FIRST WATERGATE, NOW THIS: (It's wierd to post this man w/o a barf alert)

TNR ^ | 12.18.03 | Jonathan Chait

[.cnI redruM]

Will the political media finally start holding Howard Dean to the same standard as other candidates? Sure, some reporters have questioned whether Howard Dean would hold up against George W. Bush. But on the basic question of credibility--a topic on which they have skewered candidates like John Kerry and Wesley Clark for a couple muddled statements--reporters have given Dean a pass. Perhaps today's Washington Post story signals a change. If you haven't read this story yet, do so immediately.

[PAUSE FOR THOSE WHO HAVEN'T YET READ THE POST STORY]

As good and overdue as this article is, what's so amazing is that it merely glides over the surface of Dean's misstatements. Off the top of my head, I can think of a couple major ones that didn't make it. Earlier this year Dean accused John Edwards of fudging his position of the Iraq war, when in fact Edwards had not equivocated at all. (Dean did apologize.) Or take this exchange with George Stephanopoulos on "This Week":

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: (Off Camera) You have changed on various issues. On NAFTA, you used to be a very strong supporter of NAFTA.

HOWARD DEAN: George, you're doing it again. I supported NAFTA and wrote a letter to President Clinton in 1992 supporting NAFTA. That's different than "you used to be a very strong supporter of NAFTA."

STEPHANOPOULOS: (Off Camera) You were a strong supporter of NAFTA.

DEAN: I supported NAFTA. Where do you get this "I'm a strong supporter of NAFTA"? I did anything about it. I didn't vote on it. I didn't march down the street demanding NAFTA. I simply wrote a letter supporting NAFTA.

STEPHANOPOULOS: (Off Camera) Well, are you ashamed of that now?

DEAN: No, I'm not. And I tell the labor unions I did and I tell them why I did it. Because NAFTA did a lot of positive things for Vermont because it's right up against the Canadian border.

STEPHANOPOULOS: (Off Camera) But now you've renegotiated.

DEAN: What I see you doing is painting me into a corner that I was never in, and that's what a lot, that in some ways it's a funny ...

STEPHANOPOULOS: (Off Camera) But I don't get this. I mean, you were a supporter of it. You wrote a letter supporting it, you talked about it.

DEAN: Sure, yeah, right.

STEPHANOPOULOS: (Off Camera) And now you have a different position?

DEAN: No.

STEPHANOPOULOS: (Off Camera) Why isn't it right to ask about that and explain what you mean by it?

DEAN: It is. It is fine. I have no problem with you asking about it but don't put me in a position, which most journalists do, including you, of "you were a strong supporter of NAFTA and now it's not true." If you had watched this exchange, you probably thought that one of the following two possibilities was the case: 1) Dean was not really a strong supporter of NAFTA and that Stephanopoulos was trying to overstate his pallied support, or 2) Dean was a strong supporter of NAFTA, but was relying on a niggling, lawyer-like defense that hinged on the precise definition of the term "strong supporter." But you'd be wrong! In fact, in 1995 Dean had described himself as "a very strong supporter of NAFTA."

There is an enormous amount of similar stuff out there if the press decides to pay attention. Hopefully reporters will do this now, rather than let Dean cruise to the nomination and only reveal this massive political and characterological liability when we're stuck with him against Bush.

posted 11:16 a.m.

[.cnI redruM]

Even if other Dems have a better shot at Bush, I don't want Howard Dean a lucky break or two away from The White House. Bury him, Jonathan Chait, bury him deep!

[Criminal Number 18F]

This is all part of the war for the Democratic Party. Dean, Kucinich, Gore & Co. want to retake it from Clinton, Clinton, McAuliffe, Clark, & Co. This will sound weird to anyone living in the real physical world but Dean and those guys think that the Clintons, totally apart from running the Democratic Party as a cargo cult for their friends, are way too far to the right.

Think of them like two barbarian tribes, and it all starts to come together -- to us, they all just look like barbarians, but among themselves there is a deep divide.

