Self-Destruction

[DannyRed]

For anyone who has any questions about how and why the Democratic party will not win the next election, nor any in the near future...

Simply read this message board.

I am a Dean supporter, and have certainly attacked the positions of other candidates, and defended my own choice from attacks, no doubt.

But what we see here goes way beyond that.

What we see here is an exposure of the extent to which the supposed liberalism and progressivism of many on DU is a veneer masking the same desire to be "in" and the same need to "belong to the winning team" - herd/pack mentality - that feeds into and typifies the media-driven, image-driven, surficial, shallow brand of politics that dominates America.

There is no doubt that this primary was going to be tough fought, and it was never certain that my choice (Dean) was a lock (regardless of the "inevitability" feeling that suckered so many Dean supporters and others into such grandiose expectations, followed by deep despair or giddy excitement, depending on outlook). Many, myself included, were looking toward a tough fought battle of ideas, organizations, issues, and themes.

Now we can see clearly - this is a media-driven, popularity/image dominated counterpart of a high-school student council election.

Look at the reaction from the right-wing radio/cable/newspaper hate-mongers...they are soooooo happy about it. Why? Because they were afraid of Dean. So much for the "Dean is the one they want to run against" bullshit.

Now what is going to happen?

Clark and Edwards will be next, at which point Kerry will be the prime target, and an easy target he is.

Now, don't get me wrong.

I personally have no problem voting for ANY of the Democratic candidates, with the exception of Lieberman. Kerry has excellent credentials and history - with the exception of the IWR/Patriot votes. Pretty much the same goes for Edwards. Clark seems a decent guy with an excellent resume and not enough political experience.

So, should one of the above win, I will certainly vote for him.

But look at the behavior here on DU. Compare that behavior to the behavior on FreeRepublic, Lucianne. Compare the "analyses" here to those on Letterman, Drudge, Limbaugh, and others.

You should be ashamed of yourselves.

Not only that, but you should not be surprised when the same treatment is proffered to your candidate, and you should not be surprised when the Democrats lose, and lose badly, in the next election.

Again, NOT because any of the candidates is un-electable, terrible, wrong, unpopular, bad, or whatever, but because if the people here respond so viscerally, reflexively and...obediently... to the media spin and media coloration and manipulation of events, facts, occurrences...then think what everyone else will be doing.

Gore invented the internet, right?

[Jim Sagle]

1. Great post. We should all read it once a day.

So many, even on DU, are in the Matrix.

[Dookus]

2. *shrug*

I don't buy the idea that we're all manipulated by the media perceptions. In fact, people here respond to breaking issues long before the "conventional wisdom" becomes conventional.

This is politics - it's messy, and feelings get hurt if you don't develop a thick skin.

There's nothing for us to be ashamed of.

[bearfartinthewoods]

5. yep...read the real time, DU reaction to 'the speech'

that was not manipulated by the press.

[DannyRed]

8. You don't even get it do you?

Look, I am writing this from Japan, therefore my media exposure is quite limited, and by necessity (and desire) carefully chosen to represent as wide a range of outlets as possible.

Whenever possible I get to original source material and complete transcripts (video or audio).

The fervor over the Dean "speech" is absolutely manufactured, weird, and out of control.

I heard about the "speech" because of some coverage in the Japan Times (English Language) and because of hearing Rush talk about it on the Armed Forces Network Radio (yes Rush is on Armed Forces Radio....AAAAAH)

So, I went and found the video. And the audio. And I thought...whatever, Rush is being his usual assinine self....Nikita Dean and all that.

Then I came here.

Pathetic.

Sure, politics is not for the thin skinned. No question.

But look at the message boards here. Look at the glee, the blatant swallowing and regurgitation of the "accepted" line on the "speech".

Compare the posts here with Drudge, with Limbaugh, with the NYPost.

There is not much difference.

THAT is what I am talking about.

My life will not end if Dean is not nominated. Dean himself is really not so much different than the other Democrats looking for the nod - yet another centrist Democrat playing up to the populist wing of the party while winking at the Neo-liberals...and so on.

The campaign is new and different and important.

It has bugs, problems, shortcomings...but it is potentially a new way to really change the face of political organizing.

And yet, coming here, all I see is parroting of TV news. Crowing about Dean exploding. Repetition of media created themes.

How progressive!

How Liberal!

How informed!

Riiiight.

[Dookus]

11. and yet...

there were literally hundreds of posts here about "the speech" BEFORE anybody in the media even had a chance to comment on it.

Many of us saw it for what it was immediately, and apparently, so did the media.

The media aren't always wrong, you know.

[CWebster]

50. Then again

For some here, bashing Dean is the primary directive, hey? It doesn't really matter what he says or does when there is an obvious agenda to destroy Dean behind it.

