I agree with you that the only candidate who can beat Bush is a candidate who knows how to play offense, that is, a candidate who knows how to identify and exploit the weaknesses of the other side. I've always believed that the candidate who wins is the candidate who has successully managed to define the terms of the debate.  If Bush manages to define the terms, we're sunk.  He'll win.  I don't care how many medals you won or how polished your resume looks, if you can't take control of the engine, you're going to get driven wherever Bush wants to drive you.

That's where I think Dean has failed. When he became the front-runner, he stopped defining the debate and starting fielding questions about the unelectable tag that was pinned on his forehead.  He could have taken the pin off and said "We've got 44 million without health insurance, 9 million unemployed, daily deaths in Iraq, we're spending $1 billion dollars a week on a war that was based on faulty intelligence and you're calling ME unelectable?"  Instead, he started playing defense. Look where it's got him.

I still believe that he's got it in him to play offense, but he's still got the gloves on now and I don't see them coming off in the near future.  

When you play by someone else's rules, you ALWAYS lose, because it's their game, not yours.