Reply #18: After all your virulence, are you going to get huffy now? [View All]

Yes, I'm familiar with the concept.

You have been tireless in your support of your champion, while some of us have committed the sins of actually engaging in qualified discourse. If you take the time to read my post, you'll see that it's an argument against Gore and others in the party establishment for wanting to avoid popular voting in order to either install their choice or just kill the issue before the general populace sullies it all with their tiresome wishes.

Yes, the Dean team has worked wonders, but some of their--and his--tactics are very reminiscent of conservative tactics: smearing and outright lying, while demanding the moral highground as a given. It's laughable to see the Deanies shriek when Clark partisans hit them with the same tactics.

Howard Dean does not unquestionably deserve the nomination. He is not the new messiah, and his tactics have been nastily insulting to some very fine people. You won't see that because, for some reason, you feel entitled to his ascendency. He feels entitled to it, too; that's why you hear so many personal comparisons between him and Bush. (He's an infinitely more decent person, beyond question, but the pomposity, privilege and authoritarian style are eerily similar.)

Don't feign the dudgeon of the wronged; Deanies have rubbed everyone's nose in it long past the time when it was an endearing fervor of the underdog. Now it's the lockstep crushing of inferiors. Maybe he'll win; if so, he's going to have to work with those "cockroaches" and the "Bush-lite" losers who are far more to the left and concerned with the commonfolk than he is, so it's time to join the party and not piss all over anyone who has the effrontry to point out that the Emperor thinks he's precisely that: a monarch.

More than anything, gain the wisdom of knowing when one's position has changed. You people are not the wronged victims, so please back off from the self-granted right of unconditional, unlimited retaliation.

If you don't think that establishment Dems have been averse to actually letting the people into the decisionmaking, then you're missing something; that was the subject of my post.