Sure one needs a thick skin in politics. That is, everyone but the smirking chimp it would seem. So, the question you have to ask is, is the destruction deliberately manipulated by a press no longer responsive to or concerned with the truth or does it defend lies and deception at the expense of the truth and people who rely on a free press to reflect it.

The press, the media, has become little more than a mouthpiece for corporate interests to further an agenda to support policies in their best interests, and the politicians who support their policies as well.

[polpilot]

55. The DU Deannbashers are only following the DLC. Go to the DLC site

and tell me why Dean shouldn't go 3rd party. Many Dean backers, myself included, knew 12 months ago that Dean is, in reality, 3rd party, and was running under the radar as a demo. Read today's DLC's comments as well as their 2003 articles and attacks on Dean.

Dean...Defacto Third Party

[KoKo]

56. The replies on that Dean thread were like something one would see over

at that other site. You know the one I mean. I came to DU that night to see what was going in in Iowa because I refused to watch the Whore Media all day. So, when that thread came up about Dean giving the speech I followed the commentary and thought from what many were posting that Dean had somekind of "Event" and should have been taken off by the "White Coats." That's how bad it was. This was different from anything I've seen on DU before in it's viciousness in reporting on a live happening event.

I've done running commentary with other DU'ers for a couple of years now for Senate Speeches, the IWR Vote, Dumbya's other SOU speeches and other events where we all were watching and reporting for those here who don't have cable or don't want to watch because their blood pressure goes up. In none of those threads have I ever seen a pack attack on even a Repug's speech as vicious as what was said about Dean here Monday night.

I couldn't find the video until the next day and watched the whole thing from the C-Span link. I couldn't believe that we watched the same speech it was so misrepresented on threads here. I could have been listening to Anne Coulter posting on DU about the "Speech" given what I heard. And, if I hadn't followed up and watched it for myself I would have probably never know what it was all about, and moved on to another candidate. And, that's what the posters involved in that "pack attack" were hoping for. That no one would take the time and watch the speech for themselves. Or, there's a possibility that it was just an attack for the plain all out joy of viciousness that Coulter spews her garbage.

If any Candidate had been attacked that way, I would have been angry.
I'm Dean/Kucinich but even if Lieberman had been characterized as "dangerous, unhinged, too unstable to have his "finger on the button," "red faced" in anger, and so arrogant he didn't even "thank those who voted for him in Iowa" (all bald faced lies, I might add)....even if it had been Lieberman I would have posted exactly what I have here.

It wasn't true reporting of what happened in that speech, no attempt at giving the reader of the thread what was being said....it was just vicious.

My last 2 cents on this. (I hope) :eyes:

[izzie]

17. I like your post I guess because it is the way things seem to me.

The media will look for a story to make a point and it will usually be to wards their bottom line. It would be hanging your self to do anything else. This looked like the story. Look back to see what Dean has said about media control, should help. I am willing to bet you could count on the Big companies to like a man in the percent he wanted to keep big media to lose some of this control.Dem want to control some of this power. A real left Dem will not even get into the 5% list as we have seen.I am hoping we can keep the new voters Dean has brought into the party. I still like Dean but have never really hoped who I liked would get it, as they never have before.

[bearfartinthewoods]

48. i was watching MSNBC..listening to the republicans cautioning

that dean could not be counted out. seriously, buchanan and scarbouroughwere talking about dean and how he could recoup, away from the effect of geph's attack ads.

they broke to watch Edwards speech and part way through that, they broke for dean's speech. then they came back to the panel who were obviously shocked. the same people who for some reason i still can't fathom, were bucking up dean prior to the speech were dumbfounded by the performance.

the reaction was immediate here. the reaction was immediate there with those pubbies. maybe that's because it was so out of the realm of "presidential". you can try and dismiss this as media spin and i grant that the letterman,leno, daily show stuff is piling on BUT if you are old enough to remember dan quayle and potatoe, it was not out of the norm.

i could make a pretty good argument that poppy bush lost the election because he expressed interest in how a grocery checkout scan worked......

the knife cuts both ways.

[XanaDUer]

3. Skinner said it best:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=120&topic_id=11370#11392

[DannyRed]

13. Skinner said

"This is a political discussion board. Let's discuss politics."

Oh indeed?

And when the discussion is dominated by media created imagery and spin?

Look, don't get me wrong, please.

Of course I am disappointed with Dean's placing in Iowa, and of course I want him to do well, and of course I worry that this will derail his campaign, and etc.

BUT, look at the threads. Look at the commentary.

Ridiculous. Shallow. Unthinking. Unuseful.

And ultimately self-destructive for ALL the candidates, not just for Dean.

