I just posted this on a local listserve in response to another post. It is an important perspective to consider in what has become a Dean vs. Fowler race at least among progressive Dems.
"Donnie Fowler is not a nationally controversial person within the
Democratic Party who has a strong coalition of Democrats opposing his
candidacy like
Howard Dean does."
This may be true, but it is important to ask why Dean has some opposition. Don't we want to change the party? Isn't it those who are resisting change and who want more DLC GOP-lite who are opposing him so vehemently? As well as those who have believed the anti-Dean media jihad and would believe such a media jihad against any progressive who shows the directness, honesty, and potential to set the grassroots on fire the way Dean did? Dean had an incredible ability to convert Republicans and independents before the media campaign against him (which started before the Iowa caucuses) took full root. He still has that potential because they cannot keep repeating the same lies WITH THE SAME EFFECT forever. The truth keeps coming out (think of the WMD lies, etc.).
Dean was demonized by the media because he was the type of person that can make the Democratic party more successful again. The corporate media (and the corporatist wing of the Democratic Party) do not want a successful populist liberal major party. They intentionally demonized Dean because he had the potential to make this happen. If Fowler starts to show the same potential, the mass media will just demonize him in the same way.
If the Republicans do not want Dean to be DNC chair, why is the mass media (voice of the Republican party these days) biasing every article on this race against Dean? (They are, in case you haven't noticed.) They don't want us to nominate someone who really can revitalize this party, so they are campaigning against it. Think of the Time "Fowler 1, Dean 0" headline, despite the fact that Dean has gotten a lot of endorsements lately also, including Ickes and Webb.
Did the party not choose Kerry over Dean because Kerry was seen as not having so much media-overplayed baggage? Did the media not then create such baggage for Kerry (encouraging the swift boat people, overplaying the "I voted against it" speech, etc.) in order to make sure Kerry didn't beat Bush either? To claim that we should not hire someone because the mass media has some overblown ammo on them that they can keep replaying is to claim they won't overblow something that Donnie Fowler once did. Let's get real. As if they don't want to destroy every liberal individual or movement!
"HIS POLITICAL ENEMIES CANNOT USE FRIVOLOUS AND STUPID THINGS
LIKE THIS
ON HIM TO TRY AND DEFINE HIM IN THEIR OWN WAY, MAKE HIS MESSAGE LESS
CREDIBLE
AND EFFECTIVE BY DOING THIS, AND CAUSE DEMOCRATS TO WASTE THEIR TIME
TRYING TO
DEFEND HIM FROM THESE KIND OF ATTACKS" I'm sure a lot of people said this when they voted for Kerry over Dean in the primaries. Many swift boat ads, "sensitive" clips, "I voted for it before I voted against it" clips, "cut off heads" clips (Vietnam congressional hearings), and one election day later we see how wrong they unfortunately were.
We must be strong and stand up to the media and the Right by saying we will not make our own decisions based on who they have already tried to destroy with propaganda. I think they are being a bit Orwellian and dishonest when they talk about how much they DO want us to have Dean, because Dean, given the chance to do his work and be listened to, has proven to be able to convert Republicans with his directness and unapologetic logic.
"Do you want to go in `a different direction from (Bill) Clinton' like
how
Dean does"?
Yes, I want an Iraq-War-Opposing, gay-rights-supporting, health-care-providing, media-consolidation-opposing direction in which we won't surrender, will always stand up to the Right, and won't apologize for having and supporting progressive values.
I wish I had more time to go on the offensive and not just the defensive about Dean, but I stand by the assertion that he is a uniquely strong, principled, smart and accomplished politico. To learn more go to democracyforamerica.com. I think our delegation in Oregon endorsed him for a reason. We are fooling ourselves if we think that anyone who shows potential to revitalize the Democratic Party (in the ways that good people like Dean AND Fowler can) will not be intentionally given contrived yet seemingly real "perceived personal baggage" by the media the way Dean has already been given. Believe me, I saw the "scream" in person and know just how different it was than the media claims and how the media knows it was different. They will do this to anyone who shows this potential, and the truth is WE NEED TO DO WHAT WE THINK IS RIGHT DESPITE WHAT THE RIGHT_WING MASS MEDIA IS TRYING TO GET US (DIRECTLY OR MANIPULATIVELY) TO DO, because we need to change the media before any worthwhile DNC chair or powerful liberal gets any good media attention. To paraphrase the author of the post, that is really unfair but it is the way it is right now in reality. I understand the author thinks it is right to support Fowler over Dean for some other reasons, but for those otherwise considering Dean, please take the all caps part of this paragraph to heart. J
I really appreciate the effort and opinion shown in the author's post and understand it is not a slam on Dean or his fans. I just wanted to bring up some important perspectives on the media facts and its inherent and pervasive bias, which is an important thing to realize when it comes to this race and any other issue. We'll never get anywhere being manipulated by a media that does not want us to win in the first place.