Howard Dean to headline fundraisers for Bradbury

Carla Axtman

This just hit my email box, forwarded from the Bradbury campaign:

As one of my supporters I wanted you be the first to know that Governor Howard Dean will be headlining two fundraising events in support of my campaign on February 11. Mark your calendars!

I cannot tell you what an honor and a privilege it is to have the support of the former head of the Democratic Party, Governor of Vermont and Presidential Candidate.

Howard Dean once famously said during his 2004 Presidential run “I am Howard Dean, and I'm here to represent the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party”. He said that at a time when Republicans were running rampant in D.C. and he gave voice to Progressive Democrats the country over.

His message was simple: we should longer be afraid to stand up and be proud of being a Democrat, because we are actually right on the issues

He took that message to the DNC where he pioneered a 50 state strategy that was largely credited with recapturing Congress in 2006.

In the wake of the debacle in Massachusetts, it's more important than ever that Democrats at all levels remind voters of what Democrats stand for and embrace it rather than running from it.

I am that Democrat. I will never shy away from advocating for progressive, innovative ideas and have done so in this campaign already.

Here in Oregon we have shown the nation that it is possible to move progressive ideas forward with the passages of Measures 66 and 67 last week. I am proud to say I walked, called and fundraised for those measures right along side thousands of others.

In their wake, now is not the time for half-measures and post-partisan vagaries. We need leadership in the Governor’s office that is unafraid to express progressive ideals and continue to reenergize our state once again.

In the next 24 we will be announcing details of the events. We are planning a fundraising luncheon and lower priced event between 12:00 and 2:30 p.m. on February 11.

I am honored, privileged and excited to have Howard Dean’s support and I hope you can join us.”

FYI: I am neutral in this race and have not declared support for any campaign, so please don't be confused by the language. Dean is very popular among many Oregon progressives, so this is a newsworthy announcement, IMO.

If you want more information on these events and other Bradbury related stuff, I suggest you go to the Bradbury campaign website and go from there.

  • cary mallon (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Mr. Dean will be debating Carl Rove on Feb 11 as well.

  • Geoffrey Ludt (unverified)
    (Show?)

    This is beautiful! Associating the Bradbury campaign with a dangerous extremist like Dean is PERFECT!

    Geoff Ludt

  • (Show?)

    Howard Dean once famously said during his 2004 Presidential run “I am Howard Dean, and I'm here to represent the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party”. He said that at a time when Republicans were running rampant in D.C. and he gave voice to Progressive Democrats the country over.

    His message was simple: we should longer be afraid to stand up and be proud of being a Democrat, because we are actually right on the issues

    Grrr, that's a Paul Wellstone quote that he used in his stump speeches when he was running in 1998, Howard Dean happened to borrow it years later. If I were to be giving a speech and happened to say "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" without appropriating it to JFK, would people refer to me as giving voice to a new generation of civic involvement?

  • (Show?)

    Well Geoff, knowing how you feel about Dean is almost enough to make me wanna give money to Bradbury.

  • rw (unverified)
    (Show?)

    This represents a tremendous step forward: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/7092137/Italy-opens-first-prison-for-transsexuals.html

  • Geoffrey Ludt (unverified)
    (Show?)

    @Carla -- please do ... I invite you to pour money down that black hole.

  • (Show?)

    A black hole as opposed to...Freedomworks or AFP? LOL

    I'll take my chances with Dean, thanks. The 50 state strategy alone is kick-ass.

    Like I said in the post, I'm neutral on this race. But if it irritates teabaggers to see Dean in the mix, then it's a good thing.

  • Scott in Damascus (unverified)
    (Show?)

    "I invite you to pour money down that black hole."

    Hey Geoff, let's count all the repubs that hold a major office in Oregon. I'll get you started:

    ZERO

  • Oksy Moreon (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Re: "... it's more important than ever that Democrats at all levels remind voters of what Democrats stand for and embrace it rather than running from it"

    Yes. We Progressive Democrats stand for wars for empire, torture, anti-Arab racism, bailouts for the rich, increasing corporate power, limiting the exercise of effective speech to the two business-as-usual parties, nuclear/clean-coal, and opposition to universal Medicare-for-all.

    So let's embrace it rather than run from it, people!

    Torture Never Stopped Under Obama:

    “A year on, the [Obama] administration continues to look the other way when it comes to full disclosure of and remedy for human rights violations perpetrated by the U.S.A. in the name of countering terrorism.”