If you don't understand why, then you aren't paying close enough attention.

Let me repeat, the discussion of the Dean "speech" is an exhibition of exactly the problem in ALL American politics today, and goes a long way toward showing that perhaps all you folks here at DU are maybe not so "plugged in" or "aware" or "informed" as you think you are.

So keep on griping about the BFEE and Black Box Voting, and the Neocon Cabal...and keep not paying attention to the imagery, themes, ideas, and "manufactured consent" that is being spoon-fed to you even as you complain about media bias.

Compare Dean's speech to the SOTU, eh?

Or compare Dean's behavior to the "Clymer" incident with Bush and Cheney and an open mic.

And compare the media treatment and public reaction and your own reaction.

Again, I will most certainly vote for the Dem nominee. I do not hate Kerry or Edwards or Clark, and would vote for them.

I am talking not about my own candidate - although that certainly is a part of my gripe, mostly I am talking about the entirity of the response from so many so-called "prgressives" and "liberals" as viewed from afar.
 

[Dookus]

15. but what if

a lot of us "so-called progressives and liberals" TRULY believe that Dean's speech was bad?

You can find the threads from that night - hundreds of posts BEFORE there was any chance for media commentary.

I appreciate that a lot of his supporters don't think the speech was damaging. I disagree, and evidently a lot of other people do, too. Should we not be able to say so?

[DannyRed]

18. Look,

I saw the speech in its entirity.

I was not a good speech - it was not a horrible speech - it was certainly not a "normal" election night "concession" speech.

The point you seem to be missing, is that it is NOT AN IMPORTANT EVENT!

Who cares?

Why is this speech being made such a big deal of?

Why is this speech such a huge event?

Big woopdewoo!

See?

Not only the spin, but the very focus itself is being dictated to you.

[Dookus]

21. well I disagree, obviously.

I formed my opinion on the speech by watching it. Judging from the reaction to it, my opinion was spot-on; it was an embarrassing display for Dean.

Furthermore, I really think it would behoove Dean supporters to occasionally consider the possibility that the media perception is being CAUSED by Dean. People seem so intent to blame the media, the other candidates, Karl Rove, Hillary Clinton.... everybody except Dean himself.

Dean is not naive. He knew going in how the media play these things. If he can't work within that, he's got no business running for President.

This is politics, not croquet.

[CWebster]

51. Right, he posts his perspective and locks the thread.

End of the debate.

He talks about right-wing smear jobs as if it was legitimate on a progressive board without bothering to inspect the motives that drive such sentiments.

I understand that he was outraged by the 2000 election and all that transpired---all the dirty tricks, all the deception and manuvering, all the corruption. Based on that if someone were to post threads trashing Gore and the disenfranchised voters -hey fair game, it's politics after all.

So where is the damn line between what constitutes a legitimate discussion of progressive Democratic issues and what formerly would be viewed as destructive neo-con objectives to destroy Democratic party hopefuls via media "goring".

What happened to the damn line?

[genius]

4. There's more ammunition with Dean. He reguarly tells whoppers.

And his story one day will too often differ from his story the day before.

[donotpassgo]

6. c'mon Kerry supported the war and has spent the last 7 months trying to

backtrack. The Republicans are gonna use that flip flop sure as Im sitting here typing this.

[goodhue]

7. shame, shame, shame

how's that for spirit?
the people have not responded to the media
if so your guy would be on top
please get over it and move on

[frank frankly]

9. you are absolutely correct in your thoughts

but we cannot lose the GE. I love Dean. Always will. You'll never hear anything but metaphysical praise for the man. I don't see him beating this incredibly corrupt media. not because he should not...

[CWebster]

53. Like kerry will fare any better?

you ain't seen nothing yet.

[Old and In the Way]

10. Is this your 1st election?

I agree things are rough, but it's the nature of how candidates get selected. How your candidate stands up to the pressure will influence how people decide on his/her electibility.

I like Howard. I've contributed money to his campaign early on. I admire his strong attacks, his leveraging of the Internet, and his toughness. He got out of the gate fast and strong. But how he bounces back in NH and beyond will be what counts. Can he regain momentum? I'm not sure. He may have reached his maximum potential.

If he wins the nomination, I'm in with him.

[DannyRed]

16. Is this my first election?

I am going to take that as an honest question, rather than as a snide quip.

No. I am 34 years old, and have been involved in elections since I was 10 years old and helping my parents and community (in Maine) organize for Carter.

I have watched, since that time, the character and topics and tone and themes of political discourse decline, and rot, and fester since then, whether you want to talk about the savaging of Carter, the destruction of Mondale, the absolutely disgusting treatment of Dukakis, and the sliming of Hart, and on down to the treatment of Clinton and the asskissing of Bush.

