This is the original article:
http://www.ctnow.com/hc-dean0710.artjul10.storySome guy called me this morning to thank me for writing it. And here is my response (They didn't even call me to verify I wrote it like the last time):
http://www.ctnow.com/news/opinion/letters/hc-letterbox0712.artjul12.storyA Hatchet Job On Howard Dean
July 12, 2003
Although David Lightman makes some interesting points in the article on Howard Dean
that are important and should be discussed, some of his sources are suspect.
His failure to reveal a blatant conflict of interest of two of his sources brings his objectivity and his motives for writing the piece, which is clearly dismissive of former Vermont Gov. Dean's chances to become president, into question.
Susan MacManus, professor of political science at the University of South Florida, was also in charge of Gov. Jeb Bush's transitional team, and Alan Quinlan, whom Lightman describes as a "Democratic consultant," is Sen. Joseph Lieberman's pollster.
Lightman's critique of Dean fails to mention the obstacles Dean has already overcome, as well as his successes. The glaring distinction between Dean and the losers that Lightman compares him to (Buchanan, McCain and McGovern) is that Dean, while garnering the support of the progressives on the left, is a centrist on policy. The others were ideologues from the fringe.
Dean's outsider status comes from his prominence in a small, rural state and his heretofore relative obscurity, rather than his stance on the issues. Rep. Richard A. Gephardt's health care plan is much further left than Dean's.
Finally, Lightman tries to add an air of enlightened judgment in the last sentence by having an assistant professor of political science state the obvious, ominously described as a sobering notion: When referring to the losers, it was noted that "none of them became president."
If Lightman really needed to have an assistant professor of political science bring that little nugget to his attention, then he has no business on a political beat.