    — Amnesty International

  • (Show?)
    Posted by: cary mallon | Feb 1, 2010 1:22:05 PM Mr. Dean will be debating Carl Rove on Feb 11 as well.

    Who is Carl Rove?

  • Scott Jorgensen (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Wow. This is a real boon to the Bradbury campaign.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I'll bet that is Karl Rove!

  • Mike M (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Scott in D wrote: Hey Geoff, let's count all the repubs that hold a major office in Oregon. I'll get you started:

    ZERO

    Rep. Greg Walden, 2nd District. How soon we forget.

  • Geoffrey Ludt (unverified)
    (Show?)

    @Scott in D

    Lets look at Oregon's unemployment rate under Dem's ... 10.8%

    http://is.gd/7vGdy

    Go ahead, keep propping that "leadership" up ...

    Geoff

  • Bill R. (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Maybe we'll have a real primary contest in May. Bradbury's biggest liability is his dreadful showing against Gordon Smith, and Kitzhaber is a proven winner at a time of GOP ascendancy.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    GL---what are you FOR?

    Or are you just someone who attacks political enemies but does not have any positive ideas of your own?

  • (Show?)

    Lets look at the latest Gallup poll. According to Gallup there are only 5 solidly Republican states; Alaska, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah and Alabama. Leaning Republican states are Montana, Nebraska, Mississippi, Texas, N. Dakota and Kansas. Note the low population of most of these states.

  • (Show?)

    Once again, Geoff, you're showing that despite your claims to independence, your Tea Party is just shilling for Republicans. If you look at overall US unemployment rates historically, Democrats actually do much better than Republicans for the economy.

    Tell you what: I'll even cite a right wing source for you. The Heritage Foundation has a chart of unemployment rates under modern post-war Presidents. Three of the four lowest rates came under Democratic Presidents, while three of the four highest rates came under Republicans.

    And this is just one indicator. By most measures the economy has fared better under Democratic than Republican administrations.

    You sure you're not smoking that tea, or do you just like to spout off this stuff?

  • Ms Mel Harmon (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Paulie,

    Don't forget that in some areas of the country, Democrats are more like Republican-lite. Oklahoma comes readily to mind. So while some polls may not show Oklahoma has solid R, I assure you that the attitudes of most voters in Oklahoma are VERY much to the right.

  • (Show?)

    According to Gallup there are only 5 solidly Republican states; Alaska, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah and Alabama. Leaning Republican states are Montana, Nebraska, Mississippi, Texas, N. Dakota and Kansas.

    And one of the solidly Democratic states is Massachusetts.

  • rw (unverified)
    (Show?)

    http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=10/01/31/1327238 "When President Obama said in his State of the Union address on Wednesday that the country should build 'a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants,' it was one of the few times he got bipartisan applause. Now the NY Times reports that administration officials have confirmed their 2011 federal budget request next week will raise potential loan guarantees for nuclear projects to more than $54 billion, from $18.5 billion, and a new Energy Department panel will examine a vastly expanded list of options for nuclear waste, including a new kind of nuclear reactor that would use some of it. The Energy Department appears to be getting close to offering its first nuclear loan guarantee. Earlier this week, Southern Co. Chief Executive David Ratcliffe said the company expects to finalize an application for a loan guarantee 'within the next couple months,' while Scana Corp., which has also applied, is 'a couple months behind Southern' and is hopeful of receiving a conditional award 'sometime in the next months.'"

  • (Show?)

    Nick, Dean always attributed the quote to Wellstonen

  • Ricky (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I don't consider Bradbury a progressive. The problem with progressives like Dean, and even a lesser figure like Novick, is they do well in primaries, to a degree, especially in larger blue counties, but still not ready for prime time, as far as being electable in a general. Bradbury is from Chicago. Other than him latching onto the global warming issue, what's he progressive about? If you're a progressive you should be asking lots of questions to Kitzhaber, seeing that he has the practical experience in working to provide health care to those without in Oregon.

  • (Show?)

    Dan - Despite their protestations to the contrary, the Tea Party movement is not an independent movement. It is not independent of the big money backers of Freedomworks or AfP, and it is not free of the influence of rigid RNC ideologues like Jim Bopp, whose only real agenda is to more directly align all three branches of government with those of concentrated wealth.