And you want to tell me that this is not a pretty carefully scripted situation? This unbelievable spinning of an unscripted and pretty much unimportant event?

Give me a break.

[Old and In the Way]

62. No, it was an honest question...really.

You do understand that the corporate media is actively participating in trying to "help" us elect our candidate, right? This is a relatively new role that the press has taken on...there has always been partisans in the media, but it is now a core strategy of the profit driven media. Who's for limited media consolidation? We are. We are their enemy.

The point is, it's not Kerry,Clark, or Edwards supporters that are framing the image...it's the media. I watched the Dean "EEEEEE...AH" 30 times on CNN the evening of the caucus...not because I wanted to, but because CNN (and all the others) saw this as an easy sound/image bite that could be played while their "political analysts" questioned his sanity. And each candidate will have their "special moment" in front of the lens at some point in the campaign....until, well, there isn't possibly a challenger up to the task of taking on the Annoited One.

I don't see any script, but I do see a willing media biding their time waiting to ambush each candidate when they screw up in front of the lens and then they'll just burn that image into the public's mind until the message sinks in.

So I take no glee in seeing Dean's character questioned, his statements distorted, or his image manipulated to nuetralize his candidacy....if they can do it to him, they can do it to all of our candidates.

I share your anger and frustration.....I just hope we can all understand who is creating the problem and channel this anger to our advantage.

[overground1]

12. Excellent post! I've been telling people Dean's "fall" is a media smear

I am just surprised how quickly so many here have surrendered to the right-wing media dictating who to vote for. Despite what they tell you, Dean is not "angry", "unstable", "unelectable" or "finished"!

[Dookus]

14. He got 18% in Iowa...

after campaigning for two years, and being the presumptive front-runner. How is that a media smear?

[overground1]

19. You just don't get it. He was torn down by a concerted right-wing effort

That has since then continued relentlessly to ground him into the dirt. They want to MAKE SURE Dean is good and dead.

So tell me something, when Clark gets 18% or less in NH, what will YOU be saying then?

[Dookus]

23. Actually...

he may very well get less than 18%. I won't be surprised, and sure as hell won't blame the media.

You can blame the media, or the republicans, or sasquatch for your candidate's problems, but it's not going to do any good. Your candidate is the issue.

He did dismally in Iowa. That was reported, as it should be. We commented on it, as we should.

As for the speech, read the threads from that night. You can't blame the media for the perception that arose from it - a lot of us drew our conclusions long before there was any "analysis" of it. The first thread started while he was STILL speaking.

[overground1]

29. THE MATRIX HAS YOU.

[Dookus]

31. yes..

it was the media that forced my jaw to hit the floor while watching Dean's speech live on TV. It was the media that forced me to burst out laughing when he let loose with his "YEEEAARRGH!". Somehow, they managed to manipulate my mind WHILE I WATCHED THE SPEECH! How nefarious! How evil! How ridulous.

It's an absurd assertion, but I suppose it's easier to blame everybody else instead of blaming Dean.

[BootinUp]

30. Its become an internet craze

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/2004-01-22-dean-usat_x.htm

snip......

Howard Dean, off a disappointing showing in the Iowa caucuses, let loose with a primal scream Monday night that seems to have inspired a generation.

By Wednesday, the young voters that Dean had hoped to attract — or at least the techno-wizards among them — had set his words to music and created a handful of audio remixes that contained all or parts of Dean's 61-word screed. The more educational ones even featured Dean's dramatic reading of the names of 13 states. (Related audio: Dean clip No. 1 | Dean clip No. 2)

But the highlight of the mixes was the creative use of Dean's closing shriek.

Transcripts of the speech say Dean uttered the word "Yes!" The ear registered "Yeeeeeeeearrrrrrhhhhh!"

.............................

and another bit here in WP

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36752-2004Jan21.html

snip.....

Squibs

• Howard Dean, whose presidential campaign caught fire on the Internet, has become something of a musical star among MP3-trading Web-heads. "Remixes" of his rollicking speech after placing third in the Iowa caucuses Monday -- complete with primal scream -- blazed into e-mail boxes throughout the country yesterday. For our favorite, the techno version arranged by Minneapolis-based blogger and columnist James Lileks, download: homepage.mac.com/lileks/.cv/lileks/Public/Yeagh.mp3-link.mp3.

[blm]

52. Get this: The media BUILT Dean UP for months.

They tore Kerry down proclaiming his candidacy dead for months to dry up his fundraising.

June 2, 2003

Kerry Seeks to Reverse FCC's "Wrongheaded Vote"
Commission decision may violate laws protecting small businesses; Kerry to file Resolution of Disapproval

Washington, DC - Senator John Kerry today announced plans to file a "Resolution of Disapproval" as a means to overturn today's decision by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to raise media ownership caps and loosen various media cross-ownership rules.

