Originally Posted By woody When the Dems act crazy, they really get bad. They lured Paul Hackett (Iraq War Veteran) to run for a Senator seat in Ohio. Then dumped Hackett for a more viable candidate. REPORTING FOR DUTY. KIA (Killed in Action). ----------- <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/2/14/0135/82714" target="_blank">http://www.dailykos.com/storyo nly/2006/2/14/0135/82714</a> Paul Hackett, an Iraq war veteran and popular Democratic candidate in Ohio's closely watched Senate contest, said yesterday that he was dropping out of the race and leaving politics altogether as a result of pressure from party leaders. Mr. Hackett said Senators Charles E. Schumer of New York and Harry Reid of Nevada, the same party leaders who he said persuaded him last August to enter the Senate race, had pushed him to step aside so that Representative Sherrod Brown, a longtime member of Congress, could take on Senator Mike DeWine, the Republican incumbent. Mr. Hackett staged a surprisingly strong Congressional run last year in an overwhelmingly Republican district and gained national prominence for his scathing criticism of the Bush administration's handling of the Iraq War. It was his performance in the Congressional race that led party leaders to recruit him for the Senate race. But for the last two weeks, he said, state and national Democratic Party leaders have urged him to drop his Senate campaign and again run for Congress. "This is an extremely disappointing decision that I feel has been forced on me," said Mr. Hackett, whose announcement comes two days before the state's filing deadline for candidates. He said he was outraged to learn that party leaders were calling his donors and asking them to stop giving and said he would not enter the Second District Congressional race. "For me, this is a second betrayal," Mr. Hackett said. "First, my government misused and mismanaged the military in Iraq, and now my own party is afraid to support candidates like me."
Originally Posted By gadzuux Much ado ... This is standard backroom politicking, where the party elders are throwing their support to the candidate most likely to win election. You think maybe the GOP doesn't do the same thing? Ask tom mcclintock, he'll tell you all about it.
Originally Posted By cmpaley >>You think maybe the GOP doesn't do the same thing? Ask tom mcclintock, he'll tell you all about it.<< Well, at least we can give the extremist right-wing California Republican Party is that they McClintock is an extremist nut...even for them.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj Who writes the headlines for these things? I don't see how this event has anything at all to do with being a war veteran? Are we trying to say that every candidate for the Senate has to be a war veteran, and to deny a veteran otherwise is a betrayal? By the way, if you actually bother to go to the link that this story was quoted from, you will find a lot of information that was not originally posted here: 1) Mr. Hackett was woefully behind in the polls 2) Mr. Hackett had essentially no money to mount a senate campaign 3) After Mr. Hackett was urged to run for the Senate, he refused to announce a candidacy until will after Mr. Brown threw his hat into the ring. The political wonks that initially supported him were not impressed with the delay, and sided with the candidate who was already on the road toward a successful campaign.
Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder Re: Post 4. You're dead on. You immediately spotted what Darkbeer does all the time around here. We call him on it all the time as well, but that has never stopped him from making a fool of himself. He apparently derives some perverse pride out of it all.
Originally Posted By DVC_dad LMAO !!! hahahaha Don't take that lying down Darkbeer. Win one for our side!
Originally Posted By woody mrichmondj: Mr Hackett described the betrayal himself. He was a war veteran who used this fact in his campaign. In the NYTimes article it said "Mr. Hackett was the first Iraq war veteran to seek national office, and the decision to steer him away from the Senate race has surprised those who see him as a symbol for Democrats who oppose the war but want to appear strong on national security." AND ""For me, this is a second betrayal," Mr. Hackett said. "First, my government misused and mismanaged the military in Iraq, and now my own party is afraid to support candidates LIKE ME."" Sounds like a betrayal of a war verteran. You said "1) Mr. Hackett was woefully behind in the polls" NO WHERE in that article does it describe the polls. Mr. Hackett was asked to resign from his campaign without being tested. "2) Mr. Hackett had essentially no money to mount a senate campaign" Mr. Hackett's senate campaign money was denied when Senator Schumer and Reid called his campaign donors to stop giving Hackett any money. It was a betrayal. "3) After Mr. Hackett was urged to run for the Senate, he refused to announce a candidacy until will after Mr. Brown threw his hat into the ring. The political wonks that initially supported him were not impressed with the delay, and sided with the candidate who was already on the road toward a successful campaign." If Mr. Hackett never entered into the race, why was he asked to withdrawal? It said "But for the last two weeks, he said, state and national Democratic Party leaders have urged him to drop his Senate campaign and again run for Congress." Hackett was running. Mr. Hackett was LURED to run for the Senate because he was a promising candidate. However, a proven candidate like Representative Sherrod Brown decided to run so the Democratic Party decided to push Hackett under the bus. It is quite easy to see it. When Republicans non-military veteran candidates won over war veteran candidates (Kerry, McCain, McCelland), it was considered very wrong due the campaign tactics, but this time it is fair game with the Democrats. There should have been a Democratic primary, but Hackett was never allow a vote. It's party politics betrayal.
Originally Posted By woody Hackett was probably part of a whispering campaign against him. I thought the Democrats were above this sort of thing when the Republicans did this to Kerry, McCain, and Cleland. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/19/weekinreview/19dao.html?ex=1298005200&en=5e5d212875a99dc2&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss" target="_blank">http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02 /19/weekinreview/19dao.html?ex=1298005200&en=5e5d212875a99dc2&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss</a> "But Mr. Webb, an independent sort, might look to Paul Hackett for how things can go very wrong. Mr. Hackett, a loud, profane and unpredictable Iraq war veteran and Democrat, almost won a Congressional election in Ohio last year and had been running for the Senate this year." "But last week, he quit politics, declaring he had been forced out of the Ohio race by national Democratic leaders who had no faith in his electability in a statewide race. He also contended that he was the victim of a whispering campaign alleging he was responsible for war atrocities."
Originally Posted By youyouit2 >>Mr. Hackett sounds like a sore loser to me.<< he did not run yet how can he be a sore loser?
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By thehasit >>Mr. Hackett sounds like a sore loser to me<< HE has not even ran yet how can he be a sore loser?
Originally Posted By thehasit >>Mr. Hackett sounds like a sore loser to me<< HE has not even ran yet how can he be a sore loser?