    It is not an erstatz movement by any means, but it is a movement in which the interests of many of the people out of the streets have been sublimated and pressed into service of the institutions that they are railing against.

  • (Show?)

    Dan - Despite their protestations to the contrary, the Tea Party movement is not an independent movement. It is not independent of the big money backers of Freedomworks or AfP, and it is not free of the influence of rigid RNC ideologues like Jim Bopp, whose only real agenda is to more directly align all three branches of government with those of concentrated wealth.

    It is not an erstatz movement by any means, but it is a movement in which the interests of many of the people out of the streets have been sublimated and pressed into service of the institutions that they are railing against.

  • Zarathustra (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Have we moved on from "the scream"? I still don't see what should have been a problem with that.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    "And one of the solidly Democratic states is Massachusetts."

    Last I heard, 50% of voters in Mass. register NAV---which only goes to show the folly of giving political labels to geographic designations.

    Oregon went for GOP presidents from like Nixon to 1988, then solidly D.

    I still think candidate quality and campaign quality (not to mention grass roots support) are as important as party label.

  • Scott in Damascus (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Ricky,

    Thank you for your faux concern over the selection of the Democratic contenders of the upcoming primary.

    If I may be so bold, can I ask you to handicap the upcoming Repub contenders? To refresh your memory, here is the list of potential Republican contenders for the office of Gov:

    1. Nothing
    2. No one
    3. Nada
    4. Ain't Got Game

    Again, thank you in advance for your deep insight.

  • pammy (unverified)
    (Show?)

    It is fascinating to me that Kitzhaber has almost no support amongst national Democratic leaders (and is disliked even). First Al Gore and now Howard Dean, M.D., endorsing Bradbury.

    Kitzhaber was also the invisible man in the recent M 66 & 67 campaign (too busy sucking up to the downtown Portland business community and the wealthy elites?). So far Bradbury seems to have a lot more fire in the belly for this race while Kitzhaber seems like he thinks he can connect to voters by releasing general and simplistic position papers and avoiding ever actually having to talk to real voters. This race is starting to get interesting.

  • Ricky (unverified)
    (Show?)

    @Scott the Angry Troll.

    No Republican is going to win no matter who they run.

    Your little jabs are pretty funny. I notice them all the time. Just don't bother to respond. You`progressives' are a riot. As I stated, the place for the voice of the progressives is in the primary, then established Democrats come along with the money and common sense and pick someone who can actually beat the Republican candidate. Bradbury didn't even come close to beating Smith in 2002. Dean helped kill the Health Care Bil right before the senate votel. Obama putting the progressive agenda over the economy hasn't helped much either. Frankly, progressives have done more harm than good thus far since Obama was elected.

    I'm voting for Kitzhaber and I am going to volunteer my ass off to ensure he wins the nomination. With all the progressives screaming for HCR, you'd think they'd back the candidate who got 200,000 uninsured Oregonians health insurance.

  • backbeat (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Oh how I miss Howard Dean as head of the DNC. I doubt HE would have spent almost 500K on Ben Nelson's public option bashing ads. :(

    The Democratic National Committee is defending its decision to spend nearly $500,000 on television ads that, in the process of defending Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) for his support of health care reform, took a swipe at a public option for insurance coverage. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/01/dnc-defends-spending-460k_n_445272.html

    Why are we stuck with Kaine?

  • Kitzhaber doesn't believe in Democrats (unverified)
    (Show?)

    The under reported story of the passage of M66 and M67 was Kitzhaber's decision to sit out the campaign.

    Kitzhaber wanted his photo taken with M66 and M67 about as badly as Gordon Smith wanted George Bush to visit Oregon in 2008 and help him against Merkley. But Bradbury recognized how important these measures were and contributed -- which makes my choice for who to vote for in May much easier.

    Let's face it -- Kitzhaber didn't believe these measures would pass, and calculated that actively supporting the measures might damage his prospects in the general election in November.

    He's already presumed he's the Democratic nominee, which is arrogant.

    He doesn't have confidence in the Democratic leadership and Democratic representatives and senators in the legislature, who passed these measures.

    He doesn't have confidence in the broad coalition of folks who worked their asses off and passed these measures.

    And he doesn't have confidence in Oregon voters.

    In short, he still thinks the state is ungovernable.