Kerry will soon introduce the resolution seeking to reverse this action under the Congressional Review Act and Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act on the grounds that the decision may violate the laws intended to protect America's small businesses and allow them an opportunity to compete.

As Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, Kerry expressed concern that the FCC's decision will hurt localism, reduce diversity, and will allow media monopolies to flourish. This raises significant concerns about the potential negative impacts the decision will have on small businesses and their ability to compete in today's media marketplace.

In a statement released earlier today regarding the FCC's decision, Kerry said:
"Nothing is more important in a democracy than public access to debates and information, which lift up our discourse and give Americans an opportunity to make honest informed choices. Today's wrongheaded vote by the Republican members of the FCC to loosen media ownership rules shows a dangerous indifference to the consolidation of power in the hands of a few large entities rather than promoting diversity and independence at the local level. The FCC should do more than rubber stamp the business plans of narrow economic interests.

"Today's vote is a complete dereliction of duty. The Commissioners are well aware that these rules greatly influence the competitive structure of the industry and protect the public's access to multiple sources of information and media. It is the Commission's responsibility to ensure that the rules serve our national goals of diversity, competition, and localism in media. With today's vote, they shirked that responsibility and have dismissed any serious discussion about the impact of media consolidation on our own democracy." 
 Alert

[DannyRed]

22. You've never heard of

"build 'em up to tear 'em down" ???

I cannot believe it.

Look at the Iowa polls before the last weeks' tracking polls.

Look at the number of undecideds.

Look at the caucus night horse trading and ganging up and etc.

The "presumptive front-runner" meme is simply another theme put into play.

A theme that Dean himself and WAY too many of his supporters and detractors bought into, by the way.

You are being led by the nose, sir/madam.

Dean may or may not have won "on his own merits" - in Iowa or in the entire nomination procedure, and he may still. But the point I am trying to make stands, his position in the polls, the characterization and spinning of his personality, the gross distortions of his (and Clark's and Kerry's) rhetoric, past statements, past positions, and so on...

Is so bad, and so blatant, and so sick...and yet so many people here simply swallow it.

THAT is the depressing part, really, not the loss or setback to a particular politician.

[Dookus]

24. we can discuss this

without getting insulting. I'm not being led by the nose.

You can search my posts and you'll see exactly how I felt about the screech-speech. I posted on it before the speech was even finished.

I'm quite capable of drawing my own conclusions. Simply because they're not the same ones you draw doesn't mean I'm being manipulated. It just means we disagree.

[overground1]

27. Exactly. It has been manufactered from the start to get a desired outcome.

The people dance when the media says "dance!" They jump when they say "jump!" And they believe all along that they have a free choice. The truth is the public is being herded, and even those who think they know the truth about the media don't even know the half of it. Most who think they are beyond the media's control are still really just part of the herd too.

[The Magistrate]

43. But You, Sir, You See Through It All, Eh?

Your reactions are authentic, owing nothing to anything but your own keen insight and knowledge of the world?

Any disagreement with you can only be the result of someone's beinmg played by an unheard tune that envelopes the,?

One learns the damndest things some nights....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[overground1]

59. in 1992, Bill Clinton only got 2.8% in Iowa, coming in 3rd...

And then he came in 2nd in New Hampshire with 24.8%.

1/21/1992: Harkin 76.4%, Tsongas 4.1%, Clinton 2.8%
2/18/1992: Tsongas 33.2%, Clinton 24.8%

If Clinton could survive all this and the "bimbo erruptions" then Dean can certainly survive this and the "anger erruptions".

http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/000487.html

[Adjoran]

20. Don't be so dramatic

"Politics ain't beanbag."

This is the contest to nominate our candidate to be the most powerful single person in the world, responsible for over 4 million employees and a budget over $2 trillion a year, not to mention commander-in-chief of the strongest military force in world history. This isn't a student council election. The fate of the country and the world could rest in the winner's hands. It is full-contact, no-holds-barred politics, and that is as it should be.

Politics is not a recommended advocation for those of weak heart or tender feelings. Everybody loves to dish it out, and nobody likes to take it.

Are some punches borderline, or below the belt? You betcha. It's been that way since Jefferson and Adams in 1796. Check out a book on the history of presidential campaigns; this stuff is mild in comparison to most contested races.

You can spend time nursing your offended sensibilities, or you can suck it up and get back to work doing whatever you can for your guy. If he doesn't win, you'll have plenty of time to decide what you want to do about the fall campaign.

[DannyRed]

25. Sigh, I can see people are

just not getting my point.

I am not abjuring or commanding that everyone lay off Dean, or that people should be ashamed of themselves for opposing Dean, or that people should vote for Dean.

