I'm sure Democrats respect the opinions of others -- as long as they conform to the party line.

Roemer lashes out in DNC chairman race
Memo criticizes candidate's opposition to abortion rights
Sunday, January 16, 2005

ST. LOUIS, Missouri (CNN) -- The campaign for Democratic chairman turned contentious over the weekend when Tim Roemer lashed out at criticism of his views on abortion and accused opponents of negative campaigning.

The candidate told a gathering in St. Louis that he wanted to have "a conversation" on issues but that he is "having trouble doing this because of negative campaigning and litmus tests."

His voice rising, Roemer added, "I like a good fight. But don't put my arms behind me. Give me a chance to talk about my values. And don't litmus-test me."

Roemer's comments came at the opening of a candidates' forum at the Democratic National Committee Midwest Caucus on Saturday, a week after the former Indiana congressman formally entered the race.

Roemer aides said he was angry over an opposition research memo being circulated in Washington and Democratic circles that outlined his voting record, which sometimes did not follow party lines. Aides said they did not know who wrote the memo and whether it came from a rival for the party's chairmanship.

Representatives of the other six candidates denied their campaigns distributed the memo.

Roemer's position against abortion rights was criticized last week by some party members.

Kate Michelman, former president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, a group that advocates for abortion rights, said she considered running for the job after Roemer entered the race, but opted against it.

"I will spend the next month leading a vigorous effort to ensure that when the DNC elects its new leader, it selects someone who stands forthrightly for a woman's right to choose," Michelman said.

"I will also urge DNC members to make an unequivocal statement that choice is both a fundamental value of the Democratic Party and an essential component of our winning message."

Massachusetts Democratic Party Chairman Phil Johnston said Tuesday in a written statement, "It would be extremely foolish if the DNC were to be led by a chair who agrees with the Bush administration's position on abortion."

Roemer responded Saturday, "That makes me mad. And I'm going to fight. Because I'm part of this great party."

Roemer said Democrats should learn from the Republican Party, which has allowed former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani and California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to play prominent roles. Both of them support abortion rights.

"Republicans have a big tent; why can't we?" he asked.

Other candidates rose to Roemer's defense at the caucus. Former Denver Mayor Wellington Webb said the party should remember that "George Bush is the enemy."

And former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, a 2004 presidential candidate who is also angling for the job, said, "I know something about being a target of other Democrats."

DNC members will pick a successor to outgoing Chairman Terry McAuliffe at a meeting February 12 in Washington, D.C.

The other candidates are: former Rep. Martin Frost of Texas; Simon Rosenberg, head of the centrist New Democratic Network; former Ohio state party chairman David Leland; and Donnie Fowler, a veteran party activist and campaign manager for retired Gen. Wesley Clark's presidential bid.

The Dems are radical fundamentalists (of the PC, leftist kind )...they are non-inclusive, non-tolerant, disdainful of other viewpoints, incredibly condenscending...well on their way to long term status as a minority party...their inability to see and recognize that they are on this path is why they will trod it a long time.

Funny how the virulently intolerant Republicans have many prominent pro-choice individuals in the party. Colin Powell, to name one.

quote:

---

Originally posted by O Man:
The Dems are radical fundamentalists (of the PC, leftist kind )...they are non-inclusive, non-tolerant, disdainful of other viewpoints, incredibly condenscending...well on their way to long term status as a minority party...their inability to see and recognize that they are on this path is why they will trod it a long time.

---

Your point is backed up completely by the Kennedy speech at the press club this week. The man is so full of himself that I wonder when the last time he accepted anyone else's point of view on anything. I realize most politician's have this quality, but Teddy is the epithomy.

quote:

---

originally posted by Coriolanus:

Funny how the virulently intolerant Republicans have many prominent pro-choice individuals in the party. Colin Powell, to name one.

---

I count Powell and Christine Todd Whitman as the two notable pro-choice Bush appointees (Whitman has since left--for reasons unrelated to her stand on abortion). Of course there are prominent pro-choice Republicans, though I might rank that distinction alongside "tallest midget".