    Kitzhaber declared the state ungovernable back in 2002. Since then he's played no part in building the Democratic majorities in the legislature. He didn't bother to cast a vote in November 2007 when two big measures were on the ballot (Healthy Kids, and preserving land use planning). And he didn't bother to work for M66 and M67.

    The fact is, since Kitzhaber declared the state ungovernable, a whole bunch of folks have worked their asses off to make Oregon governable. They chose to fight rather than whine. They put supermajorities in the legislature, preserved land use planning in Oregon, put Jeff Merkley in the U.S. Senate, and brought some fairness and balance to our state taxes while preserving essential services.

    Oregon Democrats appear to be doing just fine without John Kitzhaber. I don't see any good reason to make him my party's nominee for governor. Kitzhaber's apparent strategy is to lay low -- not participate in the campaign for M66 and M67, no engagement or comment on the February legislative session. He'll show up sometime later this spring and ask us to anoint him.

    Isn't this kind of arrogance and unwillingness to actively engage with voters and work for the job what turned the U.S. Senate race in Massachusetts into a disaster?

    Bradbury wasn't afraid to show up for M66 and M67. He's the most approachable public servant I've met. I think he'll support and work hard for the best policies and legislation in Salem, as he did with M66 and M67, even if it isn't his pet project and the idea didn't originate in his own brain. He's got my vote in May.

  • (Show?)

    Bradbury's biggest liability is his dreadful showing against Gordon Smith

    I'm working for Kitzhaber, but it's silly to suggest that Bill's going to lose in 2010 because of what happened in 2002. Let's not forget that in 2004, he got more votes than anyone in Oregon history.

    And let's also remember that he lost in 2002 because he spoke out against the Iraq War - and Oregonians weren't ready for that yet, just 14 months after 9/11.

    By 2008, even Gordon Smith was trying to pretend he'd been against the War all along. Bradbury was right.

  • BOHICA (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Correction The Dean v. Rove event is Wednesday Feb. 10th not the 11th. http://www.worldoregon.org/events/iss.php

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Instead of the Kitzhaber vs. Bradbury debate, I'd like to bring in a larger view---a quality standard if you like.

    If you have access to Oregon Channel on cable TV (or if someone knows how to find their oral history interviews online) watch the one of Gov. Roberts. I have seen it several times, and when I was flipping through cable channels last night it was on again.

    She is a woman with true grit. She never gets nasty. She explains things as she saw them, without sarcastic, nitpicky comments (clearly warranted in some cases--like what Larry Campbell did to her tax proposal, probably just out of spite as much as anything else).

    She tells a story about running for Gov. and being asked a direct question at some event. She gave a direct answer, and that became the headline. It was a straight answer to a question about a controvery of the time.

    Next day, 2 members of her finance comm. resign because they are convinced the campaign is over.

    Day after that, people start bringing in checks to her campaign and thanking her for her honesty. Then people start recruiting volunteers for her campaign. Turned out that the honest answer had been a smart move.

    They had decided early that 50% of what they raised went into the media account. If they couldn't afford something else, tough luck. 50% went into the media account.

    Comes August, when supposedly "nobody" watches TV. So TV time is cheap. They decide to blow the whole wad on positive commercials in August---if the Labor Day poll in the Oregonian shows her 15 points behind it is probably over anyway. She starts hearing from people who say they saw the spots. The Labor Day poll shows her only 5 points behind.

    (She was at the State Fair shaking hands--more than once, perhaps every day--which I remember from going to the state fair that year, maybe that was one of the years I worked in the Dem State Fair booth.)

    She talks about the luck they have--things that could not have been planned for.

    One example: Last question in a debate--Barbara R., Dave F., 2 other candidates. "Imagine if you are not running, and you can't vote for yourself. Who would you vote for as the next Gov. "

    Luck of the draw, she is the last one called on. The men all said "no one more qualified, so I would vote for myself".

    She says "Unlike my male opponents, I am going to answer the question asked. If I could not vote for myself, I would vote for the only other qualified candidate in this race, Dave Frohnmayer".

    That answer prompted the next debate moderator about a week later to ask the same question "giving you a chance to answer the question you did not answer last week".

    They all gave the same answer.

    Barbara graciously says she thinks Dave was "over managed" because he was so smart that left to his own choice she thinks he would have given an answer other than "my wife who is both a woman and a Democrat".

    I remember that campaign. Dave is a bright guy whose stupid campaign seemed to have been run by consultants, not by the candidate.

