It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Democrats mad at Howard Dean for spending almost all the funds for campaign.

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 30 2006 @ 02:14 PM
link   
www.drudgereport.com...


Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill are privately bristling over Howard Dean’s management of the Democratic National Committee and have made those sentiments clear after new fundraising numbers showed he has spent nearly all the committee’s cash and has little left to support their efforts to gain seats this cycle, ROLL CALL reports.

Congressional leaders were furious last week when they learned the DNC has just $5.5 million in the bank, compared to the Republican National Committee’s $34 million.

Senate and House Minority Leaders Harry Reid (Nev.) and Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), along with the Senate and House campaign committee chairmen Charles Schumer (N.Y.) and Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), have made their concerns -- directly or indirectly -- known to Dean, claims the paper.

Emanuel was particularly upset last week upon seeing the latest DNC numbers.

“A lot of people are scratching their heads as to what’s going on,” said one senior Democratic aide.



I wonder what Howard Dean do with all the money. Either spend more than he should, or he has sticky fingers.




posted on Jan, 30 2006 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Seems like Howard Dean has been much better for the Republicans than for the Dems...



posted on Jan, 30 2006 @ 10:24 PM
link   
You wish Howard Dean did something wrong like that.


Screw the huffy Democrats. If they actually grew a backbone and stood up and told the truth to the American people about what is actually happening within the US government right now and with our foreign policy, the donations would pour in.

Until that happens, they only have themselves to blame.

Howard Dean is one Democrat, one politician who actually shoots straight. No one, from the left to the right, likes that. That is why he is so unpopular.



posted on Jan, 30 2006 @ 11:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
Howard Dean is one Democrat, one politician who actually shoots straight. No one, from the left to the right, likes that. That is why he is so unpopular.


That and the fact people were dumb to fall for the media smear campaign after Dean showed some passion and fire in his belly.



posted on Jan, 31 2006 @ 12:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by xpert11
That and the fact people were dumb to fall for the media smear campaign after Dean showed some passion and fire in his belly.



Exactly. I couldn't believe Americans actually fell for that media-induced smear job. He did nothing other than show his passion, as you said. Both the right and the left were invested in that outcome.



posted on Jan, 31 2006 @ 12:14 AM
link   
Dean is an idiot and a liar. Even Katie Couric (whose thin liberal lips quiver with disgust when she has to say something even moderately nice about a Republican
) had to call him out on the Today show.



posted on Jan, 31 2006 @ 12:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
Exactly. I couldn't believe Americans actually fell for that media-induced smear job. He did nothing other than show his passion, as you said. Both the right and the left were invested in that outcome.


Call me naive but I cant figuer out what the democratics gained from losing the 2004 presidential election ?

Cheers Xpert11.

[edit on 31-1-2006 by xpert11]



posted on Jan, 31 2006 @ 12:36 AM
link   
John Kerry was the DNC establishment's pick. No one else had a chance, other than dark horse Gov. Dean. As soon as he started letting loose with his anti-war rants, his numbers went through the roof. He had a real shot at it. If that same establishment would have done the right thing and embraced him, he would have beat Bush (in a fair race).

Then again... Kerry would have beaten Bush in a fair race.

[edit on 1/31/06 by EastCoastKid]



posted on Jan, 31 2006 @ 12:41 AM
link   
EastcoastKid it seems that you are implying that the 2004 election was rigged.
Why else would the dems turn there back on a potential winner?
Forgive me but Im not sure if I grasp what your saying .

[edit on 31-1-2006 by xpert11]



posted on Jan, 31 2006 @ 12:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by xpert11
EastcoastKid it seems that you are implying that the 2004 election was rigged.


Yes, I believe the 2004 election was stolen by Bush's faithful. I have never in my life seen so many people get out there and vote. They X sure weren't out there voting for Duhbya.


The powers that be would have been fine with either Kerry or Bush. But Howard Dean was simply out of the question. He was independent of their control. Ultimately.



posted on Jan, 31 2006 @ 12:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
The powers that be would have been fine with either Kerry or Bush. But Howard Dean was simply out of the question. He was independent of their control. Ultimately.


Who are the powers that be ?
Hailburton?
the media?
Religious leaders ?



posted on Jan, 31 2006 @ 01:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by xpert11
Who are the powers that be ?
Hailburton?
the media?
Religious leaders ?


xpert, you will have to do the research on that. Google is a wonderful tool. The powers that be are comprised of those who pull the financial strings behind the curtains. The military industrial complex, big oil, international banking and pharmeceutical companies are a good place to start looking.



posted on Jan, 31 2006 @ 01:11 AM
link   
Eastcoastkid thanks for the replys.

If I get time after I finish my studies I might do some research but you have to look after your own backyard first.
Cheers Xpert11.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join