"Dean: Dominator or Detonator?" by David Broder, Washington Post

[flpoljunkie]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60594-2004Jan6.html

Wednesday, January 7, 2004; Page A21

DES MOINES -- Howard Dean is now racing the clock to see what comes first -- nomination or detonation.

The former Vermont governor is closing in on the honor of leading the Democratic ticket at the same time that his critics and rivals are busily converting his own utterances into controversies that could blow his chances to smithereens. The nightmare possibility for the Democrats is that the two might happen at once -- that Dean will polish off his opponents just as he commits the gaffe of all gaffes, the one for which no repairs are possible.

It is hard to recall another challenger who has simultaneously outdistanced, out-organized and outmaneuvered the other candidates as thoroughly and swiftly as Dean has done, and at the same time has so thoroughly demonstrated a penchant for embarrassing himself.

Whatever happens the rest of the way, it is clear that the doctor has an instinct for the political jugular -- other people's and his own. Dean has been scoring despite himself -- and because of himself.

<>Were these isolated incidents, the damage might be minimal. But Dean has found so many ways in a short time to set people's teeth on edge -- with his comments about the Confederate flag, about his struggle to bring himself to talk religion in the South, about his variant positions on Medicare and trade and other issues -- that this is clearly a pattern.

more...

[Mairead]

1. Broder is a Log Cabin Republican

(well, I don't know that he's actually a member, but he's queer and very conservative)

[Racenut20]

3. Actually I don't think either one of those statements are true.

[Mairead]

8. Really? Who'm I thinking of, then?

I'm fairly sure it's Broder.

[jumptheshadow]

9. ????

Recheck your sources. :)

[Mairead]

11. woops, I retract -- I got confused.

I was conflating him with David Brudnoy, I think.

[Hep]

2. Wow, another idiotic example of the media's double standard

And the Dean opponents fall for it like so many swing voters fell for it in 2000.

Can we start a new forum just for people who learned something from 2000?

[KissMyAsscroft]

4. Amen Hep!

nt

[maddezmom]

12. ask for one in ATA?

:)

[oasis]

5. Many conservatives want Bush/Ashcroft out and they see Dean blowing it.

[wtmusic]

6. 'this is clearly a pattern'

the only pattern I see is over-analysis which seems to be Dean detractors' only remaining weapon.

[NWHarkness]

7. Just another beltway blowhard

Broder doesn't have the slightest clue what's going on in this country.

[dsc]

10. here is a novel idea

let's look at his examples.

In the area of foreign policy, his rivals say Dean has demonstrated his inexperience and naivete. To argue, as Dean did, on the day after Saddam Hussein's capture by American troops, that jailing the Iraqi dictator left America "no safer" was a classically ill-timed remark. Whatever the ultimate judgment of history, that was a day for celebrating the success of the manhunt for this thoroughly malignant character.

Here is example one. Yep Dean is right, as Broder admits history might show, and yet it shouldn't be said. Let's review the record now. Since Saddam has been captured we have lost 2 dozen soldiers in Iraq (none of whom had parents of Broder's pundit class it should be noted), we have been on orange alert, we have fighter jets and missile batteries protecting Washington DC. This is the first time ever this has happened. Now, maybe Broder has a different idea of safer than I do. I, silly me, think safer means that we have less signs of danger not more.

His remark to the Concord Monitor that he did not want to prejudge the guilt or innocence of Osama bin Laden left Dean arguing a legalistic point that once again set him apart from public opinion. As he later acknowledged, no real doubt attaches to the al Qaeda leader's role in masterminding the attacks that took nearly 3,000 lives at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Dean himself later said that a death sentence would be just punishment when bin Laden is found. His effort to rationalize his earlier remark on the grounds that he might be president when bin Laden is brought to trial and that a government official "must uphold the rule of law" put a hypothetical barrier in the way of identifying himself with a near-universal sentiment among the American people.


That is no hypothetical barrier. If Dean or anyone else for that matter, goes around saying he needs executed and then become the President who has to make that decision motion 1 will be to make him recuse himself and his appointees. That is red letter law. The executive has to enforce the law without prejudice which is what those remarks are. While it is unlikely that a judge will actually do his or her job in this regard that doesn't make it less of a violation.

[dansolo]

13. Masterminding the attacks?

Haven't there been two or three al-Qaeda 9-11 "masterminds" that have been captured? It seems to me that Osama is more of a figurehead and a money-backer than a mastermind. I'm not saying that Osama isn't guilty and that he probably should be put to death, but it should be fairly easy to prove Osama's guilt, so why not have a trial?