    Barbara and I were from different branches of the Democratic party, but I have enormous respect for her. It wasn't about "this week's poll" or what the consultants wanted or anything like that. It was a genuine human being running for office and being very clear where she stood.

    I am glad Dean is doing a fundraiser for Bill Bradbury.

    I am glad John Kitzhaber is collecting ideas from across the state on various topics.

    But the 2006 Gov. campaign was one of the most brainless, shallow, uninspiring campaigns I have seen in all the decades my family has lived in Oregon.

    Barbara's 1990 Gov. campaign was inspiring, energizing, as hopeful as the Obama campaign, as well run.

    Until I decide there is a candidate who comes anywhere near that standard (or even the "vision for the future and plan to carry it out" standard a friend used in a previous election to say "show me a candidate who matches the standard, and then I will consider backing someone in the primary"), I remain what I told Bill and John to their faces back last year when the weather was nice enough to be outdoors without a coat. I saw each of them at a function where food was cooked outdoors.

    I am a member of the "spectator caucus", and until I see someone who I find inspring, I don't have to say a word regarding the primary, I can just watch.

  • notchomsky (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Re: "The problem with progressives like Dean...":

    ...is that he's a Democrat and therefore not a progressive.

    From Single Payer Action (http://singlepayeraction.org/index.php) website:

    On Single Payer, Himmelstein Says Howard Dean is a Liar

    Dean and the self-anointed "progressive" Earl Blumenauer actively discriminated against Portland single payer advocates by not allowing them in to their non-town-hall farse.

    Dean/Blumenauer was an attempt to marginalize the majority, refusing entry to a large group of single-payer advocates in spite of the fact that many seats were empty. Tickets were given to party elites and refused to the rest, contempt for democracy of the most obvious sort.

  • (Show?)

    I don't know anything about the ticket situation referenced in the above comment. But I've been in the room at least four times when Dean has mentioned that the best outcome for health care reform is single payer: twice at book signings and twice at other events.

  • Brian C. (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I still like Howard Dean despite the damning, comical "yeeaw!!!" sound bite relentlessly bashed into our skulls like a rusty nail.

    Can't say the same for Bradbury. Sorry, but if human CO2 emissions currently ranks #1 on your priority list then I am unable to take you too seriously at the moment. Same goes for the pretentious nitwits on the right with their bullshit "family values" agendas. In the end it all amounts to religious dogma over genuine change. We have bigger fish to fry and I'm damn glad we have a president who understands that. We need that kind of pragmatism in Salem rather than another partisan disciple. Where's the next Tom McCall? Oh, wait...he's long gone and nobody worth a damn in their right mind wants that lose/lose gig. Who wants to represent a bunch of lazy deadbeats on the left or be owned by business interests on the right? Thus the downward spiral continues.

  • Zarathustra (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Brian C., when the editors of BO bothered to sniff in our direction recently, we heard that BO concentrates on local issues and that isn't one. I resisted the comment then, as it was clearly preachy and I knew no one would be listening, but I would love to put money on that sentiment being laughable within the decade.

    Good to know that at least one person sees the fact that we are all dieing ahead of what isn't going to happen to the kicker. Talk about narrow, "kill it" is too direct. "Political third rail". But CO2 isn't parochial enough. That is the #1 thing I dislike about Dems. They have no ability to acknowledge what they've decided, a priori, that they need to address.

  • we're already frying the fish, and Bradbury gets it (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Brian C...

    Seattle just recorded its warmest January in more than 100 years, and last I heard there's not much snow up in British Columbia for the Winter Olympics.

    You say we have bigger fish to fry. Glaciers are receding on Mt. Hood. The average temperature of the Columbia River is rising, and nearing a point where it will be too warm and uninhabitable for salmon. The fact is, the fish are already frying. Bradbury is the only candidate running for governor who has been trying to warn folks about this for years.

    You ask where's the next Tom McCall? McCall launched his political career with a documentary on pollution in the Willamette River. I don't believe a "pragmatist" (as you call for) would have delivered protection of Oregon's beaches, the bottle bill, and land use planning.

    I'm glad Bradbury sees the damage from human greenhouse gas emissions. I would not say from his campaign that it's his number one priority. It's the economy, and jobs, of course.

    But because Bradbury cares about our biosphere and thinks the responsible path is to leave a better planet to our kids, he will support the growth of business in Oregon that is sustainable, that reduces pollution, and that makes Oregon energy independent.

