerry dismissed the South with a wave of his hand. That proved to be his undoing. Thankfully Schumer and Rahm are going to prevail in this turf battle. I'm sure plans are underway for Dean's bus accident especially if Rahm is spewing coarse language and venom.

[kim]

That heritage DNA is there for a reason. Only evil would deny that.
==================================

[richard mcenroe]

This just in... Pelosi backs away from impeachment...

[Gary Maxwell]

Pelosi backs away from impeachment.

Do you believe her? think she might change her mind again? And notice they did not think they could wipe away all the foam froth from John Conyers in time to put him with Pelosi in the press conference. ( for those who dont know this bozo would be the chairman of the House Judiciary committee where any investigation would start ).

[Joseph Cannon]

This House could pass an elephant if it chose.