I understand the establishment Democrats (registration req’d.) are frightened about Howard Dean possibly becoming the Democratic nominee in 2004. And I agree, there’s a very real chance he could be nominated and get completely Punk’d by Karl Rove, Destroyer of Worlds, eventually dying friendless and alone in a Shaker commune, clutching his Joe Trippi doll.
But come now.
Marvel at the rhetorical contortionism some columnists demonstrate in portraying Howard Dean as the True Emerging Evil of the 2004 elections.
There’s Gregg Easterbrook, in The New Republic, weighing in with an article ominously entitled, “The Dark Side of Small Donors.”
Actual Quote: “But the problem in seeking large numbers of small donations may be that it forces Dean to sell out to everyone.” (Emphasis his. All his.)
Fear the American people! That $77 donation is the price of your soul, Dean!
Welcome to democracy, Gregg. Kindly remove your shoes.
I’ll try to take the next entrant in the Dean wars more seriously.
Except George Will, the aforementioned next entrant, makes it awfully hard. He starts off strong (that’s irony, for those of you playing along at home) with a completely incoherent anecdote about the WWII-era Labor Party in Britain, then launches an equally incoherent attack on campaign finance reform/Howard Dean. He then forces himself into the amusingly awkward position of having to make his argument on the one hand through complete agreement with the words he puts in Dean’s mouth, and on the other hand through denouncing Dean in the severest possible terms (including one reference to