A quote from the Salon article about Kerry....

It isn't a flattering article about Kerry, but I'm not here to bash him. I'm including it here because I think the quote is right-on--Washington insiders really don't get the anger at this fraudulent administration--they live in Washington, work in Washington, and only listen to other people in Washington.

It's an isolated world, and they are really out of touch.

______________________________________________



Instead, Dean became the only leading contender to oppose the war. He soared, and Kerry sagged. But more than antiwar sentiment was at work. "The essence of the Dean message wasn't antiwar, it was anti-Bush," explained Robert Borosage, co-director of the liberal Campaign for America's Future. "It was that Dean was willing to speak out against Bush, and the others weren't. The Washington-based candidates, including Kerry, didn't understand how furious Democrats were with Bush and how much they wanted someone who would express fury at his policies, how he had stolen the election, and what he was doing to the country."

They didn't understand how furious we were with Bush, and with the Dems who were too intimidated to stand up to him.

They also left out how furious the rank and file Dems are getting with members of their own party who failed to speak out.

...remember Dean's announcement speech?...How he'd learned people want more control over the govt than the corps have? *That* is a transcendent swing/indie issue which can also be interpreted as anger- a frustration really- and it can be a helluva motivator.

BTW welcome to DU! :hi:

...and people like Dean and Clark are seen as "outsiders" and therefore don't share the blame for bending over like the Dem leadership in Congress have done.

It's total bs that Dean was out there, all by his lonesome.

The larger question is this:

Why did Dean become the "leading contender"?

My opinion is that articles like the Salon one had a lot to do with it. They put a nice qualifier in like "leading contender" just so they can pump Dean up. That's new. Not.

for some reason.

If you get a chance, raed the whole thing.

However, they do point out that his message has resonated--there are numerous reasons for it.

Kucinich--although very liberal and ant-war, probably is seen as an insider in people's minds--same as Graham. May not be fair to label them so, bu that's the lay of the land these days.

the big flame wars were between Kerry and Gore supporters who were assessing which one of them was hammering Bush more. The media would RARELY cover their criticisms.

Last Dec. Carville said that Kerry was the candidate that was the most substantive in his critiques of Bush.

Why wouldn't the media trumpet their critiques? Because they hurt Bush too much and they weren't willing to go there at that time.

Dean got press for bashing the other Dem candidates last January and the press showered him with attention. Then they acted as if he was the ONLY one criticizing Bush.

No Kucinich, the true antiwar candidate, no Kerry, no Edwards, no nobody but Dean.

Is Howard Dean the Crypto-Republican Candidate?

By Norman D. Livergood

Why is the Republican-owned media giving Howard Dean multi-million dollar media attention? That's the question no one's asking.

Dean made the covers of both Time and Newsweek, was interviewed by Larry King, was the subject of a US News Special, and receives continuing major coverage on all the "news" channels: MSNBC, CNN, and Fox.

Even Dean's campaign manager, Joe Trippi, appeared on CNBC's Capital Report, was interviewed on Fox News' Fox Facts, and was interviewed on CNN's Inside Politics--all in July, 2003. Why is Dean the only Democratic candidate to be given this kind of coverage?

The Republicans and their media hirelings would have us believe that they're giving Dean the spotlight because he's an Internet phenomenon, that he's the leading Democratic contender, and because he represents the "Democratic wing of the Democratic Party" (a line Dean stole from the late Senator Paul Wellstone). None of the media's claims are true.

Dean As the Ideal Democratic Candidate for Bush to Beat

Continued...

http://www.hermes-press.com/HDean/dean_republican.htm

Dean only started getting media attention AFTER he raised so much money and started rising in the polls.

Don't be fooled--Repukes are afraid of Dean, as well they should be.

Both the Newsweek and Time articles alluded to GOPers who sent money Dean's way. Because MILLIONS in donations were for less than $25, we'll never know who they were.

One thing's certain: The GOP wants Dean to be nominated. Why? Two words: National Security.

candidate, when he was neither? Why did liberal antiwar $$$$ and support go to Dean early on, when it was Kucinich who was speaking at antiwar protests to millions of people with NO media coverage?

Not sure about Graham, but I certainly agree about DK, MB, and AS.

various candidates and we certainly have a media with a big filter on it. Everyone of those candidates has come out screaming and bashing the hell out of Bush. I expected to find the Dean was going to do something really awesome and it didn't happen. In fact, Gep's "miserable failure" comment was the most brutal I've seen from any of them. Edwards was real in the face. And Howard's was just "usual" and so-so. Everyone of these guys have hit him all over the place so this news media b.s. about "only Dean" is stupid---and a little bit suspicious. In fact, just reading Time and Joe Klein made some comments about Dean's appearances on these debates and called his performances not anything great. His piece this week is about Gep. He talks about Dean having a bad two weeks.

a long time, like a lot of left leaning internet sites run by youngish folks. See Liberal Oasis and Daily KOS for more of the same. What a coincidence, this is the exact same demographic where Dean gets most of his support.

Really, he should! It's not merely that he's "Inside the Beltway" - he has a tin ear. Beyond that, he's an uninspiring speaker and is physically unattractive. He should withdraw his candidacy for the good of the Democratic Party.

He’s the Man

By Michelle Mairesse

On April 2, Senator John Kerry told a New Hampshire crowd that President Bush had so alienated allies before the Iraq war that only a new president could rebuild damaged relationships with other nations. He said that in addition to a regime change in Iraq, "we need a regime change in the United States."

That remark brought the weight of the Bush Cabal’s spin machine down on Kerry’s head.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, House Speaker Dennis Hastert, and House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, all Republicans who have never served a day in the military, questioned Senator Kerry’s patriotism.

Kerry’s patriotism? While George Bush was absent without leave for eighteen months from his Texas Air National Guard post, Kerry served in Vietnam and earned a Bronze Star, a Silver Star, and three Purple Hearts. Following his conscience, after returning home, Kerry co-founded the Vietnam Veterans Against the War.

CONTINUED...

http://www.hermes-press.com/kerryprez.htm