    You'll even find rural Republicans who agree that reducing our dependence on oil is desirable. There's a broad consensus out there that paying 3 to 4 dollars a gallon for gas from the Middle East while we borrow money from China is reckless. End our dependence of foreign fossil fuels, end the occupations of two Islamic countries without an exit strategy started by Bush, reduce our military spending, and reduce our need to borrow huge sums of cash from Asia.

    I'm glad Bradbury chose to run. Apparently, no other Democrat has the gumption to face Kitzhaber. If Bradbury didn't run, we wouldn't be talking about much of anything right now. Kitzhaber would be saying as little as possible, and preparing for the general. I like Bradbury's boldness, and willingness to speak to the big issues, and willingness to stick his neck out and actively support M66 and M67. He has earned my vote.

  • notchomsky (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Re: "But I've been in the room at least four times when Dean has mentioned that the best outcome for health care reform is single payer: twice at book signings and twice at other events."

    This is one of those examples Zara pointed to (http://www.blueoregon.com/2010/01/raw-chicken-the-mercury-endorsment-interview-with-novick-and-mccormick.html) of Carla's and other DP strategists' lack of intellectual integrity. It's like when you guys were saying that Obama was "anti-war" or "anti-corporate".

    Howard Dean was shilling for the sold-out Obamanesque semi-public option and trying to mislead people into thinking that it was the same thing as single payer. Dean is and was a liar, and he has never supported single payer, regardless of what you shills say he said to you inside some book store.

    See this before you make up your mind about who's lying:

    Single payer groups accuse Dean of having them arrested in Portland

    And here's an idea: Do your own research and search "Howard Dean on single payer". You will see the overwhelming evidence of Dean's and the DP's perfidy.

  • (Show?)

    Uh, you're aware that the purported anti-Dean link you gave concludes by saying this?

    "Dean has been traveling the country fighting for the public option choice alongside private options. It is a practical sensible view. There is no reason to attack him for his view that this is how we will get to single payer."

  • Brian C. (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Note to weather alarmist: We are currently experiencing a rather strong El Nino pattern, a naturally occurring process that existed long before our species emitted a single carbon atom into the atmosphere.

    Reality: Removing human ignorance & self-importance from the equation, 100 years < nanosecond.

  • notchomsky (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I was looking for an addy for the video, not for the opinion expressed at the end of the blog that posted it.

    The opinion is foolish. The "public option" never was single payer or "a practical sensible view" to get to single payer, and it makes about as much sense to bail out the corporate insurers in order to get to what the corporate insurers will use their money to oppose as it does to increase militarism to get to peace.

  • (Show?)

    This is late & so probably will go unnoticed, but on the Dean-Blumenauer event, it is not strictly true that single payer advocates were excluded but it does appear to be the case that there was some effort made at such exclusion. There were at least two PNHP docs who got tickets and got in -- one, Dr. Peter Mahr who is a leader of the Portland PNHP chapter, was nearly excluded despite having a ticket by Blumenauer staffer Willie Smith but managed to persuade him that his intent was to listen and not disrupt. Something similar happened to a member of the Jobs with Justice Health Care Committee (single payer advocates) who was wearing a different hat, covering the event for KBOO. After some dithering and non-disruption assurances he was allowed in as press.

    The temporal context was that this was shortly after the arrests of single payer advocates as Senate Finance Comm hearings ordered by Max Baucus. Also PNHP, JwJ, Single Payer Action and others had recently staged a "die-in" outside of Blumenauer's office and some had tried unsuccessfully to commit civil disobedience by sitting in at the office. There was a pretty strong feeling among s.p. people that despite the claim that tickets were assigned by lottery, known or self-identified s.p. advocates were excluded from any such lottery that may have occurred.

    The event was a strange hybrid in which a very large block of tickets was reserved for DPO big donors, yet was advertised as a town hall meeting.

  • Zarathustra (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Well, yes! If progressives were at his event being disruptive, imagine all the fuel for the fire that gives the "Dems aren't progressives" argument, once you can exclude Dean.

  • Sue S (unverified)
    (Show?)

    UPDATE: The Howard Dean/Bill Bradbury event date is Wednesday, February 11, at 1 p.m.

  • Sue S (unverified)
    (Show?)
    <h2>Opps! That's Wednesday Feb 10th.</h2>

connect with blueoregon