LOOK at the issue that people are using to oppose Dean?!

What is going to happen when there are a string of testimonials from Clark's former colleagues, superiors or subordinates, indicating that he is unstable, unfit to command, an egomaniac, and so on?

What is going to happen when Kerry gets a full dose of dredged up financial smears flung at him, or "medal throwing" or drugs, or what have you.

What is going to happen when Edwards gets shafted by ginned up "scandals" (Edwards supporters, brace yourselves, because Drudge is hinting just that on his site)?

Look at what people are focusing on, look at the story that makes headlines, not just the spin on the story, but the subject.

Everyone starts arguing about how "Clark almost started WWIII" or not, and the game is ALREADY over, see?

[Dookus]

26. Dude...

we "get" your point.

We disagree with it. It's not for lack of explaining. I understand exactly what you're trying to say.

I think it's bollocks. All those Clark slams you mentioned have already been used, repeatly, by Dean supporters here. I'm not terribly worried about them. There are compelling answers to those criticisms.

Do you really think that the media won't uncover any of this if a few thousand people on an obscure corner of the internet don't discuss them? Of course not!

[DannyRed]

32. No, "Dude", you don't "get it"

"There are compelling answers to those criticisms."

Too late. See?

It's already been put out there, it's already been planted, and it's already the topic of discussion.

Yes, Dean supporters certainly fall into that same trap, and have certain run with the herd on a bunch of these issues, wrt Clark in Kosovo, or Kerry, or blah blah blah.

Dean supporters are most certainly not immune from the same criticisms.

Believing in the "frontrunner" status based on polls, spending all their time talking about "anger" rather than ignoring such dumb discussions.

Dean himself is certainly guilty, too. He SHOULD know better than to make that kind of speech under such scrutiny, and he SHOULD know better than to play into the theme the way he does.

You still aren't getting me:

The point is that HERE of all places, amongst Democrats, Liberals, and Progressives who supposedly closely follow the media, the spin, the mediawhores, counterspin, daily howler, and so on....

One would think that we would be a little better at avoiding that trap.

But clearly we are not.

[Dookus]

33. OK..

it sounds like you're objecting to the fact that we expressed negative opinions about Dean's speech.

Too bad. I thought it sucked, and I said so then and I'll say so now. It has NOTHING to do with the media about it - in fact, I've hardly watched any tv since Monday night. My opinion was formed BY ME WHILE WATCHING THE SPEECH!

I know it sucks to be a Dean supporter this week, but it's unreasonable to expect that we're not going to discuss his dismal showing in the Caucuses and his even worse performance afterward.

Sorry, I have never bought into the whole "let's all be nice" school of politics. I enjoy politics so much PRECISELY because it's rough and tumble. If your guy can't take it, then he has no business in the race.

I suspect, however, that Howard Dean is a lot less naive than his supporters. He knows the game.

[DannyRed]

34. Repeat after me

The speech is not iimportant.

The speech is not important.

The speech is not important....

You didn't like it? Fine for you. Great.

Is it "politics" ?

No.

Is it substantive?

Do it clarify for you why you like Clark and not Dean or Kerry or Edwards?

No.

It is a planted, false, lame-ass topic of discussion that has NO import.

The gist of the speech, the content of the speech - "we will fight on".

The tone of the speech? Loud, a bit obnoxious, and a little over the top.

The real importance of the speech?

Zilch.

The media driven import of the speech?

It made top headlines OVER the SOTU, and OVER a Kerry policy statement.

All I am saying is that the fact that so many here are jumping on that bandwagon is pretty damned lame.

[Dookus]

38. If you feel it's so unimportant...

why start a thread about it? Why be so vehement about it?

I didn't jump on any bandwagon - my views were formed by WATCHING the speech - I didn't need a talking head to tell me how to feel about it.

I know you can't comprehend that people have different opinions than you do, and that they could possibly come by those opinions honestly. Oh well.... I'm not gonna worry too much about what a stranger on the internet thinks of me.

You don't like the reaction to the speech. I get that. But you should consider that the speech may have caused the reaction, not a media conspiracy to destroy Howard Dean.

[overground1]

35. It has nothing to do with expressing the opinion the media fed you

It has to do with the fact that you were conditioned to draw the conclusion you have and form the opinion that you did. As you were watching Dean come out to give his speech, you were expecting him to "meltdown". No, not just expecting, HOPING. No matter what he did or what he said, you would have interprited it as such. If you are looking for something, you will find it. You will read it into it. You would have shoved any reaction from Dean into the "angry" or "crazy" box. It is what you have been programmed to think.

I don't blame you. You have been conditioned by the media to respond this way to Howard Dean now. But now that you are aware of this, you can begin the process of deprogramming.

