Dean makes the cover of Time and Newsweek this week.

Nice...

Newsweek: Destiny or Disaster?

The Left’s Mr. Right?
IN YOUR FACE: His willingness to go after Bush on Iraq thrilled long-suffering liberals. And his unexpected success at fund-raising gave him crucial momentum. But is Howard Dean the Democrats’ path back to power—or a recipe for another 49-state defeat?

Time: The Dean Factor

He's got money, momentum, excitement. But is that enough to take him to the top?

http://www.blogforamerica.com/

they should be asking that of bush and his policies!

But as usual they have it bass ackwards.

I signed the petition to put Dean on the ballot in Virginia. They were also registering people to vote. This campaign is generating a lot of excitement and the young people are leading the way!

Because there are a lot of People Dean's age who are stepping up to the plate and wanting to hit a home run for the Dr; to use the baseball metaphor again! :kick:

This is great news. Haven't read the articles yet, but regardless of the content, this is great exposure for Dean. Yippee!

Alter's article depicts this as a weakness in comparison to "presidential" sounding candidates such as Kerry, Lieberman and Gephardt. IMHO I think Dean's voice stands out because he doesn't use the same, tired "debate sounding' rhetoric. I think talking like a seasoned politician turns a lot of people off as well as putting them to sleep faster than a Sominex pill.

how people who praise Bush's plain spokenness have Cartmen style hissy fits over Dean's style. I think Dean is both more restrained and more literate than Bush could dream of being.

true

bush is an illiterate speaker. I've forced myself to hear him talk on the Mike Malloy Show. WE have a brainless liar up there spouting off the lastest lie... No way does that compare to Dean's honesty about taking our Country BAck!

Sometimes "plain talk" can be MORE deceptive. And I don't think it will work again. Many are tired of dumbed down speech from their president. Europe certainly is.

I'll take the way Gore and Kerry speak indepth about complex issues, rather than any hot rhetoric spewing glib talker.

Nobody every went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people

Anti-intellectualism in American politics bugs me to no end, but I'm not entirely optimistic about 2004.

One heartening note from July's Democracy Corps survey: "College graduates (white). They have pulled back on Bush's foreign policy performance, trust on WMD and the economy, which is impacting votes. In the last month, Bush is down sharply with white college graduates, with his re-elect falling from 55 to 49 percent. The shift is for both men and women, but greater for women, where Bush has fallen from 51 to 43 percent."

you take kerry's talk. he lost me when he voted for the Attack on Iraq. Now he's talking trash trying to get out of it.

at the loaded language used in the Time article "The Cool passion of Dr Dean"

this is just the 2nd paragraph
"Zounds? Zounds is an old word, a fine word, a word with a pedigree. Iago says it in the opening lines of Othello; it was the 17th century's whoa. But it's not the first word one expects to hear from the "maverick" (USA Today), "insurgent" (Los Angeles Times), "fiery" (New York Observer) self-proclaimed leader of "the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party," the great repository of hope—and donations—from the antiwar, anti-Bush, pro-gay, Michael Moore left. Even so, the Anglophile locution sounded quite natural coming from Dean's thin Wasp lips."

and I suppose I should appreciate it when he explains Dean is
"a true lefty on only a few issues, primarily the use of U.S. military power, which Dean seems to regard with a mixture of contempt and suspicion."

then goes on to say "At this early stage it's likely that Dean enjoys support from those to his left who don't know the fine points of his proposals as well as they know the fine volleys of his rhetoric"

I found the whole article insulting in the extreme. The Newsweek article seemed a fairer assessment. I'm not looking at this with rose colored glasses...I know the good and the bad...I'm banking on the good. I just don't want the outcome predetermined.

Just go to:
http://blogs.salon.com/0001137/2003/08/03.html#a318

I like the 10 Days that shook the race Timeline.

Go Dean!

this coverage will serve to reinforce the message of Dean's campaign: You have the power to take your country back.

Dare we dream that we can get our media back too?

The reason that Dean is resonating is because he is embracing the power of true grassroots politics.

"Carville suggests that instead of Dean’s going before abortion-rights activists and pledging his support for late-term abortion (which could prove harmful in a general election) or Lieberman’s apologizing to the NAACP for not attending its convention, some candidate should advocate civil unions before the Baptist convention or oppose the war at the American Legion. That would show strength, he says."

Dean refused to speak about the need for disarmament before anti-war crowds. He preferred comfortable issues like imminent threats, pre-emption, and regime change (all examples where Bush had no legitimate case). It wasn't until the war had almost begun that he talked about the issue of disarmament.

Kerry on the other hand, made a point of talking about the need for disarmament (a position he advocated since '97) wherever he was. You can bet it wasn't a crowd pleaser, but it showed me that he was willing to confront an audience with uncomfortable issues. He could have skipped the issue and talked about what a jerk Bush is, but he got in their faces and told them about his convictions.

It turns out that Dean had the same convictions, but it would take months to find it out (after he realized he would need to appeal to the general public).

So much for "straight shooting."

The problem is that Bush pushed through a bill with dem support, that basically authorized him to invade Iraq whenever he wanted without ever proving Iraq had them or that he was an imminent threat to the US.

Dean asks for proof on Iraq September 24, 2002

Dean, who spoke Monday night at the Iowa Memorial Union, also said he would endorse a pre-emptive strike against Iraq if it can be proven that Saddam Hussein has access to weapons of mass destruction and the means to discharge them. He said President Bush has never proven that case.

<...>

Dean described himself Monday night as a political moderate who can balance budgets, reduce the deficit and spend wisely on social programs that reduce child abuse and make health insurance accessible. He also said he was pro-choice and in favor of rights for all people, including those who are gay.

He's looking for proof of an imminent threat again. Not about the need to disarm Saddam one way or another, imminent threat or little threat.

Kerry's point was that the UN needs to pressure Saddam to allow unfettered inspections as a permanent condition of proof that Iraq had disarmed. If Saddam screwed around, then force would back up that pressure.

Dean did not mention this until much later. Perhaps once or twice (of which I'm not aware), but he certainly did not make this clear as a condition he supported to the all the anti-war crowds he spoke to.

http://www.deanvolunteers.org/DeanVolunteers/press_view.asp?ID=583

"The president approached it in exactly the wrong way. The first thing I would have done is gone to United Nations Security Council and gone to our allies and say, "Look, the UN resolutions are being violated. If you don't enforce them, then we will have to." The first choice, however, is to enforce them through the UN and with our allies. That's the underlying approach."