Roemer isn't being subjected to a "litmus test"--unlike, say, Arlen Specter. In fact, his candidacy has been championed by the stridently pro-choice Nancy Pelosi. He seems to confuse "criticism"--certainly legitimate considering his voting record (it is, after all, not representative of the rank and file's wishes on this matter)--with "persecution"--some imagined whispering campaign on what is a matter of public record.

Name some PROMINENT pro-life Democrats from the past twelve years.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Coriolanus:
Name some PROMINENT pro-life Democrats from the past twelve years.

---

Only Zell Miller comes to mind, but he dates back to old-school dems.

Very interesting article I read at:
http://www.affdoublethink.com/archives/014214.php

This, I think, shows the bottom line for Dems:

"After Nation columnist Katha Pollitt exposed then-presidential candidate Kucinich as a pro-lifer, he abruptly reversed his position. Gore and Gephardt's switches also came shortly before their first bids for the presidency."

Draw your own conclusions about democat candidates' moral and political "choices".

No one thinks Zell is a REAL Democrat.

Gore was years ago, I remember that. His switch was talked about during the '00 election.

Barbara Bush is on record as being Pro Choice. (She could not state her view until after her husband was no longer President.)

quote:

---

Originally posted by azsar:

quote:

---

Originally posted by O Man:
The Dems are radical fundamentalists (of the PC, leftist kind )...they are non-inclusive, non-tolerant, disdainful of other viewpoints, incredibly condenscending...well on their way to long term status as a minority party...their inability to see and recognize that they are on this path is why they will trod it a long time.

---

Your point is backed up completely by the Kennedy speech at the press club this week. The man is so full of himself that I wonder when the last time he accepted anyone else's point of view on anything. I realize most politician's have this quality, but Teddy is the epithomy.

---

O Man,

I agree 100%.


azsar,

The saddest and most tragic thing about the Kennedy assinations it they let the worst one live. They should have taken Teddy out first. Maybe the girl from Chappaquitic would still be alive.

The only speech Ted Kennedy should be giving should be to the parole board...asking for early release from his murder conviction of Mary Jo Kopechne.

quote:

---

originally posted by Coriolanus:

Name some PROMINENT pro-life Democrats from the past twelve years.

---

"Prominent" looks like a weasel word: almost any of these could be dismissed as minor political players. Your suggestion was that pro-life Dems have been systematically excluded, which is just false.

In the current landscape, Harry Reid (NV), the party's new Senate Minority Leader, is a staunch pro-lifer. In the House, James Langevin (RI); Allan B. Mollohan (WV); Nick Rahall (WV); Ben Nelson (NE); Lincoln Davis (TN); James Oberstar (MN); Bart Stupak (MI); and Gene Taylor (MS) are all avowedly pro-life Democrats, and all but Rahall are members of Democrats for Life. This is far from a complete list, and says nothing for pro-life Dems at the statehouse level.

This flap reminds me of PA governor Bob Casey's insistence in 1992 that he was barred from speaking at the Democratic convention for his pro-life views. He was barred from speaking because he refused to endorse Clinton's candidacy, not for his position on abortion. There was nothing cloak-and-dagger about the decision. Same applies for Roemer.

You post the MA party chair's observation, "It would be foolish if the DNC were to be led by a chair who agrees with the Bush administration's position on abortion." Is this your smoking gun? Pat Toomey (R-PA) questioned Arlen Specter's fitness for the Senate Judiciary chair with the comment, "Many Republicans fear an opportunity to govern would be squandered by someone who doesn't share the core principles of the party." Both comments maintain each party's right to preserve certain core traditions--legitimate dissent notwithstanding. What's the difference?

Harry Reid -- I would say he is prominent.

What I don't understand is the hypocrisy of the Democratic party. They want to be inclusive and tolerant, but won't even give a fair shake to a person running for DNC chairman. It seems to me that a party should allow for some leeway.