[Dookus]

37. bullshit

I saw a decidedly un-presidential performance by a candidate.

You seem to have a problem with the concept that people can disagree with you. It MUST be the media's fault. I MUST be stupid and easily-led. I MUST be unknowledgeable.

Again, bullshit.

You don't a damned thing about me. You don't know where I get my news. You don't know how long I've been involved in politics. All you know is that your guy fucked up and you're pissed because people are pointing it out.

Too bad. Maybe when you get over your smug certitude, you'll take a minute to actually look at CAUSE of the problem - Howard Dean.

on edit: You saw a passionate speaker. I saw this:

[overground1]

39. Nice to see you are posting right-wing propaganda in DU - n/t

[Dookus]

40. What right-wing propaganda?

I made that pic today - I'm a liberal.

Wanna discuss the point, or would you prefer drive-by insults?

The simple fact is your guy fucked up and you don't like people pointing it out. Too bad. If you don't like politics, take up knitting.

[overground1]

41. Then maybe I should make a picture of Clark bombing civilians or

super-impose Clark and Richard Pearle's heads on some porn. I'm a liberal, too, so I guess it would be ok, right?

[Dookus]

42. go crazy

I can take it.

[The Magistrate]

44. Besides, My Friend

There is some importance to the speech.

Politics is a business of image manipulation; a politician must be as aware at all times of the image he is projecting to others as a smuggler in the customs line: it is really a highly specialized form of acting. He cannot let up on it for an instant, and particularly not in an instant when he knows the cameras are trained on him.

A politician must be able to speak to several audiences at once, and see to it that each takes from his speaking the message he intends it to take. Gov. Dean had at least these audiences that night: his own supporters in the hall, the wider audience on live television, and the commentators and press. He needed to rally his own supporters in the shock of defeat, impress the wider audience with his solidity and ability to take a punch, and preserve among the press and commentators the sense that he was a man to be reckoned with in the future regardless of this set-back, which could well be anomalous. Gov. Dean failed to find a way to do all these things at once. He spoke to the supporters in the hall only, and may well have rallied them somewhat; in doing so, he left the wider live audience on the outside looking in, and somewhat startled and bemused at the spectacle, and displayed real incompetence for the press and commentators, who accordingly have pounced. The wider audience finds the thing funny.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[OKHRANA]

28. Dean has not necessarily self-destructed, but...

It's how he handles gaffes that determines if he blew it all.

Clinton made a few gaffes in 92 and acted like it's the critics that don't get it, who stop focusing on the real problems; and that approach worked.

Just a few weeks ago, Kerry was being dumped on by the media. He ignored it. Look at him now. Next month we could be saying the same about Dean, but that depends on him.

Dean just needs to go back on the attack, like on the SOTU, real big, and make everyone forget Monday, instead of reminding everyone of it by singing the national anthem to quiet a heckler. How pathetic.

Dean is no Clinton, he is showing that himself.

[Adjoran]

36. Sorry if I missed your point

But you launch into the criticisms of the other candidates . . . so maybe I still don't get it.

Are you saying that criticism of Dean is unfair because the scream speech got so much play? But that criticism of the others is just?

Or are you saying that DU should be a big hugfest and no criticism of candidates allowed at all?

I assure you my reaction to the speech, or to Dean's campaign, have nothing to do with the media. I too saw it live. It was over the top, but its importance has been way overblown.

But surely you wouldn't expect the other candidates' supporters not to have a good laugh at Dean's expense?

[jonoboy]

45. I keep saying..drop any subs to any partisan media..if half of

American exercised their right to boycott the reptile media at this crucial time they would back down from trying to run the agenda.

[emulatorloo]

46. Some Basic Principles and Thoughts

1. Howard Dean is far from down and out.

2. The media exists to sell ads. They sell ads by bringing in ratings, so they can say "Look everyone watches us! Put your ad on our network"

Consequently, every little thing is reported as if it were the end of the world. All of the candidates are going to be trashed, because it makes everything seem "dramatic."

On the other hand, I am not so sure that people are as gullible as you think. Some are predisposed to gullibility, so they watch Faux!

3. It is a shame that there have been so many threads about the speech. It will go away and be forgotten. He is still a strong candidate, and he has great chances to pull ahead if he works really hard. However, I believe that it is an oversimplification to state that DU is regurgitating what the media tells them to think. Maybe some, but not a majority, no more than the *majority* of Dean Supporters are arguing NBD, a Dean Third Party Run, Iowans Are Ignorant Rubes, Kerry Clark Edwards are the exact same as GWB, or any of the other fantastic things a vocal minority of Dean supporters are arguing.

