yes, I know I haven't been blogging so much the past week, and have missed making comments on a number of good stories.
the Dean meltdown for instance, and utter farce perpetrated for the most part by the media.
I hold Maureen Down in particular contempt over this one, for several smarmy and irrelevant articles about Dr. Dean and his wife. Those articles are here and over here , although this one you have to pay for.
Here's a letter I wrote to Maureen, referring to two recent articles:
maureen: look at Dean's record in Vermont and stop
playing ad hominem games.

You are correct that "Personal history shouldn't be a
substitute for policy. An overreliance on stories of
dramatic heroism and physical suffering can overwhelm
a campaign, as it did with Bob Kerrey and Bob Dole,
devolving into the politics of self. And yuppie sagas
of sin and redemption can become strained with
repetition."

Dean has a solid record: what he did in vermont to
insure children is not only a matter of record, it is
a wild success, as is his success in reducing child
abuse in the state. I know: I lived next door in
Western Massachusetts during his tenure, and have MANY
friends in vermont.

Furthermore, I don't understand why you have a problem
with this comment "They weren't there when it was time
to stand up to the president on the war in Iraq," when
the past year or so has seen you write article after
article after article decrying the Bush
administration's behavior with regard to this war. I
am confused and dismayed by your inconsistency.

I am not a Deaniac, but I can assure you this media
pigpile is making me one. If you are going to
criticize the man, and you would be remiss if you
didn't, then you should be criticizing him on matters
of policy, not on his biography or his marriage.
You are more mature than this, and you are better than
this. For Pete's sake, it's as if Charles Krauthammer
or some other ninny is writing your column. For
crying out loud Maureen, we're talking about a man
decried by Vermonters as "too conservative" when he
was in office. I will be the first to admit that
Howard Dean is not perfect, but none of these other
guys have what it takes to beat Bush. Edwards?
Immature, no experience. Kerry? Aloof, elite, and he
looks like Lurch the Butler from "the Addams Family."
Lieberman? I use videotapes of the man to put my
newborn to sleep when he fusses, plus he has no spine.
Clark? Talk about running on your biography.
Sharpton and Kucinich aren't even worth discussing.

If the democrats are going to lose, then give me a
Dean defeat any day.. at the least he will lead the
Dems out of the wilderness in the same way Goldwater
led the Republicans out of the wilderness. I would
rather go down fighting than go down in Dukakis-style
ignominy, which is the sure reuslt of a Kerry et al
candidacy.
Brendan Skwire