Chait was always a dependable foot soldier for the Clinton tribe, and here he's throwing down on their side. Like the French Communists in 1944, they don't see the battle against the declared enemy as important, but the power struggle with their nominal allies. The Clintons know, or believe, that 04 is lost to the Democrats. But they must retain control of the Party (read: McAuliffe or another dependable clan retainer in place) and they fear that a strong and credible showing by Dean will allow him to influence the future direction of the party. Indeed, in anything less than a blowout, he would be the presumptive 08 nominee, which steps on Cruella da Hil's master plan...

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

[.cnI redruM]

Hmmm... The Deenie-Weenies as Vandals and The CLintonistas as Huns....interesting.

[Wait4Truth]

Dean has just hired a whole bunch of clitonites..the idea that this is Dean against the clintons is horse-hockey. They made it LOOK that way but it's all a sham. Dean also said the other day that he would have bill clinton as his personal envoy to the middle-east. Dean talks to clinton all the time.

[section9]

It's almost gotten to the point where the Democrats are in a no win situation.

Dean's people are fanatics who will drive several hundred miles to see him. If he is "shortchanged" by the "party apparatus" and "the Clintons", those people are staying home in significant numbers in November. If the Apparat stabs Dean in the back after he has played by their rules and won enough to give him a critical mass, if not the nomination, the masses will revolt.

And if he's nominated, the Angry Man is crushed by Bush.

Now all Bush needs to do is make a flight to Tehran to flank the Democrats and flummox the entire Democratic foreign policy meme.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[.cnI redruM]

Activists are great. When they ruin things for the other side.

[EQAndyBuzz]

None of this matters. Never did, never will. The Dem candidate is the flavor of the week that the media decides on.

Like Hillary, they are hedging their bets. The only reason the media is playing this game is because they are waiting on Hillary to make a move. The minute she either endorses a candidate or decides that she should ride in on the white horse and save the party, Dean is the flavor.

[gridlock]

Think of them like two barbarian tribes, and it all starts to come together -- to us, they all just look like barbarians, but among themselves there is a deep divide.

[GeekDejure]

STEP-ON-ALL-OF-US: (Off Camera) Drop dead, Dean-bag !!!

.

[vaudine]

"a house divided against itself cannot stand"...Let the division begin, accelerate, and annihilate!

vaudine

[IncPen]

ping...

[expatpat]

You are right on target. And Stephie was doing the devil's work during the interview, too. (Which is the devil, Bill or Hitlary? -- you choose).

[expatpat]

Like the French Communists in 1944, they don't see the battle against the declared enemy as important, but the power struggle with their nominal allies.

Or like the battle between Stalin and Trotsky -- there are some interesting stories about the assassins Stalin sent to Spain to kill Trotskyites fighting for communism against the falange.

[WOSG]

The only good Democrat is a Democrat who's knocked around.

Anyway this idea that the candidate who can win a bruising Dem nomination contest will be a pushover or easiest to beat is nonsense! Nonsense, I tell ya!

Forget their positions. Dean has gone from 1% to frontrunner through innovative campaigning and an ability to not be ashamed to changes positions faster than Liz taylor changes husbands.

I would rather have John F)*&^ Kerry as an opponent. Why? He cant run a campaign! Now a man who cant run a campaign cant be expected to run a country, but the point is, Bush can beat a BAD campaigner more easily than a GOOD campaigner any day. And right now, the Dems best campaigner is ... Dean.

Same with Gephardt. The man has no energy and is flailing. Dont ask me why, but a no-energy opponent against Bush is dead meat. He'll lose.

Dean otoh, is a wild card, maybe a Dukakis ... or maybe a Clinton. It's a long shot, but that's the best chance to give the Dems anyway ... so folks, quit wishing for Dean. No way is he any easier to beat than the othe dwarves in the Dem column.

Case closed.

[Criminal Number 18F]

The Deenie-Weenies as Vandals and The CLintonistas as Huns

Maybe the other way around... it was the Vandals who sacked ROme, and the Clintonistas the White House...

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

[Miss Marple]

Well, how about that Ghadaffi announcement? It ain't Tehran, but it comes pretty close! HA!