4. If people turn away from Howard Dean, maybe it is about Howard Dean and not a media smear. I'm in Iowa, on the ground so to speak, and let me tell you that people here are skeptical of the media and don't like being told what to think. I spent many many many months struggling over who to Caucus for. I was trying to decide between two candidates, and Dean was one of them. I saw both candidates numerous times, I watched almost every debate. And Dean lost me because of what he said and did in those unfiltered events. And quite frankly, he is too conservative for me. I still like Howard Dean, and I will vote for him if he gets the nomination. But Dean lost me as a caucus supporter without anybody's help.

5. I saw the speech live. It confirmed my decision not to caucus for Dean. It wasn't "anger" that bothered me, it was lack of Judgement. My feelings aren't media spin or preconditioning. It bothered me that he cut in on Edwards. It bothered me that he did not have the sense to realize that the post Iowa caucus speech is VERY IMPORTANT, because it is probably the ** first time ** a lot of voters are paying attention. And this is the first impression that Dean, not the media, chose to give.

But this too shall pass -- Dean can work hard and turn this around.

On Edit - clarification

[beaconess]

47. I don't understand

this notion that everybody who disagrees with Dean is somehow being manipulated. How is it that all of these people are being snookered but you and other Dean supporters have managed to avoid being sucked in by the media manipulation? Are you guys smarter than the rest of us? Are you more attuned to fact and reality, while everyone else is just clueless?

Or could it be that all of us are thinking and watching for ourselves and, like most intelligent people, we are coming to different conclusions based upon our own assessments? And if that's the case, why are you so frustrated that some people don't agree with you?

And if, on the other hand, you think it's the former, that could explain why Dr. Dean is having problems - it's not a good campaign strategy to assume that everyone who's not with you is stupid.

[windansea]

49. some basic facts

Dean's dismal 3rd place finish in Iowa had nothing to do with "the speech" He got rejected by the voters there...period. Even if he never made the speech...his numbers in NH would probably be dropping and Kerry's rising...the speech is merely accelerating Dean's fall.

The media didn't creat "the speech" Dean did. And I would bet 90% of the people who saw it live like I did had the same impression...this guy is never going to be president.

[GalleryGod]

57. Roger,that.

Couldn't have said it better myself; so I won't:pals:

[tigerbeat]

60. actually....

.....they kinda did create the speech. by filtering out the sound of the crowd and not even showing the way the dean supporters were going crazy. what you hear as "the speech" is a media-filtered version of a pep rally. if the networks had actually just stuck a camera in the room to show dean and the crowd and the sounds coming from the crowd, you would have had an entirely different perspective. you probably wouldn't have even been able to hear the speech.

the points by people who blame dean for "the speech" are actually pretty good ones. surely dean/trippi should have known that it would be broadcast live on national television and that any reaction to the crowd should have been tempered to fit that medium. but anyone on DU or elsewhere that wishes to point to that night as some example that dean is "unhinged" or "melting-down" ARE buying completely into the mediawhore spin. or at least want to use it to destroy an opponent.

the speech is an example of a blindspot in dean's political acumen, NOT of his fitness to be president.

[Bonobo]

54. "Now we can see this is a media-driven popularity (contest)"

True, but some of us knew it was that from the beginning. we have been through the process for decades and it is unchanged (except in degree).

It has always been a popularity contest and that is why the taller man usually wins. It's just a fact. Vote for the person who looks the most like a game-show host and who has the least unpalatable position. That fact was driven home in 2000 for me when I saw the election stolen and the blame placed on idealists who voted for Nader because he best represented their position (instead of voting for ABB).

I agree that those posting gleefully on the fall of Dean should be ashamed, but some of the posters are simply dedicated ABB people who are concerned about Chimp taking the election because Dean doesn't know how to comport himself in a presidential way. In a way, it is good that this happened to Dean now instead of happening later (after he became the candidate).

In any case, it IS a popularity contest and for me, the candidate is either Clark or Kerry.

[Forkboy]

58. DU has convinced me that the Dems aren't worth fighting for anymore

Your post is dead on.

[indigo32]

61. In all the back and forth on the speech I haven't mentioned my

feelings on it except that everybody seemed to start there own thread. But I was reading Dookus posts above about peoples realtime honest opinion of the thread.
Well I heard it live too....
I heard it on the radio... no video of his smiling (which he was).
and frankly what happened as a result of it did NOT even cross my mind for a second. It was just fricken Howard Dean. Why the shock, he's been around a while. I remember just trying to figure out why NPR wasn't playing Edwards speech (which I think started several minutes before Dean, but they were waiting on Deans I guess (which I honestly didn't think was fair).
But seriously most of ya'll and certainly those pundits knew enough about him that it really shouldn't have shocked you. But hey... what do I know.